Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2001 - 2005SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES January 3, 2001 Attenders: Committee Members: A. Alterson, A. Berkowsky (K. Kelly), D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, D. Jennings, M. Mylott, C. Smith, J. Wolinski (Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the draft of the 12/27/00 Meeting Note and was passed with H. Friedman abstaining. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-005 121 Asbury Preliminarv, Propose construction of 4-story mixed -use building (20 multi -family residential units above ground floor retail.) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr Michael Winfield and Clark Fell GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This proposed project has a similar footprint to a previous scheme for the site, with 15 ft. setbacks on the north and east, plus building to the lot on the south and west boundaries. It includes 1,400 SF of retail store on the ground level and 20 dwelling units in the 3 levels above, served by 24 parking spaces and one loading berth. The two easternmost units are two -level duplexes isolated from the other units and from each other. A "terrace" is formed at the second level over the parking spaces and a partial basement houses mechanical equipment. Facades of a concrete frame in -filled with modular size face brick in a brown/purple flash color and glazing in clear anodized aluminum frames are planned. Small areas of grilles/louvers are used at the parking area walls along with some precast concrete panels. On the east elevation the balconies extend over the setback area. Units will be one and two bedrooms in the 815 SF to 1,100 SF range, selling at $180K to $250K. A final decision has not been made on the control of the retail space issue, i.e. condo association ownership vs sell-off modes. Page 1 of 6 01/03/01 DISCUSSION. Committee members praised the overall project as an excellent example of contemporary design. The site setbacks developed, the formation of the terrace level, and the massing of the residential units all contribute to an interesting solution. The question of site lighting fixture types and lighting levels was raised and will be addressed in the final design. Use of some additional brick on the south elevation in the "tower" bays was suggested. Exit distances serving the terrace level must be checked. Parking/loading issues are: -can the loading berth entry accommodate a 30' truck template? (Architect said this was done, but will be re -checked) -does the northeasternmost parking space have proper aisle access? -cross traffic is dangerous in a parking area. (Reversal of the traffic flow will be considered and removal of the north+west loading berth walls to increase visibility will be studied.) The Committee liked the landscaping proposed using canopy trees and ground cover in the setbacks and also in the parkway. This provides a "softening" on the project's boundary which will lessen its impact. Use of color anodized or color coated window frames was suggested by a Committee member and the Architect responded with his experience that clear anodizing is the best weathering finish available. A motion was made and passed to accept public comments at the meeting. Aid. Rainey and a group of neighbors raised the following issues: -they felt the design did not relate to the adjacent neighborhood and use of "prairie style" or design like the 141 Asbury project was suggested. -a neighborhood meeting has not been held on this project. -lighting of the terrace level may "spill over" to adjacent residential properties. The Committee noted that selection of architectural style is not in the Committee's authorization and the Committee's review was based on good design parameters that are independent of style. The selection of style for a project is clearly the Architect's/ Developer's decision. While the size of the project is large compared to single-family dwellings, it is fully within the recently down -sized Zoning Ordinance requirements for the site. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval with the condition that proper access to the loading berth and all parking spaces be demonstrated to the City staff, and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 2 of 6 01/03/01 SPAARC 01-001 1601 Emerson —Winkles Transportation Preliminary Review of the construction of a bus and employee parting lot. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. James Murray - Attorney GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The gravel base course, curbs, and lighting for this proposed parking area have been constructed and a MWRB permit has been issued for the project. A lot located on the old Mayfair RR line right-of-way is proposed that extends from Emerson through to Foster. It will house 41 school buses and 56 employee parking spaces. Entry only will be from Emerson and exit only to Foster with bus parking restricted to the west row of spaces only. Twelve lighting fixtures have been installed on existing utility poles. The site forms a Zoning District transition, as it abuts General Industrial on the west and General Residential on the east. Most of the eastern boundary is a City play lot with two residential lots by the northeast property line. Minor landscaping is indicated at the north and south entry drives. A 6 ft. high chain link fence with slat inserts and gates is proposed for the site perimeter. DISCUSSION: Development of this area is good as it has been used as a dumping site and the play lot has been a "hang-out" location. Since employee's will not use the lot after business hours it was noted that this project will not improve after hours security for the area. Abutting a play lot with a parking lot is not desirable, but a transition must be made in some fashion between the conflicting Zoning Districts. It is not an easy problem to solve. The owner's future plans for use of this site are not known. Suggestions to lower the fence height, use a different fence type, and to introduce plantings in the sea of asphalt were made by the Committee. It was noted by a Committee member that the lot location was selected by the owner and that security concerns generated by that selection cannot only be resolved by fortress -like fencing, and that other solutions, such as security patrols are possible. A committee member suggested that any bus parking on this lot is inappropriate, as the site is narrow and next to a park used by children. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval with the conditions that: -the fencing along the east property tine be open, wrought -iron type construction and no more that 6 ft, high. -in both the east and west parking lanes, every tenth space be changed to a curbed earth, planting bed with canopy trees plus bushes/ground cover landscaping. and was passed with A. Alterson, H. Friedman, and C. Smith voting no. Page 3 of 6 01/03/01 SPAARC 00-057 1113 Clark — Mt Zion Church Revision to Preliminary Propose construction of a 5-story addition to an existing religious institution. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr, Michael Johnson - Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Sub -surface investigation has revealed a high water level and soil conditions that would require sheet piling for any basement construction. To maintain the project space program and budget a revision has been made to the scheme previously presented. An above grade story has been added to the design increasing the building height from 45 to 54 ft. and making a small increase in the building footprint by the addition of a 1-story mechanical room in the northwest site area. No basement area will be built in the addition. Vacation of the alley north of the site is in -process in the City. Use of face brick and asphalt shingle roofing to match existing is still proposed. DISCUSSION: The Committee noted that Code regulations restrict above -grade height locations of classrooms based the age group and number of students served. The dormer indicated is for elevator overrun clearance ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval to this revision and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-002 2200 Central Concept Propose relocation of historic portion of existing building and construction of 5-story mixed -use building (t f multi -family residential units, retail space, and a dental office.). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Eifler and Associates -- Architects + an unnamed attorney from the firm of Stacey, Rubin, Silver, Lord, Bissell, and Brook GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This proposal includes moving the historic dentist's office structure to the extreme northeast comer of the site and extending one story retail west from this location; and construction a five story "tower" to the south housing 11 dwelling units. A below grade parking level provides 16 or 17 spaces. The Architect views this as a "transition" site with Business zoning for the site and extending to the east; and General Residential zoning to the west. A setback is provided along the west site property line. in the southeast area of the site a landscaped "court" is formed by the building masses. Units will have three bedrooms and be in the 1,800 to 2,000 SF range. Modular brick will be used with copper roofs and spandrels on the facades. Page 4 of 6 01/03/01 DISCUSSION: The Committee strongly maintained that the structure and its sitinq generated the historic character of this building. While the site development was not designed by a famous landscape architect, it significantly complements the building and would be destroyed by the movement proposed for the structure. It was suggested that the wall "notch" used on north elevation between the historic building and the new retail be continued in the roof line to increase the "apparent" separation. Also the project could be moved south to open up the comer space and improve siting. This project has been reviewed twice by the Preservation Commission and will require a final review after a zoning analysis has been done. It was noted that while one-to-one parking meets the Zoning Ordinance for the condo units, the location and possibly the marketing might generate the need for a larger parking -to -unit ratio. The current scheme requires the following variations according to a zoning analysis: -building height of 50 ft. rather than the 45 ft. permitted -not building to the lot line on Hartrey as required by the Ordinance. Man on -site parking space may not have the required setback from the property line. -the proposed floor area exceeds the required floor area ratio. A motion was made and passed to accept public comments at the meeting. Aid. Moran agreed that the site development of walks, lawn, and plantings forms an important part of the historic design for this building. He disagrees with the position that this project is a `natural" extension of the commercial district to the east. While the site is zoned B2 on paper, its current development is clearly residential in character. Conversion to commercial use is not an 'extension" of the existing commercial strip, but rather the creation of a new commercial site replacing the existing residential setting. Some mention was made by the presenter of the relatively high taxes paid by the current owner. The Committee indicated that some recent provisions may apply to tax relieve for historic structures and should be investigated by the owner, ACTIONS: A motion was made to deny concept approval and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 5 of 6 01/03/01 SPAARC 01-003 1901 Dempster — Pisa Hut and KFC Recommendation to Sian Board Review of the re -facing of existing non -conforming pole sign for a Type-2 restaurant.. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: C. Smith GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A 15 ft. high pole sign is proposed with a "reader board" at the existing comer diagonal location. DISCUSSION: The Committee agreed that this was a good time to begin the "clean up" of this non -conforming sign ridden area and only modifications that are in compliance with the Sign Regulations should be considered. The current sign regulations do not allow reader boards and allow signs only as high as the setback from the property line, 9'-6" in this case. A Committee member noted that the inclusion of a Pizza Hut operation would have to be checked against the results of the special use process which governs the site. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend to the sign board that the sign be approved on the conditions that: -the sign array have no reader board -the top of the sign array be no higher than 9'-6" and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-004 1642 Church — Church Street Station Recommendation to Sign 09ard Review of the erection of a temporary signs for veal estate sales of condo units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: DISCUSSION: ACTIONS: A motion was made to table this item and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 6 of 6 01/03/01 MEETING NOTES SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE January 10, 2001 Room 2404 Members Present: Members Absent: Design Professional Present: Other Staff Present: Others Present: Commencement A. Alterson, P. D'Agostino, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, J. Wolinski. J. Aiello, L. Black, R. Dahal, D. Jennings, K. Kelly, C. Smith. H. Friedman. Committee aporoved a motion (7-01 to appoint A. Aitetson as actina chair. A. A terson (acting chair) determined a quorum existed and began the meeting at 3:00 p.m. SPAARC 00-108 2460 Main Street Modify exterior of retail goods establishment (Sam's Club). Revision to Final ITEM PRESENTED BY: Mr. Ronald Rees (architect) and Mr. Bob Ewald (project manager). PRESENTATION: The applicants discovered that the north end of the canopy, originally to be removed, was in better shape than anticipated. Sam's Club decided not to reduce the north end of the canopy, Instead providing a larger protected area for persons exiting the store. Sam's Club would like to enclose approximately '/2 of this area with storefront glass, matching the existing storefront system. DISCUSSION: The original Committee approval required Sam's Club to provide clear glass opposite the membership area; instead that area was constructed with concrete block. Sam's Club may have been under the impression this requirement was related to appearance and therefore only a recommendation. The intent of the requirement was related to improving safety and security — the clear glass would provide additional surveillance of the parking area. The applicants stated that Sam's Club uses surveillance cameras to monitor the parking area; also, Sam's Club will add six 1.00G-watt light fixtures, illuminating the drive area and the front of the store. In light of this information, the Committee felt that the clear glass should not be required. ACTION: The Committee approved a motion (7-0) to approve the revision to the final site plan and appearance review. MEETING NOTES SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE January 10, 2001 e Page 1 of 2 SPAARC 01-004 1642 Church Street Recommendation to Sian Board Erect temporary veal estate sales signs for multifamily residential building (Church Street Station). ITEM PRESENTED BY: PRESENTATION: DISCUSSION: No one present was familiar enough with this case to present it to the Committee. ACTION: Committee tabled this item (7-0). SPAARC 01-006 SPARC Annual Report Communication Review 2000 Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee Annual Report ITEM PRESENTED BY: M. Mylott. PRESENTATION: M. Mylott distributed copies of the 2000 Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee Annual Report to Committee members prior to the meeting. The number of items considered by the Committee during 2000 decreased almost 7 percent from 1999; however, far too many factors influence the number of items considered by the Committee during a year to begin to assume "Why?' The number of items considered by the Committee is not the same as the number of projects reviewed by the Committee; one project could appear on the Committee agenda numerous times before receiving final approval, each appearance on the Committee agenda constitutes one item. DISCUSSION: The Committee thanked M. Mylott for preparing this report. ACTION: Committee approved a motion (7-0) to forward the 2000 Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee Annual Report as a communication to the Planninq and Development Committee of the City Council. Review Meetina Notes from January 3, 2001 Committee tabled this item (7-0).. Adioumment The meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Marc Steven Mylott, AICP Acting Recording Secretary MEETING NOTES SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE January 10, 2001 Page 2 of 2 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES January 17, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: A.Alterson, L.Black (R.Waiczak), P.D'Agostino (S.Levine), R.Dahal, D.Marino, M.Mylott, S.Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: W.Hallen . . C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_. Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the drafts of the 1/3100 and 1/10/01 SPAARC Meeting Notes with minor corrections to the 1/10101 notes and was passed with S. Nagar abstaining on the1110/01 notes vote. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-007 1930 Ridge Concept Enlarge existing parking structure and construct 8-story multi -family residential, rental building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Greg Ratas and Richard Aaronson — Atlantic Realty GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This proposal retains the existing parking structure with in -fill at its northeast comer and constructs a new 8-story residential, "T" shaped tower on the southern end of the site. A total of 204 rental units would be served by 255 parking spaces and a loading berth. Units range from 550 to 1,175 sq. ft. and with rentals in the $1,190 to $2,250 bracket. A zoning district change from C-2 to R-6 will be requested for this project. This Atlanta based developer, with a regional office, specializes in the up -scale, "life- style" renter market in which the tenants rent by choice, not by necessity. Amenities included for this market are a swimming pool, cyber-caf6, screening room, fitness center, etc. A "post modern" design with a residential look is proposed reflecting the developer's Architect's preferences in an amalgam with local community design elements. An articulated fagade with in -set balconies faces Ridge Avenue capped by a hip roof with dormers and a gable marking the major entry point. Page 1 of 3 01/17/01 The hip roof is an architectural "reference" to the Civic Center. With face brick on the lower level the walls change to cement plaster "stucco" on masonry above, terminated by a standing seam roof form. Two drives are off Ridge Avenue, with the southem drive limited to truck traffic, and a link to the "tower" is shown on the ground floor. A narrow landscape strip is on the Ridge Avenue boundary and extensive landscaping is planned for the Emerson/Ridge comer and "courts" formed in the recesses of the "T" legs. DISCUSSION: A major criticism of the proposal by the Committee was that the design does not address this particular, unique site, but is a "stock" solution better suited to far western suburbs than to the Evanston community. It does not consider the existence of the railroad embankment and the grade change over the site. The "hotel" look of the proposal produces a ,frankly, rather dull design. Loading berth access by backing out on, or from, Ridge Avenue is not acceptable at this busy traffic location. Parking/loading planning is in process and this access issue will be considered in future layouts. Though it may not appear so from the comments above, the Committee is pleased to see this kind of development at this location. Good features in the proposal presented include: -bringing additional rental residential units to the area -reuse of the existing parking structure -articulation and in -set balconies giving interest to long facades -use of planting to lessen the impact on Ridge Avenue It was suggested that future site plans should show more of the surrounding area and that south+west design elevations be included. A study model should be considered to display the design integration with the site. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table this item and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-008 1225 Chicano Renovate street facade of vacant 1-story building PROJECT REPRESENTER cancelled appearance before the meeting. Page 2 of 3 01/17/01 Concept SPAARC 01-009 2730-06 Hampton — Hampton Park Condos Preliminary and Final Reconfigure existing parking area for multi -family residential buildings. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. David Laskey and Scott Inbinder — GO CATS, LLC GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Parking area changes are part of the conversion of this 4-story, 91 unit complex to condominium ownership. Existing parking of 80 spaces has 30 degree stalls backing into parallel stalls over a narrow traffic aisle. Proposed parking is increased to 99 spaces and has mostly 90 degree stalls with wider traffic aisles. A 10 ft. extension of paving is indicated at the northeast site area and additional paving is shown in the southeast site area on a portion of an "exception parcel". The remaining portion of the exception parcel may be sold off; be included in the condo ownership; or donated to the City, after a final decision is made by the developer. DISCUSSION: It was noted that the project's civil engineer should contact the City staff regarding possible storm water retention requirements for the revised paved area. A traffic aisle shown at 22 ft. can be changed to 24 ft. to meet dimensional criteria Introducing some plantings in paved areas is generally a good idea, but with this site surrounded by green spaces it is not suggested at this location. A zoning variation to permit parking outside of an area within 30 ft. of the rear lot line in a residential district will be required for the parking layout. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant only preliminary site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-010 733-39 Dobson Preliminary and Final Replace windows and add off-street parking for three residential buildings (condominium conversion — 18 units) this proposal also includes 129-131 Elmwood PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Mike Realmuto - Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Three vintage 1960 buildings will have minor interior modifications and new windows in this conversion process. An expansion of the 12 off -alley parking spaces to 18 spaces is proposed. DISCUSSION: A variation to locate parking in a required street side yard is required for the layout presented and 2 ft. must be provided from a parking stall to the alley lot line. Landscaping along the parking access walk and at the street side yard was suggested. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant only preliminary site plan and appearance review approval, subject to the review and approval of access walk and street side yard planting by P. D'Agostino, and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 3 of 3 01/17/01 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES January 24 2001 Attenders: Committee Members: A. Berkowsky (K. Kelly), Black (R.Walczak), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), D.Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, C. Smith, Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, R.Fahlstrom, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting: Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 00-002 909 Davis Revision to Final Mixed -use 6 story building. Ground floor retail+offrce and upper floors all oflrce. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. Alice Rebechini — Mesirow Financial Mr. Fernando Araujo -- Architect, OWR&P GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Central topic of the presentation was the use of gray concrete plaza paving, with some precast medallions, on the majority of the project site. The sidewalk along Church Street and a portion of the northwest site comer use the downtown Evanston streetscape paver+brick system. The scheme presented was unchanged from the last presentation. Various numbers were given as the cost increase associated with providing the downtown Evanston streetscape over the entire site. These averaged around $250K. With the cold weather construction cost increases generated by the construction start time, most of the contingency in the developer's budget has been consumed and the project cannot afford this sitework cost increase. The developer noted that the project financing was based on designs approved at the Plan Commission and in the Redevelopment Agreement. A minor issue of material choice of column enclosures at sidewalk intersection was resolved by the Architect with a 24" high replaceable section at the bottom of the coated aluminum column enclosure. The bollards in the loading area were removed, giving better access to the loading berths. Page 1 of 3 01/24/01 DISCUSSION: The column enclosure solution was accepted by the Committee after determining that other materials had been studied and the uniform appearance of the enclosure all the way to the ground was an important design element to the Architect. Anticipated truck per day numbers are difficult to estimate by the developer without knowing the tenants served. The developer must provide some estimate of the truck per day load to the Traffic and Zoning Divisions so that the Zoning Division can determine if the configuration proposed meets the Zoning Ordinance criteria. Demonstration of proper access to the loading berths is still a Committee concern. Two bike racks are currently shown at the east center site area, by the CTA entry, and one will be moved to the northwest site area in the final design. it was noted that while the site is in the existing Church Street Plaza signage district, no signage was included in the existing signage design for this portion of the district. In fact, it was specifically excluded from the signage design. A complete signage design package must be submitted and approved for this project site. The developer indicated that the approved signage design for the Church Street Plaza was going to be used as a basis for this site signage design and this was encouraged by the Committee. The need for use of the Evanston brick+paver streetscape system over this entire downtown area site was strongly re -stated by the Committee. It was noted that the motion from the 1/1/00 meeting placed a one month timing for re -presentation on the site paving issue, which has not been met. Possible use of a combination of concrete with brick borders and some increases to the brick+paver areas were discussed and dismissed by the Committee. After the significant investment in the streetscape program it was felt that it would not be fair to the citizens of Evanston to pennit a change on this large of a site. The original streetscape was financed 50/50 by property tax funds and by a special assessment paid by downtown property owners. Alternate financing from a special assessment for this property was dismissed by the developer because the cost would have to passed on in the rental rates and this would make the spaces more difficult to rent. A Committee member noted that in the preliminary approval notes for the project, use of concrete was mentioned, but pavers would be "considered" and asked if the current Committee position is a change from that original approval? It was agreed that the City's project manager for this project, Ms. J. Aiello, would be contacted for City's general understanding of the sitework design for this project during the development process. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: -that the downtown Evanston streetscape paver+brick system be used on the entire site. -that loading berth access and capacity be reviewed and approved by the City of Evanston Zoning+Traffic department's staff. and was passed with K. Kelly, D. Marino, and M. Mylott, voting no. Page 2 of 3 01/24/01 SPAARC 00-064 3200 Grant Final Construct 4-story, 24 unit residential building at the Presbyterian Homes. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. Nancy Tolan — Presbyterian Homes Mssr. Phil Barr and J. Duggan — Presbyterian Homes Mr. Timothy Schmitt — OKW Architects GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This 4-story, 24 unit residential development is basically unchanged from the preliminary submission. Use of tan, standard size face brick; limestone, and dark bronze anodized aluminum window frames is still proposed. The light tan roof -top equipment screen has been decreased in length. Casement windows have been changed from 3' wide to 2' wide units to promote ease in operation while the glazed area overall size has been preserved. Landscaping has been added in the Arbor l and II junction area. Grade level patios are screened with 5'-6" high masonry walls with low planting on the street side. DISCUSSION: Rather lengthy discussion occurred on the patio security issue. Sense of privacy vs level of security seemed to be at the core of the discussion. While it is true that security increases as a function of openness to view from the street and other public areas , privacy decreases with this viewing. Security cameras with pan and zoom capability are planned at the roof edges and will provide 24 hour views of the patios. A Committee member felt that this could be be considered as an invasive measure by potential occupants. Many occupants for these units will come from single family homes and enjoy the use/ownership of an outdoor area. This has been established by discussions with potential occupants on the project waiting list. The possible use of gates to create fully controlled enclosures has been rejected by focus groups of potential occupants as too limiting for neighbor -to -neighbor interactions. Access to the total site during the construction period is being discussed by the owner with the City Fire Department staff. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: -that the patio security measures be reviewed and approved by the City Police staff. -that the patio landscaping be reviewed and approved by the City Parks and Forestry staff. -that access to the total site during the construction period be reviewed and approved by City Fire Department staff. and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 3 of 3 01/24/01 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES January 31, 2001 Attenders: Committee Members: A. Atterson, A. Berkowsky (K. Kelly), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the drafts of the 1/24/01 Meeting Notes with minor changes and was passed with R. Dahal abstaining. Projects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-011 1900 Dempster Preliminary Demolish former type 2 restaurant (Pizza Hut) and retail goods establishment (Kids R Us) and construct 1-story mixed -use building (two type 2 restaurants each with drive -through facility and retail goods establishments). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Jim Sutphen and Chuck Fiorito GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Removal of two freestanding buildings in this shopping center and construction of a freestanding (out lot) building of 19,500 SF are included in this proposal. The new construction is located in the northeast area of the site, surrounded by parking and with two drive-thru lanes. The layout increases parking spaces by 2 over the existing number and relocates the lot retention to the Dempster Street area, with shielding landscaping. A 5' high sign is proposed in the corner area within a landscaped area. The new building uses materials and design elements similar to the existing complex and will strongly relate to the existing "Silo" shops re -design, recently completed. Page 1 of 2 1/31/01 DISCUSSION: The presenters were reminded that the drive-thru's are a special use in the Zoning Ordinance. When asked, they said that the removal of the existing facilities and the construction of the new building are contingent on having leases for the spaces. A fast food restaurant is currently in the lease consideration stage. No new curb cuts are required by the layout_ The location of the drive-thru's on the west side of the new building, facing a large parking area, is good, but the "stacking" arrangement shown has problems and could probably be improved. This will be studied by the developer. An extension of the raised divider shown in the drive off Dodge Avenue to the west will also be studied and the accessible spaces will be moved, probably farther north than currently shown. The 6 ft. high screen wall shielding the service area could be a security issue, but the developer is very aware of these kinds of problems and will well -light the area and keep the landscaping in front of the wall low. The "tower" elements developed at the comers of the new building relate to the existing building design. Suggestions for their improvement by the Committee are: -use of less EIFS and more brick, all brick on the "towers" is a possibility. -use of a hip, sheet metal roof like the existing "towers". -lower the "towers" to address the building location closer to the streets -expansion of the `tower" area to the pier positions currently shown The redesign of the "tower" elements will be studied by the developer. Drainage of "eyelid" canopies will be designed to not create icing hazards in walkway areas. Provisions for bicycle racks will be included in the overall shopping center planning. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval and was passed with R. IDahai abstaining. Page 2 of 2 211101 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES February 7, 2001 Attenders: Commitbae Members: A. Alterson, A. Bedwwslky (K. Kelly), L Black (R.Wakyak), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, M. MykAt, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, R.Fahlstrom, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the drafts of the 6/14/00 Meeting Notes vdhout comment and of the 712648/16-8/23/00 + 1/17-1f31/01 Meeting Notes with minor changes and was passed with C. Smith abstaining on the W26100 vote and H. Friedman abstaining on the 8116100 vole. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 01- 003 1901 Dempster KFC Preliminary Proposed renovation of fagade of Type 3 restaurant. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Dave Zimmermann — KFC Project Manager GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: The facade improvement consists basically of removing the red mansard roof areas and replacing them with vertical surfaces using EIFS construction. A small cooler is to be added on the east side of the building, abutting an ebsting cooler of the same size. Awning and signage changes are also part of the work. The modifications are driven by the incorporation of a `PIZZA HUT EXPRESS" operation into the building which will sell individual size pizzas at the counter and in the drive thru lane. No deliver service will be offered. Page 1 of 5 2f7101 It was noted that the specific request by the Committee to include the railroad structures and the existing parking garage in future elevations was not addressed in this presentation and was re -made for subsequent presentations. Site security of the northem "courtyard" in the "T' form will be addressed with a 'gated" site with controlled entry. A question of the condition of the existing parking structure was raised by a Committee member, considering the City's experience with the life of their garage. Another member noted that this project's garage is a poured -in -place concrete structure which has been fully enclosed for most of its life, while the City garage is precast, post -tensioned concrete sections, exposed to the weather for all of its life. A meeting with the Traffic department to review truck access off Ridge Avenue will be held. The project provides 1.25 parking spaces per unit, but City studies indicate that a 1.33 ratio is desirable. The surrounding area is 'permit ony parking and is full, so no new permits will be issued in the area. With the second preliminary design for the project soundly rejected by the Committee an impasse has been reached. To continue project development it was suggested by Committee members that a group of design professional from the City staff and volunteers from the comimunity should meet with the developer's Architects to discuss the project design. This meeting could be arranged through Carolyn Smith. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table this item and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01- 012 1507-1511 Maple Preliminary (and Final for Model Unit only Proposed conversion of multi -family residential building (J 1 dwelling units) from private to condominium ownership including renovation of the exterior and construction of new rear porch. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. George Cyrus, Peter Cladovan, Drew Heindel and James Laurraven GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This project proposes to convert the 11 units in the Layfette Building to condominium ownership. A complete "gutting' of the building is planned and all the deteriorated wood windows will be replaced with aluminum units. An existing rear parking area will be re -stripped to 14 spaces and a trash dumpster location provided. New planting will be added to the building front. A BOCA Chapter 34 study has been done and approved with trade-offs incorporated that do include a sprinkler system. Page 3 of 5 2R101 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES February 7, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: A. Atterson, A. Berkowsky (K. Kelly), L. Black (R.Walczak), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, M. MykAt, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, R.Fahistrom, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the ffl"Idng: Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the drafts of the 6/14/00 Meeting Notes without comment and of the 7/26-8/16-8/23/00 + 1/17-1/31/01 Meeting Notes with mirror changes and was passed with C. Smith abstaining on the 7/26100 vote and H. Friedman abstaining on the 8116100 vote. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 01- 003 1901 DeMster KFC Proposed renovation of farads of Type 3 restaurant PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Dave Zimmermann — KFC Project Manager Prroftlnary GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The facade improvement consists basically of removing the red mansard roof areas and replacing them with vertical surfaces using EIFS construction. A small cooler is to be added on the east side of the building, abutting an existing cooler of the same size. Awning and signage changes are also part of the work. The modifications are driven by the incorporation of a "PIZZA HUT EXPRESS" operation into the building which will sell individual size pizzas at the counter and in the drive thru lane. No deliver service will be offered. Page 1 of 5 217101 DISCUSSION: Real stucco is preferred by the Committee over EIFS construction. Plasterers have always been readily available in the Chicago area. The requirement for opaque awnings was noted to the presenter, but this would be covered in the signage review process. A zoning analysis must be done to determine if the existing special use permit needs to be updated for the changes proposed. A Committee member noted that the site has had litter control problems reported to the City. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval with the conditions that: -the black awning be removed and the flag sign retained (subject to the Sign Regulations) -the new vertical surface construction match the construction of the existing wall construction, below, i.e. EIFS if EIFS and stucco if stucco. -a litter collection plan for the site be submitted with the building permit application and was passed with A. Atterson voting no. SPAARC 01-007 19.30 Ridge Cori�iot Enlarge existing parking structure and construct 8-story mufti -family residential, rental buNding. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: ks. Richard Aaronson - Developer GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: An addition to the existing parking garage and a T shaped tower maintains the same "footprint" as the previous proposal. Changes in the new scheme include: -replacing the sloped hip roof with flat roofs. -using stepped forms in the tower array, varying from 7 to 9 stories high (10' floor -to -floor in 8 story scheme has been changed to 9' in the 7/9 story scheme to not increase the total building height proposed for the project) -using a balcony (terrace under study) at the Emerson -Ridge corner An articulated fa+ ade is still planned with inset balconies. Auto and truck traffic are like the original proposal with two short loading berths. The south "courtyard" area of the "T" form will contain a swimming pool. Ridge Avenue changes from four 10' lanes at the Emerson comer to two 12' lanes in front of the parking garage which might permit a drop-off lane in the transition area, at the north end of the proposed tower locations. DISCUSSION: Major Committee criticism of the revised design was the same as the original design, namely that it is not integrated or tailored to the specific site and represents a "generic' solution that could be located anywhere. Members felt that it does not address the site shape or the existence of the railroad bridge/embankment and ignores the prominence of the site south comer. The developer said that they had tried many schemes, but that the 60' to 70' maximum depth of mass, dimensional criteria for residential towers limited their selection. Page 2 of 5 217101 it was rated that the specific request by the Committee to include the railroad structures and the existing parking garage in future elevations was not addressed in this presentation and was re -made for subsequent presentations. Site security of the nordvm "courtyard' in the 'T form will be addressed with a "gated' site with controlled entry. A question of the condition of the existing parking structure was raised by a Committee member, considering the City's experience with the life of their garage. Another member noted that this project's garage is a poured -in -place concrete structure which has been fully enclosed for most of its life, while the City garage is precast, past -tensioned concrete sections, exposed to the weather for all of its fife. A meeting with the Traffic department to review truck access off Ridge Avenue will be held. Time project provides 1.25 parking spaces per unit, but City studies indicate that a 1.33 ratio is desirable. The surrounding area is "permit only" parking and is full, so no new permits will be issued in the area. With the second preliminary design for the project soundly rejected by the Committee an impasse has been reached. To continue project development it was suggested by Committee members that a group of design professional from the City staff and volunteers from the community should meet with the developer's Architects to discuss the project design. This meeting could be arranged through Carolyn Smith. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table this item and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01- 012 1507-1511 Manle Prallminary land Final for Model Unk onft Pmposed conversion of mufti -family residential buiAding (f 1 dwelling units) ham private to carrdw0hium ownership including renovation of the exterior and construction of new near Porch. PROJECTREPRESENTED BY: Mssr. George Cyrus, Peter Cladovan, Drew Heindel and James Laurraven GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This project proposes to convert the 11 units in the Layfette Building to condominium ownership. A complete "gutting' of the building is planned and all the deteriorated wood windows will be replaced with aluminum units. An existing rear parking area will be re -stripped to 14 spaces and a trash dumpster location provided. New planting will be added to the building front. A BOCA Chapter 34 study has been done and approved with trade-offs incorporated that do include a sprinkler system. Page 3 of 5 217101 DISCUSSION: Possible use of new wood windows was raised by a Committee member and had been dismissed by the Architect on maintenance grounds. It was noted that no Disclosure Statement of 210 Notice had been sent to the City, as required. The rebuilding of the rear porches may be considered repair in the Zoning review. Unit accessibility issues were answered by the fad that the ground floor units are up two risers and as not being first occupancies, the conversion was presented as being exempt from the Fair Housing Act. An accessible space may be required in the parking area. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval with the conditions that -new windows have the same glazed area as existing and have dark color frames -provision of a sprinkler system bere-considered -a new zoning analysis be done -proper submittal is made to the City of the Disclosure Statement and 210 Day Notice and was passed by unanimous vote. OPAARC 1001 Chicano Entemrise Rent-A-Car RecommendatIon to the Slpn Board Install new awning with signage and new wall sign for a automobile and recreational vehicle `sales" (sic) establishment. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Bob Fahlstrom GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Enterprise has rented a space abutting the alley in the building housing Hollywood Video. The have installed a canopy in the parking lot without a permit. The building owner is allowing Enterprise to use some of the spaces in the existing parking area that were previously used by Hollywood. DISCUSSION: The building owner must file for a Zoning analysis to clear up any possible parking or use questions generated from the introduction of the Enterpise operation. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table this item and was passed by unanimous vote Page 4 of 5 2(7/01 SPAARC 500-512 Main for 860 Hlnmanl Recommendation to the Sign Board Consider proposal to establish a Unified Business Center Sign Plan. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr, Bob Fahstrom GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The building owner has developed a plan to use awnings with signage on them as a unified design for the building. This will be implemented as the stores are modified. DISCUSSION: The Committee thought that this was an excellent example of improving a building's image through the use of uinified signage. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend approval of this item to the Sign Board and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 1210-1236 Chicago Recommendation to the Sign Board Install additional real estate signs for three 7-story multi -family residential buildings (condominiums) and one 4-story mixed -use building (ground floor ofte and mulb-family residential above — condominiums). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Bob Fahistrom GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: These additional sales signs have been installed without a permit. DISCUSSION: Some Committee members thought that the additional signage actually improved the construction site and others did not. Installing signs without following the permit process was condemned by all members. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Board deny this request and was not passed by a vote of 4 yes and 5 no. A second motion was made to recommend approval of this item to the Sign Board and was passed with R. Dahal, S. Nagar, C. Smith, and R. Walczak voting no. SPAARC 01- ??? 133139 Dobson and 121139 Elmwood Final ffor windows onivi Proposed replacement of the existing windows. (Added at meeting) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Marc Mylott GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This work will be limited to the replacement of the existing windows and helps to maintain the project schedule. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 5 of 5 217101 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES February 14, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: A. Alterson, Black (R.Walczak), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, M. Mylott, S. Nagar. C. Smith Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Commitbee Business: A motion was made to approve the draft of the 2/7/01 Meeting Notes with a minor change and was passed. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-015 1841 Asbury Prellminrary an Final inal Re -construct % story top of existing res/alence, requiring a major zoning variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms.Denise Simons — Owner, Ms. Pamela Sundell - Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Existing low (6-8" ridge) % story will be raised with new roof construction to create a usable % story. New area will be less than 60% of the floor below and qualify as a 1/2 story. The variation is to continue the south wall sip at 2.94' from the property line. This house is in a historic district. DISCUSSION: New window will be recessed to provide more than X to property line and avoid the fire rating. Neighbors are very happy with the proposal according to the Owner. The existing'/2 story addition was modified without a permit and is a very poor design. Adjacent properties are a "mirror" image home to the south and an expanded "bungalow" to the north. The Architect believes that the reconstructed Y2 story will fit into the existing fabric of the area. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to approval by the Preservation Commission and Zoning variation approval and passed by unanimous vote. Page 1 of 4 2/14/01 SPAARC 01-016 2111 Orrinaton Preliminary and Final Re -construct a carport and construct a second story addition to an existing residence, requiring a major zoning variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Phyllis and Jack Lassner - Owners GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This project would remove the existing carport which is in poor condition and over the property line; and reconstruct it within the property plus create a small addition to a second flaar bedroom. The variations required by the proposal are a 2' side yard instead of 15' and a 7' rear yard instead of 30'. DISCUSSION: The curb cut off Orrington will not be changed and the existing fence on the north property line will be removed and shrubs added in the area. Pervious or brick divsway material will be considered. Timing of ZBA and PC meetings for this project on 2120 will be coordinated by City staff. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-017 2027 Hawthorne Prelininary and Fipal Construct new attached garage and repair existing rear portion of structure, requiring a major zoning variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Larson Associates - Architects GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Existing "garage" space is not accessible by car and rear addition has signs of structural movements. A new attached garage is proposed along with repair the of the existing building. Garage position requires a variation on the required rear yard location. Brick is proposed for the new walls. DISCUSSION: Neighbors have been contacted, but no feedback received to date. The design is in the conceptual stage and windows will be added and redesign of the upper deck railing will be considered in the final design process. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and passed by unanimous vote. Page 2 of 4 2114/01 SPAARC 01-018 1717 Benson — Second Bacdat Church of Evanston Conc:eot Remove existing rear 2-story addition and construct a new 4-story addition in its place. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Representatives of Cambell and Campbell -- Architects. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The existing 2-story (with basement) addition at the rear of the church structure would be removed and a new 4-story (with basement) addition would be built in its place under this proposal. Soil borings and resultant studies show that the existing church foundations cannot accept additional bads. Only staff offices will be housed in the new addition. The new addition plus existing church floor areas will exceed the FAR (Floor -area -ratio) for the site current zoning. DISCUSSION: Some interior renovation of the existing church will be included in this work and the church function may be shut down for 6-8 months during construction. Existing roof top air handling equipment may be replaced by interior units as part of this work. The addition project will require approval by the Preservation Commission and -;an take cues from the existing church design or be of a more contemporary nature. Parking will certainly be an issue in any zoning review. Coordination of alley shut -downs with the Traffic Dept. will be an important part of the project construction process. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant approval to this concept and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-019 2121 Dewey Concept Proposed conversion of existing warehousa/factory structure into multiple light industdaU commercial rental units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. A. Spatz —Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Existing 28,000 SF complex was constructed as eight abutting buildings over the 1925-1956 period. It has three 'PIN" numbers associated with it and MUE zoning.. Over three phases of construction the building would be converted, under this proposal, into 20 rental units in the 1,300 to 1,400 SF range. The units would be limited to light industriall commercial use and no residential use is planned. Far future plans include new construction of 3 or 4 additional rental units on the open 33' lot south of the existing building. Current interested tenants include a bulk mailing operation; a concrete contractor; and an artisan ceramic manufacturer. Each unit would be served by an enclosed parking space. Early studies reviewed with City staff included a curb cut per unit which met considerable resistance. Current layouts access all the parking off the existing alley for Phase-1 and removes one existing curb cut. Phases-11 shows two curb cuts on Darrow and Phase -III shows one additional curb cut on Darrow. Elevation sketches and plans indicate large improvements in the appearance of the complex with large increases in window areas. Page 3 of 4 2/14/01 DISCUSSION: Downsides discussed by the Committee for this -loading and unloading of deliveries from trucks parked E Include: -increased traffic in the area -inclusion of bathtubs and "kitchens` in the units -lack of common receiving area Upsides discussed by the Committee include: -a real need in the City fnr small commercial/ industrial units (planning r8whAms many calls asking about this kind of unit) -increased traffic and occupancy increases security in the area _9ndosed parking is real marketing feature AINn-all, with some "fine tuning" required, this was viewed as an exciting proposal. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant approval to this concept and Passed with H. Friedman voting no. a.- 9 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES February 21, 2001 Attenders: Committee Members: J. Aiello, A. Alterson, L. Black (R.Walezak), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, R.Fahlstrom, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined #hat a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the draft of the 2/14101 Meeting Notes#n� passed by„. unanimous vote. ✓; .-:,,, Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-020 1128 Chicapo — Jewel Food SbDre ry Facade renovation for food store. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Mike Nevin, Kent Hanway, and Jason Cline. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This proposal consists of major interior remodeling /renovation and exterior remodeling to the south and most of the east facades of the existing store. Site work will be limited to: -maintaining the existing number of parking spaces and verifying that the currently required number of accessible spaces are provided. -patching, slurry coating, and re -stripping of the existing parking area -replacing the existing HPS lighting with metal halide to a higher lighting level -installation of ten removable "cart corrals" in the lot -improvements to the existing landscape strips Page 1 of 5 2/21/01 Improvements to the facades include removing aggregate faced panels on all walls and EiFS (Exterior Insulation & Finish System = "DRYVIT") and brick areas on the south wall with discontinuous canopies. The east wall improvements include EIFS and brick areas with new storefront + glazing in the existing openings. Cultured stone will be used on the bulkheads under the window areas and discontinuous "sunscreens" are shown over the windows. The full height existing brick area at the north end of the east wall will remain unchanged. Work on the Chicago Avenue frontage will require temporary sidewalk relocation and pedestrian protection, but this will not be needed at the north end, brick wall section. DISCUSSION: The Committee reminded the Architect that we required zero footcandles at property lines from site lighting and that signage requires a separate review process. They also requested that proposed landscape improvements be included in the next presentation and were referred to the Traffic Department for sidewalk issues and to the Engineering Department for possible drainage issues. When questioned the presenters indicated that the store layout might change if liquor sales restrictions from The City of Evanston are altered. Members of the Committee suggested less use of EIFS + more brick and suggested that "sunscreens" with more weather protection for pedestrians be considered on the Chicago Avenue face. A request for high windows in the south wall does not fit with the pharmacy function planned for this area of the store, but a suggestion for reveals to articulate the EIFS areas will be incorporated into future elevation studies. With the status of the design and the number of issues raised at the meeting, it was decided to consider this proposal for "concept rather than 'preliminary' review. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant concept only approval to this item and was with A. Alterson voting no. PO ARC 07-022 3200 Grant— Presbv/rrkn Himes Concegt Construct additions and garages for residential units at Trinity Court.. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. Nancy Tolan, Ms. Dana Howard, and Mr. Robert Walker GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This presentation covers the master plan for the western third of the site, the "Trinity Court` area. It has two basic objectives: -doubling the number of garages serving the area over the next three years -expanding units with small additioons as the units become available. Both programs are in response the change in the demands of the senior population.. More of the 57 existing units require two auto spaces as current waiting time for an on -site parking space can be as long as eight years. A increase in the kitchen/ breakfast area space is also important to the target clients along with addition of master bedroom suites with private bathrooms. Unit areas rise from 1,170 SF to 1.350 SF with the additions. Another aspect of this plant is the improvement of the western boundary of the site. This wide gravel strip will be developed into a paved drive and landscaped areas. Right angle parking will be eliminated and only parking parallel to the drive will be developed. Page 2 of 5 2/21101 The garages are positioned to not create long expanses of overhead doors on any one facade and have windows in walls without doors. All the additions to the units proper are fully integrated with the existing materials and gable roof forms. DISCUSSION: The Committee's first response was that this is a very thoughtful, excellent improvement. It was noted that a revision to the existing Special Use would be required for this construction. Presbyterian Homes has begun monthly meetings with neighbors to maintain a friendly relationship. Minor improvements suggested by the Committee for consideration are: -creation of curves in the two new long straight drives and use of brick paving -use of low berms along the western site boundary -use of more decorative (paneled?) overhead garage doors ACTIONS: ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant concept approval to this item and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-021 3330 Central — Starbucks ProHrnhry Construct new building for Type -it restaurant and retail sales. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Douglas Bean and Andrew Koglin GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: A 5,700 SF building is proposed for the southeast comer of the Central/ Crawford intersection, positioned on the southern portion of the Site. An "anchor" tenant, STARBUCK'S, will occupy 1,800SF of the space with an outdoor "caf6" area a possiblity. Basic building materials are face brick and champagne anodized storefront windows on the north and west elevations and ..,...w..;e masonry units on the south and east walls. A `tower" form is developed at the northwest comer of the structure. A loading berth is accessed off the south alley and the parking area is served by a right -turn only in/ out from Crawford plus a drive to Central. The number of curb cuts associated with the site is reduced and they are moved farther form the comer than their current locations. A residential area abuts the east site edge and a small private school is across the alley to the south. DISCUSSION: With the types of property usage to the south and east, the Committee questioned the appropriateness of concrete masonry units facing these directions. The developer agreed at the meeting to use face brick on all four walls. A good scale is created by the project design and the articulation of the building comer is an interesting element. Possible use of planting at the building wall on the east with a the walk pushed farther to the east was suggested. Use of security lighting on the south face and "soft" lighting at the building entries were also suggested by Committee members. An ]DOT permit will be required for the Central Street curb cut. Use of a monument sign, rather than a "pole" sign, was commended by the Committee. It was suggested that a unified sign plan be developed for the project and submitted to the Sign Board for review. Page 3 of 5 2/21/01 ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-023 817 Chiicapa Construct 8-unit multi -family residential building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Michael Lee Pr+eliminsry GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Garages on the grade level are topped with three levels housing the residential units in this proposal. The Chicago Avenue front of the grade level contains a small (450 SF) retail space and stairs up to a walkway serving the front entries to the residential units. Rear entries are combined for each pair of units. Exterior materials and building construction type have not been determined at this point in the project development. A combination of brick and stone is being considered for the Chicago Avenue fagade. An automatic fire suppression system is not planned at this time. Easements exist on the east ends of the north and south property boundaries. The south site area will be gated front and rear. DISCUSSION: The Committee identified the following possible BOCA Code issues in the material presented: Without independent means of egress the building could fall into Use Group R-2 which would require an automatic fire suppression system for structures higher than two stories -the exterior walkway on the second level requires a stairway at each end -an accessible toilet room will be required for the retail space -exterior wall fire ratings and percentage of openings therein must be checked based on their distance to the property line criteria -mechanical ventilation must be provided in habitable spaces without natural ventilation When asked the developer indicated that the units would be sized in the 2,000 to 2,500 SF bracket and priced in the $185K to $194K range. Committee designs suggestions Included the possible provision of an elevator to the walkway level and improvement in the appearance of the retail store front. With the status of the design and the number of Code issues raised at the meeting, it was decided to consider this proposal for "concept" rather than `preliminary' review. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant concept only approval to this item and was passed with J. Aiello voting no. Page 4 of 5 2/21 /01 SPAARC 00-002 909 Davis McDougal Litbll Communication City Managers decision regarding 6-story mixed -use building.. ISSUE REPRESENTED BY: Ms. Carolyn Smith DISCUSSION: An amended version from the City Manager of the condition placed on the 909 Davis Street project SPAARC approval, regarding incorporation of the downtown streetscape into the project site planning was presented to the Committee. Upon presentation it was discovered that the site sketch copy presented did not show all the proposed brick paver anus. Multiple coping and fa)dng has removed some lines that evidently were lightly drawn on the original. ACTIONS: No action was considered or taken on this matter. Further discussion will be held when legible site sketches are available. Page 5 Of 5 2121/01 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES February 28, 2001 Attenders: Committee Members: J. Aiello, P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, D. Jennings, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting: Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the draft of the 2/21/01 Meeting Notes and passed with M. Mylott abstaining. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-007 1930 Ridae Concopj Enlarge existing parking structure and construct 8-story multi -family residential, rental building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Richard Aaronson and Greg Ratas — Atlantic Realty GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Fresh planning/ thinking has been applied to the site as a direct result of the City's staff meeting with the project Architect and developer. The new proposal shows a tower form starting at roughly the center of the existing parkinf structure and dog -legging to the east at the south end of the site, addressing the site shape. An "architectural element" is planned at the extreme south end of the tower rising above the tower roof level marking the southern terminus of the site. An entry element has been developed east of the tower/ parking intersection, facing Ridge Avenue and stepping up as it goes west to the tower mass. A landscaped terraced area facing Ridge is bounded by the entry element; the tower proper, and the southern dog -leg portion of the tower. The outdoor pool is now located in the site area west of the tower and will be screened. Two loading berths are served by a right -in and right -out circulation flow and can accommodate delivery + refuse trucks, but not over the road semi's. Visitor parking is shown in the parking structure and a drop-off lane is formed on Ridge Avenue. Two variations of this new proposal are being considered, both house 197 rental units (55% = 1 bedroom; 45% = 2 bedroom) and provide 251 parking spaces. These are: Proposal — A = 10 floors plus penthouse, 101' overall height. Proposal - B = 11 floors plus penthouse, 1 10'overall height. Page 1 of 4 =8/01 DISCUSSION: This new concept for the project was given a warm reception by many Committee members. It addresses the site configuration; provides good internal circulation; and is less imposing to Ridge Avenue. Hopefully the "slender elegance" of the planning will be reflected in the elevation development. Re -facing of the existing parking structure will by an "enhancement" of the existing building, according to the developer. The tandem parking indicated is acceptable by the City standards if they serve the same unit. Loading berths are planned as "head -in" and trucks will be serviced from the rear. Detention is currently planned to be under the terraced area facing Ridge Avenue. It was requested by the Committee that future site layouts include the streets on the east side of Ridge Avenue for relationship purposes and the overpass be more clearly defined. A study model would help many people better understand the project's forms and site relation. A traffic study is in -process and preliminary results indicate that the proposed residential use of the site will generate less impact on traffic in the area than either previous use by a grocery store or ENH staff parking. Upon request by the Committee, the signal function at the Ridge/ Emerson intersection and the possible extension of the existing right turn lane on Ridge will be included in the traffic study. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant concept approval to this item and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-024 1601 Central - Rvan Field Preliminary and Final Install wireless communications facility (VoiceStneam) on press box. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Paul Bongaorts and Tom Ebels - Voicestream GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Three arrays of four antennas each (2+2 in two phases in each array) are proposed on sides of the existing press box. The top of the mast - type antenna will be at approximately the level of the top of existing light standards. Equipment enclosure will be behind existing roof top walls and will not be visible from the ground. Coverage studies presented show the need for this installation and the two phase mode is to provide the capacity need anticipated in the near future. DISCUSSION: When asked about neighborhood awareness of this proposal, the presenters told of hand delivery of 200 fliers in the area for a NWU/ Voicestream/ Alderperson meeting with no attendance. Voicestream received three calls relating to TV reception and the Alderperson had one relating to possible health hazards. The Voicestream presenters indicated that all studies to date showed no effect on health. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 2 of 4 2/28/01 SPAARC 01-025 1224 Dempster— Beth Emet Svnaaoaue Proliminary and Final Construct addition to and renovate religious institution.. PROJECT PRESENTERS DID NOT APPEAR SPAARC 01-026 2735 Sheridan Preliminary and Final Construct 1-story addition to the east side of a single-family residence , requiring a major variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. Bonnie Rosenberg —Architect's Rep GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A consolidation of two lots will accompany the minor additions and majors renovations to this historic residence. Continuation of the north bulding line at the existing 8 ft. side yard setback line requires a major variation from the 15 ft. zoning criteria. DISCUSSION: The neighbor to the north has been contacted and is pleased with the project work. The Committee noted that a grading plan must accompany any addition drawings. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 3 of 4 2/28/01 SPAARC 01-027 2020 Greenwood — Spartech Plastics Preliminary Construct addition to, and create 5 additional parking spaces for, light manufacturing use. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Sam Molditaries — Property Manager GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A 20,000 SF addition to the west is proposed to this 85,000 SF light manufacturing building. The addition will expand much needed warehouse space and will relocate truck docks back 50 ft. off the street. Current docks are directly off the street which has residential use opposite the building. Materials for the addition will match the existing building and the 21 ft. addition height will match the southern portion of the existing building. DISCUSSION: Questions raised by the Committee were answered as follows: -addition to landscaping in front of the building will be considered -one accessible parking space must be provided in the new parking area -existing 28 parking spaces serve the 250 employees -no employees will be added by the addition program -integration of truck traffic access to the property to the west with this property will be discussed with the owner of that property. -project is trying for a May-1 start and is estimated in the $600-700K range The application of storm water detention policy to this particular project will be reviewed by City staff from multiple departments. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval and was passed with S. Nagar voting no. SPAARC 98-0035 1501 Sherman — Holidav Inn Final Remodel exterior and interior (restaurant) of existing hotel — Phase-1. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Tracy Chen - Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Interior restaurant remodeling and new southwest entry, plus new accessible main entry are unchanged from the preliminary presentation. No work in this phase is over the public way, except the swinging door to the chair lift which will have limited use. DISCUSSION: Aside from the storefront + stair work at the new and existing entries, no exterior work is included in this phase. A Committee member noted that detectable warnings are required at the top landing of all stairways. The canopy design shown for future phases will require additional development before it comes before the Committee. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 4 of 4 2/28/01 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES March 7, 2001 Attenders: Committee Members: A. Altarson, P. IYAgostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: - Other Staff. C. Ruiz, R.Fahlstrom, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meetinjL. Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the draft of the 2/28101 Meeting Notes with minor corrections and passed by unanimous vote. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-028 1501 Central - NWU PWImInary Replace scoreboard at Ryan Field. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Rick Taylor and Gavin Tun - NWU GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Replacement of the existing scoreboard in the same location (NE comer of field) is proposed. The new scoreboard would have a large "JUMBOTRON" video display and be 14 ft. taller than the existing board. Drawings and photomontages presented did not completely agree, with the drawings reflecting the most recent design changes. DISCUSSION: A concern was raised by the Committee that the design shown in the photomontages was the one seat out in fliers and displayed at a poorly attended neighborhood meeting and that the current design differs from this scheme. NWU staff indicated that the small layout changes made were: the clock was moved from bottom to the top of the scoreboard -advertising space is unchanged Page 1 of 4 317101 -two NW logos have been replaced by one central NW logo -the text panel displaying downs, etc. data has been removed -the size of the scoreboard is not changed When asked, NWU staff indicated that the actual material choice for the non -scoreboard portion of the array had not been selected at this time but assured the Committee that it would not be EIFS (Dryvit). It was also established that the square feet of advertising on the current scoreboard and on the proposed design are very close to being equal. Some Committee members felt that the scoreboard design should relate less to the Ryan Field facades and some felt the relationships shown were good. The design is still in a preliminary stage and will be improved as it develops. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-029 2223 Wsahinaton — Easv $Duds Con_ cw�_ _ Construct a 2, 700 SF refrigerated cooler addition to a light manufacturing building.. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Peter Karamgeos and Gillespie Design Group GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This vegetable prep business which employs 22 persons, established in 1954, needs the cooler space to provide fresher, more durable products to its clients. A steel framed structure is proposed with heavily insulated membrane roof construction and pre-fab insulated wall panels. Limiting heat absorption by the cooler walls requires that only very light colors be considered for their exterior surface. The existing "L" shaped building will incorporate the cooler array on the east side of the V. A wrought iron fence is being considered to enclose the paved area of the site. DISCUSSION: The Committee noted that the cooler addition has a more "industrial" look than the existing facility and that care should be exercised to limit its impact as much as possible. Setting the cooler back from the existing wall and introduction of landscaping in front of the street facing wail were suggested. Use of the darkest color possible on the exterior that most closely complemented the existing building was also suggested. A zoning analysis is required for the project and future presentations should include current and proposed parking layouts. It was determined that track staging and overnight parking problems reported in the area are not associated with this business. The owner allows four neighbors to park on his lot and has good relationships with them. Use of the wall panels in a horizontal position was suggested. A possible security problem created by a "blind spot" in the notch shown between the existing building and the cooler will be solved by either reconfiguring the cooler or fencing. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant approval to this concept and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 2 of 4 317/01 SPAARC 01-030 1906 Dempster— Triple Check Preliminary and Final Provide new front door for retail service establishment PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. M. Mylott GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A tenant space build -out requires a new door opening in an existing aluminum storefront wall. The door and glazing will exactly match the existing storefront system. Permission for one door of identical construction per future tenant space without SPAARC review is also requested. DISCUSSION: This is a no brainer. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval to this door and to one door per tenant space in future spaces and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-031 1244 Chicago — Minaslan Rugs Recommendation to the Sign Board Retain temporary sign for one year at retails goods establiishment PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. R. Fahistrom GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Two existing temporary signs, one with dates long past and both with confusing messages are requested to remain by the business owner. DISCUSSION: Temporary signs can only be up 30 days, and with an extension a second 30 day period. These signs are beyond these limits. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Review and Appeals Board deny ft Sign Variation Application and that the owner be instructed to immediately remove both temporary signs and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 3 of 4 317101 SPAARC 01-032 2528 Greenbav — Koenig and Strev Recommendation to the Sign Board Reface non-conthrming pole sign and add new south wall sign at office. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. R. Fahistrom GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The existing pole sign is 17 ft. high and the re -facing is proposed with a white backround. A wall sign already exists on the south wall. DISCUSSION: A Committee member noted that the existing pole sign can stay "as is" for some time (maybe as long as 3 years) under "grandfather" provisions and that this is, at least, an opportunity to improve the sign for this period. Other Committee members thought that any approval of changes to a non -conforming pole sign was not proper. All seemed to agree that Ow additional wall sign was not needed and was excessive signage. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Review and Appeals Board deny the Sign Variation Application for the wall sign was passed by unanimous vote. A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Review and Appeals Board approve the Sign Variation Application for the pole sign re -facing with the condition that the sign backround color ,N L to the Sign Ordinance requirements was passed with A. Alterson, C. Smith, and J. Wolinski voting no. SPAARC 01-033 515 Main -- Great Bank Recommendation to the Sign Board Provide wall signs at financial institution. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. R. Fahlstrom GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This signage proposal requires a variation because the height to the top of the sign exceeds the Sign Ordinance criteria. DISCUSSION: The Committee could see no reason to approval new signs on this new building that did not conform with all requirements of the Sign Ordinance. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Review and Appeals Board deny the Sign Variation Application was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-025 1224 Demuster — Both Emet Svnago9ue Preliminarf and Final Construct addition to and interior renovation of religious institution. PROJECT PRESENTER DID NOT APPEAR FOR THE SECOND WEEK IN A ROW Page 4 of 4 317101 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES March 21, 2001 Attendees: Commitbe Members: J. Aiello, A. Aiterson, P. D'Agostino (S.UMne), R. Dahal, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: H. Friedman Oilier SUM C. Ruiz, W.Hallen A. Alterwm began (C. Smith (chair) later continued) determined that a quorum exhding and began the meeting s CRMM Business: A motion was made to approve the draft of the 317101 Meeting Notes and passed with M. Myiott and H. Friedman abstaining. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01.025 1226 Demaellar — Beth Emet Svna oMuo Proliminary and Final Construct addition to and renovation on a religious institution. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Mark Gershar, Phillip Pollack, Fernando Fen (Architect), and Matt Neumann. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This small, 2-story{basement addition will make all the levels of the synagogue complex accessible. The 1963 sanctuary element was built about 4 ft below the original 1954 classroom wing. In addition, major HVACup-grades, classroom window replacement, and some security system changes are included in the work. The addition is designed using the existing classroom wing materials and motif to blend in and maintain the sanctuary element's prominence. DISCUSSION: Landscape provisions were questioned by a Committee member. The presenters indicated that major landscape improvements had been made to the site 11 yearn ago; the addition removes only one tree and insignificant landscaping; and the existing' classroom wing hedge would be continued across the north face of the new addition. C. Ruiz noted that the Preservation Commission reviewed and approved the design, the matching of materials, and the replacement windows closely matching the existing windows. Page 1 of 4 3/21/0 ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-020 1128 Chicaao —Jewel Food Store Preliminary Fagade renovation and interior remodeling to a food establishment. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Mike Nevin and Kent Hanway (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: All the Committee's suggestions from the previous "concept presentation have been incorporated into the revised design. Much less use of EIFS ('Dryvir), increased use of brick, and more continuous, extended awnings are all included in the drawings shown. The proposed awnings are now continue to the north property line on Chicago Avenue and are of steel construction. DISCUSSION: Committee members suggested adding two awning units to the center of the south fagade to increase the weather protection provided and to "soften" the relatively flat wall. It was noted that the signage shown would require variations from the Sign Regulations. A question on awning drainage on the sidewalk has been answered with the use of under "lk drains, discharging into the street gutter. Possible use of more windows on the south ekwation Is limited by the pharmacy and liquor sales functions behind this wall. Committee questions found that: the parking space count remains unchanged on the site -existing landscaping will be improved with two new trees and additional plantings (including some evergreens) in the existing beds -signage will be internally illuminated and wall down lights are proposed -an existing bike rack provides 415 spaces -pipe railings at the main store entry will be replaced with metal screens, improving the appearance of this area. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval with the condition that ail landscaping on the site be property maintained and was passed by unanimous vote SPAARC 01-034 2650 Ridge — ENH Evanston Hosottal Preliminary and Final Replace a window with an exterior doorway at existing hospital. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. James Arends and Scott Schneider (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A exerting stairway currently discharges to a roof area and this does not conform to Building Code requirements. At an existing window kxation a new exit door will be formed with a "bridge" connection to an existing terrace area with stair to a grade level exit path. This meets Code criteria. DISCUSSION: Minor discusslon was held to understand exactly what was being proposed. Page 2 of 4 3/21101 ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-018 1717 Benson — Second Baptist Church Conc*21 Constrict addition at the rear of the existing religious institution.. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. William Borden and Cliff Bridges (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This revision varies form the previously presented project concept by the addition of one story (now 5 stories), and a small decrease in the addition "footprint' area. With the smaller addition the sanctuary will be increased by about 35% in area, adding 150 seats. A zoning analysis has been prepared for the project and a parking study is included in it. This study considers fire remote sites and church van access thereto. Elevation studies are in the preliminary stage with further development planned after zoning €ssues have been resolved. Brick on the addition will match the existing building. This is a historic structure and Preservation Commission review is required for any exterior modifications. Major use of the addition will be for church office functions with some 'Sunday school" classrooms. No full time educational use is included in the proposal. DISCUSSION: Project time -line starts with SPAARC Committee, Zoning, and Presevation Commission review which could lead to design development and presentation to the church congregation in the 2001/2002 frame. The Committee re -stated that the heavy traffic use of the alleys abutting the addition which will impact the construction process. Articulation of the brick surfaces and addition of windows, particularly on the west face, on the addition was suggested by the Committee and will be incorporated into further design development. It was noted that input had to be in by April 3 to be scheduled for the next Preservation Commission meeting. A Committee member thought that there are too many outstanding issues on the project to even consider "concept" review. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant concept approval and was passed with A. Afterson voting no. SPAARC 014M t3etrrosWr Street Beach Prsliminary and Final Construct 2-car attached ganege addition to existing recreation facility. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. James Ferrera GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A 24' X 20' addition to the east end of the existing building at the walk-in ramp area of the Dempster street beach is proposed. The addition would serve as for storage of boat(s) and a City vehicle. The building is within the Evanston Lakeshore Historic District. DISCUSSION: Public access around the east side of the addition will be preserved. On Mardi 20, 2001 the Preservation Commission reviewed and approved the project as submitted. Page 3 of 4 3121 /01. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed with C. Smith abstaining SPAARC 01-023 817 Chicago Preliminary Construct 8-unit multi -family residential building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Michael Lee and Aidan Radigan. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee issues raised at the previous presentation are addressed by the revised design as follows: -an automatic fire suppression system will be provided in the building -the second level walkway has a stair to grade at both ends -an accessible toilet room is shown for the retail space -the exterior wall fire rating/opening percentage and natural ventilation openings will conform to the Code requirements in the final design. Both stairs are roofed, but not enclosed, and the west stair partial enclosure is not heated. Bride and limestone will be used on the west facade and brick + block on the north facade. A gate is shown at the west end of the south property walkway and the east stair is within the 10 fL roar yard setback required in the recently modified zoning district. DISCUSSION: No building permit will be issued until a "NFR", No Further Remediation, letter is received by the City of Evanston. Mr. Lee indicated that a study by STS recommending a barrier over the areas in question has been submitted for review and that the issues were generated by an old underground 1 QO gallon fuel oil tank. A motion was made and passed to allow public input at the meeting from an akierperson and a neighbor. They both participated in the project questioning and discussion..A Committee member noted that stairs area permitted in rear yard setbacks by the Zoning Ordinance as long as they are at least i ft. from the property line. The trash container location shown under the east stair is not permitted by BOCA criteria and they must be moved east to clear the stairway. A suggestion was made to consider placing overhead (chain?) door or sliding gate at the parking entry off the alley to improve security when used with a fence on the north property line. Many Committee members were concerned about the lack of site security in the south site walkway ("gangway") with no security gate on its east, alley and. This is complicated by the existence of an easement on the 817 property that gives an unlimited access strip for approximately one-third of the property depth to the property to the south. The developer was asked to contact the City Engineer, Mr. Sat Nagar, for water detention requirements for the site. When asked, Mr. Lee indicated that the property was listed for sale, but at a relatively high asking price with no current "hoY prospect. The Committee requested that the footprints of the buildings to the north and south be added future presentation plans. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to a zoning analysis + the "NFR` letter and was passed with H. Friedman voting no. Page 4 of 4 3/21 /01 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES March 28, 2001 Attenders: Committee Members: A. Atterson, A. Berkowsky (K. Kelly), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), D. Jennings, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: W. Hallen - C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting, Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the draft of the 3/21101 Meeting Notes and passed by unanimous vote. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-069 800 EIQin Road Concept Proposed construction of a 10-story mixed use building (ground floor = retail+,parking; parking = 2 thru 4; and 6 stories of office above) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Dan Cushing, Stephen Wright, and Kevin Hollins. GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Zoning analysis has been applied for on the revised scheme. Current planning responds to Committee comments generated by the project presentation last year. A 4 story parking structure runs along the west, Benson street boundary and is topped with a 5 story office tower on the northwest comer of the site with a total parapet height of 124 ft. Parking entrylexit is off Benson and the main entry plus visitor drop-off is from a cul-de-sac drive off Elgin Road. Parking spaces total 562 in the development, versus the 503 required. Retail space is located at the Benson. Elgin Road (NW) comer of the site. A pedestrian landscaped walkway is located between the parking structure and the existing building. Diagonal parking is indicated along the east curb of Benson. Page 1 of 3 3128/01 DISCUSSION: The presentation of a dull parking structure wall to Benson and to Clark was criticized by a Committee member along with the lack of retail facing Clark. Some variation in opinion between Committee members was voiced on the viability of retail space in the area of Clark. The building south of Clark has not rented well, but on the other hand the Hilton Hotel guests may walk to this area in the near future. A Committee member suggested that removing parking to provide more retail space in this parking -needy area of Downtown would be a big mistake. It has been the Owner's experience that the retail space in the existing 1800 Sherman building is difficult to fill. A member of the City's planning division noted that many requests have come for retail spaces of 3,000 SF and larger, while smaller spaces are not in current demand. Committee members suggested the following design considerations for future planning: -a form change to make the Clark/ Benson comer more interesting -articulation of the parking structure facades to relieve monotony -relating the office tower form more strongly to the form of the existing building -creating a better approach to the existing "rear" entry of the existing building The Committee indicated that dividing the property for financing reasons would not alter the code review. It is still two building on one site by Building Code criteria. Design "tweeks" agreed to by the developer are: -improvement of the Claris/ Benson comer design improvement of the parking structure elevations on Clark and Benson -improving the path to the "rear" entry of the existing building ,but he would not agree to adding retail space on along Clark to the project. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant concept approval and was passed with A. Alterson, H. Friedman, M. MyIott, and C. Smith voting no. SPAARC 01-057 174.9; Sherman — Einstein Brothers Bagelp Recommendation for a Sidewalk Cafe Praposed sidewalk cafd at Type-2 restaurant. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Casey Kostov GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The sidewalk caf8 layout is the same as in previous years and the Owner has received no citations from the City. The only waiver required is for the type of beverage containers used, as in previous years. DISCUSSION: The Sidewalk Caf& Regulation Checklist was read item by item and agreed to by the Owner and all Committee Evaluations were made. The need for more pickups per day by the City of the container on the southeast comer of Clark and Sherman was suggested by the Owner. They restaurant staff empties it three times a day on some days. This issue will be referred by the Committee. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend approval of the sidewalk caf6 to the City Council and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 2 of 3 3/28/01 SPAARC 01-036 926-930 Maple Preliminary and Final Proposed subdivision of one lot of record into two lots of record. PROJECT PRESENTER DID NOT APPEAR. Page 3 of 3 3/28/01 MEETING NOTES SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE April 4, 2001 Room 2404 Members Present: A. Alterson, B. Fahlstrom (for C. Smith), P. D'Agostino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar. Members Absent: J. Aiello, L. Black, R. Dahal, D. Jennings, K. Kelly, D. Marino, J. Wolinski. Design Professional Present: H. Friedman. Outer Staff Present: M. Robinson. Others Present: Commencement Committee aooroved a motion t5-01 to a000int M. Mvlott as acting chair. M. Mylott (acting chair) determined a quorum existed and began the meeting at 3:05 p.m. SPAARC 00-040 500 Main Street Recommendation to City Council Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (Cafe Express). ITEM PRESENTED BY: Mr, Neck P. Palk, applicant and owner. PRESENTATION: The applicant stated that the sidewalk cafA would operate in the same manner as ft did last year. The applicant presented a typical dish upon which food would be served at the sidewalk caf6. DISCUSSION: The Committee presented the applicant with a copy of the Sidewalk CaM Regulation Checklist as well as the notification requirements. The Committee reviewed the checklist with the applicant; the applicant responded positively to each requirement and requested the waiver whereby he could serve beverages in disposable containers. The Committee emphasized that the applicant must place ropes or chains around the edges of the sidewalk caf6. The Committee informed the applicant that this item will be before the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council on April 10, 2001, and he must comply with the notification requirements prior to this meeting. ACTION: The Committee aooroved a motion (6-0) to recommend that the Citv Council aoomve the Application for Sidewalk Cafd. MEETING NOTES SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE April 4.2001 Papa 1 of 2 SPAARC 01-037 Communication Invitation to Committee members from Hilton Gardens to attend open house, April 191h @ 3 p.m. ITEM PRESENTED BY: M. Mylott PRESENTATION: Hilton Gardens has invited Conurrttee members to attend an open house on April 19, 2001 @ 3 p.m. During the open house, Comm tbee members may tour models of the interiors. Questions should be addressed to Judy Aiello. DISCUSSION: None. ACTION: None. Review Meeting Notes from March 20- 2001 Committee awroved a motion ("I to aoorwre the Meetina Notes of March 28. 2001. Adioumment The meeting adjourned at 3:20 p.m Respectfully submitted, Marc Steven Mylott, AICP Acting Recording Secretary MEETING NOTES SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMFI EE January 10, 2001 Pape 2 of 2 e L Attenders: Comrnfte Members: Design Profasalonal: Other Staff: SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 11, 2001 J. Aiello, A. Alterson, P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski H. Friedman C. Ruiz, R.Fahistrom, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ rF Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-040 910 Grvenieaf Preliminary anti Final Conabuct a '% story addition on top of a single family residence, requiring a major zoning variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Gregg Latterman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Existing attic space has two domriem and 2X4 framing for floor and roof. To support residential floor loading the floor joists must be changed to deeper wood members which would result in a unusable ceiling height. Totally new roof and floor construction is proposed, increasing the building height but keeping under the 35 ft. limit for the zoning district. The new % story would house a master bedroom and bath for this expanding family. Zoning variations are required for the % story construction to agree with the existing non -conforming side and rear yard setbacks. The neighbor adjacent on one side of the property likes the plan and the "kitty comer" neighbor has not responded to attempts at contact. DISCUSSION: The Committee felt that the proposed % story design actually improved the appearance of the residence. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 1 of 5 4/11.01 SPAARC 01-041 1939 Sharman Proliminartr Construct multi -family residential building (condominiums). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Ryan Nestor and Bob Lubotsky GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: An eight unit, four story + penthouse condominium development is proposed for the site. Twelve parking spaces are planned in an underground level, down a ramp from the alley, and four additional, on -grade spaces are indicated at the rear of the lot. North side entry will access an elevator/stairway core serving two units per floor with about 2,000 SF per unit with an additional 400 SF penthouse level space for each fourth floor unit. Articulated cast stone exterior in 1'X2' modules is proposed for four sides of the building and cement plaster with stucco finish will be used on the penthouse walls. The 10 ft. floor -to -floor dimension keeps the structure within the height permitted in the current R5 zoning district. A brick surfaces terraces is shown at grade in the front yard for private use by the front facing unit owner. Doors from this unit will open to the terrace and it will be screened from the sidewalk with low hedges. DISCUSSION: The break in the existing streetscape created by the front yard terrace was objected to by the Committee. The idea of grilles or lawn furniture on the terrace and the large extent of the hard -surfaced area in a basically landscape strip is discouraged. Re -design of the area was agreed to by the developer. Possible BOCA Code issues identified by the Committee include: -Remoteness of doors to the scissors stair was questioned (BOCA 1006.4) Two exits from the lower level (BOCA 1010) and use of the ramp (BOCA 1016) (While not noted at the meeting, BOCA 1014.10 discharge identification means should be incorporated into future layouts and BOCA 1020.5 should be considered.) The southern "notch' will be used for refuse containers with south walk access to the alley., Storm water detention is included in the project. While the cast stone can produce the "elegant" look desired by the developer, the Committee cautioned that unit size approaching concrete block dimensions can spoil its use and the articulation of the material textures is also important in its overall impression. Cast stone is more costly than brick, according to the developer. The units will be priced in the $500K range, with two-story units in the +$600K area. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 2 of 5 4/11/01 SPAARC 01-042 819 Simoson Conceild Demolish single family residence and construct multifamily residential (four condominiums). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Aurei Salmon + aide. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Removal of an existing rooming house and rear lot building is proposed by this development. A 2'A story structure with a parking level partially below grade is indicated, housing a total of four condominium units. Rough plans were presented together with simple, massing elevations. Six parking spaces are provided on the lower level. A zoning variation is needed for the project as the lot area is only 9,600 SF, which is short of the 2,500 per unit X 4 = 10,000 SF required by the R4 zoning district. DISCUSSION: The Committee agreed that the drawings presented did not have enough content, even for "concept" review. Another concern was the increase in housing density on this size parcel in this location. ACTIONS: A motion was made to deny concept approval and was passed with P. D'Agostino, R. Dahal, and S. Nagar voting no and H.Friedman abstaining. SPAARC 01-M 1004 Grove Concept Create temporary off-street parking area. TEMPORARY USE DOES NOT REQUIRE SPAARC REVIEW. SPAARC 01.044 1700 Central Tom ria Trullie Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for sidewalk caffi Type-1 restaurant within 200 fleet of a residential zoning district.. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Lenny Rago GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Only because of the 200 ft. distance to a residential zoning district is this Type-1 restaurant required to obtain approval for its sidewalk caf6. DISCUSSION: Sidewalk caf6 checklist was read, item -by -item, and agreed to by the owner. The Committee reviewed the impact of the caM and approved of it. A cloth faced railing is planned to define the caf6 area and will have no printing on it. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend approval of the sidewalk cafiA to the City Council and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 3 of 5 4/11/01 $ AARC 00-139 1511 Monroe Final Conshuct six duplexes (12 dwelling units totaQ. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Scott Krone and Steve Beds. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The only changes from the preliminary design are minor alterations to the trellises and use of white dad windows, instead of yellow. DISCUSSION: Lighting of the trellis entry areas was encouraged by a Committee member. Fenced trash cart enclosures will be added on the alley lot line. The design of the complex as a transition from the low homes to the south, to the higher 2-story homes to the north was explained. The Committee commented on the excellent design of this development. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 00-139 1511 Monroe Recommendation to the Sign Board Conte sign for six duplex development: PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: R. Fahlstrom + developers. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The only variation requested Is to permit a 4'X8' = 32 SF sign, when only a 6 SF sign is allowed. DISCUSSION: Considering the scale of the property in this development, a 32 SF sign seemed appropriate to the Committee. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Board approve this variation_ and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 00-139 1325 Howard Charter One Bank Recommendation to the Reface existing wall and free-standing signs for a financial insftifioon. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: R. Fahlstrom GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The existing wall and free-standing signs are all non- conforming. Landscaping conditions placed on the freestanding sign have not been maintained. Page 4 of 5 4/11 /01 14 DISCUSSION: The Committee cannot encourage continuation of signs non -conforming to the degree that these signs vary from the regulations. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Board deny this variation and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 00-139 909 Davis McDougal Litbsll RscommsndItIon to the Sign Board Construct rental sign for 6 story mixed -use building (ground floor rstall+ofice and oflxaes only on upper floors). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: R. Fahlstrorn GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: These signs vary from the regulation in size of sign and type of information on the sign. One is proposed facing Davis St, and one is proposed Facing Church St., both pole mounted on 'Jersey" precast concrete, traffic barriers. DISCUSSION: Exact location of these signs is a concem of he Committee. In particular, the Church St sign must be integrated with the new traffic signal and other signage in the area. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Board approve this variation with the condibon that the final location of the signs be approved by the Traffic Division of the City of Evanston and passed by unanimous vote. Page 5 of 5 4/11/01 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 18, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: J. Aiello, A. Alterson, P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, D. Jenn'ahgs, D. Marina, M. Myiott, K. Fujihara, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Proiseskmul: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meetings Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the draft of the 4/11/01 Meeting Notes with one small change and passed by unanimous vote. Pro acts Reviewed: SRC 01-019 2121 Dewev Prriiminar' f Convert warehouse into multiple commensal and/or light industrial rental spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. A. Spatz - Architect GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: A study model was presented that showed the Phase-1 development of the four phase project. This presentation and review is limited to the first three phases of the project as the fourth phase is not even programmed at this time. The model shows an overall scheme that has no revisions from the "concept" presentation to the Committee, only further design development Phase-1 elevation retains the existing brick pilasters and Wills between therm with standing -seam, coated metal panels, some masonry, and glass block window, areas. Multiple skylights are shown serving each unit. On the second "mezzanine" area, shaped window elements project over the public way with bottoms above the 10 ft. level. bighting is provided over each entry and under the projecting windows. The developer will close soon on the residential property to the south of the industrial buildings. Leasing of the Phase-1 spaces is going well with 3 very interested tenants. It appears that all units will be rented in Phase-1 before construction is started. Page 1 of 4 4/18/01 DISCUSSION: No residential dwellings units are planned in the development. A film production company may be interested in the Phase-4 space, currently leased to the City of Evanston. A Committee member indicated that the City would vacate the space to allow a film production company to locate in Evanston. Some minor landscaping is planned at the rear of each unit. The developer will contact the City regarding additional parkway trees along the project 's street faces. A Committee member raised the issue of improving security by changing the glass block "window" areas to clear glazing to give more views to the street. The developer questioned whether this would decrease security in the industrial units themselves. Street crime is probably not an issue in fts area and the ability to see exactly what is in units might iincrease the odds of burglary. This should be discussed with a police department representative. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval to only Phases 1 thru 3 inclusive, with the recommendation that the glass block/ dear glazing issue be addressed and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 97-0066 Church Street Plaza - ODUrna Concgot Construct 26-story multi -family residential building within Church Sftwt Plaza (new concept for condominium project). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Tod Desmaris - Opitma GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Use "massing" plans and elevation were presented that showed a mini -anchor on the south portion of the site; retail continuing to the north; and flimity the 26-story residential tower on the northern area of the site with a landscaped 'transition" area between the tower and Maple Ave. A two-way drive is indicated along the entire north site boundary, connecting to East Railroad Ave. The project proposes 175 condo units and 228 parking spaces. In tfhe buildings "base', office and residential uses will be located on levels 24 directly on Maple to shield the parking on these levels from Maple Ave. view. A garden terrace with pool is planned at the 7 h level for residential use. Optima is not the designer of the mini -anchor portion of this cornpolex which is being done by Nagle Hartrey. The firms are charged with "merging' their respective designs at some point In the development process. DISCUSSION: The Committee identified the continued exposure of the south face of the new City parking facility as a major drawback to this proposal. It is not a particularly inviting elevation and was planned to be covered by subsequent development. Another generally held drawback of the scheme presented is the lack of a defined 'drop-ofP position to serve the residential tower. The Committee did not agree on the use of the "transition" area facing Maple at the residential entry location, with the design professionals on the Committee approving of this "break" in the Maple Avenue streetscape. Page 2 of 4 4/18/01 Suggestions for consideration by the developer made by the Committee include: -moving the parking entry drive to the south. -entering parking off East Railroad Avenue. -continuing construction over the proposed north drive, i.e, create a "tunnel -remove the `transition" area and build to the lot line on the east. -treat east fagade like the 800 Davis solution. Some discussion of the target market was held with Optima assuming that the wide age mix they are experiencing in the 800 Davis sales and some Committee members believing that a slightly younger group may be attracted to the Maple Avenue location. Considering the scope of the revisions suggested to this scheme a motion to table, without prejudice, seemed appropriate. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table this item and was passed with H. Friedman voting no. VAARC 00-018 800 Davis — Ootlma Final Construct mbred use building (ground floor retail, parking structure, and multf-family resk endaq. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Tod Desmaris and Mark Witte - Optima GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The only major change from the preliminary presentation was the circulation connection of the north and south residential towers generating the use of only one bank of elevators. Landscape plans were presented for the first tare and show extensive landscaping at both the ground and terrace levels. Generally perennial plants were indicated consisting of trees, bushes, and ground covers with some annual plantings. An entry walk from Sherman Ave. uses the downtown pavers to extend the shwtscape into the project site and has lighting bollards along its path. Evergreens are included in the landscaping and a fountain is planned at the west end of the Sherman Ave. entry mcourtm. Discussions are being held with City staff regarding the status of the existing, and inclusion of new, construction in the public way for the project. DISCUSSION: The Committee noted that some parking spaces on the lower level do not meet the dimensions required by the Zoning Ordinance and have not been counted by the developer in the zoning analysis. The developer agreed that a condo purchaser assigned any of these spaces would be cautioned that they do not meet the dimensions required by the Zoning Ordinance before the unit sale is finalized. More review of the landscaping is required, but first reactions by the Committee were: -maybe too much planting (is this posssible?) is included in the "court" area and some drop off in the west area of the "court" might actually improve the design. -the entry walk is definitely too narrow. -private vs condo association maintenance of landscaping on terraces should be defined to assure proper care over time. Page 3 of 4 4/18/01 A Committee member noted that the retail doors could not swing over the public way as currently shown, but must be recessed. Concrete color will be gray cement/ aggregate and maintain issues have been addressed by using air entrained, seal coated concrete and epoxy coated reinforcing steel. A possible security concern generated by pedestrian access to grade level parking from both Davis Street and the southeast alley was raised by the Committee. This should be doscussed with the Police Department and possible use of a barrier should be considered. When questioned, the developer indicated that retail signage was planned in the spandrel glass areas or mounted from columns. A unified signage district plan was suggested for this projects retail areas. A Committee member suggested that grade level bike parking should be included in the planning. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval with the following conditions: -approval of the landscaping by the Department of Parks, Recreation, and Forestry. -approval of the grade level parking security improvement by the Police Department. -approval of the walk widening by the Building Division. -approval of a grade level bike rack by the Zoning Division. -recommendation to review the lower level parking dimensions with the Traffic Division. and passed by unanimous vote. Recorded by Walter S. Hallen SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 25, 2001 Attenders: Commiittse Members: J. Aiello, A. Alterson, A. Berkowsky (K. Kelly), L. Black (R.Wak zak), P. IYAgostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal; D. Jennings, D. Marino, M. Myk tt. S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wormski Design professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, R.Fahistrom, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) dleisrmined that a quorum oxistlng and began the me* ng at 3:05 p.m.! Cominittee Business: A motion was made to approve the draft of the 4118101Meeting Notes. ftiects Reviewed: SPAARC 974M Church Stnwt Plaza Final, Review Plat of re -subdivision, primarily to allocate air rights over the minienchor parse! (Re -subdivision of Church Maple First Re -subdivision) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Tom White —Arthur Hill Company GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. White stated that he didn't want to make a presentation at this time. DISCUSSION: Both City staff and the applicant did not have the proper paperwork to review this case. It was proposed that this case be heard at the upcoming May 3, 2001 meeting. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table the review of this application until next week. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. SPAARC 01-038 1932 Central Street Preliminary I Final Remodel Type 1 restaurant (JTs Blue Stone Grill) :PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Ryan Nestor— Barker Nestor Architects GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Nestor presented 8-112 x 11 bound xeroxes which showed floor plans and elevations of the proposed renovations to the building. The proposed restaurant will be called " Blue Stone" and will feature a menu based on "American comfort food". The exterior of the restaurant will reuse most of the existing storefront glazing. The existing limestone facade will be cleaned and patched as necessary. The front entry vestibule will be reworked to meet the Illinois Accessibility Code and a new three foot wide wood entry door with a small glazed lite will be provided. A new cement stucco surround will be provided for the entry door which will be painted a bright color. A new cermnt plaster soffit with recessed can lights will provide cover over the entry. A Blue stone paver infiill will be inlaid along the front storefront which is indented back at an angle from the sidewalk These pavers will extend out to the building's property line on Central Street. DISCUSSION: City staff raised the following questions and concerns which were responded to by Mr. Nestor: 1. The wood front door with the small glazing lite appeared architecturally inoonsistent with the overall building aesthetic. Staff suggested that the door vision life be made larger and more rectangular in its configuration for better visibility and aesthetics. Mr. Nestor agreed . 2. Staff questioned if air handlers on the roof might intrude into the required ten foot property line setback which is required for compressors. Mr. Nestor noted that the roof plan was showing exhaust duct terminations not compressors. 3. Staff expressed some conoem that with the new stucco entry the building is more closed in appearance and less transparent from the street which runs counter to the City's preference for open storefronts and glazing which contribute to the life of the street. Mr. Nestor noted that most of the existing storefront glazing will be re -used and the entry door will be re -designed with more glazing. 4. Staff stated that if outdoor seating is to be provide that would go beyond the property line of the building then an outdoor caf6 Permit must be obtained. ACTIONS: A motion was made to approve the project as submitted. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously. Page 2of8 SPAARC 01- 039 James Park Pr+eliminary I Final Reconstruct tennis and basketbaA courts. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. Stephanie Levine — Landscape Architect / City of Evanston Recreation Departrnent. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Levine presented xeroxes to the Committee which showed the scope of work for the project. The scope of work for the project entails replacing the tennis courts to match existing and replacing the basketball court to match existing. There will be no changes to the existing lighting. Some new trees and picnic tables will be added. Handicapped accessibility will be improved for the site. DISCUSSION: A very brief Staff discussion was held to review the scope of work. ACTIONS: A motion was made to approve the project as submitted. This motion was seconded and passed unanimously. MARL 91- 047 Alen •r Park ProlwngM I Final Reconstruct playground PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. Stephanie Levine — Landscape Architect I City of Evanston Recreation Department. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: M.s. Levine presented xeroxes to the Committee which showed that the scope of work for Alexander Park involves replacement of the play equipment which will meet the required guidelines for safety. The play equipment will be in gren and beige colors as discussed with the Park's neighbors. There will be minor modifications to the site lighting . DISCUSSION: City staff asked if bicycle racks might be provided for the project. M.s. Levine stated that bicycle racks could be added as part of the scope of work. A minor discussion was held concerning the expense and difficulties of providing handicapped accessible drinking fountains with the proper RPZ and other appurtenances. The existing drinking fountain will be replaced but it will not handicapped accessible. ACTIONS: A motion was made to approve the project as submitted with the stipulation that bicycle racks be added to the project The motion was seconded and approved unanimously. Page 3 Of 8 SPAARC 0042 1000 Grove Street Final Construct 2-story addition to gymnasium within the mixed use building containing public recreation center (McGaw YMCA)and residential. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Larry LaRoi Architect and Mr. Tony Lee Manager of the McGaw YMCA. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. LaRoi presented 2 roils of architectural plans to the Committee. The project entails a new 2 story addition to the existing YMCA. The new addition which has open parking at the ground floor features a large 13, 500 square foot gymnasium with storage spaces at the first floor with a suspended running track at the 2"d flor level. Mr. LaRoi concentrated his presentation on the exterior aspects of the project. The exterior facade of the building will be a yellow buff colored brick to match the natatorium addition that was built in 1990. Limestone copings, window sills, and one horizontal limestone strung course will be added to the east and south facade of the project similar to the stone details on the existing YMCA structure from the 1920's. The rhythm and configuration of window openings and the mullions and muntins of the new windows will try to match thane of the existing windows. Mr. LaRoi noted that the price of limestone has become terribly expensive but in spite of the costs the YMCA will use limestone elements to unite the new addition to the existing building in terms of materials and detailing. DISCUSSION: The Committee expressed the following thoughts and concerns about the new addition: 1. Staff noted that the outstanding Zoning issue regarding the number of required parking spaces (341 required and only 117 being provided) still needed to be resolved by the Zoning Division. The proposed addition will reduce the number of conforming parking spaces. A general discussion followed concerning the parking for this project. Mr. LaRoi will need to follow up with Mr. Altersen of the Zoning Division to discuss a final decision for the Parking issue. A discussion also took place concerning the possibility that the City could give back to the YMCA the spaces it now leases. 2. A generql discussion took place conoeming the proposed facade for the new addition. Several Committee members expressed a desire to see more horizontal limestone string courses extended across the east and south facades. The Committee noted that this would tie the addition to the existing building in a more architecturally convincing manner. The committee also noted that the existing strin courses are stopped short at the southeast stair tower. Mr. LaRoi stated that the proposed upper limestone string course could be extended across ft whole facade of the new building and that the YMCA would explore the feeslbft of adding this horizontal element to the new building. Page 4 of 8 SPAARC 00-62 Continued. 1000 Grove Street Final 3. City staff pointed out that the proposed southeast ground floor entry to the gymnasiurn that would be used for certain sporting events lacked definition and clarity as a point of entry. This lack of architectural definition could cause confusion for users trying to enter the building at this point. Mr. Lee and Mr. LaRoi noted that signage could be used to better define this point as an entry . 4. City Staff noted that the proposed wall signs at the southeast comer will require a separate permit and may require the approval of the Sign Board. 5. Committee members asked if bike racks will be provided for the new addition. Mr. Lee and Mr. LaRoi responded that 2 new bike racks will be added for this addition. A brief discussion followed concerning security measures for the new bike racks. ACTIONS: A motion was made to approve the protect as submitted subject to the following: 1. The project shall conform to all requirements for any resolution of the Parking issue reached with the Zoning Division. 2. The YMCA and their architect will seriously explore adding the upper limestone string course to the new addition. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. SPAARC "4129 919 Davis 1928-1002 Church) Final Install accessible ramp at Davis Street Metra station. This project was removed from the agenda at the request of the property owners and their general contractor. This case will be re -scheduled for the 513/2001 S.P.A.R.C. Meeting. Page 5 of 8 SPAARC 97-0065 Church Street Plaza — Optima Concept l Discussion Construct a 26 story multi -family residential building within Church Street Plaza (New concept for Condominium project) This project was not originally on the agenda PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mr. Tod Desmaris - Optima GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Desmaris presented schematic massing plans. Three potential schemes (A,B,C) were presented to address the committee's concerns from the 4/18/2001 S.P.A. R.C. Meeting. Scheme A - This scheme was a restatement of the initial scheme presented to the S.P.A.R.C. Committee at the 4/18/01 Meeting. The scheme featured the following elements: 1. The 26 story tower %as aligned in an east - west orientation. 2. An entry 1 alley was placed at the northeast comer of the site which exposed the southeast corner of the municipal garage. 3. A curb drop off was located in front of the tower on Maple Street 4. The proposed complex will feature a mix of ground floor retail and Upper floor terraced garden units and tower condominium units. 5. The loading dock would be accessed from East Railroad Ave. 6. Parking for the project would be located at the northern side of the complex. Scheme B - This scheme featured the following design and planning elements: 1. The 26 story tower was aligned in a north - south orientation. This orientation would allow the tower better screen the building's parking . 2. The entry alley / courtyard was similar to scheme A in its location. Planting strips and landscaping would be provided to screen the exposed edge of the Municipal parking garage to the north. 3. Terraced garden units would be provided along the Maple Street frontage to a height of 5 to 6 floors. Retail spaces would be provided at the ground floor. 4. The loading dock would be accessed from Railroad Avenue. Page 6 of 8 Scheme C - This scheme featured the following design and planning elements: 1. The 26 story tower was placed at right angles to the railroad tracks and to Railroad Avenue. This placed the building at an approximate 60 degree angle to Maple Street The proposed angled tower completely screened the municipal Parking Garage. 2. The parking for this complex would be 100% accessed from Railroad Avenue. 3. The pedestrian entrance to the complex would be located in the center of the building's frontage on Maple Street. Pedestrians would enter the complex under terraced garden units which would form a bridge element at the entry. The entry would pass into an open interior landscaped courtyard which would lead to the entry lobby for the residential units. 4. The loading dock for this complex would be accessed from Railroad Avenue. DISCUSSION: The Committee raised the following issues: 1. The Committee expressed the opinion that schemes B and C were the preferred design schemes. Great interest was shown in scheme C. The Committee liked the following features of scheme C A. The angled geometry of the scheme would enliven the urban character of the whole Church Street Plaza complex. The angled geometry of the tower would screen the municipal garage and open up lake views to all of the towers units. B. The pedestrian entry and the proposed interior entry courtyard would enrich the steetscape and give a 'Europeon' flavor to the proposed complex. C. Removing the entry drive 1 alley from Maple Street was seen as a potential plus as it would lessen the number of curb cuts on Maple and facilitate a more pedestrian friendly frontage for the building. 2. The Committee expressed some concerns and questions about the 'C" scheme these Included the following: A. It might not be a good idea to eliminate a Maple Street vehicular entry to the building. Page 7 of 8 PS _MRC 97.0065 Church Sbwet Plaza — Optima Concgot 1 Discussion Continued : B. A discussion was held concerning accessibility for both parking and loading using only Railroad Avenue. Some Committee members expressed concerns about eliminating vehicular access to the buildings parking from Maple Street. The Committee also discussed allowing a vehicular drive from Maple that could only be accessed by turning right into the building when going southbound on Maple. This driveway would also allow a right turn only exit from the building onto Maple going southbound. C. A discussion was held concerning providing a circular drop off Maple Street as was shown in schemes A and B. it was noted that this drop off could be abused by patrons of the movie theater who would use the drop off to park and wait or as a turn around for their cars. D. Committee members questioned the angled design of the tower where it touched the Municipal garage. This juncture was seen as architecturally clumsy. E. The Committee noted that the Fire department would need to review the site access issues for Scheme C. ACTION: Because this was an off agenda meeting and discussion, no vote was taken. Mr. Desmaris stated he was glad to get the Committee's input on the submitted schemes. The Committee praised Optima for their speed in revising their design schemes and their desire to work with the S.PA.R.C. Committee. Page 8 of 8 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 2, 2001 Cownnittee Members: J. Aiello, A. Adterson, A. Berkowsky (K. Kelly), , P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, , D. Marino, M. Myk*, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Woonski Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff. C. Ruiz, R.Fahlstrom, W.Hanen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting at 3:05 P.M. Prq acts Reviewed: SPAMC 0g-028 1004-1010 Church Street or (1642 Made) Find Construct mixod use building (retail, office, and multi -family residential dwelfrng units.) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Wade Giomo --- Focus development 1 Tim Schmitt -- Architect with Otis Koglin Wilson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Giomo and Mr. Schmitt reviewed changes'that wit be made to the fagade of both the lower 3 story parking and retail base and to the hkise kwier. These changes include: 1. A masonry stair tower has been added to the southeast corer of the parking garage base. This stair tower will serve as the required 2"d exit from the roof deck terrace. 2. The balconies at the 2 upper penthouse floors have been modified in design to tuck In closer to the building. 3. The fagade of the top 2 floors has been modified to give them a more distinct articulation. 4. A condensing HVAC unit will be placed on the roof behind the elevator penthouse. In addition to presenting these changes, Mr. Giomo and Mr. Schmitt presented material samples including the face brick and the cast stone which will be used for the 3 story masonry base of the building. The face brick will be a utility sized brick and the base stone has a knestone like texture, porosity, and texture. The concrete will receive a 'Modak' finish. SPAARC MINUTES May 2, 2001 Meeting Page 1 DISCUSSION: The SPAARC Committee expressed the following responses, concerns, and questions in response to the presentation by OKW Architects and the Developer. i. The Committee suggested that the masonry wall openings in the garage wall are static and the window rhythm could be changed by adding larger openings between the columns. 2. The Committee discussed how to screen the HVAC condenser from a Ridge Avenue view. The use of metal louvers as a screening element for the rooftop HVAC equipment was not neccessarily preferred by the Committee. 3. A general discussion was held with the architect and developer concerning the design of the balconies. Some committee members stated that they would prefer to see the crossed diagonal rails removed from the front c f the balconies leaving just the metal screens as baluster guards. 4. A discussion was held conceming masonry repairs for a former FOCUS project 811 Chicago Avenue. Wade Giomo noted that the mortar joints at 811 Chicago were not property cleaned during construction and this caused most of the subsequent mortar problems. Mr. Giomo noted that there would be careful supervision on the part of FOCUS Development during the installation of masonry for this project to insure that this problem does not repeat itself. 5. The Committee questioned the use of limestone at the base noting that limestone is more porous than granite and it will show more dirt and staining at the base than a granite base would. 6. Some Committee members questioned the use of the clear anodized finish for the tower window mullions. 7. Paul D'Agastino noted that the proposed beaches must have center armrests. 8. Some Committee members questioned the use of utility sized bricks versus using standard brick. Tim Schmitt noted that the larger brick is visually necessary for a building of this scale. 9. The Committee asked if standard interior window treatments would be required for Oft project by the developer. Wade Giomo noted that the standards had not yet been devsk)ped but that some standardization of window treatments would be required for this project. ACTIONS: A ration was made to grant preliminary and final Site Plan and Appearance Review for a Foundstion Only Permit for this project FOCUS Development must return before the Commithe with a solution for screening the rooftop condenser during the Comr PAse's review for the issuance of a full building permit for this Project This motion passed unanimously. SPAARC MINUTES May 2, 2001 Meeting Page 2 SPAARC 01-048 1700 Orrinaton Avenue Reccomendations for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for Sidewalk Cafe for Type 2 restaurant PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Jerry Bear / McDonalds and Mr. Ken Behles Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The standard questions from the "Type II Restaurant Questionnaire" were read to the applicants. Mr. Bear presented the proposed utensils, glassware etc. that McDonalds will use at this outdoor cafd. These included a glass coffee serving carafe, a green plastic open web basket for holding food, and samples of the 2 types of "McCafe' Coffee which will be served. Mr. Bear noted that McDonalds will seek a City of Evanston waiver so that they may use a styrofoam coffe cup. Mr. Bear also noted that although the food will be served in a plastic re - useable basket that the food will be in the standard McDonald's wrappings. The use of paper wrappings will also require a City waiver. The caf6 enclosure will probably be painted wood lattice and posts and will be de -mountable. The caf6 furniture will be a powder coated steel. DISCUSSION: Committee members expressed the following concerns, comments and questions concerning this application: 1. The food wrappings were perceived as a signifigant potential litter issue. It was noted by the Committee, that the City had previously approved paper wrappings for food at the Chipolte Restaurant. 2. Several Committee members expressed concern that there was not enough circulation space at the front entry to the restaurant. Ken Behles agreed to revise the caf6 layout to move the north boundary T — 0" to the south. Ken Behles noted that the Northeast comer of the cafe could be angled back to create an easier circulation path for patrons and pedestrians. 3. Committee members queried Mr. Bear if there would be a full time outside waiter for the caf8? Mr. Bear stated that there would be a full time waiter for the caf6. Mr. Bear also noted that there would be numerous garbage containers provided for the cam. These containers would have a hinged top configuration or small opening at the top so that litter could not blow out. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend approval of this application to the City Council provided that the Citv Council Is satisfied that all Prover measures are belna taken to contain and limit anv Potential litter problems especially from the Paper food wrapainas. This motion passed with Dennis Marino voting in opposition. SPAARC MINUTES May 2, 2001 Meeting Page 3 SPAARC 01-048 720-1/2 Clark Reccomendatfons for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for Sidewalk Cafd for Type 2 Restaurant PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Hae Yong Cha (owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The standard questions from the "Type II Restaurant Questionnaire" were read to the applicant. DISCUSSION: Mrs. Cha stated that she would seek a City of Evanston Waiver so that her cafb may use disposable plastic cups. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend approval of the application to the City Council, This motion passed unanimously. SPAARC 01-018 1717 Benson Avenue Prelimin#ry' Renovations / addition at the rear of existing religious institution (Second Baptist Chumh of Evanston) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Cliff Bridges 1 Cambell Architects William Borden GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Cliff Bridges presented new elevations of the proiect The elevations show a 5 story addition at the rear (east side) of the existing Second Baptist Church. Mr. Bridges told the Committee that the elevations had been revised to address the Committee's concerns from the previous meeting. Mr. Bridges noted that the elevation addressed site line issues that had been raised and the windows had been changed in design to reflect more of the architecture of the existing church. Mr. Bridges further noted that the new addition would be brick on all sides. The proposed brick will match the existing brick of the church In color and size as closely as is possible. DISCUSSION: Committee members expressed the following concerns, comments, and questions about this project: 1. Marc Mylott reminded the applicants that this project will require a Special Use and Variations to the following: A. The height of the proposed addition will exceed the allowable height, B. The proposed addition together with the existing church building exceed the allowable site F.A.R. C. The number of parking spaces required for the new building have not been provided. SPAARC MINUTES May 2, 2001 Meeting Page 4 SPAARC 01-018 1717 Benson Avenue Preliminary_ Continued. 2. A brief discussion was held concerning the intended uses of the spaces within this new addition. 3. Committee members expressed satisfaction with the proposed changes to the elevations of the addition. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant Preliminary Site Plan and Appearance Review approval. This motion passed unanimously. SPAARC 01 — 050 1304-08 Sherman Avenue Preliminary Construct addiction to existing multi -family residence, increasing number of dwelling units from 4to8. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Chris Manfrey of Florian Architects GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Manfrey explained to the Committee that his client Leeway Management wanted to add a 2 story addition to the rear (north side) of the existing 1304-8 Sherman Building so that they could complete repairs to other deteriorated sections of the building with the income generated by the addition. Leeway Management would eventually like to repair and reopen the atrium tight well. Mr. Manfrey showed existing site and building photographs to the Committee as well as 8-1/2 x I V plans showing schematic plans and sections of the proposed addition. DISCUSSION: The Committee expressed the following concerns, comments and questions about the project: 1. Marc Mylott reminded the applicant that a Special Use Permit would be required for this project because this building is situated in a B2 Zoning District. Multifamily residential uses automatically require a Special Use Permit if additional dwelling units are proposed. Also, the size of parking may be inadequate for this building. The applicant should contact the Zoning officer to make sure thet the space, aisle, and module requirements are met. SPAARC MINUTES May 2, 2001 Meeting Page 5 SPAARC 01 -- 050 1304-08 Sherman Avenue Preliminary Continued: 2. The Committee noted that sprinklers will be required for the addition and possibly the existing building. 3. The Committee queried Mr. Manfrey what structural materials would be used to build The new addition. Mr. Manfrey replied that Florian Architects were looking at using pre -cast concrete concrete planks and steel framing. ACTIONS: A Motion was made for Concept approval. The motion passed with James Wolinski voting in opposition. SPAARC 01- 051 1123 Howard Street Preliminar+ Construct new automobile service station (CITGO) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Nick Haritos of Metron Engineering GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Haritos presented 18" x 24" Blueline prirrts showing the site plan for a proposed gas station at 1123 Howard Street. Mr. Haritos stated the following facts about the proposed gas station: 1. The station would have 4 fuel dispensing islands capable of serving 8 vehicles at once. 2. The station would be open 24 hours a day. 3. Diesel fuel would be dispensed at 1 pump. 4. A small convenience food store would be a component of this service station. The food store would sell items such as soft drinks, candy and chips. 5. This proposed service station would feature an overhead canopy. DISCUSSION: The Committee expressed the following concerns, comment and questions about the submitted project: 1. The Committee queried Mr. Haritos if his client owned the site. Mr. Horitos stated that his client has an option to buy the land and wants to research if this project Is feasible. 2. M. Mylott reminded Mr. Haritos that a Special Use Permit would be required for this project and the proposed canopy exceeds the allowable height of fourteen feet. (14' — 01. M. Mylott noted that the proposed canopy is dimensioned at eighteen feet. Mr. Horitos stated that the intended height of the canopy is fifteen feet six inches (IS' — 6") above grade. 3. K. Fujihara noted that the site appeared to be too small to provide a comfortable tuming radius for larger vehicles especially trucks and that in general the site appeared too small for the proposed service station. SPAARC MINUTES May 3, 2001 Meeting Page 6 SPAARC 01- 051 1123 Howard Street Preliminary Continued. 4. J. Wolinski stated that it was premature to take a vote on this project for the following reasons: A. The potential owner ! operator needed to be present to answer questions B. The plans as submitted, were very incomplete. CITIZEN COMMENT: Ann Rainey of the 8th Ward addressed the Committee. Alderman Rainey queried the Committee as to why they were considering or voting on this case as it would require a Special Use Permit. The Committee replied that they reviewed the technical aspects of the proposat such as taming radii etc. The Committee's role is not to determine land use, as is the role of the City Council in this case. Rather, the Committees role is to review the project to ensure that the ianduse functions as best as is possible. ACTIONS: A motion to table the project was made because: 1. The owner must be present to answer operational questionsMore complete plans must be submitted. These plans shall be drawn at one inch equals ten feet or one inch equals twenty feet such that the turning radius of vehicles may be placed on the plans. L The submitted plans must include elevations of the canopies and buildings. The Motion to table this project passed unanimously. SPAARC 01 — 0071930 Ridge Pre -Application Conference and Preliminary Retain and expand parking structure and construct multi -family residential building. For this presentation the Committee was joined by Mr John Lyman the Plan Commision Chairman. Alder man Joe kent was invited but he was unable to attend. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Richard Aaronson and Mr. Greg Ratos of Atlantic Realty GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Aaronson reviewed the history of the prior presentations of this project to the SPAARC Committee. Using mounted presentation boards and 18-1t2" x 11" bound colored and plain xeroxes Mr. Aaronson went on to explain to the Committee the revisions that had been made to the previous 'T' Shaped design for the building. SPAARC MINUTES May 2, 2001 Meeting Page 7 SPAARC 01 — 007 1930 Ridae Continued: Pre-ADglication Conferance and Preliminary The new 11 story building design utilizes a linear design that bends at the southern third of the site at an approximate 30 degree angle parallel to the railroad tracks. The southern end of the tower features an end elevation with two curved bays that transition into a longer linear east fagade. The entry to the building is located adjacent to the south end of the parking garage and features a one story entry element which connects the garage to the building. This element will contain the building lobby and possibly a cyber cafe for the residents. The elevator cores are located just west of this entry element and they are housed in a12 story articulated tower element that contains a mechanical penthouse. SPAARC 01 — 007 1930 Ridge Continued. Pre-ADDlication Conference DISCUSSION: During the course of Mr. Aaronson's presentation the Committee expressed the following concerns, comments and questions about the project: 1. The Committee questioned the design of the domed one story entry element. Committee members noted that the placement of the dome and the offset entry doors created an akward entry. Committee members suggested shifting the dome to the south and placing the entry doors in the center of the entry element. Mr. Aaronson stated that this could be studied by the architects. He noted that the placement of the entry doors was dictated by the layout of the proposed interior lobby and that the domed area would house the proposed common area caf6. 2. Committee members noted that the articulation of the east fagade that shows changes in the plane of the wall appears to be a bit clumsy. The Committee members felt that the bumped out areas were too small to visually create a rhythm or aesthetic interest for the east face of the building. Mr. Aaronson noted that these articulations are driven by the size of the apartments within. These apartments are sized to as required to find the "market sweet spot" for that given type of apartment. 3. Mr. Lyman queried Mr. Aaronson as to whether a parking study has been prepared for the building and also have sunlight and shadow studies been prepared. Mr. Aaronson stated that both studies are being prepared. SPAARC MINUTES May 2, 2001 Meeting Page 8 SPAARC 01— 0071930 RIdg9 Pre-Aoolication Conference Continued. 4. The Committee queried Mr. Aaronson on what building materials would be used to finish the building. Mr. Aaronson stated that the building would have a split face concrete block rusticated base with three stories of brick in a matching tone or color. The upper eight ftoors of the building would have a plaster cement stucco over concrete block back-up walls. Committee members replied that brick would be abetter finish material for the building as stucco or synthetic stucco would make this building look like a hotel. instead of an apartment building. A general discussion followed on the proposed size of the brick. (Mr. Aaronson proposed a utility sized brick for visual reasons), the use of real stone in lieu of split faced block, and the use of a 'Dryvit finish for the Hilton Gardens Hotel which the SPAARC Committee 8. Committee members noted that the balconies which were `tucked in" against 2 walls at the south end of the building were preferable to the balconies which hung out straight from the face of the building along other portions of the facade. B. A general discussion was held concerning the proposed mechanical systems for the building. Mr. Aaronson stated that a split system would probably be used for each dwelling unit. 7. Mr. J. Lyman of the Plan Commission raised the issues that would be most important to the neighborhood. These included: A. The project must have adequate parking. If the project could provide parking at the ratio now being required by the Zoning Ordinance for Chicago Avenue this would lessen concerns about the impact of the this building in the neighborhood. B. The height of the building will be an issue with the neighbors. C. The neighborhood will be concerned about additional traffic on Ridge Avenue and potential traffic tie - ups. Mr. Aaronson responded that one solution to providing more parking for the project would be to have a certain portion of smaller parking stalls. A general discussion followed with various Committee members regarding the City's requirements for parking stall width. ACTIONS A motion was made which stated that the applicant had Wiled all of the necessary requirements for a Pre -Application Hearing. This motion passed unanimously. A motion was made to table this project for Preliminary Approval. This motion passed unanimously. SPAARC MINUTES May 2, 2001 Meeting Page 9 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 9, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: J. Aiello, A. Alterson, A. Berkowsky (for K. Kelly), P. D'Agostino, R. Dahal, K. Fujihara (for D. Jennings), D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski. Design Professional: H. Friedman. Other Staff: J. Edmonds, R. Fahfstrom, T. Kerr, M. Robinson, C. Ruiz, R. Schur. C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01- 052 2416 Demoster Street ConceDt, Replace the mansard roof at car wash (Evanston Car Wash) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. John Rapp (owner of the Evanston Car Wash) presented elevations, a plat of survey, and site photographs. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: J. Rapp proposes to remove an existing mansard roof and replace it with a steel gable roof. Also, J. Rapp proposes to replace the standing - seem portion of the building facade with a brick and Dryvit facade (Option "B" of the elevations is preferred). The remaining portion of the building facade remains unchanged. DISCUSSION: Several Committee members expressed concern about using Dryvit at such a water -intensive operation. J. Rapp responded that he had the same concern; however, his architect assured him that it was not a problem. The Committee expressed concern about having Dryvit at the base of the building, citing problems with durability. J. Rapp responded that he would provide a brick knee wall such that new Dryvit is not installed at the base of the building. The Committee felt that the level of information provided warranted a "preliminary review" rather than a "concept review". ACTIONS: Committee approved a motion (11-0) to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval, provided the applicant installs a brick knee wall preventing new Dryvit from serving at the base to the building. Page 1 SPAARC 98 - 0065 919 Davis Street for 928 -1002 Church Street 1Preliminary and Final Install Accessible ramp at Davis Street Metra Station PRESENTED BY: Mr. Quilatan (METRA), Mr. Jim Soreng (METRA), Rick Clark (RAW Clark Construction), Mr. Mike Nigro (Camp Dresser BMcKee) PRESENTATION: The METRA Team led by Mr. Quilatan, presented the project to the Committee using 36" x 48 'presentation boards. DISCUSSION: A prolonged discussion took place between the Committee and the METRA team that covered issues including the following: 1. Anti -graffiti measures 2. Landscaping for the project. This discussion included the review of past problems with the plantings furnished by METRA to the City at the Central Street Station. 3. The proposed design of certain retaining walls which METRA proposed to build using stacked concrete interlocked retaining wall blocks. The Committee did not favor this concept and told METRA that all retaining walls should be designed of cast -in -place concrete to match the design of the existing walls. 4. METRA must finalize the design and locations of connections for the site drainage system and have them reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 5. The proposed lighting for the handicapped ramps and adjacent site areas. 6. The patching, cleaning, and repainting of all existing concrete walls 7. METRA stated that they were caught in a serious time crunch to meet the project completion deadlines and that the Committee and City Staff would need to give them timely feed back as to ACTIONS: Committee members motioned approval for Final with the stipulation that the hollowing issues must be addressed by Matra's Architects and Engineers and reviewed and approved by the appropriate City Departments prior to the issuance of a full Permit for Construction. These issues included the following: 1. The proposed stacked interlocked concrete block retainina walls will be eliminated. In their place, poured or cast in place concrete retaining walls with attached pilasters and beams designed to match the existina concrete retaining wails will be used. 2. Matra will present the City of Evanston with a landscaping maintenance agreement that warranties all plantings initially planted by Matra for this project for a one vear period. This agreement must be reviewed and approved by Paul D'Agastino of the Parks and Forestry Department. SPAARC MINUTES May 9, 2001 Meeting Page SPAARC 98 — 0066 Final - Continued. ACTION CONTINUED: 919 Davis Street for 928 —1002 Church Street }Preliminary and 3. Metra and their project designers must finalize the design, and location of the drainage system and drainage system connections for this project The design, location and connections of the site drainage systems must be reviewed and approved by Sat Nagar of the City Engineering Department 4. All existina concrete walls at the new east side must be cleaned, patched, and painted a uniform color and given an anti graffiti sealer or coating. This color shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Evanston Building Division prior to commencement of the painting. All existing concrete retaining walls at the west side and underneath the full lenoth of the south side of the existina Church Street railroad bridge must be cleaned, patched and painted a uniform color to match the re -furbished and re- painted concrete at the east side and given an anti -graffiti sealer or coating . The painter color shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Evanston Building Division prior to commencement of the painting. 5. All Site lighting for this project ( cut sheets on all lighting fixtures and photometric charts for all lighting fixtures) shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Building Division and the City Engineers office. A site plan 1 lighting key plan showing the location and types of all site lighting shall be presented as part of this submission. The Motion to approve passed with Marc Mylott, Arthur Altersen, and Hans Friedman voting in opposition. SPAARC MINUTES May 9, 2001 Meeting Page SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 23, 2001 Attenders: Committee Members: A. Alterson, (K. Kelly), P. D'Agostino, R. Dahal, D. Jennings, D. Marino, M. MykAt, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wofinski Other Staff: R.Fahistrom C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting at 3:30. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 97. 0065 Church Street Plaza Conceot Construct 26-story multi -family residential building within the Church Street Plaza (new concept for condominiums by OpUrna Inc.) The hearing for this project was canceled at the applicant's request SPAARC 01 - 054 1225-1227 Chicago Avenue Concegi Mbdrfy exterior to convert 1 retail space to 2 retail spaces (liormer True Value Hardware store). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Ken Byerty the architect for the project made the presentation to the Committee. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The existing building is approximately 50 x 100 square feet. This building is a masonry building. The building is currently owned by the Noodle Garden Restaurant. The Noodle Garden Restaurant wants to subdivide the building into 2 tenant spaces o." unequal size. The Noodle garden would occupy about 213 of the space and rent the other 1/3 of the space. A portion of the front facade of the store would be a commercial storefront wooden window wall would be se* back approximately 3' — 0" back from the property line. The remainder of the building fagade iw-)uld remain at the property line. The masonry walls at the ends of the building and abcve the line of wooden windows would be covered with Dryvit with 1 x 8 wooden trim boards at the edges and outside and inside comers. The finish for the wood has not yet been decided. SPAARC Minutes May 23, 2001 Pagel SPAARC 01 - 054 1225-1227 Chicago Avenue Concept Condnued. DISCUSSION: Committee members raised the following concerns, questions. and comments regarding the proposed project. Committee members questioned the use of Dryvit as a finish material and suggested instead the use of brick or stone. Mr. Bryerty responded that the existing masonry had a color change across the facade and the proposed Dryvit finish would unify the facade. Committee members noted that the committee does not view Dryvit as an acceptable finish material. 2. Committee members noted that because the storefront wall of the building will be set back X- Y from the sidewalk, that the entry doors into the subdivided spaces could swing out from the building if required for exiting more than a 50 person occupant load. Because of the setback the doors would not encroach on the public way. 3. A general discussion was held concerning the location of the handicapped parking. that would be located along the alley at the rear of the building. Committee members noted that a handicapped accessible entry would need to be provided at the rear of each store. To conform to the Illinois Accessibility Code, these accessible entries would need to be connected by an accessible route that would connect the striped loading zone of the accessible parking spaces with the accessible entries. These entries would also serve non -handicapped patrons or workers using this rear parking area. ACTIONS: Committee members motioned for a two - part decision: 1. Motion to approve for concept the subdivision of the building into 2 tenant spaces. 2. Motion to deny for concept the approval of appearance issues. This motion passed unanimously SPAARC Minutes May 23, 2001 Page 2 SPAARC 00 —'140 2424 Lake Street Prroilminan! Construct school and administrative office for School District 65. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Brian M. Jack / Architect for Cannon Design, Mr. Mark Banholzer / architect for Cannon Design, Mr. Daniel Weinbach, Mr. Larry Shanuk District65, and Mr. Mark Erikson of District 65. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Brian .lack, and Mr. Mark Banholzer of Cannon Design presented the project to the Committee and-eviewed the history of the project and the design with the Committee. The presentation included a site model and numerous 36" x 48` mounted presentation boards. Mr. Jack noted that the project has now obtained full zoning approval. The building itself will be sited at the southem end of the site at the comers of McDaniel and Lake Street adjacent to the existing Martin 'Luther King School. Parking for approximately 165 spaces will be provided immediately to the north of the new building. The building will be served with a full perimeter ring road that will allow direct access to Lake Street and the existing parking lot, drop-off and bus docking areas for the Martin Luther King School. A drop off will be provided at the north end adjacent to `.`ze main entrance of the new building. Bus docking for the new building will be provided at the northwest corner of the new parking lot. Mr. Banholzer reviewed the organization of the building's 2 story plan.Mr. Banholzer noted that 5 different users will occupy space in this new facility. These users include: 1. Family Focus, 2. The Early Childhood Education Program, 3. The Jordan Learning Center, 4. Offices for District 65, and 5). Storage for the ESCA Program. Elevations of the building were reviewed with the Committee. The following design features were included. 1. 16 windo,,v 3 facing McDanie! Street will feature fritted glass images of children or artwork. 2. The masonry used for the the building will be a standard red color standard sized brick The stone :rim for the building will be limestone. 3. The building will feature a green tinted glass. 4. Where matal panels are used they will be Alucobond panels. 5. All hedge :, will he maintained at an approximate 3' — 0" height. ff SPAARC Minutes May 23, 2001 Page 3 SPAARC 00 —140 2424 Lake Street Praliminary & Final Continued: The landscaping plan for the building site was reviewed with the Committee. Mr. Weinbach reviewed the following features. I Plantings for this project include White Ash, Autumn Blaze Maples, Dwarf Lilac, and Pear trees. 2. A X-0" high berm will provided at the east side of the new parking lot. 3. The playground area, which is recessed between the eastern articulated wings of the building will feature potted plants and paved surfaces. The play equipment for the playground was briefly reviewed. A portion of the play equipment will be handicapped Accessible. 4. Flowers be provided at the front entry. 5. Benches <nd waste contairers will be painted steel. 6. Exterior lighting will be added to the 2" d story of the building. Lighting will also be added In some trees to shine do,nm. The site lighting will provide approximately a 3 foot candies per square feet level of illumination. DISCUSSION: Committee members raised the following comments, questions, and concerns about the projec+- 1. The use of curb extensions at the bus stacking area was proposed by the Traffic Engineer ^hd discussed at length. The curb extensions were seen as a way to alleviate potential danger to pedestrians. 2. Commltte*- members noted that re -paving the alley for the block immediately west of Fowler be'lveen Greenwood and Lake Street will be required. Mr. Shanuk of District 65 noted that Oistrict 65 has committed approximately $50, 000 to repave the alley. A discusrian followed en the need for "Do Not Enter Signs" at this alley. Rajeev Dahal (the City 7 -affic Engineer) noted that in order for these signs to be installed, the residents -F the immediate neighborhood must come to the City and request that these signs be irstalled. 3. A discuss'^n followed concEming allowing traffic on McDaniel to be two way rather than the curvem southbound one way. Again Committee members noted that City policy requires . at the neighborhood residents would need to approve this change. 4. Comm-tte _ members nrted that additional sidewalks should be provided for the site of the new h,.'Iding. Sorr.2 ^crrrnlCee members felt that having a full sidewalk provided only for th : east side of the site provided inadequate pedestrian site circulation. 5. Committr mambers asked if flagpoles will be provided for the new entry. 6. Committs members also asked if special lighting (lighted bollards etc.) would be provided : -~ t"e sidevalk c^ McDaniel Street. The architects stated that no special lighting v.� - s oroposed for this sidewalk. SPAARC Minutes May 23, 2001 Page 4 SPAARC 00 — ^ 40 2424 Lake Street Preliminary & Final Continued DISCUSSION Continued: 7. A brief di--- -ussion was held concerning signage proposed for the north -facing wall of the new buildi-ig adjacent to the new entry and a free-standing ground sign adjacent to the new entry. Committee mem. �ers recommended that the project team review the proposed 7ignage with Karlton Mims (Sign Inspector) for the City of Evanston to determine if the proposed signage would need to be approved by the Sign Review and Appeals B:.ard. 8. Arthur All,: -sen (Director :)f The Building Division) stated that that this time there were too many inresolved desig-, and planning issues for the Committee to undertake a vote for Prelimilary and Fina;. tither Committee members disagreed and stated that the CommittF9 could proceed to vote for approval of this project. ACTIONS: Com -nittee membem, motioned for approval for Preliminary and Final She Plan and Appe- �ance subjoct 1,o th3 review and approval from the required City Departments fo-• the following issues: 1. Review a•--r! approval far the layout of the staging area for buses and the rsquirem-nts for curb extensions. 2. Review r.•:d ;.oproval of Vie proposed signage. 3. Review-, --I ?aproval rf Vn 1 layout of site sidewalks. 4. Review o- '-lie proposal tr. allow 2 way traffic on McDaniel Street. 5. Review at,d approval of site, lighting and 6. lighting ^ �tar�etric 3. 7. The builving ontranc:s w;'I' hs planted with 8. perenniE! -,a:vers All hedge i tc be 3' -- 0" The moti^ i :c ?pprovewith Arthur Akerson voting in opposition. 11 SPAARC Minutes May 23, 2001 Page 5 17,r—. SPAARC 01- 0557 744 Novas Street Preliminary and Final Rebuild existing .;tairs for multi-fatrily residential dwelling. PROJECT REPF ESENTED BY: f ilr. 'Kinston Kow of the Hicks Architectural group GENERAL PRO: ECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kow showed the committee plans for the replacement of 7 :ets of exterizr st-airs for the 744 Noyes multi -family residential building. Mr. Kow noted that t'•:e building is -:at a landmark building and that only the stairs will be replaced. The d =sign of the stairs will change to meet the current 1996 BOCA Code. No other change , r; is be made tc .exterior of the building. The new replacement Stairs will be mai:e of steel. DISCUSSION: Cc--imittee members noted that the park adjacent to the building is a landmark The building is z !andmark. ACTIONS: Corr- ilt ite memha-r rationed to approve the project for preliminary and final. Subject tc the requirements of the Evanston Fins Department that a meeting be held with the Fire Department arior to the start of construction to review the maintenance of ,.-.its and other safety issues. The Building Division will require a construction p" - s-*rig plar to be submitted along with the Permit Plans. The motion to a.- ' ,-,:•.A passed t-F!— it cusly. SPAARC 01- :13C-1600_ Dodge .venue Pry Construct parkir:1 area, park, and retention walls for man made pond for public educational institution (Evan:, :r 7'0wnsn►F, r�,;: PROJECT REF' _:: --iNTEG 6-f. , -. Steve Garavic Director of Operations for Evanston High School, Mr. Ler in Engineer w!it. Christopher Burke Engines,):^s LTD. GENERAL PRC . PRES EfN 7% -I0Y: Mr. Garavic presented the scheme for a wetlands area that the Hig .:,.hoo; :)-. ,d 1,;_ to bu;ld adjacent to the ETHS football field on the block bounded by Lyer ., Street, Church Street, Hartray and Lemar Street. This wetlands area would be used for bich : ad nadir:' -:t _-d would be a resource for District 65 students as well as ETHS studer. - ; ha vietla . {s fl:;h would be enclosed and protected with the existing six foot (6' - G') rhain .ini. t= would be located on the western portion of the football stadium site. TI yr• 1 and a curving wooden board pathway to access the wetlands area. •l. ca provided within the wetland area. 29 parking spaces for the wetlands 1: is prcvidvd fc, t.9 wetlands site. This parking lot would be accessed from Church Str- The 't-r-:-.ch the wetlands is designed to be handicapped accessible and t.-: connecter! t.-; ar, accessible route to accessible parking spaces. SPAARC Minutes May 23, 2001 Page 6 SPAARC 01- ' 5e1600 Dodge .'venue Continued: Preliminary DISCUSSION: C :-mmittee members expressed the following concerns, questions, and comments about _i3s project: 1. Arthur Alt( --r-i notes' thit that this project must be reviewed by the Zoning Division and that it will :led a zoning var-ance because the proposed wetlands site is located in a residentia; R2 zoning District where all parking must be located within thirty feet of the rear lot lin. - . 2. Committe. -rembers notes :iat the handicapped parking spaces must be located as close as p .) 3sible to the beg-aning of the wetlands path. 3. A brief di: -: -r1ion was hnif! -�naaming the water source for the pond and wetlands. Mr. Fell nc :hat a xti!e,,- n -. rvice of 1" to 2" would be provided for the pond. Outflow from the p, ++: would c wi, r to the drainage swale. 4. Committei members asked Mr. Fell if lighting would be provided for the site. Mr. Fell replied the .:i- lightinc -,�s i -3nned for the site. 5. Committe r+: mbe a "; Fall and Mr. Garavic if the proposed wetlands would cane ultra `F-e jurisdic:i:cr +J he Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Fell responded that he vmId res. ..:i1 this is:; - .. :::__ 'f there are Army Corps regulations which are applicabls n `.his p-oje-r ACTIONS: Co. vn;ttea :nom'��ri motioned for Preliminary approval subject to the following: 1. Final app ; I zf all -c ,;, : - __ s;���s by the zoning Department 2. Vacatior ' ";:P, al!ey. 3. Verificatir n !Rs to whether !his project comes under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of . -.i.inears a,A r - rrpliance with any applicable ACOE regulations. 4. The hand ;--I -ped access:: Is spaces will be moved as close as possible to the start of V : .:od path th ;+ accesses the wetlands.. 5. Approval to &*;ie - , -:t-s City Engineering Office. The motion to a-. ; c >> far Fre rr n-.ii, passed unanimously. SPAARC Minutes May 23, 2001 Page 7 SPAARC 01- : 5" 828 Novea Recommendation For Sidewalk Cafe Review applicatic for sidewalk caf6 for Type 1 restaurant - Noyes Street Cafe. PROJECT PREP NTED BY: The owner of the Noyes Street Cafe. PROJECT PREE = NTATION- Tne owner of the Noyes Street Cafe noted that he had obtained permiss . for Caf6 for last summer. He distributed a copy of this approval letter/fr - r 'o the Co •nni't, aw members. The owner stated that he wasn't proposing a full caf6 he want( : cnly provide some outdoor chairs where patrons who ordered carry out food from his rec -.ant could sit and eat. DISCUSSION: TI ;e st ndera ;:r3stions from the Sidewalk Cafd Application Form were read to the owne, -1 'he Noyes scree* Cafe. The following issues were discussed with the owner: 1. Roaes or &,air,a would be needed to define the outdoor caf6 seating area. 2. The owner wc►ald need to provide a covered trash receptacle adjacent to 3. -he ovmer nsed to be responsible for cleaning up any litter that accurnuisled the caf6 area whether or not if was generated by his patrons. ACTION: k MoVor: wp!i !raes to recommend approval subject to the above 3 • -:%nWti ar:. "he moll^n .c eL:cmrnend approval passed unanimously. Hearing no other : L _ illess the L:o-,-,rrittee motioned for adjournment at 4:40 P.M. SPAARC Minutes r May 23, 2001 Page 8 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 30, 2001 Attendees: Commitbw Members: J. Aiello, A. Alterson, (K. Kelly), P. D'Agostino, R. Dahal, D. Jennings, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, R.Fahlstrom, C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting at 3:05 P.M. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 97-0065 Church Street Plaza Conceot Construct 26 story -multi family residential building'sWthin Church Street Plaza (new concept for Condominiums by Optima, Inc.) The presentation of this project was canceled at the request of the Optima Inc, SPAARC Meeting Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 7 SPAARC 1128 Chicago Avenue Jewel Foods Final FaVade renovation for food store establishment (Jewel) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Mike Nevin of Jewel and Mr. Kent Hanaway of CSHQA Architects. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hanaway began the presentation by showing elevations of the new building. Mr. Hanaway noted that the canopy design for the Chicago Avenue fagade had been changed slightly since the last presentation. Mr. Hanaway noted that everything else would be as drawn. DISCUSSION: The Committee raised the following concerns, questions, and comments about the submitted plans: 1. Committee members raised questions about the condition of the landscaping at the existing store. City Staff members noted that they had received many complaints about the deteriorated conditioned of the landscaping around the existing store. Mr. Hanaway and Mr. Nevin told the Committee members that Jewel intended to restore the landscaping to a like new condition using plantings that would match the existing plantings and species. Committee members proposed that there should be an annual joint review by City staff and the jewel manager of the landscaping at this store. 2. Committee members asked if new bicycle parking would be provided at the renovated store. Mr. Hananway noted that 4 additional spaces would be added to the existing bike rack for a total of S spaces. Mr. Hanaway noted that if more spaces are required for bicycle parking due to heavy usage that they could easily be added in the future. 3. Committee members noted that the new Jewel signs would need Sign Board approval because the proposed mounting height is higher than the fifteen foot six inch maximum mounting height to the top of the sign. 4. Committee members queried Jewel if the existing store sold hard liquor or only beer and wine. Mr. Nevins stated that to the best of his knowledge the Chicago Avenue store only sold beer and wine at this store. 5. Committee members asked Mr. Nevins if Jewel would consider having a representative participate in the forthcoming meetings for the Chicago Avenue Streetscaping Plan. Mr. Nevins stated that Jewel would participate in theses meetings. 6. A discussion was held concerning the proposed site lighting for the new store. Mr. Hanaway noted that the designers had checked the lighting photometrics for the site and that there would be very little light spillage at the lot line. ACTIONS: Committee members motioned to approve for Final subject to the following: 9. A joint annual review of the landscaping by The Jewel manager and City Staff. 2. Review and approval of the proposed exterior lighting fixtures and photometrics. The motion to approve for Final passed unanimously. SPAARC Meeting Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 2 SPAARC 1210-1236 Chicago Avenue Final Construct three 7 story multi -family residential buildings (Condominiums) and one 4 story mixed use building (ground floor office and residential on upper floors). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Thomas Roszak of Roszak ADC and Mr. Don Wallin of Wallin Gomez Architects. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Roszak stated that nothing has changed for the design of the building since his last presentation to the Committee for a Foundation Only Permit. DISCUSSION: Committee members raised the following comments, questions and concerns about the submitted plans: 1. Committee members criticized the size of the cast stone cladding being used for the project. Members stated that this cladding had the finish appearance of concrete block even though it is a more refined product. Mr. Roszack responded that the coursing of the cast stone will be at every twelve inches instead of every eight inches which would help the cast stone to be read as a stone cladding and not concrete block. 2. Aurthur Altersen asked Mr. Roszak if he had resolved the design issue conceming the elevator overun penthouses for the 1210 and 1236 buildings. Mr. Altersen noted that the elevator penthouses reach a height of eighty seven feet (87' — 0") which exceeds the Planned Unit development Ordinance maximum height of seventy feet (70 ' —0") Mr. Roszak presented 8-1/2' x 11" CAD elevation studies of the 4 new buildings as seen from Chicago Avenue. Mr. Roszak noted that the elevator over runs were not even visible on the 1224 or the 1222 buildings. The 1210 building would have the most prominent elevator penthouse and that the view point which showed the most bulk of this penthouse was seventy three feet (73' -- 0") across Chicago Avenue. A general discussion followed concerning potential design solutions that could screen or reduce the prominence of this penthouse. The general opinion of the Committee was that although the penthouses exceed the Planned Unit Development height requirements that their visual and aesthetic impact on the overall project was minimal. 3. The Committee asked Mr. Roszak what materials the planters would be made of. Mr. Roszak stated that the planters would constructed of fiberglass in a color to match or coordinate with the paving. Some Committee members expressed regret that the planters were not stone or terra cotta. 4. Committee members asked if the exterior lighting fixtures would have translucent lenses. Mr. Roszak stated that the lenses would be translucent. SPAARC Meeting Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 3 SPAARC 1210-1236 Chicaao Avenue Final Continued: 6. A general discussion was held concerning how the proposed paving materials for the front sidewalk along Chicago Avenue would coordinate with the proposed paving materials and designs for the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan which will be produced in the coming months. Dennis Marino told Mr. Roszak that he should stay in touch with the City concerning landscaping and paving design for the Chicago Avenue sidewalk. Mr. Roszak noted that the planned opening for Phase 1 of the project was set for late fall of 2001 and that he could amend the sidewalk design up to this time if required. Mr. Roszak stated that he would stay in touch with the appropriate City staff to coordinate the design of the sidewalk. ACTIONS: Committee members motioned for approval for final subject to the following: 1. Resolution of Zoning issues concerning the elevator over -run penthouses. 2. Review and coordination of landscaping and sidewalk paving design with the forthcoming Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan. The Motion to approve for Final passed Unanimously. SPAARC 1333 Greenwood Street Preliminary and Final Install air conditioning condensers accessory to single family residence, requiring a major variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY:Mr. Maurice Lemon /owner. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Lemon stated that the existing house is being renovated. That the house had a small yard and that locating the A.0 condensers in this backyard was visually undesirable. T he neighbors have been notified and have no problem with the proposed location. DISCUSSION: Arthur Altersen noted that a major variation was required for this case because the placement of the A.C./ Condenser two feet (2'-0") exceeded the standard (10' — 0" distance from the lot line) by 35%. James Wolinski expressed concerns that the location of condenser only two feet from the lot line could become a problem if the present neighbor moves away and the new owner finds the AC Condensers disturbing. Arthur Altersen suggested thatr. Lemon explore using a baffle system for the A.C. condensers to reduce their noise output. ACTIONS: Committee member motioned for approval for preliminary and final subject to review (if required) by the Historical Preservation Commission of the visual impact of the A.C. unit on the appearance of the house and for Mr. Lemon to explore the use of a baffle system for the proposed condensers. The Motion to approve for preliminary and Final passed unanimously. SPAARC Meeting Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 4 SPAARC 01- 058 3116 Park Place Prellminary and Final Install air conditioning condenser accessory to single family residence, requiring major variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Jim Cotting (the owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Cotting presented a plat of survey of 3110 Park Place to the Committee. Mr. Cotting noted that his lot is only thirty three feet (33' — 07 wide and one side of the property is contiguous with a sixteen foot (16'-0") wide public alley. Mr. Cotting's lot is concealed from the alley by a stockade fence. Mr. Cotting wants to place the A.C. compressor condenser four feet (4' — 0") from this stockade fence. DISCUSSION: Committee members noted that the width of the alley combined with the additional ;our feet of distance from the A.C. unit to the stockade fence meant that the condensers would be separated from the face of neighboring apartment building by twenty (20' — 0") feet which appeared to be an acceptable distance. ACTIONS: Committee members motioned to approve for preliminary and final. This motion to approve passed unanimously. SPAARC 01- 059 2553 Greeiv Place Preliminary and Final Demolish 2-car garage and construct 1-story addition with 1 car attached garage for single family residence, requiring major variations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: No one was present to represent the project. This project was reviewed in house by the Committee. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: DISCUSSION: Committee members reviewed the submitted Plat of Survey and noted that the subject property was a very large lot with sa large F.A.R. . ACTIONS: Committee members motioned for approval for preliminary and Final. This motion to approve passed with James Wolinski voting in opposition. Mr. Wolinski stated for the record that he never believes in reducing required parking. SPAARC Meeting Minutes May 30, 2001 Page a SPAARC 01- 060 1139Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Demolish existing and construct larger front porch and fence for single- family residence, requiring major variations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: No one was present to represent this project to the Committee. T GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: DISCUSSION: Committee members noted that the stairs for the new front porch were oriented to face the public street and to provide a more direct entry sequence. The existing porch had the stairs positioned parallel to the street. ACTIONS; Committee member motioned to approve for Preliminary and Final. This motion to approve d passed unanimously. SPAARC 00 — 069 800 Elgin Road Pre-Aoolication Conference Construct mixed -use building (ground floor retail and parking, parking and office within upper floors) The presentation of this project was canceled at the property owners request. Hearing no other business the Committee motioned adjournment at 4:30 P.M.. SPAARC Meeting Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 6 1 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 6, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: A. Alterson, R.Walczak) P. D'Agostino , R. Dahal, D. Jennings, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, R.Fahlstram, C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting 3:30 P.M. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 99-066 2024 McCormick Boulevard Final Construct addition to Ecology Center. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mrs, Linda Lutz / Ecology Center and Mr. Anil Khatkate 1 City of Evanston Facilities Management. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mrs. Lutz presented renderings to the Committee. Mrs. Lutz stated that the addition to the existing Ecology Center will be 2500 square feet in size. Approximately 1800 square feet of this addition will be a large single room at the northern end of the building. This large room will serve as exhibit space, classroom space, And meeting space. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 6, 2001 Page 1 SPAARC 99-066 McCormick Boulevard Final Continued: DISCUSSION: Committee members stated the following comments, questions, and concerns about the project: 1. Committee members asked what material and color the new addition roof would be? Mrs. Lutz stated that the new hipped roof would be a standing seam metal roof in a gray- green color. 2. Committee members asked if changes would be made to the existing parking area? Mrs. Lutz stated that no changes would be made to the parking areas. Committee members also asked if changes would be made to the existing exterior lighting of the building. Ron Walczak (Evanston Police Department) suggested that some additional lighting with motion sensors would provide better security. 3. Committee members asked what finish materials would be used for the new addition. Mrs. Lutz replied that the exterior walls would be brick masonry because matching the existing masonry color was not possible. Mrs. Lutz noted that the interior fireplace will be faced with real stone. 4. Committee members asked if bicycle parking would be provided for the Ecology Center. Mrs. Lutz replied that there is currently no bicycle parking and no bicycle parking was being added at this time. 5. Paul Dagastino stated that 2 existing trees on the site were cut down because they stood where the new addition will go. 6. A brief discussion was held concerning site drainage. Mrs. Lutz noted that the existing driveway is at a higher elevation than the building and tends to drain towards the building. 7. Sat Nagar stated that he wanted to review a contour grading plan of the site. S. Mrs. Lutz stated that the construction budget for the project is approximately $700,000. ACTIONS: Committee members motioned for approval for final subject to the following requirements: 1. Review and approval of exterior site lighting and security lighting. 2. The inclusion of bicycle parking. The motion to approve for Final passed unanimously. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 6, 2001 Page 2 SPAARC 97-0066 Church Street Plaza Concept Construct 26-story multi family residential building within Church Street Plaza (New concept for condominiums by Optima Inc). PRESENTED BY: Mr. David Hovey and Mr. Todd Desmaris GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: using a foamcore site model and 36" x 48" floor plans Mr. Hovey and Mr. Desmaris presented the newest design scheme to the Committee. This scheme is a refined and expanded version of the diagonal tower scheme that has been presented to the Committee at previous SPAARC meetings concerning this project. The scheme presented by Mr. Hovey and Mr. Desmaris contained the following features: 1 The tower will be 28 stories. The lower 5 stories of the building will be garage with residential units facing Maple Avenue. Approximately 5, 300 square feet of retail space will be provided at the ground floor. The building will contain approximately 175 —177 dwelling units. Mr. Hovey stated that the building design allows all tower units to have a lake view. 2 Residential parking will access the building from the rear / west side of the building. 3 The diagonal plan of the tower features triangular bays on the north side. These bays are not equal in size and they form a facade with an asymmetrical shape. Balconies will be inset or nested into the building facade. The south facade of the tower which is a straight line, features two equally sized projecting triangular balconies at each floor level. 4 The plaza of the building will feature a reflecting pool / fountain that will be contiguous to the front of the building. This fountain will shrink the available area of the plaza to minimize the amount of space that could be used for public gathering. 5. The roof of the garage will be landscaped on both sides of the tower. The landscaped roof to the south of the tower will contain the fitness room / party room and swimming pool for the building. Discussion: Committee members presented the following comments, questions, and concerns about the submitted plans: 1. Committee members noted that there was an overlap between the air rights envelope for the tower and the footprint of the proposed mini -anchor retail building to the south. Mr. Hovey agreed that there was an overlap between the air rights for the tower and the proposed mini -anchor. Mr. Hovey stated that Optima would work cooperatively with the architect for the mini -anchor. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 6, 2001 Page 3 .. SPAARC 97-0065 Church Street Plaza Conceit Continued: 2. A brief discussion was held concerning the cladding for the skin of the building. Mr. Hovey noted that Optima was concerning using a limestone or marble at the base and possibly a veneer stone cladding for the tower. Carlos Ruiz noted that because of the building's diagonal footprint and its height this building would occupy a prominent position when viewed from Ridge Avenue. He urged the designers should consider using quality materials on all elevations of the building including the western elevation. 3. A Brief discussion was held conceming the design of the reflecting pool. Mr. Hovey noted that the pool will be set at plaza level which will best provide a reflecting surface for the tower. It is also Optima's intention that a fountain would be part of the reflecting pool. Committee members noted that the reflecting pool would be usable only 6 months out of the year. Other Committee members noted that in the winter months temporary landscaping or other decorative installations might be used to fill in the reflecting pool and maintain its visual appearance. ACTIONS: Committee members motioned to approve for Concept Committee members complimented Optima for their design and the cooperative spirit they have shown in working with the Committee. The motion to approve for Concept passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT: Hearing no other business, the SPAARC Committee motioned adjournment at 4:35P.M.. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 6, 2001 Page 4 V SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 13, 2001 pttenders: Committee Members: J. Aiello, A. Alterson,), (R. Walczak), P. D'Agostino, R. Dahal, D. Jennings, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski Design Professional: Other Staff: C. Ruiz, R. Fahlstrom, C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting= Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 00 — 028 1004-1010 Church Street for 1642 Maple Avenue) Revision to Final review rooftop treatment of a/c units for proposed mixed use building (retail, office, storage, and multi -family residential dwelling units) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Tim Andersen and Mr. Wade Giomo of Focus Development, Mr. Tim Schmitt of Otis Koglin Wilson Architects. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Andersen distributed booklets of presentation material to the Committee that features photographs of a detailed study model of the building. Mr. Andersen reviewed point by point what he saw as the last remaining Appearance issues which needed to be resolved with the Committee: 1. Focus Development will used approved species of parkway trees. 2. The trees on Maple Street will be uplit with lighting integral with the tree grates. 3. The plaza benches will have center armrests. 4. Focus will need to obtain an easement for benches and plantings on Church Street. 5. Focus will use limestone at the base of the building, The architects have studied the issue and limestone looks best. The limestone will be seated with a penetrating sealer. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 13, 2001 Page 1 SPAARC 00 -- 028 1004-1010 Church Street (or 1642 Maale Avenue) Revision to Final Continued: 6. The architects have prepared alternate studies for the window openings at the garage. These studies were reviewed with Carolyn Smith and it was decided that the original design for the window openings was the best design. 6. Focus presented studies of the proposed rooftop HVAC enclosure screen. The architects felt that metal louvers would be unattractive and they propose using cement panels mounted in a horizontal pattern to a steel tube armature. The cement panels and backup framing will be painted a to match the concrete frame of the building. The area of the enclosure screen is larger than the rooftop units to provide the required air movement. 7. The architects presented plans for the landscaped rooftop terrace at the fifth floor. This terrace is built over the parking garage. Originally it was only going to be the roof for the garage but now it will be a landscaped common area to be used and enjoyed by all of the condominium owners. A large grass area will be provided at the southern end of the deck with smaller planting areas for trees and bushes placed on both sides of the pool house. The structure and foundations under this portion of the roof have already been designed to carry the increased loads. Eight inch geotextile membranes will hold the soil and allow moisture to evaporate without an elaborate drainage system. Condominium owners will be able to sit on the grass if they desire. No lighting will be provided at the deck level. Hose bibs will be provided at the planting areas. B. The Architects reviewed the final color scheme for the building. The balcony rails and guardrails will be painted white. The tower concrete will be painted a cream color "Modak" finish. Fabric awnings at the first floor tenant spaces will be black. DISCUSSION: Committee members raised the following comments, questions, and concerns about the submitted planes: 1. A brief discussion was held with Focus development about the need to obtain an easement agreement for the street furniture on Church Street. The City will assume the responsibility for trimming the trees but the owner or condominium association must assume responsibility for the maintenance of the up -lighting fixtures in the tree grate. Focus development noted that the tree grates to be used, will be similar to the handicapped accessible grate covers used by the City at Church Street Plaza. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 13, 2001 Page 2 SPAARC 00 — 028 1004-1010 Church Street for 1642 Maple Avenue) Revision to Final Continued: 2. A brief discussion was held with the developer concerning the use of salt at the base of the building to melt snow and ice. Committee members noted that salt could stain and damage the proposed limestone base of the building. Focus development noted that they do not use salt at any of their buildings. 3. Committee members asked if the distance from the tree grates to the face of the building provided proper handicapped accessibility for wheelchair users. City Staff and the architects stated that there was sufficient clearance. 4. Committee members asked if the mechanical penthouse has become larger? The architects stated that the penthouse has not changed size. ACTIONS: Committee members motioned for approval for Final subject to the completion of a maintenance agreement by Focus with the City of Evanston fos the trees and tree grates and associated tree lighting as well as an Easement Agreement covering the street furniture and planters on Church Street The Motion to approve passed unanimously. SPAARC 01 —1901 Dempster Street Final Renovate fagade of type It Restaurant(KFC) to include 2' type 11 restaurant (Pizza Nut) PRESENTED BY: Mr. Brian Kallics / Burnham Online GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kallics stated that the owner of KFC. 1 Pizza Hut had requested that he represent the restaurant at the SPAARC Meeting. Mr. Kallics stated that he wasn't familiar with al of the issues that would be raised by the Committee. Mr. Kallics proceeded to answer Committee questions. DISCUSSION: Committee members raise the following questions, concerns, and comments about the submitted project. 1. Committee members noted that litter and complaints about the litter at the existing KFC Restaurant were an ongoing problem. A litter collection plan should be part of the Permit. 2. Committee members asked if the proposed stucco finish would match the existing finish and noted that this issue had been raised the last time that KFTC had presented their plans. Mr. Kallics stated that to the best of his knowledge the new stucco would match the old stucco. Committee members reviewed the submitted elevations and saw a note that the new stucco should match the existing stucco finish. Committee members noted that the finish must be real stucco as opposed to a synthetic stucco like "Dryvit" which is more easily damaged. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 13, 2001 Page 3 SPAARC 01 —1901 Dempster Street Continued: Final 3. A discussion followed concerning the signs at KFC. Mr. Kallics stated that to the best of his knowledge the existing pole sign would be lowered to a height of nine feet six inches (9' — 6") and the reader board would be removed. City staff confirmed that the removal of the reader board was required by the Sign Review and Appeals Board. 4. Committee members noted that the existing landscaping at the KFC restaurant is cluttered and overgrown and needs to be cleaned up. ACTIONS Arthur Alterson (Zoning Division) motioned to table any vote on this project. Mr. Alterson noted that Mr. Krallics did not seem able to answer all of the Committee's questions and that the owner operator of KFC should be present to address Committee concerns. This motion to table did not pass. James Wolinski motioned to approve for Final subject to the following: 1. KFC 1 Pizza Hut shall submit a Corporate litter control plan to the City. 2. KFC I Pizza Hut shall submit a revised landscaping plan for the restaurant site. This plan shall be reviewed and approved by Paul D'Agostino. The motion to approve passed with Arthur Alterson voting in opposition. SPAARC 01- 061 622-624 Davis Street Construct 4 — story commercial building. Preliminary PRESENTED BY: Mr. Mike Radis and Mr. Bob Perlhunder of the Davis Street Land Company. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Mike Radis presented booklets of Xerox plans and elevations to the Committee and presented the following facts about the new building. 1. 622 Davis will be a 4-story steel framed mixed use building with retail on the ground floor and business offices above. 2. The building will be clad with standard size modular brick. At the ground floor the building will have a granite base with a black aluminum storefront above and exposed painted steel beam header above the storefront to create the appearance of a historical cast iron type of commercial structure. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 13, 2001 Page 4 SPAARC 01- 061 622424 Davis Street Continued: Preliminary 3. The 2nd floor will feature rusticated limestone arches with clear vision glass in the arched portion of the triple windows. The next floor will feature punched windows with smooth limestone headers and the 4t' windows will be set in a mansard roof faced with a fiberglass shingle (Mr. Radis passed around a sample of the shingle to the Committee). 4. The side elevations of the building will contain no windows because these walls are at the property lines. These side walls will be composed of smooth and split faced concrete block that is sealed. The rusticated block will run in horizontal bands that will coordinate with the placement of windows on the rear fagade. 5. The back of the building will be set back twelve feet from the property line at the alley. 6. The rooftop HVAC will be centered on the roof and will meet the City's requirements for distance from the property lines. The rooftop HVAC will not be visible from the street. 7. At the ground floor on Davis Street the paving will use the cityscape pavers. DISCUSSION: Committee members raised the following comments, concerns, and questions about the submitted project: 1. Mark Mylott and Arthur Alterson noted that this project will need to obtain City Council approval because A. The building is over fifty feet in height and is losing required parking. The Davis Street Land Company will lose a total of thirteen parking spaces. B. The front fagade does not have the required setback. 2. Committee members asked what existing businesses would need to be relocated to facilitate the new project? Mr. Radis replied that the Siam Square restaurant and Lulu's will both be relocating their businesses. 3. Committee members expressed concerns about the placement of trash containers in the alley and suggested that the developer find a way to tuck in the dumpsters into the building site. Other members noted that most of the buildings on the alley have dumpsters which are placed in the alley 4. Committee members noted that construction staging and material storage will be a major problem for this site during construction. Members noted that the City Engineer and the Traffic Engineer will need to review proposed construction fences, sidewalk canopies and site access. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 13, 2001 Page 6 SPAARC Continued: ACTIONS: 01- 061 622-624 Davis Street Concept 1 Preliminary Committee members motioned to approve for Concept and Preliminary. This motion passed unanimously. Committee members expressed their appreciation to Mr. Radis for the quality and design of this proposed project. SPAARC 01 — 062 101 Ashland Avenue Preliminary Modify the exterior of multi -family residential building (condo conversion), locating 6 garage doors along Ashland Avenue. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. J. R. Graves the owner of 1425 West Howard Street and Mr. Larry Deekman the architect for he project. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Graves explained to the Committee that he was the current owner of the existing apartment building at Howard and Ashland Streets. Mr. Graves is planning to convert this building to condominiums and he has completed his Chapter 34 analysis of the existing building. Owing to problems with the existing design, this building cannot provide adequate parking. Currently this existing 7unit building has only 4 parking spaces. Currently, the building's basement is open to re -configuration. Mr. Graves and his architect are proposing 2 large curb cuts on Ashland Avenue with ramps leading down to parking for 3 cars for each ramp or curb cut in the basement. An entry would be provided into the building centered between the 2 large curb cuts. DISCUSSION: Committee members expressed the following comments, concerns, and questions about the proposed project: 1. Committee members expressed serious concerns about the size of the proposed curb cuts and the appearance of six garage doors on Ashland Avenue. Other members noted that the center entry to the building looked pinched and unattractive between the 2 large ramps and that there was a tremendous amount of asphalt for the driveways that detracted from an otherwise pleasant looking building fagade. 2. Some Committee members suggested that Mr. Graves use attractive pavers for the ramps and a nicer design of garage doors to improve the overall appearance of this proposal. Some Committee members suggested that Mr. Graves consider bring in parking access from Howard Street. Mr. Graves replied that the Howard Street entry would not be able to provide adequate ramp room and maneuvering room to clear the underside of the first floor. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 13, 2001 Page 6 SPAARC 01 — 062 101 Ashland Avenue Continued: Preliminary DISCUSSION: Continued 3. Dennis Marino stated that he would oppose this design because it would set a terrible precedent. 4. Committee members suggested providing access to the basement parking from the alley. Mr. Graves stated that this couldn't be done for the same reasons as trying to Provide :access off of Howard Street. 5. Committee members suggested using the rear yard for carports. Arthur Alterson noted that this strategy would require Zoning Ordinance variations. ACTIONS: Marc Mylott motions to approve a modified concept of the scheme for preliminary approval, This concept would approve the 3 basement garages with a curb cut and ramp at the north end of the site. The south end of the site would be provided with 3 tandem parking pads. This motion fails to pass. Arthur Alterson motions to table any vote for this project. Jim Wolinski asks the Committee if on street parking is a problem in this neighborhood. Committee members respond that on street parking is a problem. Jim Wolinski motions to deny for Preliminary. Arthur Alterson withdraws his motion. The motion to deny passes with Carolyn Smith in opposition. The Committee asks Mr. Graves to return when he has a new design scheme. SPAARC 01- 063 2121 Forestview Road Preliminary and Final Construct second story addition to single family residence, requiring major variations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Mark VVitkowski / owner PRESENTATION: Mr. Witkowski presents a site plan and schematic plans for the proposed addition. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 13, 2001 Page 7 SPAARC 01- 063 2121 Forestview Road Preliminary and Final Continued: DISCUSSION: Committee members raised the following comments, questions, and concems About the submitted project: 1. Marc Mylott and Arthur Alterson explained to the Committee that the major variation involved allowing the lot coverage of the existing single family house to increase from 30% of lot area to 43%. The building would also grow vertically to its maximum height allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Committee members asked if comments or criticisms had been heard from the neighbors. Arthur Alterson replied that none had been received. Arthur Alterson also noted that this was a huge addition. 3. Several Committee members stated that the proposed addition overwhelmed its neighbors and appeared massive and heavy at the front facade. A discussion followed in which Committee members suggested ways to alleviate the heavy opaque quality of the front fagade. The Committee agreed that more windows needed to be added to the front fagade of the proposed renovated house to lighten it's massive appearancp-. ACTIONS: Committee members motioned to approve the project for Preliminary and Final subject to the addition of more windows to the front elevation. This motion to approve for preliminary and final passed with Arthur Alterson voting in opposition. SPAARC 01- 064 307 Davis Street Preliminary and Final Install open off-street parking space in front yard of attached single family residence, requiring major variations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Sid Ross / the owner of 307 Davis Street GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Ross noted that his property is virtually without parking. His house is landlocked without an alley. Mr. Ross is proposing to add 312 square feet of dark brick pavers to his front yard for an on grade parking pad. Existing landscaping would be re -configured to provide a symmetrical appearance to his front yard. DISCUSSION: Committee members noted this was a case of genuine hardship. ACTIONS: Committee members motioned to approve for preliminary and Final. This motion to approve for preliminary and Final passed unanimously. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 13, 2001 Page 8 SPAARC 01- 065 1700 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Expand existing Type Il restaurant (Panera Bread) to vacant storefront to the west, requiring special use. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: No person presented this project. The SPAARC Committee reviewed this project in house ACTIONS: Committee members motioned to approve this project for Preliminary and Final. The motion to recommend approval for preliminary and final passed unanimously. SPAARC 01-066 1935 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct garage for multi -family residential building (condominiums) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Carolyn Smith — In order to present this proposal Carolvn Smith recused herself from the Committee and votina on the protect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Carolyn Smith noted that this was a proposal to build parking for six cars at the rear of the 1935 Sherman condominium building . The garages would be wood frame construction with cream color vinyl siding. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz suggested that the appearance of the garages could be improved by using painted wood trim boards and corner boards. ACTIONS: Committee members motioned to approve this project for preliminary and Final subject to the use of painted wood trim boards and comer boards. This motion to approve for preliminary and final passed unanimously. SPAARC 01 — 046 909 Davis Recommendation to Sian Board Install signage for 6 story mixed -use building (ground floor retail / offices within upper floors, McDougal Littell within the Church Street Plaza Special Sign District. ACTIONS: The Committee motioned to recommend the following: 1. Deny the west facing wall sign. 2. Deny the free-standing pylon sign on Church Street 3. Deny the upper row of banner signs on the Church Street fagade 4. Approve the proposed lower blade signs. 5. Require the proposed area allowance for the Church Street wall to match the signage areas across the street at Church Street Plaza. 6. Approve the free standing pylon sign at Davis street with identification signage for 909 Davis 1 McDougal Littell only. The motion to recommend the above passed unanimously. SPAARC Meeting Minutes June 13, 2001 Page 9 SPAARC 97-0065 1720 Maple Avenue Recommendation to Sion Board Erect a real estate sign for a 28 story mixed use multi -family condominium building. SPAARC 01 - 041 1939 Sherman Avenue' Recommendation to Sian Board Erect a real estate sign for proposed 4 story multi -family condominium building. SPAARC 11 — 018 121 Asbury Avenue Recommendation to Sian B)nf Erect a real estate sign for a 4 story, multi -family condominium building. SPAARC 01 — 067 602-608 Hinman Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Erect a real estate sign for a 4 story multi -family condominium building. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend approval of all 4 signs simultaneously. This motion to recommend approval was -passed unanimously. SPAARC 01 — 068 1301 Dempster Recommendation to Shin Board Erect a wall sign for Ice cream Shop (Stecher's ke Cream, formerty Baskin Robbins. ACTIONS:A motion was made to recommend the following: 1. Deny the re -use of any elements of the previous Baskin Robbins Channel letter sign. The existing sign shall be removed. 2. Install new channel letter signs for Stecher's Ice Cream on the Dempster Street and Chicago Avenue facades mounted so as not to obscure any terra-cotta architectural elements. The motion to recommend the above specific conditions passed unanimously. SPAARC 01 - 069 1800 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sian Board Consider a free-standing sign installed without permit for a Type l Restaurant (1800 Club) within a mixed use building. ACTIONS: Committee members motioned to recommend approval as submitted. The proposal to recommend approval passed unanimously. Hearing no other business the Committee members motioned adjournment at 5:35 p.m. SPAARC Meeting Minutes .tune 13, 2001 Page 10 r SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 20, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: A. Afterson, L. Black (R.Walczak), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar, K. Fujihara Design Professional: Other Staff: C. Ruiz, W.Hallen A. Alten wm ached as chair and determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the drafts of the 61�6101 and 6113/01 Meeting Notes with the addition of the Ecology Center address as 2024 McCormick in the 616 Notes and the removal of H. Friedman from the 6/13 attendance list and passed by unanimous vote. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-022 3200 Grant Street— Presbyterian Homes Revision to Concept Additions to and garages for existing units at Trinity Court complex. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. Nancy Nolan and Dana Howard. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The additions to the units and the garage additions are the same as in the original Concept presentation. These revisions address concerns expressed by the Committee on the original scheme: -On the west site boundary the new landscaping has been reduced and lowered; and walk extensions to the Trinity Court site have been extended from the residential property to the west. These changes have been reviewed with the neighborhood group and the neighbors like the sharing of the improved viewing of the area and the subsequent improved security for all. They atso like the access to the Trinity Court site for walking and jogging. Page 1 of 3 06/20/01 -The new central driveway has been changed to a curved form from the straight, axial shape shown in the original presentation. This softens the site impact of this drive, as suggested by the Committee. DISCUSSION: Committee members suggested that the western landscape strip be limited to plantings around 3 feet tall, with only occasional higher elements, and that the walk extensions not be located abutting parking spaces. Trinity Court will incorporate these suggestions into the design. It was noted by the Committee that the plantings and walk extensions are on City property and will require an agreement with the City of Evanston. ACTIONS: A motion was made to approve this Revision to Concept and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-070 1917 Weslev Avenue Construct multi -family residential building. PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT APPEAR Concept SPAARC 01-071 1330 Ridae Avenue— Unitarian Church Preliminary and Final Replace north and south window walls at religious institution. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. John Heimbaugh — Unitarian Church Rep Mr. Roger Winter — Schaaf Glass Co. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The existing north and south 2-story window walls were originally constructed with steel channels and steel angle stops, in a single glazed, non - thermal break system. These have rusted badly and in some locations are rusted through the section. Replacement process will include removal of all glass and removable stops; and rebuilding of all the rusted steel members. The reconstructed assembly will be primed and painted. To the exterior this grid a new extruded aluminum, window wall system will be installed. The new window frames will be 4" deep of the thermal break type containing insulated glass units. Frame color will be "Champagne" anodizing and glass units will be light gray tinted. These colors agree with the original construction frame and glass colors. Page 2 of 3 06/20/01 DISCUSSION: The new window framing will still be recessed in back of the concrete folded plate form edges of the church structure. The Preservation Commission has agreed with the proposed window replacement. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-068 2545 Praire Avenue — Jackv's Bistro Recommendation for Sidewalk Caf6 fLinuorl Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe with liquor for Type 9 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of the Liquor Control Regulation Core Area. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Jacky Pluton GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Current sidewalk caf6 permit is in good standing. Valet parking is provided to an off -site lot which has at least one space per table of the sidewalk cafe. DISCUSSION The "SIDEWALK CAFt REGULATION CHECKLIST" was read and agreed to by the caf6 owner. ACTIONS: A motion was made to indicate that the evaluation of the Committee of the criteria in the "CHECKLIST" was positive and to recommend approval of this Application for Sidewalk Cafb with liquor for Type 1 restaurant and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-W 1700 Central — Trattoria Trullle Recommendation for Sidewalk Caf6 (Liquor) Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe with liquor for Type f restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of the Liquor Control Regulation Core Area. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Lenny Rago - Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Current sidewalk caf6 permit is approved and awaiting fee payment. Parking is provided to an off -site lot included in the Owner's lease agreement which has at least one space per table of the sidewalk caf6. DISCUSSION The "SIDEWALK CAFE REGULATION CHECKLIST was read and agreed to by the cafd- owner. ACTIONS: A motion was made to indicate that.the evaluation of the Committee of the criteria in the "CHECKLIST" was positive and to recommend approval of this Application for Sidewalk Caf6 with liquor for Type 1 restaurant and was passed by unanimous vote. Page 3 of 3 06/20/01 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 27, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: A. Aiterson, Black (R.Walczak), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, K. Fujihara, D. Marino, M. Mylon, S. Nagar C. Smith, J. Wolinski, Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the draft of the 6/20/01 Meeting Notes and was passed by unanimous vote. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-041 1939 Sherman Final for FOUNDATION ONLY Construct foundation only for multi -family residential building (condominium) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Robert Lubotsky, Ryan Nestor, and Kevin Barker GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The only footprint change from the Concept presentation is an air intake areaway in the southwest comer of the lower level. A underground detention structure is under the paved area off the alley and has been submitted to MWRD for permit review. DISCUSSION: While the south site strip is gated, the northern strip is not and contains two "notches" for unit patios. Committee members expressed security concerns for the northern configuration and suggested use of walls, fences, or glass barriers to improve security. Other Committee members considered this "fortress mentality" and noted that these areas are along the main entry path; are visible from many unit windows; and are visible from the building north of this project site. No consensus was reached by the Committee. This issue and concerns about use of the front yard for private patios will be addressed at the review of the full building by the Committee. Page 1 of 3 06/27/01 ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval for the foundation portion only. of this project with the condition that the north site area security issues will be addressed at the next presentation and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 96-0074 1724 Sherman — Starbucks Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for Sidewalk Cafe for Type-2 restaurant. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. Karen Alexander - Manager GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Sidewalk Caf6 Checklist was read, item by item, and agreed to by the facility Manager. DISCUSSION: A copy of the current public notice requirements was given to the Manager by the Committee. ACTIONS: A motion was made to indicate that the evaluation of the Committee of the criteria in the "CHECKLIST" was positive and to recommend approval of this Application for Sidewalk Caf6 for a Type 2 restaurant and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-152 1303 Hartrev -- Nextel Preliminary and Final Construct 100 ft. tall monopolo antenna and equipment shelter for wireless communication facility. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Brian Kallies and Chuck Brown. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The project layout remains unchanged from the Concept presentation, previously approved by the Committee. A fenced 50 ft. square leased area in a recessed portion of an existing industrial building houses a 10' X 20' equipment shelter and a 100 ft. antenna mast. The mast is V diameter at its base and 2' at its top. The location is needed because of blocked or dropped calls in this service area. Antenna coverage studies with and without this site were presented at the previous presentation and shown to the Committee again. DISCUSSION: When questioned the Nextel representative indicated that this site does not serve Skokie, but fills a void in Evanston coverage. Current sites are at the Northwestern campus and in downtown Evanston. A Committee member asked if a neighborhood meeting had been held or the local Alderperson contacted regarding the project. Neither action has been done by Nextel and they did not know it was required. Page 2 of 3 06/27/01 Considerable, vigorous discussion by the Committee took place on the issue of requiring a neighborhood meeting and the use of this particular site for the antenna array. -A negative aspect of the site is the residential properties in the R3 zoning to the west. -Positive aspects of the site include: -It is located beside an industrial building in a 12 zoning district. -The site has 12 zoning to the north and south and C1 to the east. -A high voltage power line with approx.. 100 ft tall. towers abuts the eastern edge of the site. ACTIONS: A motion to table this item was defeated by a tie vote with H.Friedman abstaining. A motion to defer consideration if this item for two weeks to allow some Committee members to view the actual site conditions was approved with A.Alterson voting no and S.Levine abstaining. Page 3 of 3 06/27/01 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 11, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: J. Aiello, A. Atterson, L. Black (R.Walczak), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, K. Fujihara, M. Mylott, S. Nagar C. Smith, J. Wolinski, Design Professional: Other Staff: H. Friedman R.Flahstrom, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting: Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 00-152 1125 Hartrev — Nextel Preliminary and Final Construct 100 R. tall monopole antenna and equipment shelter for wireless communication facility. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Mike Stem and Chuck Brown. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: As noted in the presentation two weeks ago, the proposal has not changed from the "Concept" presentation approved by the Committee months ago. The location is needed primarily to increase call handling capacity in the area which has many "dropped" calls. It reflects a second step in the growth of the cell phone industry's antenna needs. First was the issue of coverage, which has now evolved into the issue of capacity. DISCUSSION: The Committee's questioned whether the following sites had been considered and received no actual answer. -adding antenna to the existing mast west of Home Depot's parking lot. -mounting antenna on the Pitner/Cleveland City water tank. -mounting antenna on the High School power plant chimney. Page 1 of 6 07/11/01 It was also noted by the Committee that Nextel had independent negotiations in process for a tower in the north end of Evanston and it was suggested that all planning for Evanston locations by Nextel be consolidated by the company so that the total community impact could be evaluated. A Committee member suggested that any antenna location visible from a residential property was unacceptable. A map showing the area for possible antenna location that would meet the capacity needs was requested for future presentations. ACTIONS: A motion to table this item with the condition that a listing of possible antenna sites considered by Nextel be presented with reasons for not selecting the site enumerated, and was passed with M. Mylott voting no. SPAARC 01-072 129-131 Elmwood Preliminary and Final Add additional open parking for multi -family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Mike Reaumuto GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Three condominium buildings are currently served by 12 parking spaces off the alley. This proposal adds 6 parking spaces off the alley and does not encroach on the 15 ft. street side yard and provides the 3 ft. setback from the rear property line. The new and existing spaces drain to the alley pavement and are softened by Barberry shrubbery plantings. DISCUSSION: The only issue raised by the Committee was the use of appropriate plant materials together with the long-term maintenance thererof. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval with the conditions that the Parks and Forestry staff review and approve: -the plant materials to be used. -a maintenance plan for the plantings and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-073 1520 Chicano Preliminary and Final Install roof -top condensing units for telephone company facility. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Tom Persin GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: New roof mounted condensing units are required to serve the cooling loads generated by new equipment. The 4 ft. tall units will be located on a single story roof at the north end of the complex and will be screened from Chicago Avenue view by taller portions of the building. Page 2 of 6 07/11/01 DISCUSSION: Sound control was questioned by the Committee. The alley space to the north provides isolation in that direction and taller portions of the building block the sound path to the south. Only business and mercantile uses directly abut the site. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-074 2233 Grev Preliminary and Final Remove existing landing at front door and construct new landing for a single-family residence, requiring a major variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Jagdid Raval and Ms. Vaishali Yajnik - Owners GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This residence built in 1935 has been owned for 18 years by the current owners. The front entry landing and steps are settling and are to be replaced in a slightly expanded form under this proposal. An existing garage wall line will be the limit of the new landing. DISCUSSION: It was suggested that the owners might consider using smaller risers and larger treads on the site stair, but be sure to stop the stairs one foot from the property line. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-075 1220 [Monroe Preliminary and Final Construct front and side porch for a single-family residence, requiring a major variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Mario Miller - Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This proposal includes new deck "porches" to the west and north of the existing residence. The decks would be elevated around 4 feet from grade and are located in required front and side yard setback areas. A unsuual feature of this property is that its west side yard abuts the rear yard of a property facing Asbury. DISCUSSION: A Committee member did not think that a hardship was demonstrated that justified this variation. When questioned it was determined that all adjacent neighbors have been contacted by the owners and they all like this proposal. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed with K.Fujihara voting no Page 3 of 6 07/11 /01. SPAARC 01-076 2311 Lincolnwood Preliminary and Final Install condensing unit accessory to a single-family residence, requiring a major variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Stuart Cohen - Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A condensing unit is required for the cooling of the interior remodeling of second floor and attic of this existing residence. With extensive landscaping in the rear yard and many windows viewing the area, a side yard location is proposed for the condensing unit with 7.1 ft. to the side property line. A catalog cut of the high efficiency condensing unit was presented together with sound level comparison data. The unit creates a sound level of 68db, while a "standard" unit operates at the 82db level. A alternate to enclose the unit in a 4 ft. high fence was presented. The adjacent property owner has written that they prefer the side yard location over a rear yard position. DISCUSSION: When asked by the Committee, it was determined that the unit faces a windowless garage wall on the adjacent property ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed with K.Fujihara and J.Wolinski voting no. SPAARC 01-077 618'/1 Church — Saao Tea Caf6 Preliminary and Final, Operate a Type 2 restaurant requiring a special use. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Presented by M.Mylott GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: No exterior work is included in this retail store to restaurant change of use. A menu and litter collection plan has been submitted. DISCUSSION: None, other than lack a tenant's representative for the project was noted. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed with J.Wolinski voting no and S.Nagar abstaining.. SPAARC 01-078 2316 Main — Bethel United Church Preliminary and Final, Remodel a religious institution.. PROJECT PRESENTATION WAS CANCELED BEFORE THE MEETING, Page 4 of 6 07/11/01 SPAARC 01-079 2047 Asbury Preliminary and Final Replace porch roofs and siding at multi -family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY Mr. Rick Pasquesi GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Stripping of the walls to the existing sheathing and installation of new "Tripe-3" (narrow style) vinyl siding is included in this proposal. New porch roofs are also proposed and the existing gables will be faced in rough profile asphalt shingles. DISCUSSION: When questioned, Mr. Pasquesi indicated that his siding contractor was ready to start upon his phone call. The Committee desires to have the current unsightly condition of the walls corrected as soon as possible. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-080 603 Main Preliminary Construct additions, including adding two stories and mezzanine, and convert use to financial institution, retail, and multi -family residential. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Presenters did not sign in. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: An existing 3-story bank building will have a 2'/z story addition on top and a 1-story addition to the north under this proposal. The bank function will be changed to business on the lower level; retail on the south end of the first floor with parking to the north; and the remaining area housing 14 condo units. The units would range from 2 to 4 bedrooms and 1,200 to 2,550 square feet. Some of the units would be 2 and 3 stories high. Fifteen parking spaces are shown in the north enclosed garage and an additional 10 spaces are provided in on -grade parking down the block to the north. The design "reclaims" the fagade of the old bank in massing while changing the infill of the openings. A 7' to 8' setback occurs at the new added floors on the east and south faces and a "colonnade" is created at the new fourth level with a trellis on the Main/Chicago corner. The new upper addition will be clad in a material like lead -coated copper in non -window areas with varying patterns used in the cladding. DISCUSSION: Introduction on a much needed landscaping strip on the Chicago Avenue face was suggested by a Committee member. A better tie-in of the west €agade design to the east and south fagade design was also suggested by the Committee. Some Committee members thought that the scale of the project was appropriate for the site and others thought that it was much too large a proposal. Page 5 of 6 07/11/01 It was noted that storm water detention will be required for this site and the developers were cautioned that an MWRD permit was required for building permit issuance. A question regarding the 10 ft., utility access easement on the west boundary of the site was raised. The developer indicated that the easement only extends over the southern part of the site and does not go through to the north property line. A small portion of the new garage addition does occur on this easement and discussions with the utility company are in process. A Committee member indicated that the removal of the 10 ft. rear yard setback did not seem justified for this project. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval and was passed with H. Friedman voting no. SPAARC 01-045 1325 Howard — Charter One Bank Recommendation to Sian Board Install new and re -face existing wall signs for financial institution. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Robert Fahlstrom GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The proposed signage has been revised to conform to the requests of the Sign Board. Signs proposed include: -east face = removal of time+temp display and one channel letter sign at proper height -west face = one channel letter sign at proper height -south face = re -facing of the existing box sign -site r removal of the existing free standing sign DISCUSSION: The Committee wondered why the designer had increased the letter height on the east face over the height used on the west face. ACTIONS: A motion to recommend approval to the Sign Board with the condition that the east sign letter height be decreased to agree with the west sign letter height and was passed with A. Alterson voting no. SPAARC 01-081 1900 Dempster—Shoaoina Center Recommendation to Sian Board Revise Unfffed Business Center Sign Plan for Dempster/ Dodge Shopping Center. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Robert Fahlstrom GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This revision covers the new stores developed in the old `Silo" portion of the center. A sign band is defined and the letter height on the east will be % of that on the south. This proposal does not include the future out -lot building. DISCUSSION: The Committee regretted that the out -lot was not included. ACTIONS: A motion to recommend approval to the Sign Board was passed unanimously. Page 6 of 6 07/11 /01 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES August 22, 2001 Attisnders: Committee Members: J. Aiello, A. Alterson, Black (R.Walczak), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), D. Jennings, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar C. Smith, J. Wolinski, Design Professional: Other Staff: I. Eckersberg, C. Ruiz, R.Fahistrom, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the draft of the 8/15/01 Meeting Notes and was passed with M. Mylott and S. Nagar abstaining. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-096 2201 Foster— Friendship Baptist Church Concept Erect a 120 ft. high monopole tower for use by PrimeCo on church property. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Vem Wear, Jason Kopeny, and Mike Yake. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A specific site area has been established to plug a coverage problem for this carrier. The area is almost entirely residential. An existing church is interested in providing a site for this 120 ft. antenna mast. DISCUSSION: The Committee suggested that: -the monopole could be masked as a sculptural form or a lighting standard. -a coverage need map should be included in any futrure presentations. -other sites be considered, rather than one closely surrounded by residences. -an antenna need master plan with a five year time frame be developed for Evanston and the surrounding communities. Staff was requested to determine if the GIS process could produce a map of Evanston showing all existing communication antenna locations for future reference. Page 1 of 4 6122f01 ACTIONS: A motion to table this item with the conditions that: -the ETHS athletic field be considered as a possible site. -the arboretum along McCormick Blvd. Be considered as a possible site. -other sites in the area in Evanston and in other communities be considered. -an antenna need master plan with a five year time frame be developed for Evanston and the surrounding communities -a coverage need map be presented at any future meetings. and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-089 1502-06 Sherman — Prairie Moon Restaurant Final, Exterior fagade renovation for retail store to restaurant conversion. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Rayn Nestor and Ms. Jessica Growe GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The revised drawings address the design concerns expressed by the Committee at the previous presentation. Namely -the existing false metal parapet has been removed. -a trash area has been developed in the southwest site area with a two container capacity with masonry wall screening from the outdoor dining area. -a color change in the EIFS system has been introduced to demarcate the two businesses on the Sherman Avenue facade. DISCUSSION: Manv Committee members restated many times the original concern that the fagade design does not reflect the two businesses it represents and different window arrays they contain. The Architect indicated that the owners had reviewed the issue and the color change was all they are prepared to do, The Committee considered this only a "token' response and had hoped for a more significant revision to the design. It was noted that the "pylon" must be re-formed to conform to BOCA criteria (pp 3203.4) and that an agreement with the City of Evanston is required for any projections over the public right-of-way. Aluminum divider strips and a reveal between the two businesses in the EIFS system are welcomed by the Committee. The relation to the overall design of different new window proportions on the south and east sides; and the need for the "art deco" curves on the east end of the south parapet were not understood by the Committee. As requested by the Committee, the owners will find out if Sunday reuse pick-up is available. This would remove the carry-over of the normally large weekend refuse load to Monday. The inspection manhole issue will be resolved with the City Engineer. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed with J. Aiello, S. Nagar, C. Smith, and R. Walczak voting no. Page 2 of 4 8122/01 SPAARC 01-019 2121 Dewev —the Stamp Factory Phase-1 Final Convert warehouse complex to commercial/ light industrial uses. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Andrew Spatz GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A model and colored elevations were presented to show the final design. The only major variation from the preliminary design was the change of glass block areas on the first floor to wire glass to improve area security, as requested by the Committee in the previous presentation. Materials include black window frames with clear anodized aluminum operating sash and entry doors; beige brick piers, and extensive metal clad areas with corrugated, ribbed, and square patterns incorporated into the design. DISCUSSION: The use of black 12X12 ceramic tile next to black window frames was questioned by a Committee member and will be re -considered by the designer. The Committee was impressed with the project design and the idea of the conversion to an active use for this building complex. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval to Phase-1 of this project and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-094 610 Davis — Olive Mountain Restaurant Preliminary and Final Renovate store into Type-1 restaurant. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. Lori Saleh GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Construction drawings were presented for this retail store to restaurant conversion. Complete removal of the existing storefront area is proposed with a new french door array in its place. DISCUSSION: The Committee noted that this building has historic status and any facade work will require review by the Preservation Commission. This review can probably occur at their August 28 h meeting. It was suggested that the presenter bring to this meeting: -an elevation drawing showing the complete building. -photographs of the existing building facade. -samples of the actual materials proposed in the storefront reconstruction. ACTIONS: A motion to table this item until input is available from the Preservation Commission review process and passed by unanimous vote. Page 3 of 4 8=01 SPAARC 01-095 2404 Ridae Preliminary and Final Proposed subdivision of one lot of record into two lots of record. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: {Illegible signature} GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Making a separate lot of record of the south 37 ft. of this 29,000+ sq. ft. lot is proposed. No zoning variations would be required for this separation. This address is in the historic status listing. DISCUSSION: A Committee member questioned if the site is included in the historic preservation sheet for this property. C. Ruiz will investigate this issue. It was noted that the north lot formed by this proposal will need parking access that can only be provided in the proposal by an easement through the new south lot. A Committee member determined that no lot of record exists for this property as the survey gives only a "leaps and bounds" description. The owner was cautioned that the rooming house capacity of the existing residence must never exceed the Zoning Ordinance li,nits. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval with the condition that an easement through the south lot be included in the sub- division and was passed with J. Aiello, and J. Wolinski voting no. Page 4 of 4 8/22/01 i SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES August 29, 2001 Attenders: Committee Members: A. Alterson, P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, K. Fujihara, D. Jennings, M. Mylott, S. Nagar C. Smith, J. Wolinski, Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: I. Eckersberg, C. Ruiz, R. Fahlstrom, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Protects Reviewed: SPAARC O1-098 110S Central - EFD Preliminary Construct new fire station, re -using existing foundation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. S. Yas, J. Fischel, S. Hunter, M. Mcl-eilen, A. Knatkhate, F. Kassen, and J. Mac Neil. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A new fire station is proposed on the existing foundation of the previous fire station. with a resultant similar site plan with some improvements in the north parking area. Three eighty foot long apparatus bays are maintained with a new projection to the south to aid vision of the sidewalk from the trucks. The southwest area of the building will house an office, a public toilet, and a "tower" referencing hose towers required on older fire stations. A clerestory surrounds the apparatus bay on four sides and the full second floor provides living space for the fire fighters. Brick in 12 X 12 size will be used in two tones on all facades and green tinted glass units will be mounted in colored frames (pale green?). A space frame tops the tower, supporting a flagpole and is uplit to signify that the site is one of the °five points of light" in the community. Page 1 of 4 08/29/01 DISCUSSION: Committee suggestions include: -decreasing the brick color contrast from that used on previous projects by this firm. -possibly providing more window area in the tower element. -discouraging any roof top mechanical units because of the direct view from the EL -possibly using the "hose" tower as a communication antenna rental site. Public art for the project has not been located at this time and signage will be developed and permitted separately, as required. Considering the level of design development presented, the review was raised to the Preliminary level. ACTIONS: A motion was made to approve this concept and grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-094 610 Davis —Olive Mountain Restaurant Preliminary and Final Renovate store into a Type-1 restaurant. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Ahmed Saleh and Don Wallin. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: An elevation of the proposed infill to the storefront on the lower east portion of the building was presented. This infill configuration has been approved by the Preservation Commission. A series of bronze anodized clad, wood doors are shown with no canopy and no change to the existing metal roofed "eyebrow" above the storefronts. DISCUSSION: A Committee member suggested matching the existing non -original fixed panels glazed into existing non -original storefront system in the western store to maintain the horizontal mullion line across the facade. The owner noted that patrons would step over a lower wail with door -like windows above it. The introduction of a horizontal mullion in the doors was suggested as a solution. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval with the suggestion that the horizontal mullion in the doors be considered and passed with H. Friedman voting no. SPAARC 01-099 2022 Maple Preliminary and Final Construct new roofed porch and enclose existing porch, requiring a major variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Jerry Folz, Owner and Nancy Schlosberg, Architect. Page 2 of 4 08/29/01 GENERA! PROJECT PRESENTATION: This project consists of re -building an existing rear porch to a slightly larger dimension and construction of a new front porch. Variations required by the proposal include side+front yard setbacks decreases and a building lot coverage increase. Finished of both porches will match the existing, re -sided house. DISCUSSION: When questioned, the owner noted that all other residences in the area have front porches and that both adjacent neighbors are in favor of his porch proposal. It was noted that the Building Code requires no openings in exterior walls 3 ft. or less from the property line. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-097 1501 Central -- NWU Rvan Field Preliminary and Final Construct auxiliary scoreboard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. George Woock and Kishore Mahanev GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: The zoning issue regarding this signs inclusion in the original special use extension presentation has been resolved. No change has been made in the sign design from the original presentation. DISCUSSION: When asked, the presenters explained that the south face of the sign would be painted gray to match the stadium color and agreed not to have any advertising on this side facing Central Street. The Committee noted that this sign would be masked from Central Street view by the existing trees and that it replaces a 15' X 33' freestanding sign mounted on independent columns, which is much more noticeable that the proposed new sign position. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval with the condition that the this sign be treated as a "sign" for tax and license revenue purposes and passed with H. Friedman voting no. SPAARC 97-0065 Church Street Plaza — Optima Preliminary Construct 28-story multi -family residential building within the Church Street Plaza complex. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr, Tod Desmaris, Architect and Matt Cison, both of Optima. Page 3 of 4 08/29/01 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The design presented at this preliminary stage is the reflection of additional development on the concept design originally approved by this Committee. A 182 residential unit complex (265' high) is still proposed with around 58K SF of retail space and 230 parking spaces. A residential tower provides lake, downtown Evanston , and downtown Chicago views from its units and from their balconies. A courtyard is formed as the twer meets the street level, The four parking levels are topped with a "green" roof containing the pool and exercise room areas. Vehicles will enter from Railroad Avenue and pedestrian approach will come from Maple. The parking area is shielded from Maple by retail spaces at the first floor and by residential units on the upper three levels. A glass and concrete design is proposed with varying depths on the slab edge beams. Green tinted glass will be used in the building surfaces and the balcony guardrails will glass with a silk-screened white scrim pattern. DISCUSSION: The Committee suggested that the horizontal bands on the west elevation be more related to the existing abutting City parking garage. The Architect noted that a massing notch was used at this meeting to provide a transition area. A Committee member indicated that no street closures are a goal for this project and that construction traffic and crane location(s) be carefully worked out with City staff. The developer intends to use the site for construction trade parking in the early project stages and will use the projects garage in the later construction period. Foundations drawings are to be in -for -permit on October 15 and a 12/1 construction start is currently scheduled. Streetscape is being designed by Teska Associates and will be like the design on the east side of Maple. Pavers will be used at the entry walk to the residential tower and to the retail spaces. A reflected pool will be in the entry area and ground covers, shade trees, and vines will be provided in the landscaping. The Committee requested details of the project's meeting with the existing City garage north wall be included in the final review presentation. ACTIONS: A motion was made grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval and passed by unanimous vote. Page 4 of 4 08/29/01 SITE PLAN APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES September 5, 2001 Revised 9113I01 Attenders: Committee Members: J. Aiello, A. Alterson, A. Berkowsky (K. Kelly), L. Black (R.Walczak), P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, K. Fujihara, D. Jennings, D. Marino, M. Mylott, S. Nagar C. Smith Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: I. Eckersberg, C. Ruiz, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum eklsdng and began the meeting_ Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-086 1123 Howard Preliminary Construct addition to building (for retail goods establishment) and establish new Type-1 restaurant (former La Pita's). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr Ed Yung — Architect and Ms. Yong Hee Lee — Owner. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A revised design was presented that incorporated the comments made by the Committee at the previous presentation of the project. Site photos showed the surrounding environment. The addition construction now matches the existing building and creates a cohesive design. A full length screen faced with roof shingles has been used to shield roof -top mechanical equipment. Two drives off Howard are maintained in the site design and the drive off Barton is closed. Nine parking spaces are provided with one being accessible. Plantings have been added at the strip abutting the south wall of the building and a new strip has been developed along Barton. Page 1 of 4 09/05/01 DISCUSSION: A planting strip along the Howard Street boundary was suggested by Committee members. The Architect noted that this strip was only 18" wide and could not be increased if proper parking aisle/ stall dimensions are used and suggested that the "greening" of this edge might done in the sidewalk area by the City. A Committee member noted that maintenance agreements with the City are sorely needed for any landscaping installations. Committee members comments included: -lack of a fourth side to the proposed sloped roof, facing north to the residential area -the need for the equipment screen -the extent of the equipment screen (some members felt that the full length screen was "less busy" while others felt that use of two small screened areas would greatly improve the design. Some Committee members thought that roof shingles were a poor choice of finish material for this surface.) -a Zoning analysis has been done for the proposal. When asked, the Architect indicated that: -the north site area is paved and would be fenced with a wood fence offering more screening than the existing chain link fence. -the new fencing would also be along Barton. -the existing parking lot would be re -surfaced. -existing brick will be stripped off and new brick to match the addition installed. -new windows would be uniform with existing windows. Further Committee comments were: -additional landscaping on the north alley boundary should be considered to limit the impact of the addition on the residential properties across the alley. -a new sewer connection and storm water detention would probably be required for the expansion and a MWRD permit would be required before a building permit can be issued. -addresses are required front and back on the property and a new address must be obtained from the City Engineer for the addition. -the existing "pole" does not agree with Sign Regulations and must be removed. ACTIONS: A motion was made to reduce the review to the concept level and to approve this concept. This motion failed to be seconded. Another motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance approval with the following comments: -that the full length equipment screen is preferred by some Committee members. -that curbing for paved areas be shown on the final plans. -that signage concepts be included in the final presentation. -that landscaping details and plant list be included on the final drawings. and passed with A. Alterson voting no. Page 2 of 4 09/05/01 SPAARC 99-064 Sherman Plaza Revision to Prellminary Adjustment to Planned Development for mixed -use development with block bounded by Church -Sherman -Davis -Benson. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. James Klutznick, John Terrell, Marc Klutznick, - Developers and Daniel Coffey, Architect. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This presentation includes only minor revisions to the Planned Development approved on October 10, 2000. The major change is the that the condominium units will be designed for sale to the general public and not the senior market as previously intended. Lack of availability of financing for the senior housing was the motivation for this change. Planning revisions will be made to the residential "tower" to reflect this new marketing direction. As previously discussed, a fitness center with possible "wellness" component will occupy 80/ 11 OK SF of the commercial space in the project, replacing the Sears store function. The overall configuration of the complex and arrangement of functional uses remains unchanged from previous presentations. The Architect presented schematic plans of all level types and gave a virtual tour of the entire complex from all directions and from "helicopter" perspectives. The 1590 space garage will have 113 residential owner's and 213 shopper's spaces on about the first six levels; and City permit parking will be housed on the 7th thru the 12th levels. Current garage design uses brick on the first four floors and painted cast -in -place concrete above. Functions to be programmed for the commercial block roofs may include fitness center outdoor uses and some common -use terrace area serving the residential tower. This development has not been incorporated into the design presented at this meeting. DISCUSSION: A Committee member questioned the effectiveness of the "plaza" at the north- east comer of the site considering its small size and through pedestrian traffic. The Architect said he has had success with plazas of this size and that the commercial entry at the south end of the plaza forms a "focal point" and the outdoor dining planned in the area would enhance the "plaza" space. The Developer noted that the use of the term "plaza" was not intended to mean a public square, but a more of a thoroughfare. Additional design is planned for this important site area. The maintenance of the plaza will be done by the devleoper in an agreement with the City. Another issue raised by a Committee member was the "dead" zone formed by the truck/auto drive on Davis Street. Seeing the impact on the street from the existing garage entries, all agreed that these drives should be as narrow as possible given use of the proper vehicle clearances and site lines required for pedestrian safety. Another sitting issue was the very narrow sidewalk proposed on Benson. Creation of an "arcade" serving the retail spaces in this area was suggested as a way to solve this site problem. Page 3 of 4 09/05/01 Garage design was noted at the meeting as being a very important element in the complex design, that should be given careful consideration in the materials used and in the details developed. The Maple Avenue garage design genre should be considered far too utilitarian for the Sherman Plaza project, according to a Committee attendee. A Committee member indicated that a working group has been designated as the "owner" by the City and that group was responsible for both functional and aesthetic issue on the garage design with, of course, the project Architect's 'lead" on the exterior design. A Committee member asked the Architect and D. Jennings to cite examples of 12 story parking garages in locations other than the Chicago Loop and questioned the likely usage of a garage of such height by Evanston shoppers and residents. D. Jennings and the Architect stated that they saw no problem of usage with a structure of this height with permit parking on the upper levels. A security question on the garage was answered with the planned 24 hour security plan with full camera coverage and alarm stations throughout the parking spaces. A Committee member noted that the glass tower at the southwest corner extended over the sidewalk and asked if it could be pulled back. The Architect answered that the glass towers marked the pedestrian entries to the parking in the complex and that the projections made this tower more noticeable. The nine bay array on the west elevation has one banner and the eight letters spelling "EVANSTON" on it and the question was raised if this could be changed to eight bays without the banner or to ten bays with a banner on each end. The Architect responded that the north banner made sense if one the three dimensional view including the banners facing Davis Street and that changing bay numbers was not only a visual issue. When questioned, the Developer indicated that the "balconies" would be semi -recessed at least and that many would be fully recessed in the building form. The average residential unit will be 1,300 SF and sell in the $220-250/SF target range. Current project schedule was given as demolition in the Feb./March 2002 frame and full occupancy in fall of 2003. Construction sequence will be first the garage, then the residential tower, then the central commercial space, and finally the commercial space in the northeast site area. A Committee member noted that with the scale of this project and considering the other construction in the downtown area, that a complete, logical construction management plan is required, including no street closures. A Committee member asked for the design rationale of the two 4-story buildings facing Sherman Avenue. The Architect responded that using the change in materials and design elements kept the masses within the scale generated by existing buildings in the Evanston downtown area. The center "building" is close to a finished design and the northern "building" will have more design effort, according to the Architect. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance approval to this revision and passed with H. Friedman and C. Smith voting no. Page 4 of 4 09/05/01 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES September 12, 2001 Attenders: Committee Members: J. Aiello, A. Atterson, P. D'Agostino (S.Levine), R. Dahal, K. Fujihara, D. Jennings, S. Nagar, C. Smith, J. Wolinski, Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: I. Eckersberg, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-086 1915 Maole — NWU Englehardt Hall Final Erect communications antenna (AT&T) on roof -top. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Ed Stapleton GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: These 1' X 4' antenna will be mounted on the existing brick penthouse and colored to match the brick color. They will not extend above the top of the penthouse and will not be visible in the building profile. On a photograph of a similar installation it was difficult to evert see the antenna. DISCUSSION: The Committee agreed that this was a very nicely concealed antenna array. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval and passed by unanimous vote. Page 1 of 5 09/12101 SPAARC 01-100 1603 Orrinaton — Bank One Concept (Raised to PreliminarvIl Reconfigure Davis Street drive -up facility for financial institution, reducing number of lanes from 6 to 4. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mr. Ray Mamalang - Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Under this proposal the 100' wide lot would be reduced to 60' and the six auto lanes with 3 ATM's would be reduced to four lanes with 4 ATM's (one in tandem). The existing T-6" clear canopy is too low for many modem vehicles and will be rebuilt at a 10'0" clear height. Existing building finish and color will be matched in the new canopy construction. DISCUSSION: A Committee member noted that a total of 8 "stacking" spaces are required by the Zoning Ordinance and more are provided in the site design. The Architect also noted that a 16' easement at the north end of the property will provide a "get -out" to the alley for patrons tired of the waiting period. A zoning analysis will be applied for as drive-in facilities are in the "special use" category. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-101 1818 Maple— Hilton Gardens Recommendation to the Sion Board Install throe 1 8" high channel letter signs on north, south, and east sides of Maple Avenue canopy on a hotel. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. C. Smith GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: No street level signage exists on the Hilton Gardens. The existing high-level sign uses orange -red letters and the propsed canopy signs match this color. DISCUSSION: This seemed like a reasonable signage array for this hotel at street level by Committee members. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend to the Sign Board approval of this signage and passed by unanimous vote. Page 2 of 5 09/12/01 SPAARC 01-102 3434 Central— Unity Church Recommendation to the Sian Board Install 6 ft. high monument sign for religious institution. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. C. Smith GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: An existing old sign would be replaced with a free- standing, illuminated sign with 4'H changeable lettering. Another existing, free-standing sign serves notice of the church bookstore at the site. DISCUSSION: Changeable lettering is not permitted by the Sign Regulations, but a historic precedence exists for this type signs at church locations. The 4" letter height seemed a bit high to the Committee, but only if exterior illumination is used. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend to the Sign Board approval of this signage with the condition that the proposed internal illumination be changed to only external illumination and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-103 433 Asbury — BP Amoco Recommendation to the Sign Board Replace all signage at an automobile service station. (Fonnerty Amoco) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. C. Smith GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A one -for -one replacement of the existing signage to reflect ownership change is proposed for this site. DISCUSSION: The existing signage appears to be reasonable for the site in the Committee's view, as long as some restriction is placed on the comer sign to assure good view of the many school children passing this comer ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend to the Sign Board approval of this signage with the conditions that: -the corner diagonal sign bottom be no lower than 5 ft. above the ground -the landscaping in the northwest comer bed be maintained no at no higher than 3 ft. and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-104: 1975 Greenbav— Cinaular Wireless Recommendation to the Sign Board Replace all signage for retail services establishment. (Formerly North Shore Cellular) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ms. C. Smith GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Again. a one -for -one replacement of existing signage is generated by an ownership change. Page 3 of 5 09/12/01 DISCUSSION: The Committee noted that the signage on the east wall was never reviewed or approved. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend to the Sign Board approval of this signage with the condition that the signage on the east wall be removed and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 00-069 800 Elgin Road Pre-A+3olication Conference Construct mixed -use building (ground floor retail and parking, parking and offices on upper floors). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mssr. Steve Wright, Aaron Ebent, Kiven Hollins, Daniel Cushing, and Paul Shadle. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A single Planned Development (PD) is proposed for this site including the existing 1800 Sherman building. The major thrust of this presentation is to address the concerns raised at concept approval by the Committee in March. The project still proposes an office tower at the northwest corner of the site and a 4-story parking structure in the southwest site area. Retail is planned on the Elgin Road side on the complex and wraps 40 ft. south down Benson. No retail is indicated on the Clark Street face, Changes made in response to Committee comments include: -the "monotonous" Clark and Benson view of the parking structure has been meditated with the use of recessed display "shadow boxes" with awnings over them and the garage design now uses punched openings to conceal the automobiles and to make a difference from the "grid" design of the tower element. The punched window design is an architectural "reference" to the existing Orrington Hotel garage on the east side of Sherman, about % block away. -the new entry drive off Elgin Road now has an drop-off space for the new tower and for the existing 1800 building. -no drive-thru facility is included in the revised planning. The Developer noted the existing OSCO and Radio Shack storefronts as examples of blank walls used on retail stores rather than display windows or other street energizing elements. Continuation of the low level of pedestrian traffic on Benson and only small increases of this traffic on Clark Street are anticipated by the Developer. The revised design attempts to make the project more a part of the downtown area with its "arms around the comprehensive plan". Two variations are required for the proposed complex, They are: -no "Ziggurat" design on the building. (It was noted that it is about 85' to Las Palmos, 108' to Sherman Gardens, and over 200' to the NWU BIRL Lab building.) -no ground floor retail on all of Clark or south portion of Benson. The project will be presented to the Plan Commission tonight. Page 4 of 5 09/12/01 DISCUSSION: When asked, the Architect indicated that the west side of the garage would be level and the ramps would only be on the east side in a "two-way 90 degree" design pattern. Committee members raised concerns on the maintenance responsibility of the displays in the "window" cases. The negative experience of a shabby appearance at the old "KIDS'R US" store in the display "window" cases was recalled by Committee members. Movement of the office tower to the southwest comer of the site was suggested by a Committee member and the resultant destruction of views for both the new tower and the existing building indicated noted by the Developer. A Committee member noted that the zoning relief requested by the variations was very minor considering that the site only forms a transition district on its north face. He also indicated that the overall project was welcome and that the removal of grade level parking was a good feature of the design. Most Committee members were strongly opposed to the lack of retail space on Clark Street proposed by the revised layout. This was a strong objection at the concept stage and has not been addressed. The use of display "window" shadowboxes does not generate the energy to the streetscape that retail uses would. It was determined that the garage design would require alterations to accommodate adequately sized retail spaces on Clark. Some considerations in garage re -design were noted as: -possibly adding a level to the 4-story parking structure. -having a "working session" on the issue with City staff. -considering ramp slopes above the 6% used in the current layout. -that while the number of parking spaces provided meet the Zoning requirement, they do not meet the real building demand, according to the Developer. (A total of 562 spaces are provided in the current design.) -maybe "speed ramped" portions should be used in the garage layout. ACTIONS: No actions are required at a "Pre -Application Conference". It was noted by the Chair that all requirements of this conference had been met by the discussion. Page 5 of 5 09/12/01 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 26, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: David Jennings, Stephanie Levine (for Paul D'Agostino), Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Keith Fujihara, Susan Guderley, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-105 SPAARC vs. Zoninp Relief Processes Discussion Discussion of the timing of SPAARC review of developments also reviewed by the ZBA, Plan Commission, and/or City Council DISCUSSION: Timing of SPAARC review is a concem because there have been occasions, especially regarding the 1800 Sherman case, in which cases can be approved by Plan Commission immediately following disapproval by SPAARC. The current process for a proposed Planned Development (excluding SPAARC in this process) is as follows: • Zoning Analysis • Public Hearing notification • Plan Commission hears case, forwards case with recommendation to Council • Planning and Development Committee considers recommendation of Plan Commission, also forwards recommendation to Council • If City Council approves, then an ordinance is introduced and that ordinance is enacted at the subsequent City Council meeting A member of the Committee expressed his discouragement with the SPAARC process. He suggested that a project should go to Plan Commission first, a recommendation should be made to City Council, and then the case should be sent to SPAARC so that the City Council will get the benefit of SPAARC review when making a decision. City Council approval should be contingent on SPAARC approval. SPAARC - Sexember 26, 2001 Page 1 Most other members believe that a project must have concept approval before it can be forwarded to Plan Commission and City Council. SPAARC is well -suited to review something in its early stages. The main problem seems to be that SPAARC recommendations are not formally forwarded to both Plan Commission and City Council, resulting in a communication gap between the Committee and the Commissions. It might be helpful for the Plan Commission chairman to sit in on SPAARC meetings. The community has a strong weight on what the Council can do, but not what SPAARC can do. SPAARC should reach out to the community and publicize itself. In addition, a developer should also reach out to the community regarding his/her proposed project through public relation measures and preliminary conversations with the appropriate aldermen. In many cases, developers do not come in with a strong project and/or a strong vision for their proposed project. This creates issues regarding the length of time it can take for a project to go through the current development review process. ACTIONS: This discussion will be continued to next week's SPAARC meeting (October 3, 2001). SPAARC 01-057 1113 Clark Street Final Construct three-story addition to religious institution (Mt. Zion Missionary Baptist Church) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Michael Johnson, Sheldon Hill Associates GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This project is in for a building permit. Materials samples are not currently available. However, the material on the addition does match the existing building. There are no changes to the proposal since the preliminary approval. A story was added to the proposal the last time this project appeared before SPAARC. The plans match those on the building permit. DISCUSSION: Mr. Johnson stated that the church has not yet decided if they wish to vacate the alley to the north, as the mechanical will no longer be within the alley and will now be located within the building envelope. The cross on the plans will be layered into the masonry. The windows will be bronze. Pedestrian and vehicular circulation will be the same. However, the ingresslegress is going to be sized for two-way access. The alley is not currently vacated. A letter should be submitted to withdraw the alley vacation request, however, Mr. Johnson did not want to go that far, as the church may still want to pursue the vacation of the alley. The Committee requested that this item be pursued with the church. There is no increase in parking required, however, eighteen additional spaces are being added. Mr. Johnson once again explained that the point of the vacation of the alley was to allow for the mechanical room to be placed on the back of the church. However, because of budget constraints, this mechanical room is no longer being considered by the church. There will be food operation within the church. Therefore, garbage needs to be contained in some location on the property so that it will not pose a problem in terms of rats, etc. SPAARC — September 26, 2001 Page 2 A landscape plan and sight lighting plan will be needed. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table this case so that the applicant can resolve the issues of landscaping, lighting, trash placement, alley vacation, and changes to the floor plan to reflect the fact that the mechanical room is no longer going to be constructed as part of the addition. The motion was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-106 2306 Hastinras Avenue Preliminary and Final Replace existing garage with new garage, requiring major variation PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Charles Engel, property owner GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: This is a zoning variation case, replacing an existing garage with a new garage. The variation is for lot coverage. The garage that is being replaced is actually larger (22'x25') than the proposed new garage (22'x22'). The existing garage is currently creating a legal non- conforming situation. DISCUSSION: The proposed garage will create a situation in which the lot coverage would be 43%, where 30% lot coverage is permitted in this zoning district. There is no neighbor opposition to this project. The Committee asked the applicant to maintain the same grade in the back yard so that runoff will not create problems with the neighbors. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and the motion was passed unanimously. SPAARC 01-107 1426 Greenleaf Street Preliminary and Final Install air-conditioning condenser unit for single-family residence, requiring major variation PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Michael Thomas, Owner GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: The proposal is to place an air conditioning compressor unit on the Ashland side of the property because this is the least obtrusive location on the lot. The compressor will be behind a fence, and across a street from the nearest residential structure. A variance is needed because the proposed location is within the setbacks imposed on the property. DISCUSSION: An option is to place the compressor on a platform on the roof. However, this would create aesthetic issues. The Committee believes that this location is the feast obtrusive. This should be approved with the condition that the compressor unit be screened from Ashland. ACTIONS: SPAARC - September 26, 2001 Page 3 A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval, provided sufficient screening is maintained in perpetuity. This motion was passed unanimously. SPAARC 01-108 2412 Payne Street Preliminary and Final Construct 1 % story addition generally above entire first boor of single-family residence, requiring major variation PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Chris Froeter, Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: There is nothing regarding this project that is in opposition to the neighbors. A variance is needed because the existing setback on the side is I Y2 feet too close to the property line. The proposal is to construct an addition straight up (vertically), so that there will be no further encroachment into the required side yard. DISCUSSION: There is a fire rating requirement that states that no openings are allowed on a side of a structure that is within 3 feet of a property line. The wall would have to be brought in, or skylights may be needed to substitute for window openings on this side of the structure. There are ways to work around this situation. The Committee suggests that the applicant work with the architect to deal with this situation. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-109 805 Ridge Terrace Preliminary and Final Construct 1-story addition to, and 2-car detached garage for, single-family residence, requiring major variation PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew Venamore, Owner Representative; Martin Mead, Owner Representative GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This is a major variation to construct a one-story addition and a two -car detached garage to a single-family home. The proposal is to remove a one -car attached garage, and replace with a bigger kitchen and family room. The proposal also includes the construction of a two -car detached garage on the north property line, immediately opposite of Central Street. This property has two front yards, and makes it difficult for compliance. The two variations include: - Lot coverage - The construction of a garage in the front of the house A fence will be replaced in kind. The fence will provide privacy from the hospital construction behind the home. So far, there have been no objections to this project by neighbors. DISCUSSION: SPAARC — September 26, 2001 Page 4 The lot coverage will increase from 33% to about 46%. The zoning district allows for 30%. Gutters will be installed on the garage and on the addition. The Committee suggested that the new garage be constructed with same roofline as the house so to compliment the house. Some members of the Committee did not express concern with lot coverage. The applicant asked the Commission if the issue of lot coverage would be a concern of the Zoning Board of Appeals. In response. the Committee suggested that the applicant present the lot coverage of the surrounding properties to the ZBA to illustrate that the lot coverage is consistent with surrounding properties on this street. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by a vote of 5-1. The only opposition was given by Keith Fujihara (voting in David Jennings' absence). His concern is with flooding that may result from the increased lot coverage. He suggested that the installation of a dry well may eliminate this concern. SPAARC 01-110 3040 Colfax Street Preliminary and Final Construct 1-car detached garage for single-family residence, requiring major variation PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: E. Shamus Hanlon, Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This request is for the construction of a one -car detached garage for a single-family residence. The variance is for the separation between an accessory structure and a principal structure. The ordinance requires a 10-foot separation, the applicant is requesting a 4' 9" separation. The applicant is planning on firewalling the garage. A carport -like structure currently exists on the property. DISCUSSION: The Committee asked how the garage would be frewalled. Would brick be considered a firewall material? The answer was yes. Brick was considered by the applicant for sakes of aesthetics, but it was found to be cost prohibitive. The applicant is considering using vinyl siding with a 3/. inch drywall for fire protection. The Committee suggested using a material called hardy plank. It would be more aesthetically pleasing. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-111 2530 Ashland Avenue Preliminary and Final Install off-street parking space within front yard, requiring major variation PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kevin McGarvey, Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A major variation is being required to construct an off-street parking space within the front yard. The petitioner described where he lived. Townhomes are located to the north of the applicant's property. There is not an alley behind the house because there is an office behind SPAARC — September 26, 2001 Page 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 3, 2001 Attendees: Commiifte Members: Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Protect Reviewed: SPAARC 01-112 2735 Sheridan Road Preliminary and Final Review of plat cf consolidation, caonsolidating Vag' portion of 572 Isabella Street zoning lot with 2735 Sheridan Road zoning lot GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: At Chairperson Carolyn Smith's request, Frank Aguado briefly explained what the petitioner was proposing to do. He stated that the lot consists of 1 % lots, which are depicted by Lot 1 and part of Lot 2, which is shown on the plat of survey. Mr. Aguado stated that nothing would change on the site, with the exception of the legal description of the property. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and the motion was passed unanimously (3-0). Hans Friedman abstained from voting. Old Business: Chairperson Smith asked the Committee if they wished to continue discussions regarding the timing of SPAARC review of developments also reviewed by the ZBA, Plan Commission, andfor City Council. Rajeev Dahal stated that he was not at the meeting the previous week and was not aware of the discussions. Chairperson Smith suggested that the discussion be continued to the SPAARC meeting of October 10, 2001. The Committee agreed. Hans Friedman suggested that this discussion be included as an agenda item for the October 10 meeting so that it would attract more Committee members to attend. Chairperson Smith stated that she wanted to postpone the voting on the September 26, 2001 meeting minutes, as she had not yet had the chance to review them. These minutes have been prepared by Jeffrey Burdick — General Planner SPAARC -- October 3, 2001 Page 1 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 10, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Rajeev Dahal, Stephanie Levine (representing Paul D'Agostino), Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Consideration and ADDroval of Minutes: Wednesday. Seutember 26. 2001 Meeting Minutes A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes as corrected. The motion passed unanimously, with two members abstaining. (Arthur Alterson and Rajeev Dahal) Wednesday. October 3. 2001 Meetina Minutes A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes. The motion was passed unanimously, with one member abstaining. (Arthur Alterson) Discussion of SPAARC vs. Zonina Relief Processes: Chairperson Smith asked Walter Hallen to summarize his memo regarding this issue. The memo stated that the minutes of the preconference hearing for a project should be forwarded to Plan Commission before the Plan Commission meets on that project. In addition, the forwarding of the minutes of the pre application hearing and the recommendation of Plan Commission to City Council should be made mandatory. Committee member Arthur Alterson stated that SPAARC minutes regarding any zoning relief issue are already forwarded to City Council. He explained that he had an issue with mandatory requirements. The minutes are being sent to the Plan Commission, the problem is with the scheduling of the meetings. Chairperson Smith explained that the role of SPAARC was to communicate early on any problems with a project prior to that project appearing before Plan Commission and City Council. Committee member Alterson stated that the pre application conference was a misguided procedure. Chairperson Smith inquired about the elimination of the preapplicabon process. SPAARC — October 10, 2001 Page 1 Committee member Marc Mylott explained that the Zoning Ordinance states that the pre application process is to occur prior to submittal of the application for a Planned Development. However, this has not always been a reality. Committee member Alterson suggested that the pre application process not be inserted into a regular SPAARC meeting timeslot. Hans Friedman, the Design Professional Commission member, expressed concern about the timing of the overall process that a developer faces in Evanston. He sited 1930 Ridge as a particular example. Committee member Judy Aiello stated that SPAARC's recommendation for that site was completely different than Plan Commission's envision for the site and that, perhaps, projects should first appear higher up in the chain of command. Committee member Mylott stated that if a project were first sent to Plan Commission and City Council, then SPAARC would be rendered powerless. Chairperson Smith recommended holding this discussion until further time permits. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-119 1016 Church Street Preliminary and Final Remodel facade for a type t restaurant (Thai Sookdee) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Vazoop Ratana, Chan Pen Ratana (Owners) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith asked the petitioner; to present their project. The petitioners did not have a material sample or drawings depicting improvements to the building. The current base of the building is limestone. The petitioners stated that wood would be used as the new building material. The wood would be lacquered. DISCUSSION: Committee members expressed concern over the use of wood, especially on the base of the building. It creates a maintenance issue, especially during the winter. They suggested using the existing limestone base. However, the petitioner explained that some demolition would need to be done, and they did not want to expose the limestone base for fear that new limestone in the areas of the demolition would not match the existing limestone. The petitioner sited Pete Miller's facade as an example of the attractive use of wood as a building material in this area. The Committee inquired about the new fans being installed on the roof. These fans will be placed a considerable distance from Church Street. However, there is potential for a lot of visibility of these fan units. Chairperson Smith made a motion to table the project pending revised drawings, and she requested a material sample. Committee member Mylott requested that the petitioner return to the Committee with a resolution on what the base material will consist of. The Committee suggested granite as a possible material. ACTIONS: SPAARC — October 10, 2001 Page 2 A motion was made to table this case pending the inclusion of revised drawings. The motion was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-121 1128 Chicaao Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Install illuminated wall signs for food store establishment (JeweUOscao) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Carolyn Smith (Chairperson) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith stated that the applicant is seeking approval of a sign that exceeds the height requirements of the sign ordinance. Each proposed sign is greater than the maximum 15' 6 height. The signs are for the renovated Jewel store on Chicago Avenue. DISCUSSION: The lowest proposed sign is 17' 6, and the highest proposed sign is 22' 3. There will not be a freestanding sign on this site. One Committee member expressed the desire for a smaller sign facing the parking lot. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend approval to the sign board and the motion was passed unanimously. ,SPAARC 01-122 2511-2515 Prairie Averu a Recnmmendation to Sign Board Erect temporary, freestanding, real estate sales sign for new multi -family residential building PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Carolyn Smith (Chairperson) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith explained that this temporary residential condo. development sign was put up without a permit. DISCUSSION: There was some concern among Committee members that the sign contains too much information and is basically an unreadable advertisement. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend approval to the sign board with the condition that the sign is only left up for 12 months or until all of the units are sold. A Committee member expressed concern regarding the potential for the setting of a precedent for allowing the placement of such signs without first getting a permit. The motion was passed. (Vote 7-1). SPAARC 01-088 819 Simpson Street Final Construct multi -family residence (3 dwelling units) with underground parking PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Warren Spitz, Jerome Salzman, Elena Goldin (Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The architects presenting the project stated that there have been a few changes since this project first appeared before SPAARC. A detailed landscape and sight lighting plan has been SPAARC — October 10, 2001 Page 3 completed, the front door of one of the units has been moved from the side of the building to the front of the building, and one of the dormers will consist of cedar siding as opposed to masonry. Samples of the building materials were passed out to the Committee members. The roof will consist of asphalt shingles. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott read the minutes of the meeting in which this case appeared before SPAARC for preliminary approval to the Committee. A Committee member asked how many buildings were being demolished to accommodate the new construction. One of the architects answered 'one'. White mortar is going to be used in conjunction with the masonry. The Committee suggested using a more neutral color mortar, such as off-white. Committee members inquired about the handling of trash enclosures. The architects mentioned that this issue had not been brought up before. They stated that the enclosure could be put placed in the alley. A Committee member asked whether the new units would be condos or if they would be rental units. The project manager stated that this would depend on the bylaws, which had not yet been drafted. The Committee expressed concern regarding the number of student rental units in this neighborhood and the potential of students renting these new units. They were primarily concerned with the garbage generation of student rental units, and the ability for the garbage receptacles to handle this amount of garbage generation. The zoning relief requirements had been taken care of; the air conditioning units would be pushed under the building so to allow for setback of greater than 10 feet. A Committee member asked what the slope of the property between the alley and the building would be. One of the architects stated that it would be 1/8 inch to 1/12 inch. Another Committee member suggested that the two middle garages should be sold together so to allow for tandem parking for the two units with one garage that would not block the center of the driveway. The detailed landscape plan was presented to the Commission. Committee member Stephanie Levine suggested that a smaller shrub be placed along Simpson Street so to not block sight views along the street. Committee member Mylott noted that the building itself is formal and symmetrical, while the landscaping arrangement is informal and random. The landscaping arrangement should compliment the architectural style of the building. A Committee member suggested widening the driveway to make it easier for cars to maneuver into the parking spots on either end of the driveway. Another Committee member inquired about bicycle parking. A large amount of bicycle parking space will be provided. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to review and approval of the landscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department and exterior lighting review and approval by the Building Department and was passed. (Vote 7-1). SPAARC 01-120 2153 Ashland Avenue Preliminary and Final Remodel existing two-family residential building and construct attached 2-story commercial building SPAARC — October 10, 2001 Page 4 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Leineweber (Owner/Builder) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Leineweber gave a detailed presentation of the project to the Committee. The existing house consists of two dwelling units and is 11/2 stories in height. It is of significant historical value. He wishes to restore the house to its original Victorian appearance. The property is zoned C2, and the current residential use is grandfathered. The plan is to add a building to the bads of the lot that will contain uses that are consistent with C2 zoning. This plan is based on existing historical structures existing on Sherman and Elmwood Avenues between Dempster and Main Streets. The existing residential structure will be redesigned to accommodate his family. Mr. Leineweber presented the floor plan to the Committee. He stated that the existing back porch would be removed to accommodate the new commercial structure in the rear. The new rear building will consist of first floor shop spa )e and second floor office space. It will reflect a turn of the century appearance, the windows will be double hung, and there will be stone details around the windows and a limestone cap. The doors on the rear building will resemble old garage doors. DISCUSSION: The Committee inquired about the material of the house. Mr. Leineweber stated that the material would be cedar siding. Standard sized brick would be used. The Committee members stated that they liked the project, but expressed concern regarding the size of one of the windows on the elevation. Mr. Leineweber stated that the large size of the window concerned him as well, and that changes would be made to approve the appearance. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval and was passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 01-123 1930 Rldne Avenue Coneeot Demolish parking structure and construct 4-story multi -family residential buildings wilh underground parking PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Greg Ratas, Richard Aaronson (Development Manager and Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Aaronson presented an overlay showing current curb cuts on the site as well as building footprints. Originally, an 11-story building was proposed for this site. However, neighbors vehemently proposed this plan. The revised plan called for an 8-story building, but this was also strongly opposed by neighbors and residents, mostly due to height concerns. The new plan is for a series of four-story residential buildings, resembling the historical, brick apartment buildings which line Ridge Avenue in Evanston. This proposal would allow the developer to maintain the same level of density. These buildings would be focused around courtyards. Mr. Aaronson presented photos of existing multi -family residential buildings that SPMRC — October 10, 200I Page 5 exist along Ridge Avenue as a comparison. The four stories would be above grade, with three bays of parking located below. A swimming pool will be located within the largest sawtooth on the site, and will receive southern exposure. An internal pedestrian courtyard has been created that will provide the opportunity to create a sense of community between buildings. There will be two breaks in the building along the facade facing Ridge Avenue to avoid the appearance of a long, continuous wall. The current layout consists of 195 residential units and seven parking spaces in exoess of the requirement. One elevator will service each building. DISCUSSION: A series of questions were asked of the developers: What would the treatment of the balconies of the new buildings be?. Mr. Aaronson stated that different variations are being considered at this time. The Committee stated that cantilevered balconies are not popular in the community. What is the size of the new units? The net square footage would be between 825 — 850 square feet. A Committee member stated that the amended site plan is an improvement over the previous site plan in that the buildings are now tied together through the inclusion of courtyards. Where would stormwater detention be placed on the site? Mr. Aaronson explained that the civil engineer is doing computations to determine the best location for stormwater detention. There is some room both in the front and back of the proposed buildings. How will truck loading and unloading work? Two 10' x 30' bays were provided on the original plan. Based on feedback, the proposed plan provides two 12' x 50' bays with a long pocket provided for staging. The trucks would have to back out onto Ridge Avenue. A Committee member noted that there would be a one -foot setback on the west side of the property. Because of building code restrictions, window opening would not be permitted on this side. This would create a blank facade facing the railroad. Another Committee member noted that the older apartment buildings that were sited as examples during the developer's presentation were not built on top of parking garages. As a result, these properties are not limited regarding what they can do with their courtyards, where this property would be. Severe structural limitations are placed on the courtyard because of the parking garage located below. Mr. Aaronson stated that it is feasible to place sod in the courtyard because of the proposed membrane systems that will be installed. He assured the Committee that the courtyard would be handsomely landscaped. A Committee member noted that there would be limited fire access to this property. Mr. Aaronson stated that fire trucks could access building via the courtyard. What are the materials being used for the building? Mr. Aaronson explained that masonry brick would be the primary building material, with possible stucco and pre -cast in locations. He stated that a number of building materials are being contemplated, and wood may be used as an accent element in some locations. SPMRC — ocmbcr 10, 20Q 1 Page 6 A Committee member noted that it is important for a building to carry a courtyard, not the other way around. Landscaping should not be the focus; interesting and attractive architecture should be the focus. The Committee requested drawings that depict the conditions of surrounding properties in order to provide a context to this development. In addition, the height of the buildings should vary to create and attractive building fagade, especially as viewed from Ridge Avenue. What is the zoning being requested? Mr. Aaronson stated that R5 zoning is being requested with a setback variance. What about guest parking, will that be provided? Mr. Aaronson explained that a permit parking system would be used. The Committee suggested that the developer contact Northwestern University in order to arrange for a weekend shared parking arrangement with their lot to the north. A Committee member suggested that the building housing the leasing office be moved further to the north to call it out more and create room for a larger courtyard. What is the developer giving back to the City and the community in exchange for the Planned Development? Mr. Aaronson stated that this had never been requested before, and asked for examples from the Committee that would qualify. These examples would include an affordable housing component, a donation to the City's affordable housing fund, or public art. Mr. Aaronson stated that an affordable housing component would be included with the development. What are the current rent structures for the units? Mr. Aaronson stated that the rent structures for the original plan were between $1.95 -$2.20 /square footage/month. The new plan's rent structures are an average $1.95/square footage/month. A motion was made to approve the concept. A Committee member asked whether this motion would mean that the Committee approves the density and the arrangement of the proposed plan. The Committee explained that it would mean the Committee approves the concept of the plan. J � ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant concept approval and was passed. (Vote 6-3). Chairperson Smith explained that she was not ready to vote to approve this motion. She would like to see further improvement to the site plan due to the high density of the project. These minutes have been prepared by Jeffrey Burdick — Genera(Planner SPAARC — October 10, 2001 Page 7 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 17, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Aiterson, Paul D'Agostino, Keith Fujihara, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz' Roberta Schur C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Consideration and AoDroval of Minutes: Wednesday. October 10.2001 Meetina Minutes Chairperson Smith motioned to approve the minutes. The motion was passed 7-0 with three members abstaining. Discussion of SPAARC vs. Zoning Relief Processes JSPAARC 01-105): A decision was made to start these meetings at 3:00, as opposed to the new 2:30 starting time, due to the recent light load of projects. A motion was made to change the start time and was approved unanimously. The Committee tried to determine the purpose of the preapplication process. The ordinance reads that the alderman, the Plan Commission, and SPAARC review a project during this process prior to the formal application being submitted. A Committee member stated that the reason that 1930 Ridge and 800 Elgin were so problematic was that the developers' plans and ideas for these two project were wishy washy. The preapplication process is usually not held early enough for the Plan Commission members to review the minutes prior to the project being brought before them. A suggestion would be to put a timing mechanism in the ordinance. The minutes are sent out, but there is no guarantee that they are being read. The Committee agreed that either an Alderman or Plan Commission member should be in attendance at the SPAARC meetings, or a SPAARC member should be attendance at the Plan Commission and City Council meetings. Committee member Wolinski suggested that a member of SPAARC be in attendance at the Plan Commission meeting to present SPAARC's recommendation regarding a particular case. As far as which member would attend, it could be handled on a rotating basis. SPAARC —October 17, 2001 Page 1 Committee member read off a list of items that need to be submitted at the time of the preapplication process. They include: • Conceptual site plan • Plat of Survey • Elevations • Narrative of project • Description of adjacent land uses • Description of critical historical details or characteristics of property Committee member suggested that time be set aside at the Plan Commission meeting for a SPAARC member to present a report on a project. The Committee liked this idea, and inquired about how it could be implemented. It was decided that a change to the ordinance would not be needed to accommodate this suggestion, just a policy change would be necessary. There was a general consensus among Committee members regarding this policy change. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-119 1016 Church Street Preliminary and Final Remodel fagade for a type t restaurant (Thai Sookdee) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Vazoop Ratana, Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant displayed a sample of the granite material that will be used on the base of the building. Committee members were glad to see that granite would be used as opposed to wood. DISCUSSION: The Committee inquired about whether the architect had submitted the revised drawings. The applicant stated that the architect would be submitting the drawings later in the day. The Committee stated its approval of the color combinations being used on the fagade. Committee member Wolinski stated that this storefront has been neglected for too long, and it behooves the Committee to act quickly regarding this matter. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the Building Department's review and approval of the revised drawings. The motion was approved 10-0. SPAARC 01-124 1000 Grev Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct addition to existing building (C.E. Niehoff) DISCUSSION: The applicant called an hour prior to the meeting and stated that they would not be showing up. Committee member Mylott stated that he and the zoning officers were going to arrange to SPAARC - October 17, 200I Page 2 meet to discuss possible scheduling changes that would eliminate long gaps in SPAARC meetings in the event that applicants do not show up. This project is in for building permit. Walter Hallen explained that there is to be no addition to the building. A small concrete pad will be built and an airhandling unit will be placed on the concrete pad and duct through to the building. A fence will surround the unit and will face the street. ACTION: Applicant did not appear SPAARC 01-125 2668 Prairie Avenue Preliminary and Final Raze building and construct 4-unit multiple -family dwelling. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Potter, Renata Buenrostro — Wilson Architects GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: There is an existing bungalow on this site that will be demolished in order to accommodate this project. Pictures of the existing condition of the property were passed out to Committee members. The bungalow will be replaced with a four -unit condo development. A building permit has already been applied for. The lot is 50 feet by 150 feet. The architects presented a plat of survey of the property. The proposed development will create a lot coverage situation of 39.7%; just under the 40% permitted in this zoning district. Members of the Committee expressed concern regarding the planned amount of impervious surface on the site. The architects stated that they attempted to keep impervious surface to a limit, but they needed to provide proper act;ess to the garages. The garages will be below the rear units and there will be four spaces. There will be one enclosed space per each unit, and four open spaces along the alley. All required setbacks will be met. Retention will be provided on the site in the rear yard, however, the project's civil engineer, which was not present, would be able to elaborate further. The Committee requested that the engineer design the retention so to not create a low -long marshy area in the rear yard. The building foundations are pulled back from the alley in order to save a large oak tree on the property. Chairperson Smith asked if a sidewalk was going to be provided from the front to the rear of the property. Patios were originally planned along the side of the units, but these would not be permitted per the zoning ordinance. The third floor along the street elevation has been pushed back so that only two stories are visible from the streetscape view. The rear units will have walk out decks over the garage. The front units will have walk out patios in the front. This development is within the R4 zoning district. The architect stated that the zoning ordinance allows a story to be considered a half story if it takes up less than 60% of the area of the structure. Therefore, this is considered a two and a half story building, which is permitted in the R4 zoning district. Committee member Atterson informed the architect that the height issue might not be met because a formal zoning analysis regarding this project had not yet been undertaken. The architect was also informed that front patios might not be a permitted use. The Zoning Department will look into this issue. SPAARC —October 17, 2001 Page 3 DISCUSSION: A few Committee members asked the architects to make sure that there is no slope in the backyard that could create flooding situations and to lessen the radius of the driveway. The Committee felt that the project is handsome and of a good scale. The architects provided a sample of materials to be used. Modular or jumbo brick will be utilized. The lower two stories will contain brown brick with white renaissance stone. Real stucco will be used as opposed to Dry-vit. The bead board being used will have a natural finish. The building is fully sprinkled. A Committee member inquired about the location of a trash area. The architect stated that a trash enclosure area will be provided in the rear of the home, but an exact location was not specified. Aluminum woodclad windows will be used. The railing on the rear decks will be constructed of wood. The roofing material will be asphalt shingles. The units will be between 1,850 and 2,000 square feet and will be marketed for around $500,000. Roberta Schur informed the architects that they needed to file for a condominium with the Planning Department. The developer is a company called The Building Group. They intend on starting construction right after Thanksgiving. A landscape architect is putting together landscape plans for the project, but the plans were not present at the time. Lights will be used at each patio location and above the front door. A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to: • Approval of landscape plans by the Parks and Forestry Department • Approval of exterior lighting plans by the Building Department • The addition of a sidewalk connecting the front to the rear of the property on at least one side. • The approval of a trash enclosure area • Air conditioning units be located on the roof • Detention be provided and details of such depicted on the plans A recommendation was made to pave the driveway with pavers. Committee member Alterson stated that there were many outstanding Zoning issues regarding this project, including the front patios and the height of the building. Chairperson Smith stated that the front patios, which are at -grade, are out of character with the scale and appearance of the neighborhood. Her motion was withdrawn. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). These minutes have been prepared by Jeffrey Burdick — General Planner SPAARC — Ocu+bcr 17, 2001 Page 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 24, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, A. Berkowsky, Keith Fujihara, Stephanie Levine, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Moms Robinson, Carlos Ruiz, C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-126 1630 Chicano Avenue Preliminary and Final Install antennas (XM Radio) on roof of multi -family residential building (Park Evanston). ACTION: Applicant did not show. SPAARC 01-118 1948 Ridge Avenue Preliminary and Final Install fuel storage tanks for vehicle maintenance facility (Northwestern University). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The Northwestern University Facilities Management Department is requesting the movement of their fuel tanks from their present location at 901 University Place to a locale behind the University building at 1948 Ridge Avenue. Mr. Nestor visually described the location to the Committee by using the plat of survey. The location is adjacent to the City's maintenance yard. The Committee informed Mr. Nestor that a proposed residential development might be located very near to the proposed fuel tank location. Mr. Nestor was aware of the proposed residential development. Mr. Nestor presented photographs of the site from different directions. The tank will be located on a concrete pad with bumpers around it. There will actually be two tanks — one for gas and one for diesel. The Fire Department requested that the tanks be installed at the proposed location because of concerns over visibility issues. The Committee was concerned about the visibility of the tanks from the new residential development. Mr. Nestor argued that the area is already blighted, with the City's maintenance yard and salt dome in the immediate vicinity. SPAARC — October 24, 2001 Page I According to the Fire Department, the tanks must be 20 feet from any property line and 30 feet from any building. Storage and vegetation must be 25 feet away from the tanks. The size of each of the tanks will be 8 feet by 6 feet by 5 feet. DISCUSSION: Committee members inquired whether a masonry wall could be installed to screen and protect the tanks, rather than a bumper. Mr. Nestor replied that this could be possible, as long as access to the tanks was not precluded. The Committee reiterated that screening of the tanks was the primary concern and a Committee member stated that this is the City's opportunity to "clean up" this area. Visual mitigation is the key issue, and the City may be able to get a nice fence or wall out of the project. A Committee member asked whether a timeframe could be placed on the construction of a wall or other visual mitigation device so that the adjacent residential development could first be constructed. Another Committee member stated that this could be possible, but the discue.sion should be continued when the applicant comes in with a landscape plan depicting the actual mitigation measure. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table the case until a landscape plan is provided. The landscape plan should specifically depict an attractive screening measure for the tanks and the possible paving of the adjacent area. The motion passed 6-3. SPAARC 014341 1939 Sherman Avenue Final Construct muttrfam►ly residential building (condominium). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor, Architect Bob Lubotsky GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Final approval for foundation only has been granted for this project. A sample of materials was brought in by the applicants and presented to the Committee. The building materials will consist of pre -cast stone, brick and stucco. The roof material will be box -seam metal. The units will start at $510,000. DISCUSSION: A Committee member commented that there was a nice selection of materials, but asked the applicants to consider using a different color trullace. The two previous concerns regarding this project from when it appeared the last time before the Committee were: The front yard landscape plan, the side entry location. A Committee member asked whether there would be lights located at the side entrances. The applicant stated that there would be lights, but that they would be washed against the walls of the building and would not shine into the adjacent yards. There will be parking off the alley and an underground parking garage in the rear. A terrace will be located above the underground parking garage that will be twelve inches off of the ground. This terrace will not be common open space and will only be accessible to the rear 1a floor unit. The at -grade terrace depicted in the front yard is permitted according to the Zoning Ordinance. The Committee expressed concern regarding tenants planting heavier vegetation in front of the terrace in order to create more privacy. The overall sentiment of the Committee SPAARC — October 24, 2001 Page 2 was to maintain an open feel to the property and the street, and discourage privacy features in the front such as fencing and thick and tall vegetation. Detention will be provided underground towards the rear of the property. A Committee member suggested that pavers would improve the appearance of the paved driveway in the rear of the structure. The applicant stated that the driveway in on an incline and that he does not like to use pavers on incline surfaces. However, the pavement itself could be dressed up, through engravements or other measures. The lire Department representative asked the applicant to incorporate the address of the building on both the rear and the front of the structure. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval with the condition that no fencing be permitted in the front yard. The motion was seconded. Many Committee members stated that this was denying the owner due process to apply for a variance for front yard fencing and denied this motion 8-2. A new motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval with the suggestion that pavers be used in place of concrete on the driveway. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 97-0065 1700 Maple Avenue Preliminary Construct "mini -anchor" retail establishment within Church Street Plaza. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom White, Attorney Jim Nagle, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This is the corner piece of the Church Street Plaza property. It is on the northwest comer of Church Street and Maple Avenue. The presenters discussed a schematic design for this parcel. A retailer interested in moving its Evanston store to this location has approached them. According to the schematics, a portion of the store will be built below the Optima residential to the north. The architect handed out elevations and presented them to the Committee. There will be a second floor extension that will jut out over the Maple Avenue right of way and create a sheltered outdoor seating area below. The proposed store will be approximately 22,000 square feet. The presenters stated that they hope to do something interesting with the comer point of the property and incorporate some sort of plaza to create street life in the area. The City currently owns this area and an agreement would have to be made between the developer and the City regarding this area of the parcel. DISCUSSION: A Committee member stated that the preliminary architecture for this project missed an opportunity to accentuate the comer of the building, thus making it a focal point of the building. The presenters stated that this project is in the very early stages and that elements can still be added to the building. Committee members encouraged different elevations between the store and the residential building, but stressed that these elevations should be complimentary. A more open fagade with more glass was suggested. The presenters said that they would need to talk with the proposed tenant to see if this would be possible. SPAARC — October 24, 2001 Page 3 A Committee member asked when a decision would be made regarding the height of the building. The presenters replied that a large part of the decision of whether or not to build three or four floors would be left up to the City and its desire for that comer. Many Committee members thought that four would be ideal if one of the stories was setback, creating a roof top deck for tenants on the top floor. This story could then be flush with the rest of the building at the comer, creating some sort of focal piece at the comer of the building. However, some Committee members felt that four stories would be too dense for this area, especially in terms of scale. Another Committee member asked the presenters to make sure that they treat all sides of the building as a front side and to assure that the west side of the building not appear as a rear wall. The presenters stated that the four-story scheme would be approximately 34,710 square feet. The Committee summarized their common thoughts regarding the project: the need for larger windows, further accentuating of the comer of the building, and the pros and cons of a four- story building. ACTIONS: Although this item was on the agenda for preliminary approval, the Committee felt that concept approval would be more appropriate at this point. A motion was made to grant concept site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). These minutes have been prepared by Jeffrey Burdick — General Planner SPAARC — October 24, 2001 PAV 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 31, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Akerson, Alan Berkowsky, Rajeev Dahal, David Jennings, Stephanie Levine, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff. Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-127 1414 Ashland Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct addition to, and create legal open parking space upon existing driveway of a single- family residence, requiring a major variation PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Laurel O'Sullivan, Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The owners are planning on constructing a 2-room addition to the home. The plans were presented to the Committee. The lot is 180 feet long and is narrow, and the addition will be to the back of the home. The existing one -car attached garage will be removed to accommodate the addition. The distance between the existing detached two -car garage and the home is between 90 feet and 100 feet, making unloading difficult. The driveway leading to the existing attached garage will remain. It is one of few driveways on the block and the neighbors wish for the driveway to remain so that they can use it for off street parking for visitors. The owner stated that removing the driveway would cost approximately $1,700, not including the sodding and landscaping that would have to be done after the driveway is removed. There are two variations required for this project: - The attached garage is 3 feet from the property line. The new addition is also going to be 3 feet from the property tine (flush with the rest of the home), which encroaches into the zoning district's side yard setback. - Parking spaces in residential districts have to be within 30 feet of the rear lot line. Cars can temporarily park in driveways according to the ordinance, but because the garage will be removed, the driveway would no longer be considered a driveway, it would be considered a parking space. SPAARC - October 31.2001 Page DISCUSSION: A Committee member expressed his concern with allowing a car to be parked in a driveway in front of a house with no garage. The zoning ordinance specifically prohibits this. The owner explained that the addition will be not be flushed with the front of the house, so if a car is parked in the driveway, it would not be readily visible from the street since it would be further back than the front of the house. The neighbors do not have any issues concerning these variance requests. A Committee member suggested allowing the applicant to keep the concrete, but not allow the driveway to be considered a legal parking space. Another Committee member stated that keeping the curb cut in this location would work well for the block, providing cars a place to pull off the street and turn around if necessary. A different Committee member expressed concern that by allowing this variation, the City will be selective in enforcing its zoning ordinance. However, it could be considered a hardship to require the owner to remove the existing pavement. The addition to the home is very straightforward and will be aligned with the existing home. However, window openings along walls that are three feet from a property line are not permitted. The Committee suggested that the owner work with her architect regarding this issue. ACTION: A motion was made to approve the variance related to the addition. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). A motion was made to deny the request to retain legal parking and maintain pavement in the front yard. The motion was seconded and was denied (3-4) with one member abstaining. A motion was made to permit the driveway to remain for a period of five years but to not permit it to be a legal parking space. The motion was not seconded. A motion was made to permit the driveway to remain but to not permit it to be a legal parking space. The motion was seconded and passed (4-3) with one member abstaining. SPAARC 01-128 741 Brummei Street Preliminary and Final Retain fourth dwelling unit within multi -family residential building, requiring major variation PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jacqueline Verrilli, Agent for Owners GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The owners purchased the building in April of 2001. It is a 1920's vintage property. The building was sold to the owners as a four -unit building. When the City did Its inspection, they ordered the fourth unit to be removed. The owner's agent passed out pictures of the property and the neighborhood. The City gave the owners a laundry list of what needed to be done to bring the building up to code. However, the owners did not budget for this. The owners intend to rehabilitate the units and sell the units, creating a situation where there are four owner -occupied units instead of four renter - occupied units. SPAARC - October 31, 2001 Page 2 DISCUSSION: The unit in question is a ground floor unit. Committee member Jim Wolinski provided a brief history of the building. He stated that he supported the fourth dwelling unit, it is an English basement unit, with the majority of it being above ground. However, it is not permitted by the zoning ordinance because the lot area will not accommodate four units. Committee member Wolinski stated that the City's building inspectors felt that it could be easily adapted to a legal dwelling unit. The square footage of the unit in question is approximately 1,000 square feet. The upper units will be priced around $250,000; the ground floor unit will be priced around $200,000. A Committee member inquired about the plans for the concrete pad in the rear of the structure. The applicant stated that the owners do not intend to remove the pad, it is in good condition and is used to accommodate the three parking spaces provided for the building. The three parking spaces will be deeded to three of the four units. According to the zoning ordinance, five parking spaces are needed for this building. If the Zoning Board of Appeals approves the requested variance, then the property will be considered legal non conforming because it contains only three parking spaces. The Committee determined that the fourth unit was probably created in the last five years. ACTIONS: A motion was made to approve the request for the variance. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 01-123 1930 Ridge Avenue Pre -Application Conference Demolish parking structure and construct four 4-story multi -family residential buildings with underground parking. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Greg Ratas, Development Manager Stephen Yas, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Alice Rebechini was present to represent the Plan Commission. The applicants passed out copies of the plans to the Committee members and observers In the audience. Greg Ratas reviewed the project parameters for the Committee. The project will consist of a series of four-story buildings surrounding a courtyard. A central corridor has been developed since the last incarnation of the plan that will connect the north end of the site to the south end of the site. Landscaping will be achieved through the use of planters in the courtyard and along Ridge Avenue. The project will consist of 194 units, of which 114 will be one -bedroom, 72 will be two - bedroom, and 8 will be three -bedroom. The unit sizes will range from 595 to 1,440 square feet. SPAARC - October 31, 2001 Page 3 Fire lane accessibility will be achieved by reducing the landscaped area in the courtyards and providing an 18-foot wide aisle in the courtyards in which fire trucks can maneuver. The main ingress/egress for the sites underground parking lot is on the north end of the site. North of this are two loading bays, one short bay and one long bay. The parking structure will have 220 spaces, some of which will be staggered. There will not be reserved spaces, but permits will be required to park in the lot. Steve Yas discussed the design of the project. The central corridor was designed to tie in the pool area on the south end of the site with the office and clubhouse on the north end of the site. The units adjacent to the two gateways leading into the courtyard from Ridge Avenue will be curved in order to shorten the gateways. Juliet balconies will be built on these units. This will create resident surveillance of the gateways. The balconies will be angled towards the south to promote views to the south and capture southern exposure. Mr. Yas stated that they are trying to create an intimate urban village with this design. There will be different focal points at the intersections of the courtyards such as fountains and landscape areas. The use of renaissance stone at the base of the buildings and different brick patterns on the upper three floors will serve to shorten the visual appearance of the buildings. There was an attempt to design these buildings with the millennium in mind, rather than attempt to emulate turn of the century architecture. DISCUSSION: The meeting was opened up to questions from the Committee members. A Committee member inquired about an affordability component to the project. The applicants stated that there will be an affordability component, and that they were currently assessing the quantity and discount figure for this component. They stated that they should have an answer within a week. Another Committee member asked the applicants to provide more detail regarding the landscaping of the courtyard. The applicants said that they were examining different altematives, including green roof initiatives. They want to do things that look as real as possible. Alan Berkowsky of the Fire Department expressed concern regarding the viability of the fire lane five years from now once the landscaping matures. He said that gates with locks will not work and that the Fire Department is looking for something that will utilize the City's Opticon System. Although City code calls for an 18-foot wide fire lane, this is a minimum requirement. The Fire Department would like the project to be designed so that in ten years from now, firefighters will know what they can or can't do on the property. He also stated that the Fire Department wishes to avoid situations where firetrucks are backing onto Ridge. The applicants were informed that the scale of the elevations could be affected by the mechanical plan. The applicants stated that the elevations reflect the use of 5-6 foot high parapet walls that will effectively screen roof top mechanical units. A Committee member expressed concern regarding the design of the buildings. The elevations from Ridge Avenue don't depict how the buildings are accessed. There are a lot of blank walls and the Ridge Avenue elevation almost appears to be secondary, similar to a rear elevation. The Committee would like to see more openness and more of a sense of place reflected in the elevations and appearance of the buildings. The applicants replied that the gateways provide a visual entrance to the development from Ridge Avenue. The Committee SPAARC -- October 3 ; , 2001 Page 4 responded that lobbies facing Ridge Avenue would encourage pedestrian activity and create more of a sense of place along Ridge Avenue. A Committee member informed the applicants that when there are multiple building units on one site, an imaginary line between the buildings determines the locations of openings in each building according to Fire code. The Committee suggested that a separate meeting be held to discuss code requirements. A Committee member asked whether the loading bays would be open or covered. The applicants stated that they would be open and used mainly for residents moving in and out. The Committee expressed concern about people loading and unloading at the pedestrian gates, thus blocking traffic on Ridge Avenue. The applicants explained that deliveries would have to go through a central checkpoint. The gates will create a secure community. A Committee member stated that the gated area and curb cuts at Ridge Avenue need to be thought out more. The Committee foresees people parking their cars there illegally. There was also concern regarding the clearance provided for cars pulling out of the parking garage and onto Ridge Avenue. The applicants were made aware of the fact that a large portion of the west elevations will be visible from the other side of the railroad tracks. These elevations need to be articulated so they don't represent the rear of the structures. The Committee asked the applicants to change -up the elevations, add variety, and reduce the monotony to make the architecture more interesting. The use of quality materials should be emphasized. Furthermore, elevations should be varied between buildings so that all of the buildings do not look alike. However, the Committee suggested that fake fagade treatments be avoided, the quality of the materials is the most important issue. Committee member Wolinski stated that a public meeting has been set up with the neighbors to discuss this project on November 8. ACTIONS: Because this was a preapplication conference, no action was taken. These minutes have been prepared by Jeffrey Burdick — General Planner SPAARC — October 31, 2001 Page 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES NOVEMBER 7, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Projects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-129 2020 Asbury Avenue Preliminary Install compressed natural gas fueling facility at City Service Center. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Cathy Radek, City of Evanston Tony Lindsay, NICOR GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Cathy Radek explained that the City of Evanston must comply with the Federal Clean Air Act and Federal Energy Act. These acts require that the City explore the use of alternative fuels for its vehicles. About six years ago, Evanston started to investigate the use of alternative fuels. In an effort to comply, the City explored the possibility for a compressed natural gas station site. Evanston did not initially explore a grant to construct a station because if felt that its fleet was not large enough to warrant a grant. However, a public/private consortium was formed, consisting of Evanston, Skokie and Northwestern University to obtain grant money to build this station. Ms. Radek passed around the drawings of the proposed site and a picture of a compressed natural gas station in Downers Grove, Illinois. Tony Lindsay stated that there will be nine of these stations in the Chicagoland area and that the Downers Grove station was the first one to be built. Mr. Lindsay explained that everything is self-contained; an electric box runs the compressor, and gas is brought directly into the large box that contains the entire system. The station will be located behind a brick wall and will be screened from Simpson Street. Ms. Radek stated that the State Fire Marshall does not consider compressed natural gas to be a hazardous material, therefore, a permit will not be needed from the State. Mr. Lindsay explained that there will be a series of storage vessels for the gas and that a dryer will dry the gas before it is compressed. SPAARC - November 7, Z001 Page I DISCUSSION: Mr. Lindsay was asked how this project circumvented the NFPA 52 10,000 cubic feet regulation. The proposal is for a 15,000 cubic foot installation, surpassing the NFPA regulation. Mr. Lindsay responded that he was not aware of such a regulation. The Committee requested that this code issue be worked out outside of the meeting. A Committee member inquired about the proposed measures keeping people from walking into the station. Ms. Radek informed the Committee that there would be nothing to keep people from walking up to the station. She said that this station will be safe and will not pose a danger to the public health. She was asked if there would be any stacking or turning radius issues. She did not believe that there would be. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded. A Committee member inquired about site lighting. Ms. Radek stated that there would not be a canopy on the site and the station would be accessible 24 hours a day. The motion passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 01-130 702-704 Reba Place Prellminary and Final Rebuild garage as car port, accessory to multi -family residential PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Billie M. Horton, Owner Julie Burke, Owner's daughter GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee member Marc Mylott informed the Committee that this project is currently in for a building permit and there currently are no outstanding zoning issues. Photographs of the building were presented to the Committee. Committee member Mylott provided a brief history of this project. He explained that the roof of the former garage was falling in. The situation was cleaned -up, but without a permit. Zoning informed the applicant that she needed to construct either a carport or a garage. She explained that she decided to construct a carport because she already obtained plans for one. She said that if she decides to construct a garage, she would come back before the Committee and go through the process again. DISCUSSION: The Committee informed Ms. Horton that a seven -foot clearance needed to be maintained from the ground to the ceiling of the carport. A Committee member inquired about the draining of the carport roof. Ms. Horton explained that the roof will drain via a slope in the roof, and draining will occur onto the alley. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 01-131 101 Asbury Avenue Concept Consfruct one-story retail goods establishment (CVS Pharmacy), including drive -through facility. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Richard Cook, Architect SPAARC - November 7, 2001 Page 2 John Wotzle, Developer Michelle Dodd, CVS Representative GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Wotzle presented the site plan to the Committee. The project will consist of four properties located on or adjacent to the northeast corner of Asbury and Howard. The alley that currently exists within the project area will be vacated. Mr. Wotzle passed out pictures of the property. The developers have met with Alderman Rainey and residents of the surrounding neighborhood. From these meetings, there have been many changes to the site plan. The site plan appearing before the Committee has not yet incorporated changes requested by the community at the community meeting two weeks prior. There will be two full access drives proposed and one exit -only access drive on the north end of the site. An ornamental two -foot high brick wall will be installed around the parking in the front of the store. A bus shelter will be constructed on the comer of Asbury and Howard. This shelter is not depicted on the site plan. The drive -through as shown on the site plan will be moved to the north wall of the building in order to accommodate more parking on the east side of the building. A six-foot high masonry wall will be installed along the north and part of the east property lines in order to screen the development from the surrounding neighborhood. The trash enclosure will be located in the northeast comer of the property and the masonry wall will be incorporated into the screening of the trash enclosure. The loading area will be located along the northern property line, opposite the drive -through window. DISCUSSION: Prior to the presentation of the elevations, the Committee posed several questions and comments regarding the site plan to the developers. The Committee informed the developers that a sufficient turning radius would be needed for delivery trucks to maneuver through the site. Mr. Wotzle said that the site engineers did not foresee a problem with turning radii. Another Committee member asked if there would be enough space for cars to pass a car waiting at the drive -through window. Mr. Wotzle stated that there would be 32 feet. He was informed that the Zoning Ordinance might have regulations regarding stacking spaces for pharmacy drive-throughs. There has not been a trip generation study done on this development. However, Ms. Dodd stated that there is not normally more than one car waiting at the drive -through pharmacy window of other CVS stores. The developers were asked if it would be possible to move remove the end spaces in the main parking lot in order to accommodate landscape islands. Ms. Dodd said that they couldn't lose any parking spaces. Furthermore, light posts will probably be installed at these locations. The developers were notified that detention for this site would be required. Mr. Wotzle asked the Committee if 16.5 foot long parking spaces would be permitted, considering the overhanging of the fronts of cars. He was told yes. Alderman Rainey explained that the neighborhood does not wish for any low growing landscaping on the site because of its propensity to trap litter. The neighborhood wishes for only trees to be planted in terms of landscaping for the site. A Committee member requested that a landscape area be provided between the western wall of the building and the sidewalk along Asbury. The developers explained that there will be a small amount of space for landscaping, but the landscaping provided would be vines growing up the wall. This was a request of the neighbors at one of the neighborhood meetings. SPAARC — Novcmber 7, 2001 Page 3 Richard Cook presented the elevations to the Committee. The main building material will be brick that will resemble Chicago common brick. He presented a series of elevations that depicted the entire length of the property as viewed from different directions. Most of the glass along the front of the store will be see -through, however, some of the glass may be tinted. The base of the building will be two feet high. The Committee inquired about roof top mechanical units. Mr. Cook stated that there will be rooftop mechanical units, and these units will be screened if that is a requirement. A Committee member stated that these units would definitely need to be screened from the residents to the east and north. The bus shelter will be constructed to match the design of the building. A Committee member asked why there would be a masonry wall screening the property in the rear, but a wood fence screening the property towards the front. The developers replied that a new wood fence had just been installed by an adjacent property owner and that Alderman Rainey and the developers were working with this property owner to see if he would remove the fence and allow the masonry wall to take its place. Another Committee member stated that the City appreciates the amount of glass being used on the elevation, however, this glass could be a detraction if paper sale signs are attached to it. W. Dodd replied that CVS is not interested in pasting paper signs to the glass windows. Committee member Jim Wolinski, who serves as Director of Community Development, said that there are paper signs attached to the glass of other CVS stores. Although this violates the City's sign ordinance, there are many stores in Evanston that attach paper signs to windows and it is a very difficult and time- consuming regulation for the City to enforce. He asked for a commitment from CVS that there would be no paper signs attached to the glass_ Ms. Dodd replied "That's fine." ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant concept site plan and appearance approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (10-0). SPAARC 01-132 2011-2013 Jackson Avenue Preliminary and Final Rebuild existing porches for multi -family residential building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The owners are planning to rebuild an existing rear porch to the building. The Committee asked the owner what the finish of the porch would be. The owner stated that the front would be stucco and the side would be siding. A picture of a completed back porch on an adjacent building was presented to the Committee. The owner stated that the back porch would resemble the one in the picture. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked if there would be any exposed wood. If so, the Committee is requesting that it be painted or treated. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval with the condition that any exposed wood be treated or painted. If the exposed wood is cedar, SPAARC — November 7, 2001 Page 4 then it should be treated with a water sealant. Thy= motion was seconded and passed unanimously (10-0). SPAARC 01-002 2200 Central Street Pre -application Conference Relocate historic portion of existing building and construct 5-story mixed -use building (8 muhi- family residential units and retail space) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Eifler, Eifler and Associates Scott Hardagan, Lord, Bissell Dr. Joseph Nykaza, Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: John Lyman was present to represent the Plan Commission. Alderman Edmund Moran was present to represent the 6t' Ward. Scott Hardagan explained that this is the third time that this case has been before the Committee and corrected the notice, stating that the new plan is for 8 residential units as opposed to 11. Currently there is a small historic structure on the site. In May/June of last year, two successive meetings of the Preservation Commission led to the approval of the moving of the structure to the north on the site, the razing of the non -historic addition to the structure, and the construction of a one-story retail addition and the construction of a 5-story, 10-unit condo on the site. The project was submitted for zoning analysis, and the zoning department ruled that the condo building was too tall for the zoning. The project was resubmitted for a second zoning analysis. This time, the zoning analysis revealed that the proposed use was not permitted on the site. Because this is a complicated project in regards to zoning, Mr. Hardagan explained that the applicants would proceed with a planned development application. Mr. Hardagan explained that this project has been reduced in scope. The historic building is no longer slated to be located on the lot line. Instead, it will be set back, allowing room for green space between the building and the street. It is appropriate to go forward to the Plan Commission at this time as a request for a planned development. The applicants believe this is a creative use of property in that an historic structure is being preserved. John Eiffler, the architect for the project, presented the proposed design to the Committee. The goal was to move the mass of the 20,000 square foot building as far off of Central Street and Hartrey Avenue as possible. The scale of the building has been reduced through the design of the balconies and the fact that the building has been subdivided into different components. Mr. Eiffler believes that this design is a great example of how the past can be incorporated into the future. Historic preservation should not be just freezing things in time. The new building will take design clues from the historic structure, but it will not attempt to replicate if. There has been an attempt to free up the historic building with new access to the second floor and the addition of a terrace. The specifics, in terms of square footages, etc. are listed in the report that was handed out to the Committee members prior to the presentation. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked how the proposed project would impact the single-family homes in the area. Mr. Eiffler explained that there are a lot of transitions on this site. Four to fire SPAARC - November 7, 2001 Page 5 story apartment buildings begin to predominate at this location along Central. This development is consistent with that transition. A member inquired about the materials of the new building. Mr. Eiffler explained that the idea was to continue the use of bricks as a building material on this site, the bricks on the new building will be similar in terms of color and tone, but will step to a slightly lighter shade. The goal is to avoid direct connections between the historic building and the new building. Some members of the Committee expressed their concern regarding the mass of the new building. There was concern regarding the below -grade entrance to the new building. Mr. EirNier explained that this had to be done to keep the building height at 45 feet. However, because this is now a planned development, there is room for deviations from the zoning ordinance requirements. The Committee requested a more clean and crisp separation between the buildings to make clear the difference between the new building and the historic structure. The Committee believed that a model of the project incorporating the size of some of the surrounding structures would be very helpful in bringing the whole project into context. This issue will be very important to the Plan Commission. A member of the Committee stated that a provision for bicycle parking would be requested, although not required. Moreover, because this will now be developed as a planned development, rehabbing or reconstructing the bus shelter on the corner of the property in order to make its design match that of the site would be recommended. Alderman Moran informed the Committee that the bus shelter has community significance, it has been dedicated to Alice Berg, a former resident of the community. However, it may be appropriate to rehab the shelter. Alderman Moran believed that the real story of this project springs from the plat of survey. This plat will change if this project goes through. As a result, the corner will change, and the environment of the area will change in a detrimental fashion. He expressed concern regarding the fad that a neighborhood meeting had not been set up to discuss this project. Mr. Hardagan explained that he did not want to set up a meeting if the project was in a state of flux because the plan presented to the neighbors may be totally different than the final plan. The applicants intend to have a neighborhood meeting prior to this project appearing before the Plan Commission. Alderman Moran said that the meeting should happen sooner than later and that the applicants could have at least presented different options to the surrounding neighbors. A Committee member informed the applicants that size and species of trees should be identified on future site plans. The applicants were also informed that the Preservation Ordinance states that the Preservation Commission has to review planned development proposals that affect landmark properties. Therefore, this project will have to appear before the Preservation Commission prior to it appearing before the Plan Commission so that the Preservation Commission can forward its recommendation. ACTIONS: Because this was a preapplication conference, no action was taken. SPAARC 99-033 1508 Elmwood Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Erect temporary, free standing, real estate sales sign for 7-unit multi -family residential building PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen, Plan Examiner SPAARC - November 7. 2001 Page 6 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that the temporary sign will be 10 feet by 40 feet and pointed out on the elevations where it would be placed. The two variations are borne from the fact that: 1.) These signs can only be 24 square feet; this one will be 40 square feet. 2.) Only seven items of information are permitted on the sign, this sign will have 18 items of information. DISCUSSION: The timeframe for this sign has not been specked. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant site plan and appearance review approval subject to the removal of the sign or reapplication within one year or when all of the advertised units sell. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (7-0). SPAARC 97.065 1720 Maple Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Add sales center location and hours °panel" to existing temporary, freestanding, real estate . sales sign for new multi -family residential building (Optima Views) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen, Plan Examiner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: � I . There is currently a large billboard advertising the Optima residential development., The :- developers wish to add a 3-foot by 10-foot tag to the billboard that would provide sales office directions. DISCUSSION: There was no discussion regarding this case. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant site plan and appearance review approval subject to previous conditions mentioned earlier. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (7-0). SPAARC 01-133 2628 Gross Point Road Recommendation to Sian Board Reface existing signs at automobile service station (Cifgo Gas) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen, Plan Examiner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that Citgo is changing their corporate image and is requesting the refacing of signs at this site. The canopies and the signage on the comer will both be refaced. A white background is not permitted on signs. DISCUSSION: The Committee considered the white background to be white trim. Mr. Hallen recommended that the sign be raised five feet above the ground for safety reasons regarding visibility at the comer. The Committee asked Mr. Hallen to work with the applicant regarding this issue. SPAARC - November 7.2001 Page 7 ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (7-0). Non Agenda Item: PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Nestor informed that Committee that this project appeared before them about two months ago. It is regarding a condo development on Hinman. The previous SPAARC comments were regarding the need for detention and landscaping in the rear yard. Mr. Nestor illustrated how these issues were going to be resolved and requested a foundation only permit for the project. DISCUSSION: The Committee asked about the location of trash receptacles. Mr. Nestor said that he is looking at three possible locations, but none of these locations would affect the foundation of the project. Committee member Dahal requested more detailed information regarding the below grade parking and informed the Committee that he is required to sign off on the foundation permit because below grade parking is involved. i ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant foundation only approval. The motion was seconded and passed (6-0), with Committee member Dahal abstaining. These minutes have been prepared by Jeffrey Burdick — General Planner t:. SPAARC — November 7, 2001 Page a SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES NOVEMBER 14, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff. Jeff Burdick, Vti alter Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Consideration and Approval of Minutes: _,; !,e% tAye, October 17, 2001, October 24, 2001, October 31, 2001 Meetina Minutes A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes of these three dates with the following corrections: October 24, 2001 — Regarding the 1700 Maple project, the right of way referred to was the Maple Avenue right of way, not the railroad right of way. October 31, 2001 — Regarding the 1414 Ashland project, the motion that Committee member Mylott made needs to be differentiated from the final motion that was voted on. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). November 7, 2001 Meeting Minutes A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes subject to correcting the address of the 2200 Asbury project, The actual address is 2020 Asbury. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (3-0), with three members abstaining. (Hans Friedman, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith) Correction resalardina October 10. 2001 Meetina Minutes Although these minutes were previously approved, it needs to be noted that 1930 Ridge Avenue received concept approval, not preliminary approval. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-134 1603 Ordripton Avenue Prellminary and Final Revise steel framing for rooftop antenna mounting on roof of office. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Patricia Schlauder, Managing Agent SPAARC -November 14, 2001 Page I Doug Pfaff GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Pfaff explained that tuckpointing and other minor improvements would be done to the roof of the building around an existing catwalk. Existing antennas will need to be moved to provide the space for the work to be done. The antennas will be moved five feet in towards the center of the roof. There will be no additional antennas installed, they will just be moved. The existing antennas are attached to a railing around the catwalk. This railing was not designed to support antennas. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked whether the antennas would be raised. Mr. Pfaff said that the height of the antennas would not change, just their location. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the antennas not changing in height. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 01-124 1000 Grev Avenue Prellminary and Final Replace windows and install air-conditioning unit with security fence at C.E. Niehoff PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Norm Ellingston, Building Superintendent GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Ellingston explained that a new breakroom would be added to the subject building. A new air conditioning unit would also be installed. Mr. Ellingston passed out pictures to the Committee that showed where the units would be located. A Committee member asked why the units could not be installed on the roof. Mr. Ellingston replied that the roof is an old barrel roof, and there are maintenance and cost concerns regarding a roof installation. He stated that a chain link fence would be installed around the unit, and evergreens would be used for screening. DISCUSSION: A Committee member inquired about the size of the unit. The unit will be appro)dmately 10 feet by 12 feet and will be 4 feet high. The owners intend to install a 6-foot high chain link fence around the unit. The unit will be located on the parkway of a vacated street. Mr. Ellingston was informed that there is a noise ordinance that regulates decibel readings at the property line. He stated that this unit will be brand new, and should be quieter than most existing air conditioning units. The Committee felt that the unit should be screened on all sides. Mr. Ellingston asked if flower planters could be used as screening. Committee member D'Agostino replied yes_ Another Committee member stated that year-round vegetation should be used, primarily evergreens. Mr. Ellingston was asked if the air conditioning unit could be installed behind the building link so that it would not be visible from the street. He responded that this would not be possible because it would then be located too far from its point of use. The Committee stated that it SPAARC — November 14, 2001 Page 2 would prefer a 4-foot high fence as opposed to a 6-foot high fence. A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: 1.) The chain link fence will not exceed 4 feet in height 2.) Review and approval of the landscape plan, which should include evergreen shrubs that will grow at least 4 feet in height. The motion was seconded. Chairperson Smith noted that this project also consisted of the replacement of windows. Mr. Ellingston stated that all of the windows would be replaced. The new windows will be aluminum frame. The Committee looked at the building permit drawings to view the appearance of these new windows. The Committee informed Mr. Ellingston that the ductwork from the air conditioning unit should go straight through the wall behind the unit so that it would not be visible. ACTIONS: An amended motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: 1.) The chain link fence will not exceed 4 feet in height. 2.) Review and approval of the landscape plan, which should include evergreen shrubs that will grow at least 4 feet in height. 3.) Ductwork will enter the building at a point even or below the air conditioning unit, so to not be visible. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 96-025 1615 Emerson Street Revision to Final install transformer within former parking space and add 2 additional parking spaces for 76-unit independent living facility. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Pastor Wade GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Pastor Wade explained that a transformer would need to be relocated on the property. This relocation will eliminate one parking space. However, there are currently more parking spaces than are required. In addition, two parking spaces would be added. DISCUSSION: Committee member D'Agostino reviewed the drawings to determine if landscaping would be sufficient. Pastor Wade explained that additional landscaping would be donated. Committee member D'Agostino stated that he was comfortable with the planned use of "shrubbery" as landscaping for this location. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant revised final site plan and appearance review approval with the condition that mulch or groundcover be used underneath and around the shrubbery. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (6-0). These minutes have been prepared by Jeffrey Burdick — General Planner SPAARC —November 14, 2001 Page 3 0 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES NOVEMBER 21, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Rajeev Dahal, Keith FuMara, David Jennings, Stephanie Levine, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the msetingL . Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-186 1123 Howard Street Final Construct addition to building (for retail goods establishment) and estsbffsh new type 7 ; restaurant (formerly La Pita's Mexican Restaurant). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ed Yung, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Yung presented the landscape plan to the members of the Committee. Committee member Stephanie Levine conveyed the concems of Alderman Rainey regarding trash collecting on this site. She wishes to see only trees as a landscaping measure because bushes and shrubs will collect trash. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked Mr. Yung if the freestanding sign would remain on the site. Mr. Yung said that it would. He was informed that it is currently not legal and would have to appear before the signboard. Committee member Levine suggested that the small tree in the parkway along Howard be removed and two new trees be planted in the parkway. It was also suggested that the island at the end of the parking row be extended and that a tree be planted there. Mr. Yung .suggested replacing the blacktop in the parking lot with pavers to warm up the site. A Committee member thought that this may be a good idea, seeing that there are streetscape plans for Howard Street and these pavers could match the pavers being used as part of this streetscape plan. Committee member Dennis Marino stated that the Howard Street streetscape improvements would only extend as far west as Ridge Avenue. Committee SPAARC — November 21, 200I Page 1 member Levine suggested planting two trees in the Howard Street parkway, spaced 35 feet apart. The Committee asked Mr. Yung what the materials of the parapet wall would be. He explained that it would be stained and treated plywood. The Committee requested that the screening of the rooftop mechanical units be limited so that it takes up a minimum amount of elevation coverage. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: 1.) The height of the parapet be reduced to three feet. 2.) The placement of both mechanical units on the lower roof 3.) Review and approval of materials and colors of the elevation and roof by the Building Department 4.) The planting of two trees in the Howard Street parkway, and one tree in the Barton Street parkway. 5.) The replacement of the understory tree with a canopy tree at the southwest comer of the building and the planting of a canopy tree at the southeast comer of the building. 6.) The replacement of on site landscaping if needed in perpetuity 7.) The replacement of parkway landscaping if needed within two years of its planting 8.) That landscaping be checked daily to remove collected trash The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 01-136 525 Chicago Avenue Concept Construct 90 attached single-family residences (townhouses) at site of former Domlinick's grocery stone. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Dubin, Principal Matt Silvers, Developer Stuart Kantort, Developer Katrina McGuire, Attorney Jim Plunkard, Architect Liz Harmon, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: David Dubin presented the general proposal to the Committee. There is currently a 65,000 square foot footprint on the 120,000 square foot site. The site is 700 feet by 120 feet. R is currently zoned to allow for a maximum F.A.R. of 4.0 and maximum height of 67 feet. The proposal is to construct 90 townhomes, 80 of which will have 2-car parking, and 70 of which will have 3 bedrooms and 2 112 baths. All units will have roof access. All of the garages will be located off an alley that will have ingress/egress onto the existing alley to the east of the site. The surrounding neighborhood contains buildings that are up to three stories in height. • Mr. Dubin explained that townhomes are a niche that is currently not being met by Evanston. He stated that the elevations were developed on a moment's notice and will not necessarily reflect the final product The developers intend to request a planned development. SPAARC — November 21, 2001 Page 2 Jim Plunkard, the architect for the project, presented the building elevations to the Committee. He explained that in order to compete against other developers looking to develop the site, 90 units of townhomes would be necessary, or else the project would not be economically feasible. Many layout options were considered. The option presented to the Committee allowed for the goal of 90 townhomes to be reached. The building setback along Keeney and South Blvd will match the established setback along these two streets. There will be three different unit types. There will be a courtyard between each building and these courtyards will have entrances onto Chicago Avenue. The buildings will be masonry with limestone. Unit sizes will range from 1,800 to 2,400 square feet. DISCUSSION: A suggestion was made to rotate that two end units 90 degrees so that the fronts of these units would face Chicago Avenue, thus creating a pedestrian scale along Chicago Avenue. A Committee member expressed concern regarding the homogeneity of the buildings, which would create a row of buildings that looked the same along the entire 700 feet of frontage of Chicago Avenue. This site should be creatively designed. Mr. Dubin responded that this was done in an attempt to preserve the maximum amount of open space on the site. The Committee stated that it is clear that the design is based on the economic parameters of 90 units being needed. As a result, the developers have missed an opportunity to look at the site as a whole and develop it in a creative manner. The Committee also expressed concem that the site seems to open to the alley as opposed to Chicago Avenue. Mr. Plunkard responded that Chicago Avenue is not a great street to open residential units to in that it is a loud street. A Committee member expressed concern regarding the five blind comers at the intersection of the alleys. It should be checked to see that the dimensions of these alleyways could accommodate the required fire truck turning radii. Some of the Committee members stated that there is a market for larger townhouse units and that this development may be better served if it included a smaller number of units as a whole, but made the units larger in size. The Committee inquired as to the price of the units. Mr. Dubin stated that the smaller units would start around $330,000. The Committee expressed an interest in less units. but more expensive units. Mr. Dubin stated that he did not consider this option because of the current recession. The Committee asked him if he did market research to determine that larger, more expensive units would not sell in Evanston. Mr. Dubin stated that research has not fully been done to make this determination. The Committee stated that there is a real desire for townhomes in Evanston and that the developer may be selling himself short concerning the price and size of the units. It was suggested by a Committee member that the police look at this plan to determine if the on site visibility is sufficient. Mr. Dubin stated that he believes 3-4 story buildings are appropriate for this site and that other developers may consider building taller buildings given that fact that the zoning of the site would allow for much taller buildings. Mr. Dubin stated that the architectural issues brought up by the Committee can be resolved and that this project, especially in terms of height, is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Residents on Hinman have made it clear that they do not want to see a tall building on this site, this proposal appears to meet their concerns. The Committee stated that there is a great opportunity for SPAARC — November 21, 2001 Page 3 lake views from the top of these units. The Committee made a motion to hear public testimony • regarding this proposal. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. John Macsai: He stated that this is a very difficult project to design given that it calls for such a large number of townhomes on this site. He expressed concern over how detention would be handled on the site and stated that the comer of Chicago and South Boulevard deserves to be celebrated because it is a gateway to Evanston from the south. He did a rough calculation of 25 units/acre. f. subsequent calculation determined that this project proposed 32.72 units/acre, a figure that he felt was far too dense, especially considering the fact that the site would be developed with 100% townhomes. Alderman Melissa Wynne: Alderman Wynne asked the developer what the sidewalk and parkway width is along Chicago Avenue. Mr. Plunkard stated that the parkway north of Keeney is 6 feet. South of Keeney, the width jumps to 14 feet. He stated that they hope to manipulate the public right of way using landscaping and other measures to create a buffer for the townhouses. Mike Lee: He informed the Committee that there is a newly completed project located southeast of Calvary Cemetery that is very similar to this project. Alderman Arthur Newman: Alderman Newman believed that there are too many units packed onto this site. He did not believe that this project was representative of Evanston and that a significant amount of neighborhood outreach should be done. A mix of housing types that may include a taller building should open up this site and would probably be supported by the neighborhood. Committee member Marino explained that the desire for townhomes on this site by the neighborhood was established through the Chicago Avenue plan recommendations. ACTIONS: No action was necessary because this project is in the concept stage. SPAARC 817 Chicano Avenue Final Conshucf 8-unit multi -family residential building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Pam Hutter, Architect Debbie Kent, Architect Michael Lee, Developer GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Pam Huffer presented the changes to the project from the time that it appeared before the Committee for preliminary review. A colored rendering was presented. She explained that the exterior corridor will create a front yard for the units. The railing will be metal and the sidewalk will be concrete. • DISCUSSION: SPAARC — November 21, 2001 Page 4 • A Committee member felt that the new design had caused the elevation along Chicago Avenue to suffer dramatically. The building materials appear to be too traditional when compared to the design of the building. The new facade is very massive, dark, and ominous when viewed from Chicago Avenue. Ms. Hutter suggested that blocks of brick color could be used instead of the stripe that is depicted on the new elevation. A Committee member suggested that larger windows instead of divided lights would help. The Committee felt that the north and south sides of the building don't relate to the adjacent buildings. The Committee summed up their suggestions for Ms. Huffer: - Windows should be larger - There should be more limestone on the base - The building should be set back further from the gate - Two different window types should be used at the base Ms. Hutter stated that the trash enclosure would be located off of the alley. Mike Lee, the developer for this project, requested that he be given a foundation only approval. He explained that the suggested changes would not affect the foundation of the building. A Committee member stated that a limestone base might affect the foundation. Some Committee members stated that they were not comfortable giving foundation only approval at this time and that they would prefer that everything be approved at one time. Alderman Wynne mentioned that there had been some question as to the environmental cleanliness of the site and that the developer was supposed to obtain a letter from the IEPA Sstating that this site was fit to be developed. The developer replied that approval has been given by the IEPA. but a letter has not yet been received. A Committee member informed the developer that the front chimney encroaches into the setback. The developer was also informed that the neighbors need to be noted prior to excavation taking place. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table this project. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (10-0). SPAARC 1601 Emerson Street Preliminary and Final Review Robinson's Resubdivision of former Mayfair Railroad ROW, between Foster Street and Emerson Street PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: James Murray, Attorney GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is seeking approval for a plat of survey that will subdivide the subject property in half, just as it was originally subdivided. The new property line will run exactly half way down the middle of the property. The east parcel will retain a residential zoning classification. The west parcel will be zoned industrial, which is consistent with the parcel immediately to its west. DISCUSSION: SPAARC — November 21, 2001 Page 5 A committee member asked Mr. Murray d there are other active zoning districts adjacent to this • lot. Mr. Murray said no. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (10-0). These minutes have been prepared by Jeffrey Burdick — General Planner • SPAARC — November 21, 2001 Page 6 SiTE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES NOVEMBER 28, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Alan Berkowsky, Rajeev Dahal, P&UI D'Agostino, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Wafter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meetin 11L.'' Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-137 2"7 Lincolnwood Drive Prefimb ary and Final Install two air-conditioning condenser units liar single-family residence, requesting major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kendal Gladish, Owner GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Gladish stated that her family moved into this home in June. It is a non air conditioned home. Her contractor recommended that the units be installed on the north side of the home, which faces an alley. Ms. Gladish pointed out where the units would be installed on her plat of survey. The plat of survey labels the alley as Harrison Street, but she explained that this right of way is actually an alley, with a pocket park farther to the north. She informed the Committee that she received approval from her neighbors regarding her proposal. She stated that a couple of bushes would need to be removed to accommodate the units. Once the units are installed, landscaping would be planted around the units to screen them. Both units are a Stellar 2000 Plus Series High Efficiency. DISCUSSION: A Committee member inquired about the noise level of the units. Ms. Gladish stated that these units are top of the line and will be quieter than standard units. Site Plan and appearance Review .Keeling - November 18. 2001 She was also asked if the neighbors are aware of the potential noise levels. She stated that she sent a letter with a picture of the units to her neighbors and has not received any complaints. The Environmental Board Representative in the audience asked if the units were rated for energy efficiency. Ms. Gladish replied that they are top of the line models and are rated as energy efficient. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Vote (11-0). ; SPAARC 01-023 817 Chicago Avenue Construct 8-unit multi -family residential building. - PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Pam Hutter, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Hutter presented the revisions to the design of the building to the Committee. She explained that she lightened up the brick color, but kept some dark colors 'to' provide a contrast. There will be four brick colors used. She presented a board - that showed a sample of each of these brick colors. The windows have been made larger and the window surrounds will be limestone. DISCUSSION: A Committee member suggested that the burgundy brick strip be brought down to the base of the building. This would call attention to the detail of the building., Other Committee members felt that the first floor should be distinguished from the upper floors. The Committee asked Ms. Huffer if the issue of the chimney and the two Juliet balconies overhanging the sidewalk was resolved. Ms. Huffer explained that there was a lot of phone tag going on and that this issue has not yet been resolved. She explained that she would be willing to find a way to alleviate this . situation through design measures. The Committee asked Ms. Huffer if she had a cut sheet depicting the light fixtures. She did not, but she stated that there would not be a large element of light emission. Ms. Hutter explained that two 5-gallon princess spireas would be planted in the front. The Committee asked her if streetscape landscaping would be provided. She stated that it would in conjunction with the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan. The Committee explained that the streetscape elements of the plan would not be in place until at least 2-3 years and that landscaping and a sidewalk would need to be provided by the developer at this time. The Committee requested that the developer use the plans in the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan as a model for landscaping and sidewalk placement. Site Plan and Appearance Review ,1leering - November 28, 2001 Final The previous environmental issues related to this site have been dismissed by the State. Mike Lee, the developer of the site, passed out a letter stating so. The letter to the neighbors notifying them of the planned excavation was also passed out to the Committee. A motion was seconded and passed that allowed public comment regarding this project. A resident who lives directly across the alley from the proposed project inquired whether there would be garage doors on the alley side. Ms. Hutter explained that there would not be garage doors there, and that the lighting of the garage would not be any greater than that of most garages. The neighbor expressed concern with safety, in terms of loitering in the area. Ms. Hutter explained that there would be a locked gate to the entrances of the garages. A Committee member asked if the changes to the front facade would be carried over to the other facades of the building. Ms. Huffer said that they would. The Environmental Board representative in the audience asked Ms. Huffer if the project would be in compliance with the National Energy Code of 2000 or if Ms. Huffer had applied for Energy Star rating. Ms. Hutter said that she had not applied for Energy Star, but would be very interested in receiving more information. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to: - The review and approval of the exterior lighting plan by the Building Department - The review and approval of the streetscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department - Any necessary license agreements for projections Mr. Lee was informed that a foundation permit could be issued prior to the completion and approval of the landscape plan. The motion was seconded and passed. Vote (10-1). Hans Friedman cast a 'nay' vote. SPAARC 01-138 1511 Monroe Street Preliminary and Final Review plat of subdivision for 13 lots, resulting from construction of 6 duplexes (12 dwelling units total). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Scott Krone GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Krone explained that the proposed subdivision would divide each unit into its own lot. The buildings are two stories high. The outside of the building, including the foundation, would be the responsibility of the association. The unit owner would be responsible for the area within the unit only. Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeeting - Nm-ember 28. 200) DISCUSSION* The Committee informed Mr. Krone that he would have to take the subdivision plat to David Orr's office to get it stamped. It would need to be stamped by the City Council meeting of Monday, December 3 or it would be removed from that meeting's agenda. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Vote (11-0). SPAARC 01.139 2127 Weslev Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct additions to single-family residence increasing footprint and height from 9 % stories to 2 % stories, requiring major variations PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The owner of the home, who also serves as the architect for the project, stated that he and his wife are planning to construct an addition to the home they recently purchased. The addition would increase the height of the house from 1 stories to 2'/2 stories. They are requesting a variance to construct on the vertical wall along the north side of the structure. The front porch will also be extended, the door will be relocated, and a wrap -around porch will be created. A letter has been sent to the neighbor to the north informing him of their proposal. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked whether the third floor would contain living space. The owner said that at some point it may, but at this time, it would be minimal. The square footage of the current house is approximately 1,100 on the ground floor. The planned addition would more than double the square footage. The owner was asked what the square footage of the third floor would be. He stated that this would depend on how it was measured, but approximately 50 feet by 12.5 feet would have a clearance of at least five feet. The Committee asked what types of exterior materials would be used. The owner stated that the entire house, including the addition, would be wood cedar siding. A Committee member informed the owner that he might have a difficult time proving a hardship to the Zoning Board of Appeals, considering that it can be construed that he bought a house that was too small for his needs. The owner responded that he bought the home with the hope of being able to expand and improve the home. There was some concern about the possibility of this house towering over the surrounding houses. The owner replied that it would be taller than some of the homes in the neighborhood, but that there are other 2 % story homes in the neighborhood, including one across the street. The Environmental Board representative in the audience asked whether the owner intended to Site Plan and Appearance Revje% l reeling - November 28. 2001 comply with the National Energy Code of 2000. The owner stated that he would make every effort to comply with the code. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Vote (11-0). SPAARC 01-094 610 Davis Street Revision to Preliminanr and Final Review installed doors, different than those approved, for building renovation for type 1 restaurant (Olive Mountain). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ahmed Saleh, Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Saleh explained that the change to the storefront would consist of removing the three in -swinging doors in order to install two out -swinging doors. He presented a drawing of the doors to the Committee. DISCUSSION: The Committee expressed concern regarding the doors prohibiting the accessibility of the sidewalk when opened. It was suggested that one of the doors could be fixed to alleviate this concern. Mr. Saleh was made aware that he would have to appear before the Preservation Commission regarding this change to the storefront. However, this change might possibly be handled administratively in terms of preservation review. ACTION: A motion was made to grant revised final site plan and appearance review approval subject to preservation review either through the Preservation Commission or administratively. The motion was seconded and passed. Vote (10-0). One member abstained. SPAARC 01-140 1216-1226 Harvard Terrace Preliminary and Final Convert former ground -floor commercial space to 2e dwvelling unit, requiring major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: James Murray, Attorney GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: James Murray stated that his client is seeking a variation to utilize a portion of the building for a residential unit. This unit had been operating as a realty office but the ordinance required it be eliminated in 1983. The unit has been vacant since then. Mr. Murray stated that there would be no changes to the exterior of the building. The newly created residential unit would be 759 square feet. Site Plan and Appearance Review .Sleeting -November 28, 2001 DISCUSSION: A Committee member informed Mr. Murray that the new unit may need to be sprinkled and is subject to building department review. A Committee member commented that he is troubled by the density of this site. The property is zoned R4, but the existing density is already in excess of the maximum density allowable under R4 zoning, thus making this site legal non -conforming. Mr. Murray was asked if there would be enough parking on site to accommodate this extra unit. He replied that this unit is not required to have a parking space, but there would be enough on -site spaces to accommodate this unit. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval with the understanding that there be no change to the exterior of the building. The motion was seconded and passed. Vote (10-1). Committee member Alterson cast a 'nay` vote. SPAARC 01-124 1000 Grey Avenue Revision W Final Reconsider previously approved location of air-conditioning unit and security fence at C.E. Niehoff PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Norm EliingWon, Building Superintendent GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Ellingston stated that he received approval for the location of the air conditioning pad a few weeks ago from the Committee. However, it has been decided that the approved location would inhibit the appearance of the front door of the building. The company would now like to move the location of the air conditioning pad to the rear of the building on the southwest side. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked if the ductwork would still go horizontally through the wall. Mr. E(lingston stated that it would. ACTION: A motion was made to grant revised final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Vote (11-0). SPAARC 97-065 Church Street Plant Revision to Final Consider architectural changes to City parking garage within Church Street Plaza (1800 Maple Self Park). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: David Jennings GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Jennings explained that on the front side of the garage (the north and east sides), Christmas tree features have been installed to provide support for the Site Plan and .appearance Review .fleeting - Xovember M.1DD1 horizontal members of the garage. Originally, square tubing was going to be used; however, this would have been too cost prohibitive. These tree features are obtrusive and not aesthetically pleasing. They do not serve as a safety feature. He is proposing that they be popped out and that panels are put in to provide support and allow for a view into the garage. Mr. Jennings depicted what this would look like using a slide presentation. He informed the Committee that an art piece is going to be installed on the garage in the near future. These tree features would have to be removed now because once the art piece is up, this could not be done. DISCUSSION: A Committee member was concerned that this would increase the amount of light emitted from the garage. Mr. Jennings said that it should not. The Committee member stated that if money is to be spent on the garage, it should be spend on shielding these lights to reduce their emission. Other Committee members stated that they like the brightness of the garage because it makes the area appear active at night. Members of the Committee stated that the canopy over the entrance of the garage is unattractive and asked about its possible removal. Mr. Jennings explained that the Parking Committee is in favor of the canopy because if marks the entrance to the garage and would not be in favor of its removal. A Committee member felt that the new openings that would be created from the removal of the tree -like features would not read well with the openings on the top floor of the garage because they would be too big in comparison. Another Committee member suggested installing a material that covers the unfinished slab of concrete that would be exposed. Still another Committee member felt that this measure would create a patchwork -like appearance. It was suggested that the unfinished concrete be painted or treated. ACTION: A motion was made to grant revised final site plan and appearance review approval provided the new treatment to the unfinished, exposed concrete approximately maintains the current depth between the existing finished panels surrounding the exposed concrete and the exposed concrete itself. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Vote (11-0). Sue Plan and Appearance Review Urering - owmber 18. 2001 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES DECEMBER 12, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Alan Berkowsky, Paul D'Agostino, Keith Fujihara, David Jennings, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff., Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting= Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 97-0066 Church Street Plaza Final Construct 28-story multi -family residential building within Church Street Plaza (Optima, Inc.). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tod Desmarais, Developer Matt Cison, Developer GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Tod Desmarais explained that there would be no change to the open space areas or the courtyard in front of the building from the previous submittals. The lobby will be glass -enclosed. Mr. Desmarais presented a copy of the landscape plan. The paving pattern being used in front of the building will be the same as the pattern used by the City in the nearby public areas. The same brick that is used on the soldier course of the border will be used on the walkway, giving the elevation a seamless feel. The reflecting pool will have three geysers, each will be lit. DISCUSSION: Mr. Desmarais was asked if the stairways would project from the wall. He responded that the stairways would be flush and would nat project from the wall. A Committee member noted that the emergency exit door would swing open over the sidewalk. Mr. Desmarais explained that this door would be infrequently used and would not swing out over the public way. A Committee member stated that the sheet draining should not run over the sidewalk. Mr. Desmarais replied that the draining could be redirected into the landscaped area. There is an Ameritech duct arrangement underneath the building. The developers are working with Ameritech to determine if a metal plate will be placed over this arrangement. Two ducts are outside and will be covered by a driveway. A Committee member inquired about exterior lighting. Mr. Desmarais stated that a series of small bollards were being considered and/or in ground accent lighting. The Committee informed Mr. Desmarais that the Parks and Forestry Department would need to review and approve the landscape plan. Mr. Desmarais was asked if he was coordinating with the developer of the mini -anchor next door so that the design could be carried through between the elevations. He stated that it is his intent to do so. The Committee asked Mr. Desmarais if there is an easement between the Optima and Hill properties, because it is not shown on the plat of survey. He stated there was and was informed that the City would need a copy of the easement language for the records. Mr. Desmarais explained that there would be no change to the elevation from the previous submittals. The lobby is recessed and there will be butt glaze at the entrance of the lobby. Some of the windows will be operable as in -turning vents. The concrete will be smooth and there will be a series of recessed terraces in the bottom four stories of the building. The railings will be a painted metal. The mechanical equipment will be contained in a mechanical plant on top of the garage. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to: • Review and approval of the exterior lighting especially along the west elevation by the Building Department • Review and approval of drainage in the front of the building near the sidewalk by the Engineering Department • Review and approval of the landscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department • Review and approval of the easement and its language along the former East Railroad Avenue by the City Manager's Office and the Zoning Division • Submittal of a plat of survey showing said easement to the City Manager's Office and the Zoning Division • Review and approval of the Ameritech duct plan by the Engineering Department Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - December 12, 2001 Page 2 The motion was seconded. A Committee member asked if the motion was for the entire project of for foundation only. It was explained that the motion was for the entire project. Some Committee members stated that the Ameritech issue should be resolved prior to the entire project being approved. Other Committee members felt that if the applicant is willing to take the risk of not having the Ameritech issue resolved prior to approval, then it is their responsibility. The applicant stated that a meeting with Ameritech determined that the locations of the caissons and foundations would not effect the duct banks. However, Ameritech will probably not provide a letter stating this finding. The motion was called to question. It was approved. Vote (9-2) with 1 member abstaining. Committee members Judy Aiello and Ron Walczak voted against the motion. Chair Carolyn Smith abstained from voting. SPAARC 01-135 525 Chicano Avenue Comm Construct 90 attached single-family residences (townhouses) at site of former Dominick's grocery store. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Matt Silvers, Broker Stuart Kantoff, Developer David Dosin, Developer Len Koenig, Developer Liz Harmon, Architect Jim Plunkard, Architect Bernard Citron, Attorney GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Jim Plunkard presented the revised project to the Committee. He explained that the project still consists of 90 townhomes. The overall site will consist of 41% open space, with half of this open space being green space and the other half being parking. Mr. Plunkard stated that the redesign of the buildings was done to address the Committee's previous concerns. Every unit fronting a street has been turned so that the front of that unit will face the street and the front door will be visible from the street. 40 of the 90 units will face a street. The building on the comer of South Boulevard and Chicago Avenue will be curved at the comer to create a celebratory feature for the gateway into Evanston. A couple of different colors of masonry will be used. The buildings fronting the alley to the rear of the property will be stepped back at the comers in order to increase the line of sight for cars pulling out of the driveways and onto the alley. Bernard Citron, the attorney for the project, explained that he examined what else could be built on the site with the existing zoning with density in mind. He presented a drawing depicting the maximum amount of building that could be built on the site. He explained that this is what Dominick's is basing their price for the property on. He stated that anything short of his client's proposal would not be feasible for his client. The variations being asked for by the developer Site Plat and Appearance Review .lfeeling - December 12. 2001 Pop 3 regard the setback off of the alley and include four units with parking within the setback along Chicago Avenue. DISCUSSION: Alan Berkowsky from the Fire Department expressed concern regarding the accessibility of the site from Chicago Avenue. Mr. Plunkard said that the gates would not be security gates and would be wrought iron. Mr. Berkowsky stated that the Fire Department does not want to rely on the rear alley for sole access to the site. Access from Chicago Avenue will be needed. Another Committee member reminded the applicants that Evanston does not snow plow alleys. David Dubin, the developer, stated that the Association would probably be responsible for snow plowing the rear alley. The Committee took comments from audience members: John Macai: Mr. Macai stated that this is basically the same plan that was rejected previously. He believed that the only solution would be for all of the building to not be identical in type. A mid -rise building would provide variety and open up the site. Jack Derrin: Mr. Derrin explained that he is a resident of the neighborhood to the west of the proposed project. Because the project is directly adjacent to a CTA station, he believes that it should contain a retail component. He also believes that more should be done in relation to the site's connection to the neighborhood park directly to the east. Mr. Dubin responded that the Chicago Avenue Corridor Plan is recommending town house development in this area and that residential should be brought in prior to additional retail. Evanston Environmental Board Representative: The applicants were asked if they intend to comply with the most recent energy codes. The applicants explained that this issue has not yet been addressed. The representative stated that the Evanston Environmental Board is in favor of transit oriented development. A Committee member suggested that the site should celebrate to a greater extent the entrance to each unit. Another Committee member stated that she could not support 90 townhouses on this site. She believes that the right development will have a mix of units, with possibly one mid -rise building. Some retail would be necessary. Another Committee member stated that Dominick's would not have closed if there was more community support for retail in this area and that more retail is not needed in this area. Some Committee members disagreed with this assertion. A Committee member requested that elevations be presented depicting the rear of this development. Mr. Plunkard explained that these buildings would be four- sided buildings. Site Plan and Appearance Review .1feeting - December 12. 2001 Page 4 ACTION: A motion was made to approve the concept. The motion was seconded and passed. Vote (7-4). Arthur Alterson, Hans Friedman, Carolyn Smith, and Ron Walczak voted nay. SPAARC 01-061 622 Davis Street Construct 4-story commercial building_ PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Robert Perlmutter, Developer/Owner Mike Radis, Developer/Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mike Radis explained that this building would consist of retail space on the bottom floor with three floors of office space above. There will be a one -foot high granite base. The design of the building will be complimentary to the other buildings on the block. The columns will be painted cast iron and there will be a steel channel band that will divide the first floor elevation from the rest of the building. The brick will be modular and the trim around the windows will be Indiana Limestone. The top of the building will have a copper comice that will serve as a gutter. Mr. Radis briefly reviewed the side and rear elevations. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked if the designs of the front facade line up with the designs and details on the adjacent buildings. Mr. Radis stated that the brick band was designed to attempt to line up with a detail on the building to the west. Another Committee member requested that the side elevations be finished with brick down to the base. Mr. Radis explained that this could not be done because there is a lack of space between the two buildings on either side to apply brick. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (10-0). Final SPAARC 01-141 618 Library Place Preliminary and Final Build out cellar, requiring 2 window wells along north side of building (Family Institute at Northwestern University). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Andrew McGonagle, Owner Representative GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. McGonigle explained that this was a proposal to build out the cellar of Northwestern's Family Institute. Light wells will be constructed at grade level around the cellar windows. These light wells will not go to the full depth of the cellar floor and there will be a banding around them. He presented the landscape plan to the Committee. Site Plan and Appearance Review Aleeting - December 12, 2001 Page 5 DISCUSSION: Mr. McGonigle was notified that guardrails would be required around the light wells by code. Mr. McGonigle stated that grates would be provided. Carlos Ruiz notified the Committee that this project was reviewed and approved administratively for the Preservation Commission. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 00-028 1640 Maple Avenue Revision to Final Review sign package and change to railing treatment for mixed -use building under construction. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tim Schmitt, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Tim Schmitt explained that the revised hand rail design is due to the maintenance concems. This new, simplified design will help alleviate this concem. The color of the revised handrails will be the same as the previously approved. Mr. Schmitt stated that the second item for discussion is signage. He is proposing a unified sign to serve each of the tenants on the first floor. He presented the elevations of the building that included this signage. He explained that the signage would be LED or fiber optic, both of which would present considerable energy savings. DISCUSSION: A Committee member expressed concern regarding the lack of setback between the letters of the sign and the edge of the sign. Mr. Schmitt stated that if this setback were decreased, it would possibly affect the size of the lettering on the sign. ACTION: A motion was made to grant revised site plan and appearance review approval for the revision to the handrails. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). A motion was made to the sign board to recommend approval with a one -foot setback on each end of the sign. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously. (10-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review .fleeting - December 12, 2001 Page 6 SPAARC 01-143 743 Judson Avenue Preliminary and Final Renovate Snyder Paris. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stefanie Levine GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Stefanie Levine explained that the playground equipment in the park is no longer compliant with current safety guidelines and needs to be replaced. It will be replaced with a similar style of playground equipment. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked Ms. Levine if the playground equipment is to be illuminated. She said that it would not. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 97-065 1700 Maole Avenue Preliminan► Construct mini -anchor retail establishment within Church Street Plaza. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ben Rannel, Tom White, Greg Hakanen, Owners Bill Duke, Nagle Hartray, Architects GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Bill Duke notified the Committee that this project previously appeared before the Committee as a three-story building. The new proposal is for a two-story building. There will be box window treatments and the parapet screen wail will be higher than the previous proposal. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked if Optima's storefront design would be continued through this project's design. Mr. Duke said that he is working with Optima to design a storefront with complimentary design elements. Mr. Duke informed the Committee that the awnings would remain. A Committee member stated that at least 80 units would be viewing the roof of this building and that all roof top mechanical units would need to be screened. Mr. Duke was notified that for final review, he would need to show the exact placement and screening method of the roof top mechanical units. A Committee member stated that the vertical mullion at the comer of the building is a main focal point and that an attractive or distinctive design element is needed here. Mr. Duke informed the Committee that the brick pavers that will be used in Site Plan and Appearance Rrview Aleeling - December 1 Z 2001 Page 7 f, SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES DECEMBER 19, 2001 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Afterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, David Jennings, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak, Jim Wofinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Consideration and Approval of Meeting Minutes: November 14, 2001 Meeting Minutes: Approved unanimously November21, 2001 Meeting Minutes: Approved unanimously November 28, 2001 Meeting Minutes: Approved unanimously December 12, 2001 Meeting Minutes: The Committee members received these minutes earlier in the day and most had not reviewed them. The Committee decided to hold the approval of the minutes pending further review. A gentleman in the audience stated that he had not received meeting minutes via e-mail since the November 14, 2001 meeting. The Committee assured him that they would look into this situation. Projects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-146 2460 Main Street Preliminary and Final Construct addition to retail goods establishment (Sam's Club). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ronald Rees, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ronald Rees explained that the scope of work would occur in the tire -mounted area of the building. The size of the showroom would be increased by 1.440 square feet. Mr. Rees passed out pictures of the building and explained that the showroom would add 48 additional feet to the rear of the building. Elevation drawings were presented to the Committee. Matching building materials would be used on the addition and the color scheme would remain the same. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked Mr. Rees if the fenced in short term tire storage area would be retained. Mr. Rees explained that it would be retained. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The (notion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 1916 Dempster Street Preliminary and Final Replace storefront entrance system for new retail goods establishment (A.J. Wright). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Marc Mylott, Zoning Planner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Marc Mylott explained that the owner of the project was not able to attend the meeting. The applicant is proposing to open a new clothier named A.J. Wright In the space previously occupied by Office Depot. Mr. Mylott explained that the store's appearance would be similar to a Marshall's. He presented the existing elevation and explained that additional windows would replace the vestibule and a double door would replace the existing door. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked if the new store would have the same storefront length as the Office Depot. Mr. Mylott stated that it would. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the installation of a bike rack in front of the store. The' motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). 1 SPAARC 00-157 2515 Prairie Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct 8-unit multi -family residential building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom Gourguechon, Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Site Plan and .appearance Review .Veering -- December 19. 2001 Page 2 Tom Gourguechon passed out photos of the site. He explained that it is on the east side of Prairie Avenue and consists of two current addresses. There are currently two dwelling units on the site with condo ownership conditions. He presented drawings of the proposal to the Committee members. The project will consist of an 8-unit condo building with 2 units per floor. There will be 14 parking spaces under the building and three exterior parking spaces. Standard modular brick in the "Old Fort Smooth" style will be used. The accent piece will be a buff -colored pre -cast that will resemble limestone. This will be used on the base of the building and the chimneystack. The building will be protected wood frame and will be sprinkled. DISCUSSION: Mr. Gourguechon was asked why the site is shown as elevated. He explained that he raised the building 4 feet from Prairie Avenue to minimize the amount of excavation needed and to lessen the slope of the ramp to enter the underground parking lot. The face brick will wrap around the sides of the building to a portion of the rear elevation. A conventional block material will be used for the balance of the rear elevation. Committee members expressed concern with the large amount of conventional block material being used on the rear elevation. Mr. Gourguechon was asked K he considered using alternative materials. He replied that he wanted to compliment the deep red brick and limestone treatments of the surrounding buildings. A Committee member suggested treating the two towers on the north elevation with the same material in order to break down the scale of the building and tie together the design elements. The Committee suggested putting the project on hold pending the further discussion and review of proposed building materials. f r A Committee member inquired as to the permitted lot coverage of the site. The site's zoning allows for 45% lot coverage. The proposed lot coverage is 44.6%. Mr. Gourguechon was informed that site detention would be needed. He stated_ that stormwater detention would be accomplished by using oversized underground piping and the inclusion of an underground cistern -like material. Mr. Gourguechon presented both the site and landscape plans. He explained that the entrance to the parking lot would be from a heated ramp with ingress/egress off of the east alley. A Committee member commented that the significant setback and green space from the edge of the street to the front of the building is a nice feature. Mr. Gourguechon was informed that the site plan depicted some of the columns encroaching into parking stalls. The Committee stated that there would probably be outstanding code -related issues that would require a meeting with the Building Department. ACTION: . Site Plan and .appearance Review .1leering - December 19. 2001 Page 3 A motion was made to table this project in order to see a reworking of building materials. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (12-0). SPAARC 01-147 1001 Emerson Street Preliminary and Final Remodel existing independent living facility (Ebenezer Prim Towers). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Pat Wada, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Pat Wada explained that the only work being done to the exterior of the building consists of tuckpointing the brick facade and window replacement. The window type will not change but the windows will be enlarged and some will be sliding windows. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked Ms. Wada what color the windows and window frames would be. She replied that the windows would be clear glass and the frames would be white. A Committee member suggested that bronze would be a more aesthetic color for the window frames. Ms. Wada said that the decision is ultimately the owner's. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the consideration of using a light bronze window frame. The motion was seconded and passed. (11-0). Hans Friedman abstained from voting. SPAARC 01-148 2822 Central Street Preliminaq and Final Construct new store front and add three windows on west side of commercial building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kenneth Hazlett, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Kenneth Hazlett explained that he plans to move his and his lawyer's offices to this building. The front of the building will be reglazed. He referred to this building as a garage loft. The side of the building contains one glass block panel. He would like to add additional glass block panels along the side in order to increase the light within the building. He will use real limestone along the base of the building. Lights will be installed on the front of the building. Mr. Hazlett stated that he wants to find old lighting fixtures to compliment the style of the building. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked Mr. Hazlett if he plans to eliminate the existing curb cut in front of the building. He replied that the curb cut would be eliminated and Sde Plan and Appearance Review ifeeting - December 19, 2001 Page 4 the sidewalk would be redone in front. The Committee requested that trees be planted in front of the building. Mr. Hazlett agreed to do so. A Committee member inquired as to the type of signage to be installed. Mr. Hazlett said that signage would not be installed to the top of the building, but there would be a small space above the door in which signage could be installed. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the street trees by the Parks and Forestry Department. The motion was seconded. A Committee member asked Mr. Hazlett to consider installing lights just around the doorway as opposed to along the entire front facade of the building. The motion was approved unanimously. (12-0). SPAARC 01-149 741 Howard Street Preliminary and Final Replace windows with people doors within garage, accessory to mired -use building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Applicant did not show. ACTION: No action was taken. SPAARC 2428 Emerson Street Renovate Sock Park. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stefanie Levine Preliminanr GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Stefanie Levine explained that this project is phase Il of the park renovation. In the first phase, the old playground was replaced with the new playground equipment. Phase II will include the expansion of the playground to include an area for tots. The bike path will be completely reconstructed and lighting will be installed along the entire length of the path. Residents of the area requested the installation of exercise stations, which will be another aspect of phase II. New benches will be constructed and horseshoe pits will be rebuilt. A gateway feature will be constructed at the comer of the park. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked Ms. Levine if the pedestrians and the bicyclists would share the path. She replied that they would and that the path would be widened. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (12-0). Site Plan and appearance Review .tleeNng - December 19, 2001 Page 5 SPAARC 1700 Maple Avenue Revision to Preliminary Construct dormer within near portion of roof of single-family residence, requiring major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ben Ranney, Developer Bill Duke, Architect Greg Hakanen, Developer GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ben Ranney explained that revisions had been made to the project based on Committee comments from the previous week. Bill Duke stated that the tenant was asked if awnings could be removed from the facade. The tenant stated that awnings are a must for their corporate image. As a result, Mr. Duke explained that option 2 was followed, which included making the base of the building different from the adjacent Optima building farrade. Mr. Duke explained that a purplish brick material would be used on some of the facade. The Committee previously requested that the comer of the building be accentuated by bringing the glass feature down to the ground. However, this feature of the building could not be brought down to ground level because that portion of the ground is City property. However, a revolving door has been added to the comer. Mr. Duke presented the preliminary landscape ideas for the corner of the property. A significant amount of green space with a berm along the railroad embankment has been proposed. The Ameritech duct issue in this area still needs to be resolved. DISCUSSION: A Committee member suggested that a pathway traverse the landscape area in order to provide better access to the plaza for pedestrians arriving from the west. The Committee was concerned with the fact that the landscaped area does not have a point of reference. It was suggested that a statue, fountain or piece of public art be included in this area. Committee members questioned who would be responsible for maintaining this area. Mr. Ranney stated that it would be City property so the City would be responsible for maintaining it. Committee members felt that the tenant would be benefiting from the landscaping, so the tenant should be responsible for its maintenance. Committee members stated that putting a different base on the tenant's portion of the facade would be a mistake. This tenant may not be here forever and there are other ways to distinguish the two facades. A Committee member asked if the City would allow a building to be built over a public sidewalk area. It was noted that the City could sell this portion of property to the developer in order to allow the comer feature to be built to grade. Site Plan and .Appearance Review .fleeting - December 19. 2001 PW 6 Mr. Duke presented samples of building materials to the Committee. He stated that the curved portion of the building would be butt glazed. Some Committee members stated that the comer of the building still does not receive the prominence that it is due. The glass overhang should be brought down to provide this prominence. Mr. Duke explained that the bricks would be elongated from their standard size. There will be an embossed white panel above the brickwork. The Committee felt that this white panel would be too strong and would override the subtle purple brick. ACTION: A motion was made to approve the revisions to the preliminary with consideration that the applicant explore the sale of the at -grade area under the comer, changes to enhance the corner, and the issue of landscape maintenance. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). Other Action: SUBJECT: A committee member suggested that the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee meetings be scheduled to begin at 2:30 instead of 3:00 if the scheduler deems necessary. Members of the Committee supported this suggestion and suggested that the starting time for the meetings be at 2:30. ACTION: A motion was made to start the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee meetings at 2:30. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (12-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review .l(eering - December 19. 2001 Page 7 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JANUARY 9, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, KeWi Fujihara, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Consideration and Approval of Meetina Minutes: December 19, 2001 Meeting Minutes: Approved unanimously Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-001 1850-1864 Sherman Avenue Preliminary Reconfigure former type 1 restaurant (Yesterday's) for new type 1 restaurant (Lou Malnati's), requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Marc Malnati GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Malnati explained that he is proposing to tear off the old annex building and reconfigure the rear of the building to accommodate a kitchen for a new restaurant. Variances are needed for the reconfiguration of the building. First, there is currently 74% lot coverage on the site. The zoning of the site allows for a maximum of 50% lot coverage. The new construction will not change the existing lot coverage figure. Second, the new annex will be within the interior side yard, setback and rear setback. Third, additional, non -regulatory parking spaces will be located within the rear yard setback. Mr. Malnati stated that the restaurant would be similar in size to the Lou Malnati restaurant in Lincoln Park. The proposal is to tear down the one-story slab addition and reconfigure the kitchen in the rear of the building. This will 4 accommodate a new garbage location and will allow for three additional parking spaces. The existing building is masonry and the addition will also be masonry. DISCUSSION: A Committee member inquired about the long exhaust duct that currently climbs up the entire height of the existing building. Another Committee member stated that the kitchen exhaust could probably be emitted from the roof of the kitchen instead of through the long duct since it most likely would meet the City Code's distance separation requirements. Other Committee members were not sure if this would be the case and determined that it may be a Health Department issue. A Committee member asked Mr. Malnati how he planned to utilize the upstairs. He replied that the upstairs currently contains some offices and a couple of art studios and that these uses would continue to exist. He explained that the existing windows would be removed and replaced with new ones. The Committee recommended that the new trash enclosure match the material of the building. Mr. Malnati said that he was thinking of using a wood fence to screen the trash. The Committee informed him that a masonry trash enclosure would be preferred. A Committee member stated that the current storefront appears to be very dosed in and difficult to see into. Mr. Malnati explained that the storefront would be changed, and that his desire is to peel everything off the first floor of the building and make the first floor exterior match the second floor exterior. A Committee member replied that this intention has not been depicted in the plans or drawings presented. The proposed parking area in the rear troubled some Committee members. It was suggested that this area could be used for outdoor seating or for green space. Mr. Malnati explained that outdoor seating would be a big problem for the neighbors, especially in terms of noise. The Committee suggested that the parking area could be made more attractive through the use of landscaping and/or tree planting. A Committee member suggested using signage as an asset to the building. The proposed signage seems excessive in that it includes a canopy wrapping the entire side of the storefront. The Committee agreed that this project could not be approved for preliminary because the full amount of information has not been presented, including full elevations. A Committee member asked what the percentage of carryout business would be. Mr. Mainati replied that the business would consist of approximately 25% carryout, 25% delivery, and 50% dine -in. He stated that bicycles would be used for some deliveries. A Committee member reiterated the need to make the parking area more attractive. ACTION: Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - January 9, :Orl? Page 2 A motion was made to table the case pending further information from the applicant. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-002 803'/2 Chicago Avenue Preliminary and Final Operate type 2 restaurant (Seattle Sutton's Healthy Eating) within existing storefront. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Eileen Gelman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Gelman stated that she currently operates a Seattle Sutton's Healthy Eating in Skokie. She explained that the customers sign up for a week of food and then come in twice a week to pick up their food. Food is delivered twice weekly to two coolers on the site. There will be no cooking on site. The only exterior change will be the placement of a new window sign. The operation will be open from 12- 7 on Mondays and Thursdays. DISCUSSION: A Committee member inquired as to the number of customers visiting the store on the days that it is opened. Ms. Gelman replied that she is hoping to have 10- 20 customers at first and that she currently has 90 customers at her establishment in Skokie. Committee members were unsure if this operation would be considcred a Type 2 restaurant. ACTION: A motion was made to grant concept site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 02-003 327 Howard Street Preliminary and Final Operate type 2 restaurant (Subway) within existing storefront PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Nizarali Ladhani GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Ladhani explained that he is seeking a special use to open a Subway Restaurant at this location. He is planning to open the restaurant early because there are no other breakfast places in the immediate area. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked Mr. Ladhani what kind of signage he intended to use and suggested that the signage remain within the existing band and not be placed on the limestone. Mr. Ladhani stated that he intends to keep the signage within this band and include canopy signage. He passed around examples of signage and exterior designs of other Subways. Mr. Ladhani was informed that because this is a type 2 restaurant, a litter plan would need to be submitted and Site Plan and Appearance Remew Afeeting - January 9, 2002 Page 3 that Subway would be responsible for the daily clean up of trash and litter within 250 feet of the store. A Committee member felt that canopy signage would not be desirable because many other storefronts within the building did not have canopies, A Committee member suggested that a unified business center plan is needed for the building and that the building owner should be notified of this fact. Mr. Ladhani explained that the owners are doing a lot of interior worts to the building and should be receptive to a unified business center plan. Mr. Ladhani was asked if the storefront door would swing over the public way. The building manager replied that it would not. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 01-132 2528 Green Bav Road Recommendation to Sinn Board Remove existing signs and add one new wall sign at office (Koenig and Strey). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that the owner is proposing to take down the existing freestanding sign and replace it with a wall sign on the fagade of the building. Facade signs can only be installed on facades that face a street, so a variation is needed to allow the proposed sign to be installed on the facade facing the parking lot. DISCUSSION: A Committee member was concerned that people travelling southbound on Green Bay Road would not be able to see the sign and that a monument sign may also be requested in the future to better serve the business. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend site plan and appearance review approval to. the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed. Vote (9-1). Chairperson Carolyn Smith voted nay. SPAARC 01-146 909 Davis Street Recommendation to Sign Board Relocate Church Street sign zone for future ground -floor retail and office tenants. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that the applicant wishes to move the sign zone on the facade up higher on the building so that it matches with the sign zone on the Sim Plan and Rppeurance Review Afeeting - January 9. 2002 Page 4 facades across the street. He explained that the sign zone would be higher than regulation. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend site plan and appearance review approval to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed. Vote (10-0). SPAARC 02-009 1016 Church Street Recommendation to Sipn Board Construct new awnings with signage on front and rear entries of type 9 restaurant (Thai Sookdee Restaurant). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that the applicant wishes to install canopy signage across the front facade of the restaurant. He presented illustrations of the canopy to the Committee. A variation is required because food and drink messages cannot be included on canopy signage and because only seven items are permitted on a sign. This sign will have nine items included. DISCUSSION: Many Committee members stated that the sign includes too many items of information and that the applicant should retain the existing sign or reduce the items of information on the proposed sign. ACTION: A motion was made to deny site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. Vote (9-1). Jim Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 02-006 1611 Crain Street Preliminary and Final Create second zoning lot from original zoning lot, construct single-family residence requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Martha Strong Michael Breclaw GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Breclaw explained that the new lot to be created would not meet the minimum lot requirement of the zoning district. The new lot would be 4,620 square feet. The minimum lot size in this zoning district is 5,000 square feet. Mr. Breclaw's intention is to construct a 2,000 square foot home on the new lot. He believes that the new lot will not be out of character with the rest of the neighborhood. Another variance would be needed to construct a two -car garage within 9 feet of the new house. The minimum distance allowed by the Zoning Ordinance is 10 feet. A third variance would be needed to allow the covered front porch to encroach into the front yard. Sile Plan and Appearance Review .%feeling - Januarys 9. 2002 page 5 The existing lot would have alley access, but the newly created lot would not. As a result, the new garage would require access from the street. Mr. Breclaw stated that he has only talked about his plans in general with the neighbors and has not shared any design ideas. His intent is to retain the character of the neighborhood. The new home will be taller than the adjacent homes. Four -inch or eight -inch clapboard siding would be the predominate building material of the new home. DISCUSSION: The Committee asked Mr. Breclaw if he considered the option of placing the garage up against the house. He replied that this would create an additional variation because it would infringe within the required 30-foot rear yard setback. A Committee member suggested that Mr. Breclaw present the detached garage and attached garage option to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Breclaw explained that a public notice has already been sent out which specifically lists the variations being requested. A Committee member asked if any berming would be installed to raise the foundation of the home. Mr. Breclaw stated that the height of the building would be measured from the natural grade and that no berming would be done. Another Committee member stated that there are currently little to no curb cuts on the block and a curb cut providing access to this new garage would break up the rhythm of the block, ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval for the subdivision of the lot. The motion was seconded and it did not pass. Vote (5-5). Judy Aiello, Paul D'Agostino, Keith Fujihara, Ron Walczak, and Jim Wolinski voted nay. Members of the Committee stated that they would prefer to see the garage attached to the new home. Mr. Breclaw stated that he could attempt to make it appear connected by constructing a gate structure between the garage and the home. A motion was made to table the request to construct a single-family residence. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Vote (10-0). SPAARC 02-007 1106 Dewev Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct 1 % -story addition on top of 1-story single family residence, increasing building height to 2 % stories, requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Nancy Castro GENERA!_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Castro explained that the existing house is a one-story bungalow and that she is planning on constructing an addition to the height of the home. The house is currently 900 square feet and is within the side yard setback. The new height Site Plan and Appearance Review Aiming - January 9, 2002 Page 6 would be permitted, but a variation is needed to permit the construction of the home because it is within the side yard setback. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked if any of the neighbors have commented on the proposed addition. Ms. Castro stated that the woman to the north of her is aware of the plans for the addition, but she has not yet commented on the specific plans. The Committee asked if she had photos of the other homes in the area. Ms. Castro stated that the home is located on a vintage block. The existing home is brick. The addition would be either wood or vinyl siding. Ms. Castro presented photos showing a small portion of the adjacent house in order to depict how the new construction would relate to it. A Committee member suggested that she use wood siding as the building material instead of vinyl siding. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 02-005 1100 Davis Street Preliminary and Final Operate type 2 restaurant (coffee shop) within existing storefront. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Adrian Stanci GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Stanci stated that he plans to open a coffee shop at this site. The only change to the exterior storefront would be the installation of a new sign. He explained that the new sign would be similar to the existing sign on the storefront. DISCUSSION: The Committee felt that this would be a good location for a coffee shop. Mr. Stanci explained that he would like to stay open late to serve the students in the area. A Committee member pointed out that the current signage is too excessive in that it contains too many words. This is another case in which the building owner should be contacted by the City to consider the development of a Unified Business Plan. Another Committee member asked if the retractable awnings in the photograph were existing. Mr. Stanci said that they are existing and that he was not sure that they worked. The Committee member explained that if they do not work or are in poor condition, the Zoning Board of Appeals might impose a condition upon approval that they are taken down. It was suggested that Mr. Stanci check with the owner of the building regarding the awnings. ACTION: Site Plan and Appearance Review .fleeting - Jarueary 9, 2002 Pagr 7 A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Vote (10-0). SPAARC 024)04 1701-1703 Simpson Street Preliminary and Final Operate type 2 restaurant (fast food) within existing storefront. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Patrick Blair GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Blair explained that he intends to open a fast food sit down establishment at this location. He passed around the menu for the Committee to review. The only changes to the exterior would be the addition of landscaping and the change in signage. The space is the former site of a currency exchange. DISCUSSION: A Committee member inquired about the seating capacity. Mr. Blair stated that he planned to have approximately 10 tables. He explained that his hours would probably be Gam to 10pm or midnight. He would operate the restaurant. He explained that he has been involved with the Dr. Hill Group and E-Town. A Committee member stated that this project is not yet in for building permit. It will appear before the Zoning Board of Appeals on the following Tuesday night. Another Committee member asked Mr. Blair where the landscaping would be added. He replied that it would be added along a fence in the rear of the property and that some shrubbery or planters would be added in the front A Committee member informed the Committee that the business association has a strategy that includes landscaping this area. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Vote (10-0). Site Plan and Appearance Rme s- .Veering - January 4. 2002 Page 8 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JANUARY 1 B, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Atterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Outer Staf. Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting: Pro)ects Reviewed: SPAARC 02.001 1850-1854 Sherman Avenue Preliminary Reconfigure former type 1 restaurant (Yesterda)'s) for new type 1 restaurant (Lou Malnati's), requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Marc Malnati GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Malnab presented a new set of elevations depicting the facades along both Sherman and University. He explained that the wood finish on the first floor would be removed and the masonry underneath would be restored. Instead of a tong awning, similar to the one that was presented last week, the new awnings would be simplified with one color and a sign would only be present on the awning above the front door. As a result of last week's SPAARC comments, new greenery has been proposed in the vicinity of the rear parking lot. Mr. Mainati explained that a trellis with trumpet vines is being proposed along the kitchen addition wall and a ground cover area a" the street adjacent to the parking lot ingresslegress is also being proposed - Mr. Malnati explained that the building would be built to the lot line, therefore elimkwting a dangerous passageway that currently cuts across the building's property. Members of the Committee informed him that the passageway should be bkx*ed off immediately. Mr. Malnati stated that cedar fencing would be used to provide a trash enclosure. Decorative tights would be installed along the building and there would be a full glass wood door entrance. The upstairs would consist of office/business uses. DISCUSSION: A Committee member stated that the new scheme is much improved and that Mr. Malnati did an excellent job responding to SPAARC comments. However, it is not a good idea to illuminate the masonry in spots where there is no window or awning. A Committee member asked if clear or tinted glass would be used in the windows. Mr. Malnati replied that he was not yet sure. The Committee recommended using clear glass to liven the building and explained that blinds could be used to block out sunlight. A Committee member requested that the window treatments be consistent throughout the entire building. Mr. Malnati explained that the windows on the first and second floors would match. Several Committee members stated that it is important to light the building near the parking lot for security reasons. A Committee member asked Mr. Malnati if he gave any thought to mitigating the amount of pavement in the parking lot. He explained that he thought about it, but that he needed all of the available parking spots. He attempted to mitigate the appearance of excessive pavement by proposing the installation of greenery. Another Committee member asked Mr. Malnati if there would be any way that the width of the curb cut leading to the parking lot could be reduced. Mr. Malnati explained that the current width of the curb cut is needed to accommodate delivery trucks. Other Committee members concurred, adding that the curb cut width is required for vehicle maneuvering. Mr. Malnati stated that the southeastern most parking spot would probably be dedicated to carry out customers. A Committee member asked if a sidewalk caf6 would be considered. Another Committee member stated that the property is zoned residential and would probably not permit a sidewalk caf6. Mr. Malnati said that a sidewalk cafe would not be popular with the neighbors. Mr. Malnati was asked if he resolved the kitchen duct issue. He replied that this issue had not yet been resolved, but that odor control is a sensitive subject with the neighbors and something that he intends to take very seriously. Mr. Malnati was informed that if the duct is to stay, it needs regular maintenance and cleaning. If the duct were to be removed, the emission point would need to be code compliant in terms of distance from neighboring buildings. A Committee member stated that the installation of a bicycle rack, probably in the parkway, should be a provision. Another Committee member asked where the new rooftop mechanical units would be and if they would be screened. Mr. Malnati replied that rooftop mechanical units would be installed on the second floor of the main building and that the existing parapet wail should provide the screening necessary. Site Plan and appearance Review• .11eefing - Janua?)- 16. 2002 Page 2 I ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval excluding the reworking of the ductwork. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Vote (11-0). A Committee member stated for the record that two members of the Committee live within 500 feet of the project. Other Committee members stated that this is not material because these Committee members are City employees. SPAARC 00-002 909 Davis Street Revision to Final Change location and style of doors along north and west sides to accommodate prospective ground floor tenants (McDougal Litfell Office Building). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Greg Hakanen Tom White Dan Aboutar GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. White explained that a minor change to the elevation of the building is being requested to accommodate the movement and replacement of doors on the first floor. One double panel door would be replaced with a revolving door. Another door has moved and will now open into a vestibule and then into a new restaurant. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked if the doors would open into the right of way. Mr. White said that they would not. Mr. White said that the style and treatment of the doors would be the same and that they would be from the same manufacturer. A Committee member specified the four changes being requested: 1). A pair to a single 2). Additional man door 3). Revolving door in lieu of double doors 4). A new door opening to the west ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval for the revision. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 02-010 2109 Forestview Road Preliminary and Final Construct single-family residence, requiring zoning relief. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kenneth Hazlett GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee member Arthur Alterson explained that Mr. Hazlett applied for a minor variance that Mr. Alterson denied because he felt that the proposal was too massive for the neighborhood. Mr. Hazlett appealed the denial. The Zoning Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - January 16, 2002 Page 3 Board of Appeals directed Mr. Hazlett and staff to work together to develop a proposal that would be less massive. This case will return to the ZBA on Tuesday, January 22, 2002. Mr. Hazlett explained that the house itself does not require a variance, but the addition of a two -car garage would put the total building square footage over the maximum lot coverage of the zoning district. He passed around photos of the adjacent houses. He explained that the original design had gables in the front that gave the house the appearance of being 2 %Z stories. The adjacent houses and most of the houses on the block are bungalows with a hip roof. Mr. Hazlett stated that he redesigned the house to include a hip roof and lowered the height and pitch of the house. He explained that the ZBA is looking for SPAARC input. DISCUSSION: A Committee member asked Mr. Hazlett if he had a landscape plan for the property and that landscaping could be utilized to break down the massive appearance of a facade. Mr. Hazlett presented a site plan that included landscaping. Some Committee members expressed their concern with the flat appearance of the front facade and the lack of articulation. Mr. Hazlett stated that bay windows could not be done, as they would encroach into the required front yard. Some Committee members mentioned that different brick patterning could break up the monotony of the front facade. Mr. Hazlett agreed. Another Committee member suggested that different window types be used. A Committee member stated that Mr. Hazlett should explore the creation of a recessed area on the front facade to create two different planes. Mr. Hazlett said he would be willing to do this. Another Committee member asked that wood shake be added to the remaining two sides of the dormer. Mr. Hazlett also agreed to do this. A Committee member explained that the main purview of the Committee at this time would be to determine if the new design is less massive. Mr. Hazlett could reappear before SPAARC for the review of specific design elements. Another Committee member asked that rear elevations be consistent with the front elevation. ACTION_ A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to elevation changes being brought back to SPAARC for review. The motion was seconded and passed. Vote (6-1). James Wolinski voted nay. He stated that the City is standing on dangerous ground when it imposes binding appearance review on single family residential properties. SPAARC 02-011 1148 McDaniel Avenue Preliminsfy end Final Renovate park (Harbert Park). Site Plan and Appearance Review .fleeting - January 16, 2002 Page 4 i PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stefanie Levine GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms Levine explained that the Parks and Forestry Department intend to install a gazebo structure in the park with a standing seam metal roof. Picnic tables and grills would also be installed. DISCUSSION: Members of the Committee complimented the gazebo's appearance. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Vote (7-0). Consideration and Approval of Mleetinq Minutes: January 9, 2002 Meeting Minutes: Committee member Walczak explained that he had some reservations in voting in favor of the project at 1701-1703 Simpson Street. He explained that, while he is not against development in this area, he does not think that a sit down restaurant with a large seating capacity would be appropriate for this area. There are a lot of negative activities occurring in this area and this restaurant may become a hangout. Committee member Alterson explained that this case was continued at the previous evening's ZBA meeting and that he anticipated the ZBA being concerned with these issues. Committee member Wolinski explained that the neighborhood planning process on the west side has determined a need for sit down restaurants in this area. There needs to be a compromise that allows these types of businesses to open in this area. Committee member D'Agostino stated that he voted 'nay' regarding the 1611 Crain project. The minutes did not state this. As a result, the project did not pass 6-4, as noted in the minutes. Instead, the vote was a 5-5 tie. A motion was made to approve the minutes subject to the notification of the change in the 1611 Crain vote. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Vote (7-0). Site Plan and Appearance Rn•iex• Afeenng - lanuan, 16. 2002 Page S SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JAN UARY 23, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Akerson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting;, Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 00-089 619 Main Street Final Build out eastern -most retail space along Main Street within mixed -use building under construction at northeast comer of Main Street and Chicago Avenue for type-2 restaurant (Starbucks Coffee). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: George Sarfatty, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Sarfatty explained that the installation of signage and awnings are the two major exterior projects remaining for the Starbucks project. He stated that the project was previously approved by SPAARC subject to traffic control issues being addressed. Mr. Sarfatty explained that these issues have been addressed. DISCUSSION: A Committee member commented on the low height of the parapet wall and expressed concern regarding the potential for the condo units above to view the rooftop mechanical units. Mr. Sarfatty explained that the air handling units would be located in the parking garage. The existing generator located next to the sidewalk will be screened with a masonry wall with a limestone cap. He stated that the installed awnings would match the awnings of the bank. A Committee member asked Mr. Sarfatty if Starbucks was planning to have an outdoor ca% at this location. Mr. Sarfatty explained that Starbucks has not yet considered an - outdoor cafe. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the air handler units being placed in the parking garage and not taking up a required parking space. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 01-167 602-608 Hinman Avenue Final Construct new multi -family residence consisting of 16 dwelling units. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor, Architect GENERA!_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Nestor presented the brick to be used on the building. A Committee member suggested the addition of a return wall at the parapet in order to reduce the appearance of a blank space behind the parapet. Mr. Nestor presented the site plan and explained that the parking configuration meets the requirements stated by the Traffic Engineering Department. DISCUSSION: Mr. Nestor was asked where the trash would be located. Mr. Nestor explained that the trash would be placed in the corridor in between the buildings. A Committee member was concerned about the effects of the odor from the garbage. Mr. Nestor explained that there would be 12 exposed parking spaces and 8 parking spaces underneath the building for a total of 20 parking spaces. The units would range between the low $400,000s to the mid $500,000s. A Committee member asked if there would be exterior lights. Mr. Nestor replied that exterior lights would be located at the front entrance and at the rear stairway. The Committee member stated that the interior corridor needs to be lit. Another Committee member expressed concern regarding the distance between the units considering the proposed price of the units. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to review and approval of the landscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department and the addition of protection for street trees. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-4). Arthur Alterson, Hans Friedman, Marc Mylott, and Sat Nagar voted nay. APPROVAL OF JANUARY 16.2002 MEETING NOTES: DISCUSSION: Several members stated that they had not yet reviewed the minutes. Sde Plan and Appearance Review .peering - January 23. 2002 Page 2 ACTION: A motion was made to continue the approval of the minutes to the meeting of January 30, 2002. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 02-012 1000 Grev Avenue Conceut Expand parking area and loading dock at C.E. Niehoff. ACTION: This case was rescheduled to appear at the January 30, 2002 SPAARC meeting. SPAARC 02-010 2109 Forestview Road Preliminary and Final Construct single-family residence, requiring zoning relief. ACTION: Applicant did not show. SPAARC 02-006 1611 Crain Street Preliminary and Final Create second zoning lot from original zoning lot, construct single-family residence, requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mike Breclaw, Owner GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee member Alterson explained that the lot size variation being requested could be eliminated by creating a parking parcel in the rear with access to the alley. Mr. Breclaw presented his altemate plan depicting an attached garage. He stated that the roof of the house and the garage would have a shallower pitch than that of the original plan. The same building materials would be used. Mr. Breclaw explained that the disadvantage of the deeded parking space plan would be that, in order to compensate for the lack of a garage and other floor space, the house would have to be taller or the house's footprint would have to be larger. DISCUSSION: A Committee member stated that the massing of this new plan is preferable. Another Committee member stated that one infrequently used curb cut on the entire block should not create a safety issue and that requiring a deeded parking space in the rear would negatively effect the sale -ability of the home. A Committee member asked Mr. Breclaw why the floors of the garage and the house do not match up. Mr. Breclaw explained that this is because of the planned basement. The Committee member stated that the gable should be rotated to give the house an appearance of a farmhouse. Mr. Breclaw informed the Committee that he intends to sell the existing house. Some of the Committee members were concerned that another lot would eventually be created on the west end of the overall lot. A Committee member Site Plan and Appearance Review .Veeting - January 23. 2002 Page 3 stated that an extreme variation would be required to accommodate the creation of a third lot. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval of the alternate plan dated January 14, 2002, including the recommendation of rotating the gabled roof. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-1). Jim Wolinski voted nay. Committee member Alterson voted in favor of the motion but noted that he would still prefer the deeded parking space as opposed to the attached garage. SPAARC 02-013 1004 Davis Street Concept Expand retail goods establishment (Lemoi Hardware) to vacant storefront to the east. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Cary Jacobson, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Jacobson explained that the owners plan is to expand the store into the space next door. This space was previously a fish store, but has been vacant for at least one year. He stated that another architect has been chosen to redesign the second floor and these plans should be appearing before SPAARC in the near future. Mr. Jacobson stated that the owner is leasing the space being expanded into. DISCUSSION: A Committee member requested that the awning be stopped short of the connecting columns between the buildings and that this area be maintained on the fagade. Another Committee member stated that a glass storefront should be installed and commented that the recessed doors depicted on the plans are attractive. Mr. Jacobson was asked if there would be any chance that the facade of the building could be restored. Mr. Jacobson explained that the owner would very much like to restore the facade, but there are cost concerns. A Committee member suggested looking into the City's matching funds program for facade improvement. The Committee felt that the new awning should be similar in size, appearance, and material as the awning for the adjacent Bennison's Bakery. Mr. Jacobson informed the Committee that there would be significant damage to the fagade when the sign boxes are removed. He suggested an awning that would increase in height over the entrance portion of the building. Some Committee members stated that they would vote in favor of this option. Other Committee members held that the awning should be exactly the same as Bennison's, as the new annex to the hardware store is part of the same building. Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - Janvary 23, 2002 Page 4 ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to stopping the awning short of blocking the column between the buildings and installing a glass storefront. The issue of awning type was not voted on. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - danwy 23. 2002 Page 5 Draft — Not Yet Approved SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JANUARY 30, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Atterson, Alan Berkowsky, Paul D'Agostino, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 01418 1848 Ridae Avenue Preliminary and Final Install fuel storage tanks for vehicle maintenance facility (Northwestem University) PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor, Architect Rick Nemer, Northwestem University GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Nestor explained that this project was previously tabled pending the receipt of a visual mitigation plan for the proposed tank. He explained that this tank is to be installed within the Northwestern university maintenance yard, which is adjacent to the City of Evanston's maintenance yard. There was concern regarding the newly approved apartment complex on the property to the south and the fact that this tank would be readily visible from these apartment units. Mr. Nestor presented some photographs from the site to the south depicting how the proposed tank would appear from the apartments. He also presented a study using line of sight drawings that showed that screening measures would not block the view of the tank from the upper floors of the proposed adjacent apartment complex. He explained that even a ten -foot wall would do little to nothing in terms of screening the tank. Mr. Nestor stated that he adequately looked at various visual mitigation options and that he could not, in good faith, advise his client to construct a visual mitigation measure. GN DISCUSSION: Committee member Arthur Alterson stated that the presentation convinced him that constructing a screen wall would not be a viable solution. Chairperson Committee member Walczak asked if there would be safety features installed to prevent someone from tampering with the tank. Mr. Nestor replied that the tank would be equipped with a key switch system. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded. Chairperson Smith asked if a caveat should be added to the motion that would deal with the possibility of the 1930 Ridge Avenue project not being approved. Committee member Dennis Marino stated that he would not be comfortable with such a caveat. The motion was called to question and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-014 201-203 Ridae Avenue Preliminary and Final Remodel 15-unit multi -family residential building as part of condominium conversion. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Irene Zemenider, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Zemenider stated that nothing is going to be done to the exterior of the building except for the replacement of the windows in kind. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if the new windows would be white aluminum clad. Ms. Zemenider said that she was not sure, as the owner would be making this decision. Chairperson Smith additionally asked if there would be any changes to the parking in association with this work. Ms. Zemenider stated that there is no parking in association with this condominium. Carlos Ruiz inquired as to the material of the windows. Ms. Zemenider replied that they would be wood. Chairperson Smith asked if energy efficient windows would be used. Ms. Zemenider replied that the new windows would be energy efficient. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan approval subject to the review and approval of the landscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02»006 1611 Crain Street Revision to Preliminary and Final Revised site plan and elevation for new single-family residence, requiring major variations. Site Plan and Appearance Review .Weling - January 30, 2002 Pop 2 PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mike Breclaw, Owner and Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Breclaw stated that he was considering moving the home forward 5 feet and adding 3 feet of width to the proposed house. He presented the drawings from the approved proposal and the current proposals in order to show the difference in appearance. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith stated that she favored the approved proposal because it maintained more space in the comer and front yard of the property. ACTION: A motion was made to deny the revision to final site plan and appearance review approval. Committee member Marino stated that the approved proposal was already slightly big for the site and that he would not wish to see a proposal that would add more building space. The motion was seconded. Committee member Alterson explained that the new proposal also shows the revised roof configuration. The minutes from the previous week's meeting were reviewed to assure that the motion included the recommendation to rotate the gable roof. The motion was called to question and was approved. (7-2). Hans Friedman and Ron Walczak voted nay. SPAARC 02-015 827 Simpson Street Prellminam and Final Demolish 2-car garage and install 3 open off-street parking spaces at alley, requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The petitioner explained that the owner wishes to demolish the garage and replace it with three parking spaces. DISCUSSION: Committee member Jim Wolinski asked if Property Standards ordered the garage to be taken down. The petitioner stated that this was the case. The petitioner explained that because three parking spaces are being requested, the set back would be decreased. Chairperson Smith asked if there have been any comments from the neighbors. Committee member Alterson stated that there had not been any responses from the neighbors. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. Committee member Wolinski stated that the motion should include the removal of the old slab and the pouring of a new slab with wheel Sift Plan and appearance Review .Veefing - January 30, 2002 Page 3 stops. These requirements were added to the motion. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). APPROVAL OF JANUARY 16.2002 and JANUARY 23, 2002 MEETING NOTES: DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski stated that Committee members should be identified in the minutes. Other Committee members agreed. ACTION: A motion was made to approve the minutes from the meeting of January 16, 2002. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). A motion was made to approve the minutes from the meeting of January 23, 2002. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-016 526 Greenwood Street Prelimingrx and Final Construct 2-car detached garage accessory to multi -family residential use to be converted to single-family residential use, requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The petitioner stated that this building currently contains six living units, but it appears from the exterior as a single-family residence. He explained that it Is his intention to convert it to a single-family residence and to construct a two -car detached garage in the rear. The zoning ordinance requires a distance of 10 feet between the principal building and the garage. The proposed distance for this project would be approximately 7 feet. DISCUSSION: Mr. Ruiz explained that he worked with the petitioner to assure that exterior changes to the building would restore the building to its original appearance. He explained that most of the existing windows would be replaced in kind where : , appropriate and the roof would be replaced. Chairperson Smith asked Mr. Ruiz if the Preservation Commission has seen the proposed garage. Mr. Ruiz replied.. that the garage is out of the purview of the Preservation Commission as it is not. within view of the public right of way. Chairperson Smith suggested that the garage door be of a nicer quality than the average garage door. Committee member Hans Friedman stated that sixteen - foot garage doors did not exist at the tirne that this house was built. He suggested that the petitioner install two eight -foot garage doors. The petitioner expressed concern regarding vehicle maneuverability. Chairperson Smith stated_ that there should be enough space to maneuver vehicles. She asked if there . Site Plan and Appearance Review Heeling -- Januan, 30, 2002 Page 4 were any issues presented by neighbors. Committee member Alterson said that he was not aware of any. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the installation of two eight foot paneled garage doors. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-017 2427 Central Park Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct 1-story addition to rear of existing reskkmce, requiring major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The petitioner explained that he is proposing to construct a second floor addition on top of the house's existing condition. The addition would provide space for a master bathroom and a closet. The house is Tudor style and the current addition was constructed in the 1940's. The variation is due to the addition not meeting the separation requirements of the zoning ordinance. The petitioner explained that everything on the addition would be designed to match the existing house. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-018 1133 Dempster Street Preliminary and Final Operate bed and breakfast establishment accessory to single-family residence, requiring special use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The petitioner explained that she would like to operate a bed and breakfast out of her home. She believes that the home is an excellent location for a bed and breakfast and she has plenty of room for the operation. She does not plan to advertise or use signs to promote the business. She explained that she has room to park cars in her driveway and that her driveway provides shared access to her home and her neighbors. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked what the maximum number of people would be that would be staying in the home. The petitioner explained that she intends to use two bedrooms for the establishment, and possibly a third if one of the couples has children. Committee member Alterson explained that this would be the first legally operating bed and breakfast in Evanston. There was a previous application for a bed and breakfast that was withdrawn on account of Site Phtn and appearance Review Afeeling -- January 30. 2002 Par 3 neighborhood opposition. The petitioner stated that she was aware of two neighbors that are against her proposal. Chairperson Smith asked if there is an easement allowing for shared driveway access. The petitioner replied that she thinks there is. Mr. Ruiz asked if she would be planning any exterior rehab work. She replied that she would not be doing any work to the exterior of the home. Chairperson Smith stated that a clearer and easier to read plat of survey would be needed. Committee member Alterson felt that neighbor support would be needed to get a variation from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Chairperson Smith stated that she would be in favor of a bed and breakfast at this location if the parking could support it. Mr. Ruiz explained that this would have to appear before the Preservation Commission and that their next meeting would be on February 19, 2002. Committee member Alterson asked what the likelihood would be that each of the rooms would be occupied at once. The petitioner explained that she had researched different Bed and Breakfasts and found that they are occupied on average of 120 days per year. Therefore, she doubted that both rooms would usually be occupied. ACTION: A motion was made to table pending the review of the most recent plat of survey. This motion was seconded and passed. (6-1). Committee memberAtterson voted nay. SPAARC 01-090 1300 Main Street Revision to Preliminary and Final Review partially constructed street side yard fence accessory to single-family residence, requiring relief from condition previously imposed by Zoning Board of Appeals. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The petitioner explained that this proposal previously appeared before SPAARC and two alternatives were presented. He stated that the owner is insistent on creating a sense of privacy for the home from this comer. DISCUSSION: Committee member Woiinski stated that the construction of this fence violated the ruling of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Walter Hallen stated that the light fixtures on the fence are different from the ones that were approved. Committee member Alterson expressed his displeasure with the appearance of the -fence and the fact that its material does not match the material of the house. He also stated that the fence is too massive for the size of the yard. &it Plan and appearance Review .1feeling -January 30. 2002 Page C� Chairperson Smith suggested that the piers be left in, that they be stained a darker color, and that the brick infill in the middle be removed and replaced with wrought iron. The petitioner stated that the piers match the stone base of the house. Chairperson Smith explained that they should match the material and the color, not just the color. Mr. Hallen stated that the wall would impair the vision of the sidewalk from the driveway, creating safety concerns. Chairperson Smith stated that her suggestion would alleviate this concern. Mr. Ruiz asked the petitioner if the owners considered landscaping as a screening option. The petitioner replied that the owners have considered many options. ACTION: A motion was made to deny the revision and recommend to the Zoning Boara of Appeals that the center brick be removed and replaced with wrought iron, that the piers be stained a darker color and that the light fixtures be removed from the cap. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeeling - Januaryja 2002 Page 7 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY S, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Atterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Pro%ssional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Wafter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-123 1930 Ridue Avenue Preliminary Demolish parking structure and construct four stay multi -family residential buildings with underground parking. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Richard Aaronson, Developer Steve Yes, Architect Nick Patera, Teske Associates GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Steve Yes presented a brief overview of the overall project. He stated that the proposal has not changed since the project appeared before SPAARC for concept review, with the exception of a few minor details. He explained that the paving in the courtyards would extend out to the curb fine to clearly mark the fire access point. In addition, as a result of a suggestion from a Committee member during concept review, the entrances to the buildings have been incorporated into the front fagade in order to create a more welcoming appearance. Nick Patera from Teske Associates offered a brief overview of the site plan. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith inquired as to the type of landscape to be used in the courtyard considering the fact that it will be located above the parking garage. Mr. Yes replied that multi -stem, ornamental, or upright canopy trees would be planted in the courtyard. Committee member Friedman asked how wide the north/south courtyard spine would be. Mr. Yas stated that the courtyard would maintain a minimum width of 30 feet. Committee member Mylott asked if there would be green strip between the footwall along Ridge Avenue and the sidewalk. Mr. Yas stated that there would be. Committee member Kelly asked if a plan had been put in place to address snow removal in the fire access areas. Mr. Aaronson stated that plowed snow would be relocated on the site if possible, but if a large storm occurred, the snow would be taken off site. Committee member Aiello asked if there would still be drop off areas located along Ridge Avenue. Mr. Yas stated that these drop off areas would still exist. Committee member Dahal noted the applicants that the brick pavers in the parkway would have to be maintained by the developer. Chairperson Smith asked how the gates would function for pedestrian traffic. Mr. Aaronson responded that these gates would provide controlled access and that - there would be a call box and a possible digital directory for residents. Chairperson Smith expressed concern with the pedestrian gates in that they could create the appearance of needed security for this development. She encouraged the use of annuals or other landscaping that would suggest a residential look as opposed to office -type landscaping. Chairperson Smith asked if a garbage plan for the development had been produced. Mr. Aaronson stated that there would be a central compactor and recycling area on the site and that he is not yet sure how trash would be transported to this central site. Committee member Mylott asked if the developers intended to install something prominent at the comer such as a sculpture. Mr. Aaronson stated that this has not been planned as of yet, and that this would depend on the location of the detention area for the site. Mr. Yas presented a brief overview of the elevations. He explained that standard sized red brick would be used in accordance with the neighborhood's desire. The base of the building would consist of a limestone -like material. Chairperson Smith stated that using renaissance stone is preferable over using concrete block, but suggested that it not be used above the base or in non -load base areas. She also suggested that two different brick colors be used above the base. Mr. Yas presented the elevations from the interior courtyard facades. Committee member Mylott asked what type of sills would be used. Mr. Yas explained that this level of detail had not yet been determined. Committee member Mylott explained that one of the nice features of several of the Ridge Avenue courtyard buildings is the use of limestone sills. He suggested installing limestone sills. Committee member Aiello asked if mechanical units would be screened. Mr. Aaronson stated that a six-foot parapet wall would screen roof top mechanical units on all sides. Site Plan and .Appearance Review Meeting - February b. 2002 Page 2 Committee member Alterson asked if bicycle parking was to be provided. Mr. Patera explained that there would be spaces in the garage for the parking of bicycles, including the installation of hooks for bicycles. Committee member Alterson stated that outside racks should also be installed. Committee member Wolinski asked if it has been decided where the affordable housing units would be. Mr. Aaronson stated that this has not yet been decided, but assured the Committee that they would be spread throughout the complex. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: 1.) The pedestrian gates being either eliminated or always providing open and free access 2.) The entrance to Building C be relocated to the southernmost courtyard. 3.) The material of the bay above the base being changed to brick. 4.) Material samples shall be presented to SPAARC for final approval, and the Committee recommends using real stone. 5.) The submission of a landscape plan to the Department of Parks and Forestry prior to final SPAARC review so that it has time to be reviewed. 6.) Maintenance of the brick pavers and the mountable curb on the City right of way, the fire lane and the Opticon System, and the coordination and management of the loading and unloading operations as stated in the Traffic Engineer's memo, dated December 12, 2001. Written verification by the Developer agreeing to these conditions shall be provided to the City. 7.) A recommendation that the base material be running bond instead of stock bond. 8.) The submission of the parking garage circulation plan to the Traffic Engineering Department prior to final SPAARC review so that it has time to be reviewed. The motion was seconded and passed. (9-0). Hans Friedman abstained from voting. SPAARC 01-135 526 Chicago Avenue PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Dave Dubin, Developer Stuart Kantoff, Developer Bernie Citron, Attorney Jim Plunkard, Architect Liz Harmon, Architect Preaaplication Conference GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: (Richard Cook — The Chairman of the Plan Commission — was In attendance representing the Plan Commission) Site Plan and Appearance Rerie- Meeting - February 6. 2002 Page 3 Dave Dubin stated that the project has not changed since it last appeared before SPAARC. He explained that a neighborhood meeting was held with approximately 150 people in attendance and that he felt that it was successful. He provided an overview of the project to SPAARC and the Plan Commission chairman Richard Cook. He explained that the site was downzoned to allow for a 6-Y2-story building, but that the zoning would still allow for a massive building to be constructed. He stated that the Chicago Avenue Corridor Plan recommended that even a smaller scale development be permitted on this site and that his proposal would fit this recommendation. The proposal consists of 90 townhouses — five buildings with 18 units apiece. The buildings would be approximately three stories in height and the project would provide nearly two to one parking. Mr. Dubin presented the elevations to the Committee. He explained that other developers have contacted Dominick's with proposals for larger and denser developments. He stated that there is a deed restriction on the property that would not allow for a food store or drug store to exist on the property. DISCUSSION: Richard Cook asked Mr. Dubin if he explored other site plan options rather than configuring the buildings in such a way that they are just spread across the site. Mr. Dubin explained that this has been looked at but that a building with a height much greater than 6'/z stories would be required in order to make this project financially feasible. Chairperson Smith asked Mr. Dubin why a planned development is being sought as opposed to a variance. Committee member Alterson replied that a variance is usually requested when there is a property - related hardship. Chairperson Smith then asked Mr. Dubin what he was proposing to give back to the community in exchange for the extra ordinary zoning allowances that a planned development would permit. Bernie Citron replied that the proposal would consist of significantly fewer units and less density than could otherwise be permitted on the site and this reflects the desires of the neighborhood and the Chicago Avenue Corridor Plan. He stated that less height and a nicer streetscape would be an appropriate 'give back' to the community. Richard Cook stated that the height should be raised in order to free up more space on the property. Mr. Citron responded that a building with the maximum allowable height of 67 feet would not significantly free up the site. Mr. Cook asked what the height would need to be in order to provide a significant amount of open space on the overall site. Mr. Dubin replied that, according to their financial parameters, it would have to be at least 10 to 12 stories. Chairperson Smith asked about how trash collection would be handled. Mr. Dubin explained that garbage would be picked up by a private service and that garbage containers would be rolled into the alley for pickup by the service. Chairperson Smith inquired as to how the move -ins would be handled. Mr. Site Plan and Appearance Review .11eeung - February 6. 2002 Page 4 Citron explained that because this would not be a rental property, moving situations would not be as frequent and that a traffic study would be submitted in the near future. which would address this issue. Jim Plunkard presented the architectural plans to the Committee. He explained the design would fit in with the existing three-story buildings existing in the adjacent neighborhood. Each of the units along Chicago Avenue would have front doors facing the street. He explained that there would be some public space between the building along Chicago Avenue to provide for open space. He stated that architectural gestures have been created on the comers of the project to create a gentler and more open took from Chicago Avenue. Mr. Cook asked what the distance would be between the buildings. Mr. Plunkard replied that there would be 30 feet between the buildings. Committee member Mylott asked that greater attention be given to the building entrances and that the base of the buildings be more substantial. He asked where fences would be located. Mr. Plunkard replied that low ornamental fences would be installed along the property lines. Committee member Mylott stated that fences are not permitted at the location as of right, and they should include this additional request within their planned development application. A member of the audience requested to speak to this proposal. The Committee made a motion to permit the request, which was seconded and passed unanimously. Audience member John Macai stated that neighborhood response to the proposal was not nearly as positive as Mr. Dubin would have the Committee to believe. He stated that this project is terribly dense despite the fact that it would be only three stories in height. He explained that certain specific benefits that Planned Developments should include would not be provided with this proposal. Among these, a variety of housing types would not be provided, there would not be a commercial component to the project, and there would be little to no open space provided on the site. ACTION: The preapplication conference was closed and there was no vote taken regarding this project. SPAARC 02-020 601 Main Street -Cbnceat Restore Metra Station. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Sam Sample, Architect Don Moy, Metra John Szoctek, Custer Fair GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: John Szoctek explained that this project was originally sponsored by the City Council. The Custer Fair Organization was applying for state and federal funding Site Plan and .Appearance Rrtiiew peering - February b, 1001 Page 5 for this project. Once funding was obtained from the state, the Illinois Department of Transportation recommended that Metra be a sponsor for the project. Metra's main focus is to make the station ADA compliant. A major component of this is to install an elevator in the station. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if any funding would be provided for the repair of the viaducts. Don Moy stated that Metra leases the tracks from Union Pacific and that this would be a Union Pacific issue. Committee member Aiello explained that funding has been sought for this viaduct repair. Mr. Moy explained that the existing retaining wall would be cut to accommodate an accessible ramp. New windows would be installed on the station facade, tuckpointing would be done, and a night waiting area would be constructed. Carlos Ruiz requested that the building design of the station be restored and asked that he be able to review the proposal again to assure facade improvement program compliance. He explained that the funding provided by the City would require that the work being done to the station incorporate rehabilitation efforts. Committee member Aiello asked if the existing restaurant in the station would remain and if the proposal was reviewed by Zoning and Building considering that it includes a theatre component. Mr. Szoctek explained that Zoning has reviewed the project and offered details of the theatre component of the project. The theatre would consist of 48 seats. Committee member Aiello asked about parking for the theatre. Mr. Szoctek explained that the fit parking spaces used for commuter parking during working hours would provide parking for theatre events, which would mostly occur during evening hours. Committee member Friedman stated that he thought the Committee reviewed this project a couple of years ago but that the proposal included the addition of office space. Mr. Szoctek stated that this project was reviewed a couple of years ago but that the proposal was more or less the same at that time. Committee member Aiello stated that the Custer Fair Organization has grown tremendously in the past few years and that she was concerned that the theatre proposal would eventually create a larger impact on the neighborhood than expected. She asked Mr. Szoctek if this proposal has been discussed with the Main Street merchants. Mr. Szoctek explained that it has been presented to the Main Street Merchant Association. Committee member Dahal asked if the construction of the ramp would require the closing of Custer Street. Mr. Sample stated that it might require some lane closures but not a complete street closure. Committee member Dahal requested a lane closure plan and stated that the City has had a bad experience with these types of situations in the recent past. Site Plan and Appearance Review .fleeting - February 6, 2002 Page 6 Chairperson Smith stated that the existing retaining wall has an inset detail and asked how the sawcutting of the wall allowing the construction of the ramp would deal with maintaining this detail. Mr. Sample explained that the detail would be completed on the sawcut section. Mr. Moy explained that the timber wall on the Union Pacific side of the station is deteriorating and will be replaced with a stone retaining wall and landscaping. Chairperson Smith suggested that the new wall incorporate the same treatment as the other walls on the station in order to allow for a unified site design. Jay Terry, Evanston's Director of Public Health, explained that a pigeon and rat infestation problem exists on the right of way of many of the City's commuter stations. He requested that a comprehensive pest management plan be submitted for review as the project moves forward. Committee member Alterson asked whether bicycle parking would decrease as part of this proposal. Mr. Moy explained that bicycle parking would be relocated as part of the proposal but that the amount of parking would increase. Chairperson Smith asked if mechanical units would be added, and if so, would they be screened. Mr. Moy replied that the station would be air conditioned and that a condenser unit and additional switch gear would be installed and would be screened on three sides, with the east side facing the CTA being left unscreened to provide access. Chairperson Smith suggested that these units be screened on all sides, especially since they are subject to vandalism and graffiti. ACTION: A motion was made to grant concept site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed (5-1). ArthurAlterson voted nay on account that he believed the station should be fully equipped with elevators as opposed to ramps for accessibility. Site Plan and Appearance Review dfeeting - February 6 2002 Page 7 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 13, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting,,- Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 97-0065 1700 Maple Avenue Final Construct "mini -anchor" retail establishment within Church Street Plaza. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom White Bill Duke GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Bill Duke presented the revised elevations to the Committee. He explained that the treatment of the corner of the building has been changed so that the glass would extend to the ground. The glass would still be curved and finished with a butt -glazed system. Mr. Duke presented a color rendering of the elevation. The entrance would now be located off of Maple Avenue as opposed to the corner. Border's cafb would be located on the first floor in the comer, while the second floor comer space would be used as a reading space. The caf& space would be opened earlier than the bookstore to serve train commuters. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott stated that the cafe would appear to be more a part of the bookstore considering the fact that there would no longer be a separate entrance to the caf6. Committee member Alterson stated that it might be a distinct possibility that a Type 2 restaurant designation be required because of the cafe use. Tom White explained that Border's would be notified of this and would apply for a Type 2 restaurant use if necessary. Mr. White explained that Border's would probably change the signage from what is depicted on the color rendering. Mr. Duke presented samples of the building materials to the Committee. Mr. Duke explained that the granite base of the storefront would stop at the Optima stair tower, which would create a natural break between the storefront bases. Committee member Mylott explained that the Committee previously requested that the granite base be stopped earlier and that the awnings be continued to the end of the Border's storefront in order to signify the portion of the building consisting of the Border's store. Committee member Mylott asked Mr. Duke to explain the detail of the glasslbrick interplay on the facade. Mr. Duke stated that the glazed brick would come over and the panel would be set back a slight amount. He stated that he is considering using a ceramic frit glass where there is structure behind the glass. Mr. Duke presented a picture of sunscreens to be used above the outside plaza. The material would be installed vertically so to not allow for snow build-up. The material of the screens would be metal or steel. Chairperson Smith inquired about landscaping. Mr. Duke explained that the same streetscape materials used in the right of way would also be used in the plaza. Some berming will take place along the retaining wall and will consist of plantings. Trees will be planted in stainless steel pots. Chairperson Smith asked if sight illumination would be installed. Mr. White stated that there would be some fighting. Chairperson Smith stated that pedestrian -scaled lighting should be installed in the plaza for aesthetic and security purposes. Committee member Dahal asked if bicycle racks have been considered. Mr. White explained that this would be considered as part of the plaza design. Chairperson Smith replied that a few bike racks scattered throughout the site would look better than the consolidation of bike racks in one area on the site. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the plaza plan prior to the certificate of occupancy being granted. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously. (11-0). ,z SPAARC 02-012 1000 Grey Avenue Concept Expand parking area and loading dock at C. E. Niehoff. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Carla Mason Richard Abhram GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: ' Richard Abhram explained the proposal to the Committee. A new parking area and loading dock area would be constructed. The building addition will be a pre - Site Plan and Appearance Review .Heeling - February 13. 2002 Page 2 engineered steel building with horizontal decorative siding. There will be a small landscaping strip along the side of the building. Two handicapped stalls would be located near the existing doorway into the building. The parking lot, the loading dock, and the small storage facility are the three components to this project. DISCUSSION: Chairman Smith explained that lighting of the parking lot would need to be depicted on the plans when this appears before SPAARC for preliminary review. Carlos Ruiz asked if landscaping could be provided to further screen the parking lot. Committee member Marino informed the Committee that residential properties are not located adjacent to the property. Chairman Smith informed the petitioners that a landscape plan would be one of the requirements for final SPAARC review. Mr. Abhram inquired as to whom would be responsible for right of way landscaping. Chairperson Smith stated that the developer should be responsible, as the landscaping would positively effect the property. ACTION: A motion was made to grant concept site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-021 741 Bnummel Avenue Concept Evaluate feasibility of new garage for multi -family residential building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Jackie Verrilli GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Jackie Verrilli stated that the building is currently being developed as a four -unit condominium building. She is proposing to build a three -car garage on an existing cement slab on the rear portion of the property. The footprint that she presented is the absolute maximum of what she would consider building. The garage would have a two -car door and a one -car door. She explained that the garage would be 24 feet in depth, but that it would not have to be this deep. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen asked if a walkway would be provided along the garage on either side. Ms. Verrilli stated that she needed to ask the builder how wide the garage would be to allow for a three -car garage. If the garage could be built on the lot line on one side, then a walkway would be required. As a result, a variation would be required. A variation would also be required for lot coverage reasons. Carlos Ruiz asked if Ms. Verrilli had a picture of her building. She stated that she did not. Mr. Ruiz asked her to construct a garage that would compliment the design of the principal structure. Chairman Smith encouraged Ms. Verrilli to go forward and recommended that the design compliment the existing home. Silt Plan and Appearance Review .lfeeling - February 13, 2002 Pagr 3 ACTION: No action was taken. SPAARC 02-022 121-123 Custer Avenue Preliminary and Final Renovate 6-unit multi -family residential building and convert ownership to condominium. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Lazzlo Simovic GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Lazzlo Simovic stated that he would like to replace the windows and the garage doors in the rear. He presented pictures to the Committee. He explained that he would like to install glass block windows on the garage and replace the basement windows with glass blocks. He explained that the windows would be replaced with a double -glazed vinyl window. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz asked if the owner has contemplated restoring the windows instead of replacing them. Mr. Simovic stated that restoration would not be energy efficient. Mr. Ruiz explained that restoration could be done so that energy efficiency is met. Mr. Simovic explained that restoration would not be cost efficient. Mr. Ruiz stated that wood windows would be far more appropriate in - appearance than vinyl windows. Committee member Friedman presented a compromise that would involve restoring only the windows in the front of the building, while the side and back windows could be replaced with vinyl windows. Chairperson Smith asked if landscaping changes would be proposed. Mr. Simovic did not believe the owner would do so. He was notified that a landscaping plan would be required for final SPAARC review and approval. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval with the understanding that the windows on the front elevation be restored. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-023 201-205 Custer Avenue Preliminary and Final Renovate 16-unit multi -family residential building and convert ownership to condominium. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tal Lerberg GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Tal Lerberg presented the site plan and landscape plan. He explained that the common areas of the building have basement windows, boiler room windows, and bathroom windows that will be replaced with glass block. The current windows are steel sash and they are not secure. S4r Plan and Appearancr Revex fleeting - Fehrvary 13. 2002 P%r 4 DISCUSSION: The Committee expressed concern with the fact that the appearance of the building would be changed significantly with the proposed window change. Mr. Lerberg explained that the steel sash windows would be replaced with double hung windows. Chairperson Smith suggested casement windows with simulated divided light. Mr. Lerberg informed the Committee that the owner is not yet certain that she wants to convert the building to condominium. ACTION: A motion was made to table so that the applicant could further examine the proposal for window changes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). SPAARC 01-046 909 Davis Street Recommendation to Sign Board Consider second request to relocate Church Street sign zone for future ground floor retail and office tenants. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith explained that SPAARC previously approved an amendment to the sign district to allow the location of the signage to match the building across the street. However, the building across the street has an awning and the owners of this building realized that the new signage location would not be visible from the street considering the location of the awning. The owner then requested that the signs be placed above the awnings to increase their visibility. SPAARC granted this request, but the SignBoard did not. The owner is now re -appealing to allow the signs to be located above the awnings. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen explained that the original sign zone was above the door. Members of the Committee noticed that the requested sign zone would not be visible for pedestrians. Considering that this is a downtown street, it is more important for signs to be visible from a pedestrian's point of view than from the automobile. Furthermore, the storefronts are glass, allowing a passerby the opportunity to determine what type of store exists within the storefront. ACTION: A motion was made deny recommending approval to the SignBoard. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). SPAARC 02-024 1640 Maple Avenue Recommendation to Sinn Board Consider proposal to establish Unified Business Center Sign Plan. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - February 13. 2002 Page 5 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that this is a proposal for a unified business center signage plan that does not require any variations. However, it needs to appear before the SignBoard because the SignBoard needs to approve any proposed unified business center sign plan. Mr. Hallen was not sure what action SPAARC should take regarding this proposal. DISCUSSION: It was determined that the proposed sign location is within the required height zone. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the SignBoard with the condition that perpendicular signs not be allowed at this time. The motion was secMdad ; and passed unanimously. (5-0). . ... . - 01 Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - February 13. 2002 Page 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 20, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Atterson, Alan Berkowsky, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, R66 Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff. Jeff Burdick, Wafter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz The Committee made a motion to allow Arthur Alterson to chair. the meeting in Chairman Carolyn Smith's absence. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-023 201-205 Custer Avenue Preliminary and Final Renovate 16-unit multi -family residential building and convect ownership to condominium. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tal Lerberg GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Tal Lerberg explained that he appeared before SPAARC last week and that he needed to return to discuss the window treatment of the building. He stated that the windows are in bad shape. He explained that the windows would be casements, instead of the double hung proposal that was presented the previous, week. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen asked Mr. Lerberg how air conditioning units would be handled. Mr. Lerberg explained that a custom made panel would have to be installed over the units that matches the windows. It would be required that tenants remove air conditioning units by a certain date. Committee member Atterson asked if the air conditioning unit regulations would be put in the condominium declaration statement. Mr. Lerberg stated that the building might not be converted to condominium. Committee members stated that regulations should be put in place regardless of whether or not the building would be condo or rental. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final approval subject to the regulations being put in place regarding the placement of air conditioning units and that if the building is to be converted to a condominium, that these regulations be inserted into the condominium declaration statement. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-019 601 Main Street Restore Metra Station. PROJECT PRESENTED BY Sam Harding Don Moy Whitney Jacobson John Szostek Jesel Gonzalez Sam Sample , �i Preliminary► ,7,) GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: i Sam Harding explained that the main work being dome to the building would be to, make the station ADA compliant. An elevator will be installed along the inbound track and a ramp will be installed along the outbound track. A new concrete retaining wall will be installed to replace the existing dilapidated lumber wall. New landscaping will also be added. SPAARC previously inquired as to whether Custer Street would need to be closed in order to accommodate the replacement of the retaining wall. Mr. Harding explained that the street would not need to be closed, but that eleven parking metered spaces will be blocked off throughout the duration of this project. Three handicapped stalls will be placed in front of the station. A fenced in trash area will be incorporated. The fencing will be the same type as used on the platform, which is a picket. The existing stairs to the platform will be removed and new staircases will be added. Two different landscaping plans will be proposed. The rendering presented to SPAARC shows a number of tree plantings. However, clearance from Union Pacific is needed to allow for the planting of these trees. If Union Pacific does not permit the trees for railroad right of way clearance issues, then the landscaping will consist of ground cover and shrubbery. Commissioner Mylott asked who would be responsible for maintaining the landscaping. Jesel Gonzalez from Metra stated that if no one takes the responsibility for maintenance of landscaping, then bushes and groundcover would be planted. John Szostek from Custer Fair stated that his organization would consider maintaining the landscaping. DISCUSSION: Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - F'ebruarr 20, 2002 Page 2 Committee member Fujihara stated that he was concerned about cars turning left onto Main Street from the drop off area. Walter Hallen recommended that a right turn only restriction be placed at this intersection because of the vision impairment caused by the retaining wall. Mr. Harding explained that the bike rack shown would be removed to accommodate the staircase. More bike racks will be added after the completion of the project. Members of the Committee asked if graffiti prevention coating would be placed on the retaining wall. Mr. Szostek stated that Union Pacific notified him that graffiti prevention coating is not effective, but having a building with active tenant space is a good graffiti preventative measure. Sam Sample presented the landscape plan to the Committee. He reiterated that the landscaping may need to be cut back, especially the Mountain Laurel trees for maintenance purposes. Whitney Jacobson from Metra explained that Union Pacific wants to have a clear line of view without trees along their right of way. Committee members Mylott and Marino stressed that they would be very disappointed if the landscaping shown on the plan was not provided because of maintenance concerns. They stated that they expect this landscaping to be part of the final landscape plan and that if it were not, then the project would not be approved. Committee member Friedman expressed concern regarding the condition of the viaducts. Committee member Marino stated there is money available for the repair of CTA viaducts but no plans have been presented as of yet. Committee member Mylott asked if there is a plan for the placement of newspaper boxes. Mr. Szostek explained that the newspaper boxes in the Theatre District of Chicago are very attractive and that he would attempt to install these types of boxes. The Committee requested that this issue be resolved by the time that this_ project appeared for final SPAARC review and approval. Committee member Berkowsky stated that he is concerned with the need for another fire hydrant in the area considering the addition of the theatre use on the site. Committee member Walczak asked if additional lights would be added to the site. Mr. Sample answered that pedestrian level lights would be installed, including Tallmedge lights. Lighting would also be provided along the ramps. Mr. Gonzalez explained that the brick street would be replaced with new bricks and that the brick street will be built in accordance with IHPA guidelines. Mr. Gonzalez stated that the street qualifies as a landmark. Carlos Ruiz stated that this might not be the case because new bricks are being added and the actual historic bricks are being replaced. Mr. Gonzalez stated that full approval from IHPA would be granted and provided to SPAARC for their final review and approval. Site Plan and Appearance Review .Sleeting - February 10, 2002 Page 3 Committee member Friedman asked if existing windows would be replaced or if new window openings would be created. Mr. Sample stated that windows would be replaced and that the only fenestration change would be the replacement of single doors with double doors. Mr. Sample presented the exterior and interior materials of the station. Carlos Ruiz recommended that a mortar sample be sent to a lab to determine if the composition is correct in terms of the rate of expansion. Mr. Sample presented the floor plans of the station. The Committee asked if food would be prepared on site. Mr. Szostek replied that prepackaged food and coffee would be provided on the site. Walter Hallen asked what the existing kitchenette would be used for. Mr. Szostek explained that staff would use the kitchenette as a lunchroom and keep their food in the refrigerator. Committee members suggested that the stove and oven be removed from the kitchenette so that food could not be prepared on the site. Mr. Szostek stated that a 24-hour/7 day a week warming room would be available for commuters. Carlos Ruiz asked what issues the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency was concerned about. Mr. Sample stated that these issues included the windows, the vending area, maintaining the existing waiting rooms, and the ceiling. Mr. Sample explained that security grills would be installed on the windows on the lower floor of the station. Committee member Mylott listed the issues brought up so far during SPAARC review. Committee member Marino made the clarification that if he votes for preliminary approval, it is based on the landscaping plan that was presented to SPAARC at this meeting. If this were not the landscaping, he would reconsider preliminary approval. Committee member Berkowsky asked who would be responsible for plowing the area in front of the station. Mr. Szostek stated that the City and Union Pacific do not want to be responsible for the plowing of the private street owned by Union Pacific. As a result. Custer Fair has agreed to take on this responsibility. Committee member Berkowsky also asked if there would be an address sign off of Main Street that could be readily visible from the right of way. Mr. Szostek replied that he would work with the rest of the applicants regarding this issue. Committee member Aiello asked if there is a parking requirement for this development Committee member Alterson replied that no new building footprint is being added and that a change in use would not require an increased number of parking. He did request that the developer provide some sort of parking plan. Mr. Szostek replied that he wishes to provide a parking plan. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: 5ile Plan and Appearance Review Meeling - February 20. 2002 Page 4 • The presented landscape plan is explicitly included in this preliminary approval • The height of the screening around the dumpsters will be sufficient to cover their height. • The accessible parking spaces will come to grade or otherwise meet whatever ADA dictates • Review and approval by the Traffic Engineering Department of the right turn only proposal • Working with the City Manager's Office and Engineering Department regarding the issue of newspaper boxes and/or corrals. • Working with the Fire Department on a resolution for the need for a fire hydrant • Removing the stove from the kitchenette • Replacing pigeon netting • Resolution with the Fire Der artment on signage/addresses • Resolution with the Fire Department on the issue of occupancy. Committee member Marino asked Committee member Mylott to include a comment regarding the maintenance of the landscaping, especially including that Custer Fair agreed to maintain the landscaping. Committee member Mylott added one more condition: • The provision of a maintenance agreement to cover the landscaping shown on the plan The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Carolyn Smith arrived and resumed her duties as the Chairperson. SPAARC 02-002 803 % Chicaao Avenue Pr+eliminary and Final Operate type 2 restaurant (Seattle Sutton's Healthy Eating) within.existing storefront. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Applicant not present GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith explained this project involves no exterior changes and that it previously received concept approval, but should also have received preliminary and final approval at that time. DISCUSSION: There was no discussion involving this case. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Site Plan andAppearance Review .11eetmg - February 10. 2001 Poo 5 SPAARC 00-157 2515 Prairie Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct 8-unit multi -family residential building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom Gourguechon GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Gourguechon explained that he appeared before SPAARC on December 19, 2001. He proposed a combination of standard grade CMU, precast limestone - like panels and veneer, and face brick. The Committee was concerned with some of these materials and how they would appear from neighboring buildings. Mr. Gourguechon explained that his new proposal is to use all face brick except for two of the stair towers, remove a portion of simulated limestone, and use real limestone in the front of the building and near the elevator lobbies. He passed around samples of the limestone to be used and samples of the simulated limestone that was previously considered. He also passed around samples of the face brick to be used. Mr. Gourguechon explained that his proposal is slightly below the allowable lot coverage. The new material of the building could create lot coverage issues, so he is proposing the rear stair tower and the stair tower facing Prairie Avenue to be done in a tinted concrete block. DISCUSSION: The Committee members found it unfortunate that the Zoning Ordinance would create a situation for the developer in which a construction material of lesser quality would need to be used. Committee members Mylott and Alterson stated that they would work with Mr. Gourguechon to determine a way to assure that lot coverage would not be an issue when using the desired building materials. F Committee member Marino asked if the landscape plan has been reviewed. Mr. Gourguechon stated that he dropped off the landscape plan with the City but that he didn't bring one with him. Committee member Mylott located a copy of the landscape plan. Chairperson Smith explained that she certainly likes the choice of the materials being used, but that something has been lost in that the building is all the same material. When the building had different materials and colors, it had a very nice proportion. Mr. Gourguechon explained that he is looking at changing the texture of the brick. Committee member Friedman stated that a small recess could break up the proportion of the facade. Mr. Gourguechon stated that he is planning to provide a small recess. Committee member Friedman explained that using larger pieces of limestone would be preferred because they read more as real limestone. Committee member D'Agostino stated that he did not have any problems with the landscape plan. Carlos Ruiz suggested that a recess be included between the brick and the limestone to further suggest a change in materials. Site Plan and Appearance Review .Sleeting - February 10, 2002 Page 6 ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - February 20, 2002 Page 7 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 27, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Carla Bush, Jeff Burdick, Wafter Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting Meetinq Note Avvroval: December 12. 2001 Meetina Notes: Committee member Alterson informed the Committee that Committee member Mylott had a list of corrections that were technical in nature regarding these minutes. A motion was made to approve these meeting notes subject to the aforementioned corrections being made. The motion was seconded and passed, unanimously. (6-0). January 30.2002 Meetina Notes: _, A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Proiects Reviewed: SP►4ARC 99-075 615 Main Street Revision to Final Consider proposal to screen at -grade mechanical equipment and generator" for mixed -use building. ACTION: Case cancelled. SPAARC 97-0065 1720 Maple Avenue Revision to Final Eliminate "Foundation Only" condition of previous final approval, no change to plans from that previously approved, and all conditions satisfied. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Arthur Alterson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee member Alterson explained that this project was approved for foundation only on December 12, 2002. It received foundation only approval because certain outstanding conditions needed to be met. According to Committee member Mylott, all of the outstanding conditions have now been met. `1 DISCUSSION: There was no discussion. ACTION: i A motion was made to grant a revision to the final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-0). Chairperson ; Smith abstained from voting. .a SPAARC 00-002 909 Davis Street Preliminary and Final Review plat of resubdivision (Davis Church Second Resubdivision) PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom White Dan Aboutar GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Aboutar explained that the resubdivision would separate the retail portion of the building from the rest of the building. It would be a vertical resubdivision. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked what the long-term implications would be of this subdivision. Mr. White explained that his company retained the rights of retail fronting on Church Street and that this resubdivision would accomplish this separate ownership. Mr. White explained that his company would own the air space under the ceiling to the top of the slat, that this section of this building is placed on. Mr. White stated that his company has an operating easement agreement that . allows for utility access over and around the property. An easement on the roof has been set aside for his mechanical equipment needs. Committee member Friedman asked if there is a time limit on this subdivision. Mr. White said that this resubdivision would be in perpetuity. ACTION: `` , Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeeling - February 27. 2002 Page 2 A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-022 121-123 Custer Avenue Preliminary and Final Renovate 6-unit multi -family residential building and convert ownership to condominium. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Lazzlo Simovic GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Simovic presented landscape drawings to the Committee. He stated that the owner is reluctant to replace the front windows with wood windows because he wants to remain consistent with the rest of the building and believes he would Incur an extra cost. The owner would be willing to install divided light windows that mimic what is currently existing. Mr. Simovic stated that the owner would replace the windows with wood if he were to receive a concession from the City. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked what the difference would be in price if wood windows were installed. Mr. Simovic stated that there would be a considerable cost difference, mostly due to labor. Chairperson Smith explained that this project could not move forward without an adequate landscape plan. She also requested that cost data be provided regarding the windows. ACTION: A motion was made to table this project pending the submittal of an adequate landscape plan. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-026 930 Church Street Preliminary and Final Convert type 1 restaurant to type 2 restaurant, requiring special use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Scott Richmond GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Richmond explained the concept of Noodles, the proposed restaurant for this space. He presented the menu and explained how the restaurant would operate: He explained that Noodles wishes to present itself as a high -end restaurant as opposed to a fast food restaurant. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if outdoor seating would be provided. Mr. Richmond stated that outdoor seating would be considered. Committee member Alterson provided Mr. Richmond with information needed to apply for a sidewalk cafe. Committee member Marino stated that the City would like to see a sidewalk caf6 at this location. Site Plan and Appearanee Rmew I leering - February 27. 2002 Page 3 Carla Bush inquired as to the provision and location of outdoor dumpsters. Mr. Richmond explained that trash is taken out daily by staff in garbage bags, but that he is unfamiliar with what the landlord would be offering in terms of trash needs. Committee member Marino asked what the normal dumpster pick-up schedule is for the other Noodle stores. Mr. Richmond stated that garbage is usually picked -up every other day. Committee member Marino stated that the downtown has a problem with garbage not being picked up on Sunday. As a result, garbage accrued from Saturday night activity sits outside for up to two days. He asked how this could be dealt with. Committee member Wolinski stated that the ZBA should require Sunday trash pick-up for every type 2 restaurant that is approved. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the commitment of Sunday pick-up of all food -related, trash. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-026 835 Main Street Preliminary and Final Operate type 2 restaurant within food store establishment, requiring special use PROJECT PRESENTED BY: GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicants explained that they would like to install a fryer and sell french fries and hot dogs in their convenience store. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked how ventilation would be handled. The applicant stated that the fryer is self-contained and would not produce the amount of grease of a regular fryer. She provided pictures of the fryer. Committee member Alterson asked how the subject of litter would be handled. The applicants stated that they would take responsibility for cleaning up litter in the area outside of their establishment. '1 Chairperson Smith informed the applicants that the existing sign exceeds the requirements of the Sign Ordinance. The applicants responded that the sign already exists. Chairperson Smith explained that it is legal non -conforming and would have to be reduced some time in the future. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan approval subject to, the review of a litter control plan by the Toning Department. Site Plan and Appearance Review ,tleeting - February 17, 2002 Pagr 4 The Committee unanimously permitted a member of the audience to speak regarding this case. Audience member Diane Willett informed that Committee that a substantial amount of litter exists on school property near this site. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-027 204 Davis Street Preliminary and Final Construct addition to single-family residence, requiring variations PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ellen Galland GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Galland explained that major variations would be needed for setbacks. The existing single car garage would be made a foot wider and a hip roof would be constructed on top of it so to create consistency with the rest of the house. Ms Galland stated the neighbors have no problems with the proposal. She also explained that a small bay would be constructed to enlarge a small kitchen in the house. She presented elevations to the Committee. DISCUSSION: There was no discussion. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-028 2152 Grey Avenue Preliminary and Final Install two air-conditioning condenser units accessory to single-family residence, requiring variation PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Arthur Alterson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Alterson explained that the owner of the house would like to install two air- conditioning units in the rear yard of the property. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino asked if there are noise standards for these units. Committee member Afterson stated that there are and these units would meet these standards. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Sire Plan and Appearance Review .tfeeting -- February 17. 2002 Page 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 6, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Afterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Dave Jennings, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Waiter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meednq. Meetina Note Approval: February f. 2002 Meeting Notes: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes subject to the following: corrections being made: - 1930 Ridge Avenue ... Condition 4) If rana*rnanr stone is to be used, examples of 11he mMaterial samples shall shams -be presented to SPAARC for final approval. and the Committee recommends using real stone. Condition 8) The submission Feview f the parking garage circulation plan to by -the Traffic Engineering Department Fodor to final SPARC review so that it has time to be reviewed. 525 Chicago Avenue, second to last paragraph: He asked where fences would be located. Mr. Plunkard replied that low ornamental fences would be installed along the property lines. Committee member Mviott stated that fences are not permitted at the location as of right. and thev should include this additional request within their planned development application. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). February 13.2002 Meetina Notes: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). February 20, 2002 Meetina Notes: A motion was made to approve these meeting naves subject to the following corrections being made: 601 Main Street, bottom of page 3 ... Mr. Gonzalez explained that the brick street would be replaced with new bricks and that the brick sheet will be built In accordance with IHPA guidelines. Mr. Gonzalez sStated that the street qualifies as a landmark- 601 Main Street, conditions: 2. The dumpstem YAII be nnreenW height of the screening around the dumnsters will be sufficient to cover their height. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. February 27.2002 Meetinq Notes: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motionwasseconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-029 2024 McConmick Boulevard Conceot Replace windmill at Ecology Center. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Hal Mead Debbie Hillman Ross Vagnieves GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Mead explained that the wind generator has not worked in many years. The Ecology Centers goal is to install a new wind generator that will supply the Center with 113 to 2/3 of its electricity. ComEd would adjust its readings to take into account the amount of power that is being supplied by the wind generator. Mr. Mead stated that the new tower would either be 100 or 120 feet in height. Mr. Mead passed around a brochure depicting the appearance of the new tower. He explained that a gazeebo might be constructed around the base of the tower to enhance its appearance. He stated that the existing 60-foot tower may remain and be used as a weather tower. DISCUSSION: Site Plan and Appearance Review Aleeting - .Warc6 6.2002 Page 2 Committee member Mylott asked if the new tower would be strong enough to hold cellular antennas. Mr. Mead stated that the new tower should be strong enough for the co -location of antennas. Ms. Hillman explained that funding has been sought by the Ecology Center in order to construct this tower. Committee member Marino asked if this tower would be permitted in this location by the Zoning Ordinance. Committee member Mylott explained that it probably would. Committee member Friedman stated that he believes that cellular antennas are incompatible with the mission of the Ecology Center. Committee member Marino asked if a neighborhood meeting would be held to discuss this proposal. Mr. Mead stated that a neighborhood meeting would be planned in the future. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval subject to the City not paying for this project, the co -location of telecommunication antennas being included in the design of the tower. Committee member Dahal asked if a particular height requirement should be added to the motion. Committee member Alterson, the maker of the motion, stated that he did not wish to add a height requirement to his motion. Committee member Marino asked that a requirement for a neighborhood meeting be added to the motion. Committee member Alterson agreed to include this additional condition to his motion. The motion was not seconded. Another motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval subject to the consideration to explore allowing the co -location of cellular towers, a maximum height of 120 feet, and a neighborhood meeting be held before preliminary approval is sought. The motion was seconded and passed (6-3). Committee members Mylott and Alterson voted nay due to the fact that they believe that it should be mandatory that the tower be engineered to allow for the co -location of cellular antennas. Committee member Friedman voted nay because he felt that co -locating cellular antennas on a wind generator associated with the Ecology Center would not be appropriate. SPAARC 99-075 515 Main Street Revision to Final Consider proposal to screen at -grade mechanical equipment and generator for mixed -use building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: J.P. Sanavadis GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Sanavaitis explained that the generator was relocated to the southeast comer of the property. He is proposing to construct a masonry wall around the Site Plan and Appearance Review .Meeting - .March 6. 2002 Pav 3 generator to properly screen it from the public. The masonry wall would be 9 % feet tall. The generator is engaged every Tuesday morning for 20 minutes. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked why the generator could not be located to another spot on the property. Mr. Sanavahis explained that the building's electric has already been installed and that primary wiring would have to be removed and reinstalled. Chairperson Smith explained that when this project was approved, the plans did not show that the generator would be located at the southeast comer of the property. Transformers were the only mechanical equipment included in this location at the time of previous SPAARC review and approval. Committee member Dahal expressed concern regarding the proposed masonry wall bloating the view of the sidewalk of cars exiting the property. Committee member Wolinski explained that SPAARC was not issued the proper information regarding this project when it first appeared for approval. He stated that he would not allow the issuance of any permits or certificates of occupancy until the developer deals with this generator location situation. Chairperson Smith stated that the ramp to the parking deck is not heated and that this would create a safety concern. Committee member Jennings stated that as long as the ramp is maintained during poor weather conditions, this should not be a concern. Chairperson Smith stated that the plans for the garage area show that there are openings in the facade. However, these openings are now filled in with a cloth - like material. Mr. Sanavaitis explained that this material was installed to screen the garage lights from the surrounding area, The Committee asked if louvers were considered. Mr. Sanavaitis stated that they were considered, but that the developers received feedback that louvers were unattractive. Committee member Alterson asked why the garage lights were not shielded. Mr. Sanavait s stated that the garage lights are droplights and would not be easy to shield. Chairperson Smith requested that Mr. Sanavaitis come back to the Committee with a plan for how the vegetation on the second story of the garage is maintained. ACTION: A motion was made to deny a revision to final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (10-0). A second motion was made to require that the developer relocate the generator to a location that is inside the building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review .k(eeting - Afarch 6.2002 Page 4 A third motion was made to table a decision on the duct work issue until detailed pictures are brought into SPAARC depicting this issue. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). A fourth motion was made to table the issue of the garage light screening measure until Committee members have had a chance to view the existing screening. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 01-011 1900 Dempster Street Preliminary and Final Construct 1-story mixed -use building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: James Sutdhem GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Sutdhem explained that he is seeking final approval for this project. Committee member Mylott explained that this project previously received preliminary and final approval, however, this approval occurred over one year ago and has now expired. Mr. Sutdhem stated that he wished to discuss engineering ideas for this project. He explained that the environmental costs for this project have far exceeded original cost estimations. He stated that he would like to eliminate the eight lauga canopies on the west side of the building in lieu of one smaller canopy if a drive through window is constructed. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked to see a drawing of the canopies. Mr. Sutdhem presented the drawings, specifically pointing out where the canopies would be removed and where a canopy would probably be installed. Chairperson Smith suggested that SPAARC vote on what is currently presented. Mr. Sutdhem stated that the materials of the building would match the building materials of the existing shopping center on the site. Mr. Sutdhem stated that he wishes to eliminate the copper lettering on the monument sign and replace it with white. He explained that the lettering would be externally illuminated. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to: • Review and approval of the landscape plan by Parks and Forestry before the issuance of a permit Sire Plan and Appearance Review Alerting - Afarch 6. 2002 Page 5 F • The applicant appears before SPAARC in August of 2003 to discuss the adequacy of landscaping at the southwest comer of Dempster Street and Dodge Avenue. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-030 101 Ashland Avenue Preliminary and Final Renovate existing and recess new garage doors for underground parking area of existing multi -family residence. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: J.R. Graves GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Graves explained that he appeared before SPAARC five months ago with the request to construct garages in the front. SPAARC did not approve of this, so he determined how to reuse the existing garages. Because the slopes at the entrances to the garages are so steep, Mr. Graves explained that the garages would have to be moved back under the building an additional three feet. He explained that this would provide enough space to address the slope issue. DISCUSSION: Mr. Graves was informed that he needed a seven -foot high clearance for the garages. He stated that he would have no problem providing this. Chairperson - Smith asked if the condo regulations would require that the condo association maintain the slope area. Mr. Grave explained that this provision would be inserted into the condominium disclosure statement. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to: • lights being recessed • A seven foot clearance be provided for the garages The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 02-031 809 Dempster Street Construct addition for type i restaurant (Siam Pasta). ACTION: Applicant did not show and the case was cancelled. SPAARC 02-032 2323 Foster Street Renovate Butler Park. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stefanie Levine Pmum' Inary Preli+mirxary and Final Site Plan and Appearance Review bfeeling - Afarck 6, 2002 Page 6 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Levine explained that the existing bike path would be reconstructed and lighting would be installed along the bike path. A gateway feature would be installed at the south and north entrances to the park. Further to the north, an older children and younger children's playground would be constructed. DISCUSSION: There was no discussion regarding this project. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Off Aqenda Item: SPAARC 02-022 121-123 Custer Avenue Prellminary and Final Renovate 6-unit multi -family residential building and convert ownership to condominium. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Lazzlo Simovic GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Simovic presented a new landscaping plan for review by SPAARC. DISCUSSION: Committee member D'Agostino approved the landscape plan. There was no further discussion regarding this project. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - Alar h 6, 2002 Page 7 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 13, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Afberson, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujlhars, Stefanie Levine, Dennis Marino, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Haas Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 99-075 515 Main Street Revision to Final Consider various revisions to mixed -use building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: J.P. Sanavaids GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Sanavaitis explained that the screening wall has been located closer to the generator so to eliminate vision impairments for cars exiting the parking garage. He explained that this measure would open up a seating area in this location. He stated that relocating the generator would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Mr. Sanavaitis presented the screening for the ductwork on the building. The members of the Committee suggested that the architect should be present to address the ductwork issue. Mr. Sanavaitis stated that he was not provided with direction from SPAARC as to how to handle the garage light screening issue. Mr. Sanavaitis explained that the building management oompany would maintain the parking garage ramp and that he would provide SPAARC with the maintenance provisions the management company is to follow regarding this ramp. Mr. Sanavaitis stated that the hose bin for the building is located on the first floor of the parking garage and that a garden hose would have to be lifted up to the second floor in order to irrigate the landscaping on the second floor of the panting garage. DISCUSSION: Committee member Dahal stated that the reconfiguration of the screening wall would not necessarily alleviate the sight vision concerns. Chairperson Smith stated that the best safety measure would be to move the generator to another site on the property. She explained that she couldn't approve the generator if it remains in its current locale. Committee member Wolinski asked Mr. Sanavaitis to provide a real quote on the cost of relocating the generator. Chairperson Smith asked Committee member Wolinski what the cost would have to be in order for the City to allow the generator to remain in its existing location. Committee member Wolinski also asked for the decibel level of the generator when it is running. Mr. Sanavaitis stated that he would supply an itemized cost sheet depicting the cost of moving the generator. Chairperson Smith asked if smoke would be emitted from the generator. Mr. Sanavaitis explained that there would be no smoke emitting from the generator. ACTION: A motion was made to table the generator location issue until Mr. Sanavaitis provided detailed cost information. The motion was seconded and did not pass. Vote (3-5). A second motion was made to deny revised final site plan and appearance review approval of the generator location issue. The motion was seconded and passed. Vote (7-1). A motion was made to table the ductwork issue pending the attendance of the project's architect to determine a solution to the issue. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). A motion was made to table the garage light screening issue pending the attendance of the project's architect before SPAARC. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). A motion was made to table the second floor landscaping issue pending the attendance of the project's architect before SPAARC. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 98-0065 1454 Elmwood Avenue Preliminary Construct addition to and renovate Evanston FinwPolice Headquarters. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Anil Khatkhate Frank Kassen Site Plan and Appearance Review .lreering - March 13. 2002 Pagr 2 Elliot Dudnik GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Dudnik explained that there are modifications to the addition and that the previous SPAARC preliminary approval of this project has long since expired. He stated that there would be two sides of the building that would be affected with exterior changes. He explained that on the Lake Street elevation, one bay would be an entry, while the other four bays will be windows. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith stated that quality landscaping needs to be provided as part of this renovation. She also requested that the signage be moved down so that it is installed just above the door. Mr. Dudnik stated that they would not have a problem moving the signage in that it would be a significant cost reduction. Carlos Ruiz stated that the building would look better without the break of materials in the fagade. Committee member Wolinski asked if public art would be included as part of this project. Mr. Dudnik stated that public art would not be included in the renovation. Committee member Friedman stated that the proposed renovation does not appear to integrate with the rest of the building and that it would be interesting to see renderings of how the existing elevation and the proposed elevation would relate to one another. Committee member Wolinski asked where vehicles would be parked. Mr. Dudnik explained that parking would be provided in the lot accompanying the police station across the street. Mr. Dudnik explained that a larger salty port is going to be constructed so to accommodate larger vehicles. Chairperson Smith proposed that the concrete in the parkway is reduced and that greenspace be added in this area. Mr. Dudnik replied that Fire Chiefs would be parking in this location. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance approval with the recommendation that: • A decent amount of landscaping is included at the new Fire Department entry • The applicants examine the potential of providing more parkway greenery at the east elevation; especially at the northeast comer of the project • Review of the driveway plan by the Engineering Department • The signage be relocated to where the address currently is, which is just above the doors The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeeting - March 13. 2002 Pagr 3 SPAARC 01-011 1900 Demaster Street Preliminary and Final Construct alternative to previously approved internal gutters for 9-story mixed. use building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: James Sutdhem GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Sutdhem explained that he wished to eliminate the concealed gutters and downspouts on the comer canopies and have the rainwater drain off of the sides. A gutter system would be installed at the end of the canopies and a landscape area would be included under the canopies. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked it Mr. Sutdhem considered including a recess in the pier to improve the appearance. Walter Hallen suggested that an internal pipe be included within the piers and that the water be spilled out at the bottom of the piers. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan approval given that one of the following two changes be made: • Enclosing a pipe within the pier and having the water come out of the bottom —or- Recessing the downspout so that the outside edge would be flush with the pier The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Chairperson Smith explained that the suggested changes would be a revision to the existing permit set. SPAARC 02-033 1012 Chicaao Avenue Recommendation to Sian Board = Construct new freestanding sign (AutoBam Mazda of Evanston). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that AutoBam Mazda would like to add a pole sign on the property. He stated that it would not meet the required setback for a pole sign and that only one 20-foot pole sign is permitted on a parcel. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino stated that the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan recommends a more pedestrian friendly streetscape and having two pole signs on a parcel of property does not meet this recommendation. ACTION: Site Plan and appearance Review AkrOw - March 13. 1001 Pap 4 A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Review and Appeals Board deny the second sign based on the fact that no photos have been provided depicting the second sign. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-0). Committee member Wolinski abstained from voting. SPAARC 02-034 1916 Demuater Street Recommendation to Sign Board Install sign for retail sales establishment (A.J. Wright) that differs from approved Unified Business Center Sign Plan. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that the proposed sign for A.J. Wright alters from the Unfied Business Center Sign Plan for the existing development. First, the sign would include purple as a color, which is not one of the colors included in the sign district, but is one of A.J. Wright's corporate colors. Second, the sign district's maximum letter size is 30 inches. A.J. Wright's letter size is 48 inches. However, it has been pointed out that A.J. Wright is 800 feet away from Dempster Street and other signs in the center have been allowed to exceed the letter size requirement. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino asked what the small white letters were under the A.J. Wright sign. Chairperson Smith stated that this is logo phrase and should not be allowed. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Review and Appeals Board approve the sign subject to the maximum letter size of the sign district not changing and that logo phrase not be permitted. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-0). Committee member Wolinski abstained from voting. SPAARC 02-035 1501 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Replace signage of hotel (formerty Holiday Inn) reflecting new ownership (Best Western). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERA!_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that a pole sign exists on top of the garage and that pole signs are not permitted unless the building is set back 30 feet from the street. In addition, Best Western wishes to place a sign on the canopy, but a canopy sign would only be permitted if it were flush with the canopy. ACTION: Site Plan and / ppeamnce Revinv Ateeting - .March 13, 2002 Page 5 A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Review and Appeals Board deny the pole sign and require that it be removed. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0) A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Review and Appeals Board approve the sign on the face of the canopy at both locations. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-1). Committee member Marino voted nay. SPAARC 02-036 1580 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Establish Unified Business Center Sign Plan for mixed -use building (Optima Towers). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that Optima wish to propose a Unified Business Center Design Plan for the mixed -use building. He presented the proposed signs to the Committee. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino asked what the height of the letters would be. Mr. Hallen replied that the height limitation is 12 inches. Chairperson Smith asked what the color requirements would be. Mr. Hallen read that the letters would be fitted with amber LED illumination. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Review and Appeals Board approve the sign. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-0). Chairperson Smith abstained from voting. Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - March 13, 2002 Page 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 20, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Paul D'Agostino, Keith Fujihara, . Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Susan Guderley, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-023 201-206 Custer Avenue Revision to Preliminary and Final Renovate 16-unit multi -family residential building and convert ownership to condominium. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tal Lerberg GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Lerberg explained that BOCA requires that the building windows be at least 20 inches wide and that the new casement windows cannot be this wide. The building currently consists of steel sash windows. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if the windows would be clad. Mr. Lerberg stated that the windows would be vinyl clad. Chairperson Smith stated that the new front door should be glass for security purposes. ACTION: A motion was made to grant site plan and appearance review approval to the revision to final. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). SPAARC 02-031 809 Dempster Street Preliminary Construct addition for Type 1 restaurant (Slam Pasta). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chawakam Milindawad r GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Milindawad explained that the building was formerly home to a record store. He stated that the owner wants to open a Thai restaurant and that an addition is needed to accommodate the restaurant. The majority of the elevation material would be cedar siding, except for those areas within a small distance to the lot lines. These areas would be CMU. The storefront will be new and will consist of predominately glass. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen pointed out that one of the rooftop air handling units would be in the front and would be about three feet from a table within the restaurant. Mr. Milindawad explained that both air handling units would be placed in the back and that the existing drawings are not correct. Chairperson Smith asked if pictures were available of the existing building. Mr. Milindawad stated that he did not bring in pictures of the current building. Chairperson Smith asked that the lighting point down as opposed to pointing in all directions. Committee member Mylott stated that there may be a parking shortage for this use and that Mr. Milindawad should meet with a zoning officer to determine if a variance to the parking requirements would be necessary. ACTION: A motion was made to table review of this project until pictures of the existing site could be reviewed by SPAARC. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). SPAARC 01-135 525 Chicaao Avenue Revision to Concept Construct 90 single-family residences (townhouses) at site of former Dominick's grocery store. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Dave Dubin, Bernie Citron, Jim Plunkard GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Citron explained that the developer was preparing for a Plan Commission public hearing for the planned development. However, it was realized that there was not a great amount of zoning relief being asked for from the City and that the project could be redesigned quite easily so to not require a planned development. Mr. Citron explained that there were previously two zoning relief issues: • The upper level along the rear alley required a five-foot setback. • Some of the units had parking spaces that were within 20 feet of the property line, even though these spaces were not visible from the property line. As a result, the developers created a setback along the upper floors of the building along the rear alley in order to meet the required 5-foot setback. Mr. Site Plan and Appearance Review ,lfeeting -March 20. 2002 Page 2 Citron explained that this setback improved the use and appearance of these units. Moreover, the units have been slightly shifted in order to accommodate internal parking spaces that are not within 20 feet of the property line. Mr. Citron stated that the plan is basically the same other than these few changes. Mr. Citron presented the renderings of the development to SPAARC. He explained that the development would not be gated and that there would be green openings from Chicago Avenue that would traverse the property in an east/west direction. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith stated that she is troubled with the tightness of the site relative to the property lines. She believes that the units along Chicago Avenue are very tight to the property line. She suggested that the inner circle in each of the four small green alcoves should be filled in with landscape planting. She asked if anything could be done to increase the space between the units fronting Chicago Avenue and the Chicago Avenue right of way. Mr. Citron stated that the public right of way in this location is significantly wider than other portions of Chicago Avenue's public right of way. He stated that the developer would work with the City to complement the City's Chicago Avenue Streetscape Study recommendations. Walter Hallen asked if two different colors of brick would be used in the project. Mr. Plunkard stated that the two colors of brick most commonly used in the surrounding neighborhood were chosen for this development. Committee member Alterson asked what the white material would be that is shown on the fagade. Mr. Plunkard explained that it is limestone, with limestone banding. Committee member Marino asked if real limestone would be used. Mr. Plunkard stated that the developer is not yet sure if renaissance stone or real limestone would be used. SPAARC requested that real limestone is used, and K renaissance stone is used, it needs to be used properly and carefully. Committee member Alterson stated that he felt that the expanse of building along Chicago Avenue appears stark and does depict a residential building. Committee member Mylott felt that the stone banding on the facade would give the building a non -residential -look. Committee member Marino asked if mechanical units would be visible from the public right of way. Mr. Citron answered that the developer would take every possible measure to assure that these units would not be visible from the public right of way. Mr. Citron asked if SPAARC could approve the site plan portion of its review and allow the developer to come back before SPAARC to address some of the concerns issued today by members of SPAARC. Committee member Marino asked if lighting would be installed on the building. Mr. Plunkard explained that lighting would be recessed along Chicago Avenue at Site Plan and Appearance Review .feeling, - .11arch 20.2002 Paer 3 each entryway and the lighting would be surface mounted along the South Boulevard and Keeney Street entryways. Chairperson Smith stated that the windows should be larger, and that the top of the building is weak and should be accentuated more. Mr. Citron stated that the developer would like to work with staff to address these issues prior to reappearing before SPAARC. Chairperson Smith also stated that the entryways from Chicago Avenue to the driveways would need wrought iron gates. A member of the development team explained that wrought iron gates would be places at these locations but that they would be set back from the sidewalk along Chicago Avenue. Susan Guderiey explained that there is not a final survey for the City streetscape plans along Chicago Avenue and that the developer should work with the Engineering Department to assure that plans are in compliance with final dimensions recommended by the Streetscape Plan. She stated that the sidewalk may be geared towards multiple users and that it may not be able to accommodate a lesser width than what is currently being recommended. Finally, Ms. Guderley explained that the Streetscape Plan shows an entry feature at the comer of South Boulevard and Chicago Avenue, but there are not final plans for such a feature. Carlos Ruiz stated that it would be important for the Committee to see more renderings of the buildings, especially in the areas between the courtyard entryways. A motion was made to allow members of the audience a chance to speak regarding this project. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Alderman Melissa Wynne stated that the City needs to be careful in recommending a landscape strip in the public right of way along Chicago Avenue because this could create a sidewalk that is too narrow. She was concerned that the elevations appear monolithic and that the development would not appear as townhouses, but rather condominiums. Alderman Wynne also mentioned that the colors of brick used In the neighborhood are not necessarily models that should be followed. ACTION: A motion was made to approve a revision to concept and preliminary site plan and appearance review subject to: • Working with the Engineering and Planning Department regarding the streetscape; Providing detailed information on the stone, including samples; • Providing more information on the location of utilities; • Providing more information on appearance, specifically the horizontal banding, and the tops of the building. Site Plan and Appearance Review ,t(eeting - March 10, 2002 Page 4 • The reappearance of the developer before SPAARC to resolve these issues prior to asking for final SPAARC site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (4-2). Chairperson Smith and Committee member Alterson voted nay. SPAARC 02-038 2340 Lawndale Avenue Prellminary and Final Construct one-story addition for, and install air-conditioning condenser unit accessory to, single-family residence, requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mark Perlman, Julie Strauss GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Perlman explained that the existing inferior structure is probably a deck that was enclosed. He explained that the Strauss' wish to take down this dilapldated structure and replace it with a new structure that would serve the same use. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked what the major variation associated with this project pertained to. Mr. Perlman explained that a 30-foot setback is required from the rear property line, but the actual setback would be 4-foot, 2-inches. Chairperson Smith asked if there were neighbor concerns. Mr. Perlman pointed out letters from the neighbors supporting the addition. Chairperson Smith inquired as to the location of the central air unit. Mr. Perlman stated that the unit would be placed ten -feet from the south property line. Mrs. Strauss stated that the unit would be state of the art and would be as quiet as possible. Committee member Alterson explained that a cut sheet depicting the make and appearance of the unit should be brought before the ZBA. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 940 Church Street Preliminary and Final Operate type 2 restaurant (Marble Slab Creamery), requiring special use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: James Shipley, Greg Hakanen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Shipley stated that there would be no changes to the building as it exists. He explained the concept of the business and presented pictures of other Marble Slab Creameries in the United States. DISCUSSION: Pqv 5 Site Plan and Wearance Review .Sleeting - March 20. 2002 Chairperson Smith explained that the City is concerned regarding trash generation. Mr. Shipley explained that the ice cream is made on site and that this establishment would generate less garbage than most other similar establishments. He stated that the dumpster would be in the loading dock and that employees would have to walk the garbage out to the dumpster. Committee member Alterson asked if sidewalk seating would be considered. Mr. Shipley stated that sidewalk seating has been considered, but a decision has not been made. Committee member Alterson informed Mr. Shipley of the procedure required for sidewalk cafe approval. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). SPAARC 02-037 1129 Sherman Avenue Prellminary and Final Construct dormer within side of roof of single4amily residence, requiring major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Marc Mylott GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee member Mylott explained that the owner of the house would like io construct a dormer on the north side of the house. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith stated that the applicant would not be able to put a window opening on the dormer because it would be within the property line distance requirements set forth in the building regulations. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Site Plan andAppearance Rn ir% .Weeting - Afarch 20, 2002 Poe 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 27, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Afterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-031 809 Dempster Street Preliminary Construct addition for Type 1 restaurant (Siam Pasta). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chawakam Milindawad GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Milindawad presented photos of the existing building in response to SPAARC's request the previous week. He stated that he is removing the air conditioning unit in the front and that only the rear air conditioning unit would serve the building. He stated that he wishes to place a trellis on the second floor with lights attached that would point down. Chairperson Smith asked him what the railing on the second floor would be made of. Mr. Mifindawad explained that A would be made of steel. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if the awning would be replaced. Mr. Milindawad stated that he was considering replacing the awning. Committee member Alterson stated that the rear addition would trigger a need for more parking that is not available on the site. He explained that Mr. Milindawad would not be able to count private leased parking spaces towards his parking requirement and that this case might need to appear before the ZBA and City Council for a parking variation. Committee members notified Mr. Milindawad that if this case appeared before ZBA, his outdoor seating proposal might come under scrutiny from neighbors. Committee member Wolinski asked that garbage is picked up on Sundays. Carlos Ruiz suggested placing screening around the outdoor seating to alleviate the possible concerns of the neighbors. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to the Sunday pick-up of garbage. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-2). Arthur Alterson and Jim Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 02-039 2344 Orrinqton Avenue Preliminary and Final Convert single-family residence to office (Kendall College) and construct accessible ramp in front yard. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Paul Jeffrey GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Jeffrey stated that the existing house adjacent to the college's parking lot Is currently used for residential purposes. The College is proposing to convert the second and third floor to offices and the first floor to a conference area and a kitchen. Because handicapped accessibility is required, a ramp will need to be constructed in the front yard. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith explained that the Evanston Preservation Commission has approved this plan. She asked if landscaping would be provided. Mr. Jeffrey stated that a small amount of landscaping would be provided. He did not have a landscape plan to present to the Committee. Committee member Wolinski asked if there would an identification sign installed. Mr. Jeffrey stated that a small plaque sign would be installed. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the landscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 024M 950 Church Street Preliminary and Final Convert type 1 restaurant (Comer Bakery Cafd) to type 2 restaurant, requiring special use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Daniel Jordan GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Site Plan and,lppearance Review Afeeting -- Afarch 27, 2002 Page 2 Chairperson Smith explained that this project is already permitted for a type 1 restaurant. Mr. Jordan stated that a different service prototype would be used in this store that would be considered quick casual. He explained that patrons would place their order at the counter and then sit down to be served by employees. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked Mr. Jordan if there is a trash plan associated with this development. Mr. Jordan stated that the trash policy is very strict. Walter Hallen pointed out that there is an interior connection to the loading dock and trash area from this site. Committee member Wolinski asked if the restaurant would be open Saturday and Sunday. Mr. Jordan explained that Comer Bakery is tentatively scheduled to be open on the weekends. Committee members asked that Sunday trash pick-up be provided if the business is to be open on the weekends. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Consider/Aparove March 6. 2002 Meetinp Notes Chairperson Smith made a motion to approve the March 6, 2002 meeting notes subject to stating in the notes for the 515 Main Street case that the tabling of the shades of the window area of the parking garage was approved by SPAARC. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Chairperson Smith stated the approval of the March 13, 2002 and March 20, 2602 meeting notes would be postponed until the following week. 5ile Plan and Appearance Review Alrering - Alarch 27, 2002 Page 3 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES APRIL 10, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Rajeev Dahal, Stefanie Levine, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff. Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-013 1004 Davis Street Final Expand retail goods establishment (Lemoi Hardware) to vacant storefront to east. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Cary Jacobson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith stated that this case received preliminary approval with . conditions and that the issue of awning type was not voted on. Mr. Jacobson explained that the space in between the existing Lemoi Hardware and the Bennison Bakery would make up the addition to the store. He explained that the new space would operate as one store and that the addition would serve as the new entrance to the store. Mr. Jacobson presented elevations of the proposed project and explained how the new addition would meet the previous recommendations of SPAARC. DISCUSSION: Mr. Jacobson presented samples of building materials and awnings. Chairperson Smith stated that she would like to see the appearance of the two buildings kept separated since they are clearly different buildings. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval: -11ie motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 00-M 2545 Prairie Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Caf6 Review application for sidewalk cafe with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of Liquor Control Regulations Core Area (Jacky's Bistro). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Jacky Pluton GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith asked Mr. Pluton if the sidewalk caf& was successful fast summer. Mr. Pluton stated that it was very successful. He.explained that the street and sidewalk has been kept as clean as possible. His neighbors do not have problems with the outdoor seating portion of the establishment. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith went through the list of requirements for sidewalk cafes. The exception to the requirements was a request to ask the City Council to waive the prohibition on liquor service on in the sidewalk cafe. Chairperson Smith asked if, there would be any non -reusable beverage containers to be used in the sidewalk caf6. Mr. Pluton stated that the only such containers would serve as "doggy bags." ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval for a sidewalk caf6. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-0). Chairperson Smith abstained from voting. SPAARC 02-042 1501 Maale Recommendation to Siqn_ Retain temporary freestanding "TO RENT" sign for multi -family residential building (TLC Management Company). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that a sign was installed without a permit that adverdso for, rental units on the site. The sign has more items of information than is permitted by the Sign Ordinance. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-M 1630 Chicano Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Instal! temporary 'TO RENT' sign for multi -family residential building (TLC Management Company). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Wafter Hallen Site Plan and Appearance Rn ww dleeting - Apri1 10, 2002 Page 2 GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that the property owner wishes to install a sign that would identify the development. However, there is a minor variation involving the fad that the free standing sign would only be set back 27 feet from the property fine, rather than the 30-feet required by the Sign Ordinance. DISCUSSION: Committee member Akerson explained that this development is part of a planned development and that he is not sure if the installation of a sign would be consistent with the requirements outlined by the planned development. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Sign Board subject to the confirmation that a sign installation would be consistent with the intent of the planned development. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-0). Committee member Akerson abstained from voting. SPAARC 02-041 723 Washinaton Street Preliminary and Final Construct front porch for single-family residential building, requiring major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Arthur Alterson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee member Alterson explained that the owner is wishing to install a frost porch on the house. However, a variation would be needed for the proposed side yard setback. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 98-0065 1454 Elmwood Avenue Final Construct addition to and renovate Evanston Fkwftlice Headquarters. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Frank Kassen Frank Kaminski GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kassen stated that there would not be a problem in providing landscaping on the site. However, Police Chief Kaminski believes that it is imperative that the proposed parking space adjacent to the sidewalk be permitted and that landscaping of the space not be required. Mr. Kassen stated that this space is frequently used by the police. Site Plan and Appearance Review Hreeling - April 10, 2002 Page 3 DISCUSSION: Chief Kaminski stated that the addition of the sally port would eliminate 8 to 10 parking spaces and that parking is a premium at this site. He explained that the sally port needs to be free of vehicles for arrest drop-offs and that the existing parking space adjacent to the sidewalk provides a practical solution to the shortage of parking and drop-off space. ACTION: Committee member Atterson stated that the needs of the Fire and Police Department override moderate to minor site plan and appearance concerns and he motioned granting final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-021 741 Brummel Street Preliminary and Final Construct detached 3-car garage for multifamily residential building, requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Jackie Verrilli GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Verrilli explained that the garage was previously designed to be centered on the site, with two 1 V2 - foot setbacks on either side. The new proposal is to shift the garage to the west side of the site, thus creating one 3-foot setback and no setback on the east side of the property. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked what type of garage is being proposed. Ms. Verrilli stated that it would be a frame garage with a flat roof. Chairperson Smith reminded Ms. Verrill! to account for snow loads. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Avvrovai of Summary of Findings: March 6.2002: A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes subject to including Committee member Mylott's suggested changes regarding 2024 McCormick Boulevard: ... Committee member Marino asked if this tower would be permitted in this location by the Zoning Ordinance. Committee member Mylott explained that 4 would probably would. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Sift Plan and Appearance Review Alerting - Apri110. 2002 Page 4 March 13, 2002: A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes subject to including Committee member Mylott's suggested changes regarding: 1012 Chicago Avenue: A motion was made to recommend that the Siqn Review and AAoeals Board deny the second pole sign based on the fact that no photos have been provided depicting the second sign. 1916 Dempster Street A motion was made to recommend that the Siqn Review and Apoeals Board approve the sign s4e plan and appearance appfoyal to the SigngoaFdl subject to the maximum letter size of the sign district not changing and that logo phrase not be permitted. 1501 Sherman Avenue: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Review and Aopeals Board deny the pole sign and require that it be removed. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0) A motion was made to recommend that the Siqn Review and Appeals Board Worove Me t0aardd-ef-the sign on the face of the canopy at both locations. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-1). Committee member Marino voted nay. 1580 Sherman Avenue: A motion was made to recommend that the Sion Review and Aooeals Board aoorove the sign . The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). March 20, 2002: A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes subject to including Committee member Mylott's suggested changes regarding 525 Chicago Avenue: A motion was made to approve a revision to concept and preliminary site plan and ai vearance review subject to ... The motion was seconded and passed. (3-0). Hans Friedman and Sat Nagar abstained from voting. March 27.2002: A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review .Meeting -- April 10, 2002 Pagr 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES APRIL 17, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Rajeev Dahal, Stefanie Levine, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Martin Travis, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the rneetiny,; Projects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-044 12S-127 Callan Avenue Preliminary and Final Remodel multi -family residential building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Michael Accetturo GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Accetturo explained that new windows would be installed. He presented the proposed elevations and passed around pictures of the existing building. Mr. Accetturo stated that the front windows would be casement windows and the side and rear windows would be double hung. He stated that brick would be installed on the fagade in place of the existing air conditioning units. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked Mr. Accetturo what kind of brick would be installed where the air conditioners were placed. He explained that he was looking at decorative elements and possibly terra cotta. Chairperson Smith felt that the new brick should match the existing brick. Mr. Accetturo stated that a new steel staircase would be constructed to replace the dilapidated wooden staircase in the rear. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to review of landscaping by the Department of Parks and Forestry before the City may issue a Final Certificate of Occupancy. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 02-045 811-816 Hinman Avenue Preliminary and Final Remodel multi -family residential building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Drew Heindel Jim Laukkanen Peter Cladden George Cyrus GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Heindel stated that the condo conversion would contain a total of seven units. It is predominately constructed of brick. The majority of the work being proposed consists of interior remodeling. The exterior work consists of the replacement of wood windows with aluminum windows, tuckpointing, and the addition of three balconies in the rear of the building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith inquired as to the parking situation. Mr. Heindel explained that seven parking spaces would be provided, but that a variance would be needed to accommodate two of the spaces, which are not within distance requirements from the building. Carlos Ruiz requested that the applicant choose to use windows that enhance the appearance of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan approval subjekt to ` the review and approval of the landscape plan with the Parks and Forestry Department before the City may issue a Final Certificate of Occupancy and the use of windows that are sensitive to the building's design. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 01-087 605 Main Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe with liquor for type 9 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of Liquor Control Regulations Core Area - (Oceanique). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Renee Andre GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith went through the checklist for approving a sidewalk cafe. She explained to the applicant that she would request that the City Council waive�the liquor requirement since liquor is to be served in the cam. Site Plan and Awramwe Review .Weting - April 17, 2002 Pagr 2 ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval for a sidewalk cafe. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 004)40 500 Wain Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cafri for type 2 restaurant (Cafe Express). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Wack Pack GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith went through the checklist for approving a sidewalk cafe. She explained that Mr. Pack would need to ask the City Council to waive the requirement for non -disposable containers because the caf6 WHI offer disposable containers for coffee. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of a sidewalk cafe. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). SPAARC 96.0057 1745 Sherman Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd for type 2 restaurant. (Einstein Brothers Bagels) PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Representative of Einstein Brothers Bagels GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith went through the checklist for approving a sidewalk caW ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of a sidewalk cafi3. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Site Plan and .lpprarawe Review Meeting - April 17. 2002 Page 3 b' SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES APRIL 24, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Frank Aguado, Arthur Atterson, Paul D'Agostino, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Waiter Haller, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting.. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 3108-3114 Central Street goncept Raze dwellings and construct Five attached single-family residences with two off-,. street parking spaces each. . PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Dan Pontarelli Troy Malk GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Two different proposals were presented to SPAARC. Mr. Pontarelli explained that the parcel is 120 feet by 140 feet. He is proposing the construction of five raw homes facing Central Street. He explained that he would be providing parking below the building and that there would be two parking spaces per unit. He presented the site plan to SPAARC. Mr. Malk presented his development plan. His development also included five attached dwelling units, but would include courtyards. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz asked if the developments would be compatible with the current facades along the Central Street corridor. Committee member Wolinski stated that this portion of Central Street is currently weak, and that both of these developments would improve upon the appearance of the street. Chairperson Smith asked what the building materials would be. Mr. Pontar+ew stated that cedar siding would be used on the side and in the rear and that brick. would be used on the rest of the building. Chairperson Smith suggested that brick be used on the side and that cedar siding only be used on the gabled portions on the side of both buildings. Mr. Malk stated that his development would include brick throughout except for on the gables. ACTION: A motion was made to approve the concept of both of these proposals. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (6-0). SPAARC 809 Demoster Street Final Construct addition for type 1 restaurant (Siam Pasta). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Cha Milindawad GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Milindawad explained that most of the items were previously approved except for the outdoor fighting. He provided photometric measurements for SPAARC to review. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith explained that the owners would need to provide a hAW to! the City stating that Sunday pick-up of garbage would be provided prior to a permit being issued for this project. Chairperson Smith reiterated that a vinyl awning would not be allowed, but that canvas fabric would be allowed. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review subject to the confirmation of Sunday pick-up of garbage, that no occupancy is granted until this confirmation is provided, and that the new awning be of canvas material. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (6-0). SPAARC 1460 Sherman Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk CaM with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential zone (Tommy Nevins Pub) PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Trish Culhave GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith asked if there were any complaints regarding the sidewalk cafes. Ms. Culhave stated that there were some complaints regarding the tables moving into the Lake Street right of way. Chairperson Smith explained that a buffer, such as a fence or plant box needs to be placed between the sidewalk and the sidewalk cafes to prevent migration of chairs. Chairperson Smith went through the requirements as part of the sidewalk caf6 application. She explained that a request to the City Council to waive the liquor requirements would have to be made. Site Plan and Appearance Review Aleefing - April 24, 2002 Page 2 ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of the sidewalk cafe. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (6-0). SPAARC 1932 Central Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside Liquor Control Regulations Core Area (The Blue Stone). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Thomas O'Malley GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith notified Mr. O'Malley that a buffer would need to be provided to prevent chairs from migrating into the sidewalk right of way. Chairperson Smith went through the requirements as part of the sidewalk ca% application. She explained that a request to the City Council to waive the liquor requirements would have to be made. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of the sidewalk cafe. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (6-0). SPAARC 1700 Orrinpton Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cah4 for We 2 restaurant (McDonald's). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Glen Harrington GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith went through the checklist for approving a sidewalk cafe. She explained that a request should be made to the City Council to waive the requirement of non -disposable utensils and dishware. Mr. Harrington asked if he could pressure wash the sidewalk in front of the McDonaki's. Committee member Aiello explained that EvMark is going to be pressure washing in this area and that Mr. Harrington should contact EvMark prior to pressure washing. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of a sidewalk cafe subject to the confirmation of a Sunday pick-up of garbage. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 711 Church Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (Chipotle Mexican Grill, inc). Site Plan and Appearance Review ,Meeting - April 24, 2002 Page 3 PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Amy Johnson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Smith went through the checklist for approving a sidewalk cafe. She explained that a request should be made to the City Council to waive the requirement of non -disposable utensils and dishware. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of a sidewalk cafe subject to confirmation of a Sunday garbage pick-up. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). OFF AGENDA ITEM: Optima Buildinq PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tod Desmarais GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Desmarais explained that the developers wish to soften the edge of the building by adding landscaping between the sidewalk and the building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith explained that the Engineering Department has some concerns with the grade of the cross slopes. Committee member Aiello expressed concern regarding the fact that the new landscaping would limit the ability for a sidewalk caf6 to locate on the sidewalk. Committee member D'Agostino stated that he would not like to see the removal of the planters. Chairperson Smith stated that she would want to make sure that the landscaping would be maintained. Mr. Desmarais explained that the business association within the building would be responsible for the maintenance of the landscaping. Committee member Aiello requested that written confirmation be provided stating that the business association would maintain the landscaping. She also requested that the developer work with EvMark regarding this landscaping proposal. , ACTION: ' A motion was made to table this project until more information could be provided. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0)• Site Plan and Appearance Review .1keting - April 24. 2002 Page 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MAY 1, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Design Professional: Other Staff: Alan Berkowsky, Paul Dennis Marino, Marc Smith, Jim Wolinsid Hans Friedman D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Jeff Burdick, Waiter 1-M~, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-135 525 Chicaao Avenue Revision to Preliminary Construct 90 attached single-family residencies (townhouses) at site of fomrer Dominic k's grocery store. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: David Dubin Stuart Kanto f George Valdez Jim Plunkard GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Plunkard explained that the new proposal is to include seating and planting areas in the center of the public spaces that are bcated between each building along Chicago Avenue. He stated that the devebper is considering including a 2400t landscape strip between the sidewalk and the building along Chicago Avenue, however, this landscape strip would have to located within the right of way. The homeowner's association would maintain this landscape strip. Mr. Plunkard passed around samples of the trick to be used. He stated that the base of the buildings have been redesigned to include small bands of stone and a stone base to delineate the first floor from the upper floors. He explained that the doors to the units facing Chicago Avenue would be moved to facie the seating and planting areas as opposed to Chicago Avenue itself. He stated that the cornice would have two different brick colors. Mr. Plunkard explained that the FW- windows at the base and at the living areas have been enlarged to address previous SPAARC criticism. Mr. Plunkard explained that the electrical meters would be in the rear of the buildings between the garages. The gas meters along Chicago Avenue would be placed in the comers behind shrubs. He explained that there would be a fence along the alley and that a security fence would be set back four or five feet off of the recesses along Chicago Avenue. Mr. Plunkard explained that the lighting would be on photocells, so that they would turn on automatically according to the amount of light present. Each unit would have outdoor space within the courtyard and on the roof. DISCUSSION: Committee member Berkowsky explained that addresses would need to be visible from the alley elevations. Chairperson Smith asked if there would be lighting in the courtyards. Mr. Plunkard replied that there would be low [eve) Ballard lighting in the courtyard. Committee member Nagar asked if the rear alley would be improved in order to accommodate the increased traffic generation resulting from this development. Mr. Kantoff explained that the alley is currently in good condition and the developer would retum it to at least this condition should it be damaged during construction. Chairperson Smith asked if the sidewalk along Chicago Avenue would be replaced. Mr. Kantoff stated that the sidewalk would be replaced. Chairperson Smith recommended that the developer formulate a paving plan along Chicago Avenue that would compliment the Chicago Avenue streetscape paving plan. Committee member Berkowsky asked if the addresses would be legible from Chia-igo Avenue. Mr. Plunkard explained that the addresses would be etched into the brick in such a way that they would be distinguishable. ACTION: A motion was made to grant a revision to preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to requiring that the project reappear before SPAARC prior to final review so that the rooftop design could be reviewed. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-2). Hans Friedman and Carolyn Smith voted nay. SPAARC 02-052 723 Dobson Street Preliminary and Final! Retain fourth dwelling unit within multi -family residential [wilding, requiring major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Latasha Pittman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Pittman explained that she purchased the property in July of 2000. At this time, an illegal garden unit existed. The City ordered that this unit be destroyed in 19", yet this did not happen. She stated that the unit consists of 1,200 Site Plan and Appearance Review .Meeting - .[lay 1. 2002 Page 2 square feet and that she would like to retain it to use it as a dwelling unit. She explained that new windows would be installed. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski stated that this is an illegal unit and that it should not be condoned. He explained that there are many buildings on the street with only three units. Walter Hallen explained that the garden unit could be attached to the first floor unit with a staircase and that no variances would be required. Committee Marino asked how many off-street parking spaces are provided for the building. Ms. Pittman repfied that there are three off-street parking spaces. Committee member Mylott explained that the only reason that this case is appearing before SPAARC is because a major variation is being requested and that SPAARC could table this case and forward its comments to the Zoning Board of Appeals, who would have purview over this zoning -related matter. ACTION: Committee member Wolinski made a motion to deny the petitioner's request. The motion was not seconded and therefore did not get voted on. A motion was made to table and to send all SPAARC comments to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-1-1). Committee member Wolinski voted nay and Committee member Friedman abstained from voting. SPAARC 02-053 2142 Pioneer Road Preliminary and Final Construct 3-car detached garage accessory to single-family residential building, requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Loretta Baustlan GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Bausban explained that she purchased this property two years ago and that there is currently a 17-foot by 11-foot garage in the bade yard on the property line. She stated that she wishes to tear down this garage and build a new 3-car garage that would be two feet from the property line. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked Ms. Bausban why a three -car garage would be needed. Ms. Baustian stated that she has three cars, one of which is a company car. Committee member Marino asked what the dimensions of the proposed garage would be. Ms. Baustian stated that it would be 284eet by 22-feet. He replied that he is not comfortable with this size of a garage on this small of a lot. Committee member Mykrtt asked if Ms. Baustian considered building a two -car garage with an adjacent parking pad. She said that she had not. Committee member Marino asked what the material of the garage would be. Ms. Baustian stated that it would be vinyl and would have a reverse gable roof. &1e Plan and Appearance Review Afeeting -- Alay 1. 2002 Page 3 ACTION: A motion was made to deny preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval with the recommendation that a two -car garage be constructed with an adjacent parking pad. The motion was seconded and did not pass. Vote (4-4). Chairperson Smith, Committee member Friedman, Committee member D'Agostino, and Committee member Dahal voted nay. A motion was made to deny preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval for a three -car garage and grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval for a two -car garage. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-1) Committee member Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 02-054 2315 Lincoln Street Preliminary and Final Construct 2-car detached garage accessory to single-family residential building, requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Christopher Duquet GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Duquet explained that he recently purchased a house with a very small garage and that he would like to tear down this garage and construct a larger garage in its place and in the same location. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen asked if the existing cement slab would be used. Mr. Duquet stated that a new cement slab would be used and that the garage would have to remain in roughly its existing locale because of a utility pole along the alley. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-055 812 Davis Street Preliminary and Final Operate type 2 restaurant (Quizno's Classic Subs), requiring special use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Lawrence Castle Robert Castle GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Castle explained that he has purchased this retail space and that he wishes to open a Quizno's sub restaurant. He explained that Optima wishes to install two -foot wide planters along the front of the store. However, these planters are going to be flush with the sidewalk and he would rather see raised planters to prevent dirt from spreading into the store and onto the sidewalk. Mr. Castle stated that there are four commercial dumpsters behind each of the units, but they are within the building. Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - May J. 2002 Par 4 DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino asked if a sidewalk cafe would be considered. Mr. Castle stated that he would like to have a sidewalk cafe, but he is not sure that there is enough sidewalk width for one. Chairperson Smith asked if Mr. Castle would support a planting bed in front of the store if a measure were used that prevented the dirt or material within the bed from spreading. Mr. Castle said that he would. Chairperson Smith stated that the pick-up schedule for the trash would need to such that there would be no overflow of the dumpsters. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (7-0). SPAARC 02-057 1870 Sheridan Road Preliminary and Final Construct accessible ramp in street side yard at Alice Millar Chapel (NYorthwestem University). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor Brian Kittle GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Nestor presented the drawings depicting the appearance of the proposed ramp. He explained that the inside face of the ramp would be lit with recessed lighting. A few trees will need to be moved to accommodate the ramp. A painted steel rail would be used so that it would be as transparent as possible. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott pointed out that the construction of the ramp would eliminate the ability for ivy to grow on the wall in this location. Carlos Ruiz felt that the proposed railing should be of a different design, which would be more in keeping with the character of the building as opposed to the stainless steel railing proposal. He also asked that landscape screening be installed in front of the railing to minimize its appearance. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the installation of landscaping to screen the railing and that the railing be done in brush stainless steel. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-056 606 Main Street Preliminary and Final Operate type 2 restaurant (Subway), requiring special use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Cory Kamholz Site Plan and Appearance Rniew Alerting - .1fay 1. 2002 Par 5 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kamholz explained that the exterior of the building would not change. The space formerly consisted of a cigarette store. He presented the signage to be installed on the facade of the building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked how garbage disposal would be handled. Mr. Kamholz explained that garbage would be stored in a dumpster behind the building. He did not feel that Subway would have an issue with providing Sunday garbage pick-up. Chairperson Smith explained that the building might require a unified business sign plan and that this would be under the purview of the building owner. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearanoe review approval subject to a documented commitment of Sunday pick-up of garbage. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-068 2104 Central Street Preliminary and Final Review rear addition to retail services establishment (Sparkle Cleaners & Tallms) constructed without permit. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kely Ibrhahim GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Ibrhahim explained that he purchased the building two years ago and at that time, the addition was already present. He stated that the City told him that there was no permit allowing the construction of the addition. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked what the addition consists of. Mr. lbrhahim verbally explained the details of the addition. Committee members asked to see pictures of the addition. Mr. ibrhahim stated that he did not bring pictures of the addition. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case pending the review of pictures of the addition. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 00-018 800 Davis Street Revision W Final Review planters within right-of-way for mixed -used building (ground -floor retail, structured parkng, and multi -family residential). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tod Desmarais GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: &W Plan and Appeamwe A iew .Herring - Alay 1. 2002 Page 6 Mr. Desmarais stated that last week he presented a plan to install planters between the sidewalk and the building. He explained that this proposal was presented to the potential retail tenants in the building and that they did not have issues with the proposal. Mr. Desmarais stated that he spoke with Bridget Lane from EvMark and that there would not be an issue from EvMark's standpoint regarding the proposed planters, as long as the tenants would not have any problems. He explained that Ms. Lane recommended that he contact Jay Terry from the City to assure that the plant material would not induce pest activity in the area. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith stated that Quizno's representatives appeared before SPAARC earlier in the meeting and expressed concerned with at -grade planters because of the potential for dirt to track onto the sidewalk and possibly into the store. Chairperson Smith asked if it would be realistic for the tenants to incorporate a sidewalk caf6 in front of their stores considering the installation of the proposed planters. It was determined that there would be minimal space for a sidewalk caf6. Committee member Nagar asked if raised planters could be installed. Mr. Desmarais replied that this would not be a preferred option because the glazing of the building exists down to the base of the building. Raised planters would not accomplish the objective of softening the edge of the building. Committee member Mylott asked if measures could be undertaken to mitigate the spreading of dirt out of the landscaped area. Mr. Desmarais stated that the top of the dirt would remain two inches under the ledge between the sidewalk and the landscaping. ACTION: A motion was made to grant a revision to final site plan and appearance review approval subject to maintaining the planter grade bed two inches below the edge of the brick. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-1). Committee member Nagar voted nay. SPAARC 01-049 720 % Clark Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cate Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (JK Sweets). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Yi Young Cha GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Cha stated that she had sidewalk cafes in previous years. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith went through the sidewalk caf& checklist. She asked Ms. Ya if a waiver was going to be requested to allow the use of disposable containers. Site Plan and Appearance Review .1leeffng - ,tiny 1. 1002 Page 7 Ms. Ya replied that this waiver would be needed since she would serve drinks in disposable containers. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of a sidewalk caf6 subject to the confirmation of Sunday trash pick-up from the restaurant. The motion was seconded and passed. (4-1). Committee member Mylott voted nay. r Site Plan and Appearance Review Al"ting — May 1, 2002 PdW I SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MAY 8, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Atterson, Paul D'Agostino,: Ingrid Eckersberg, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wotinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Donna Spicuua C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting Aooroval of Meetina Notes: April 10.2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes subject to the following changes being made: • The motion and action for 1004 Davis Street should only be for final approval since preliminary was previously granted. • Changes need to be noted to the meeting minutes of March 6, March 13, and March 20. } The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). April 17.2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes subject to the following changes being made: • It should be stated that for 125-127 Callan Avenue, a motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review of landscaping by the Department of Parks and Forestry before the City might issue a Final Certificate of Occupancy. • It should be stated that for 811-815 Hinman Avenue, a motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subjed to the review of landscaping by the Department of Parks and Forestry before the City might issue a Final Certificate of Occupancy. In addition, the use of windows should be sensitive to the building's design. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino asked if a sidewalk caf6 would be considered. Mr. Castle stated that he would like to have a sidewalk cafe, but he is not sure that there is enough sidewalk width for one. Chairperson Smith asked if Mr. Castle would support a planting bed in front of the store if a measure were used that prevented the dirt or material within the bed from spreading. Mr. Castle said that he would. Chairperson Smith stated that the pick-up schedule for the trash would need to such that there would be no overflow of the dumpsters. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (7-0). SPAARC 02-067 1870 Sheridan Road Preliminary and Final Construct accessible ramp in street side yard at Alice Millar Chapel (Northwestem University). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor Brian Kittle GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Nestor presented the drawings depicting the appearance of the proposed ramp. He explained that the inside face of the ramp would be lit with recessed lighting. A few trees will need to be moved to accommodate the ramp. A painted steel rail would be used so that it would be as transparent as possible. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott pointed out that the construction of the ramp would eliminate the ability for ivy to grow on the wall in this location. Carlos Ruiz felt that the proposed railing should be of a different design, which would be more in keeping with the character of the building as opposed to the stainless steel railing proposal. He also asked that landscape screening be installed in front of the railing to minimize its appearance. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the installation of landscaping to screen the railing and that the railing be done in brush stainless steel. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-056 506 Main Street. Preliminery and Final Operate type 2 restaurant (Subway), requiring special use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Cory Kamholz She Plan and Appearance Review .fleeting - Alay !. 2002 Page 5 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kamholz explained that the exterior of the building would not change. The space formerly consisted of a cigarette store. He presented the signage to be installed on the fagade of the building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked how garbage disposal would be handled. Mr. Kamhc& explained that garbage would be stored in a dumpster behind the building. He did not feel that Subway would have an issue with providing Sunday garbage pick-up. Chairperson Smith explained that the building might require a unified business sign plan and that this would be under the purview of the building owner. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to a documented commitment of Sunday pick-up of garbage. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-058 2104 Central Street Preliminary and Final Review rear addition to retail services establishment (Sparkle Cleaners & Tailors) constructed without pennit. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kely lbrhahim GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. lbrhahim explained that he purchased the building two years ago and at that time, the addition was already present. He stated that the City told him that there was no permit allowing the construction of the addition. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked what the addition consists of. Mr. lbrhahim verbally explained the details of the addition. Committee members asked to see pictures of the addition. Mr. lbrhahim stated that he did not bring pictures of the addition. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case pending the review of pictures of the addition. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 00-018 800 Davis Street Revision to Final Review planters within tight -of -way for mixed -used building (ground -floor retail, strroctured parking, and multi -family residential). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tod Desmarais GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Seer Plan and Appearance Review .fleeting - A4W 1. 2002 Pager 6 Mr. Desmarais stated that last week he presented a plan to install planters between the sidewalk and the building. He explained that this proposal was presented to the potential retail tenants in the building and that they did not have issues with the proposal. Mr. Desmarais stated that he spoke with Bridget lane from EvMark and that there would not be an issue from EvMark's standpoint regarding the proposed planters, as long as the tenants would not have any problems. He explained that Ms. Lane recommended that he contact Jay Terry from the City to assure that the plant material would not induce pest activity In the area. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith stated that Quizno's representatives appeared before SPAARC earlier in the meeting and expressed concerned with at -grade planters because of the potential for dirt to track onto the sidewalk and possibly into the store. Chairperson Smith asked if it would be realistic for the tenants to incorporate a sidewalk caf6 in front of their stores considering the installation of the proposed planters. It was determined that there would be minimal space for a sidewalk cafe. Committee member Nagar asked if raised planters could be installed. Mr. Desmarais replied that this would not be a preferred option because the glazing of the building exists down to the base of the building. Raised planters would not accomplish the objective of softening the edge of the building. Committee member Mylott asked if measures could be undertaken to mitigate the spreading of dirt out of the landscaped area. Mr. Desmarais stated that the top of the dirt would remain two inches under the ledge between the sidewalk and the landscaping. ACTION: A motion was made to grant a revision to final site plan and appearance review approval subject to maintaining the planter grade bed two inches below the edge of the brick. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-1). Committee member Nagar voted nay. SPAARC 01-049 720 % Clark Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd for type 2 restaurant (JK Sweets). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Yi Young Cha GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Cha stated that she had sidewalk cafes in previous years. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith went through the sidewalk caf8 checklist. She asked Ms. Ya it a waiver was going to be requested to allow the use of disposable containers. Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - Afay 1. 2002 Page 7 Ms. Ya replied that this waiver would be needed since she would serve drinks in disposable containers. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of a sidewalk caf6 subject to the confirmation of Sunday trash pick-up from the restaurant. The motion was seconded and passed. (4-1). Committee member Mylott voted nay. F.Y 3. Site Plan ard.lppearawe RrWew Meeting - May 1. 2002 Page E SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MAY 8, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Paul D"Agostino, Ingrid Eckersberg, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Halien, Donna Spicuzza C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. ADDroval of Meetina Notes: April 10. 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes subject to the following changes being made: • The motion and action for 1004 Davis Street should only be for final approval since preliminary was previously granted. • Changes need to be noted to the meeting minutes of March 6, March 13, and March 20. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). April 17. 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes subject to the failowing changes being made: • It should be stated that for 125-127 Callan Avenue, a motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review of landscaping by the Department of Parks and Forestry before the City might issue a Final Certificate of Occupancy. • It should be stated that for 811-815 Hinman Avenue, a motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review of landscaping by the Department of Parks and Forestry before the City might issue a Final Certificate of Occupancy. In addition, the use of windows should be sensitive to the building's design. • It should be stated that for 1745 Sherman Avenue, the project presenter was a representative from Einstein's Bagels. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). April 24, 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-0). Committee member Friedman abstained from voting due to the fact that he was not present at this meeting. Mav 1, 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes subject to the following changes being made: • Note that Committee member Wolinski made a motion to deny site plan and appearance review approval for 723 Dobson Avenue but that the motion was not seconded. • Note that Chairperson Smith recommended that a paving plan be developed along Chicago Avenue. • Note that the 2-foot landscape strip being considered by the developer between the sidewalk and the building along Chicago Avenue would have to be located within the right of way. • Note that Mr. Kantoff stated that the alley to the rear of the 525 Chicago Avenue is in good condition and that the developer would return it to at least this condition should it be damaged during construction. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-059 1404 Greenleaf Street Preliminary and Final Rebuild rear porches of multi -family residential building "in kind." . PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tony Funari GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Funari explained that the rear porches would be reconstructed and that the new porches would maintain the same appearance as the existing porches. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if the porches would be painted. Mr. Funari stated that he is not sure, but that he would assume so. Chairperson Smith stressed that she would like the porches to be painted. ACTION: Site Plan and Appearance Review .1lttting - .1lay 8, 2002 Page 2 A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the porches being stained or painted. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 01-128 741 Brummel Street Recommendation to Sign Board Erect temporary, freestanding real estate sales signs for multi -family residential building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY. Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that the real estate signs would contain too many items of information, therefore requiring a variation. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of the sign with the conditions that the sign be posted for a maximum period of six months or until all the units are sold -- whichever comes first. The motion included granting discretion for the Sign Board to decide if the number of items on the sign should be approved. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 00-104 1901 Green Bav Road Recommendation to Sign Board Erect freestanding sign for retail service establishment (Currency Exchange). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that two variations would be required to approve this sign. First, the building frontage on Green Bay Road is 23-feet, but 30-feet is required to justify a freestanding sign. Second, the sign is 8-feet from the property line, but is 14-feet in height. The height would have to be reduced to 8-feet. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski felt that this business currently receives enough exposure without the need for an additional sign. Committee member Aiello stated that there is currently too much information on the sign. Committee member Mylott explained that the site plan presented is incorrect. He stated that the landscaped area depicted does not exist. He stated that on these grounds, he would motion to deny the proposed increased signage and notify the business that it is out of compliance. Committee member Aiello suggested that SPAARC should be aware of exactly how this business is violating the regulations before recommending denial. She recommended that the Sign Board should hold its decision on this case until it is dear as to the extent of the regulation violations. Site Plan and Appearance Rrview bfeeling - .Nay 8. 2002 Page 3 ACTION: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Board hold its review of this case until an assessment is completed to determine the degree in which the entire site, including site plan issues, is not in conformance with code. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-060 600 Davis Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (Cafe Mozart). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Fayez Hiasat GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hiasat stated that he previously had a sidewalk cafe. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith went through the sidewalk caf6 checklist. She asked Mr. Hiasat if a waiver was going to be requested to allow the use of disposable containers. Ms. Hiasat replied that this waiver would be needed since he would provide take-out containers to customers using the sidewalk cafe. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of a sidewalk caf6 subject to the confirmation of Sunday trash pick-up from the restaurant if staff determines it is needed. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-062 1560 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sipn Board Erect freestanding and wall signs for office building. (One Rotary Center). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that a new wall sign would be installed in the same location. He explained that a low monument sign is being proposed on the comer and a new monument sign is being proposed near the parking garage entrance. Both of these signs would require variances. The location and height of the parking freestanding sign would require a variation. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial to the Sign Board for the monument sign at the comer of Sherman and Grove. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-3). Committee member Aiello, Committee member Eckersberg, and Committee member Friedman voted nay. A motion was made to recommend to the Sign Board that they require that at the entrance sign and the parking garage signs, the address 01560 Sherman" should Site Plan and Appearance Review ,sleeting -clay S. 2002 Page 4 be prominently displayed. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. A motion was made to recommend approval of the parking freestanding sign. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 96-0074 1724 Sherman Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (Starbucks). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Representative from Starbucks GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The Starbuck's representative stated that the she has had a sidewalk cafe in this location in previous years. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith went through the sidewalk cafe checklist. She asked the Starbuck's representative if a waiver was going to be requested th allow the use of disposable containers. She replied that this waiver would be needed. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of a sidewalk caf6. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 01-131 101 Asbury Avenue Recommendation to Sion Board Erect freestanding and wall signs for retail goods establishment (CVS Pharmacy). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that a low monument sign and a pole sign are being proposed, there would be major signage on the building, and there would be several directional signs within the parking lot. The pole sign would be15-feet from the property line, but the sign would be drilled down to 15-feet from its 24- foot height. The south and west wall signs are too large. The freestanding sign has too many items of information on it. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson pointed out that the wall sign on the north fagade is not facing a right of way and is directly facing an apartment building. Chairperson Smith stated that the white background would not be permitted for the freestanding sign. Committee member Friedman stated that there is no cornice on the building and therefore, there should be no comics on the sign. ACTION: Sur Plan and Appearance Review .Meeting - May 8, 2002 Page 5 A motion was made to recommend denial of the freestanding sign along Asbury Avenue. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). A motion was made to recommend denial of all wall signs along the entire north face of the building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). A motion was made to recommend approval of the freestanding sign along Howard Street given that it meets height, area, items of information, and background requirements and that the cornice is removed. The motion was seconded and did not pass. (3-5). Chairperson Smith, Committee member Wolinski, Committee member Marino, Committee member Friedman, and Committee member Myiott voted nay. A motion was made to recommend denial of the area variation for the wall signs. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). A motion was made to recommend denial of the freestanding sign along Howard Street. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-1). Committee member Akerson voted nay. A motion was made to recommend approval of each of the directional signs with the condition that the cornices be removed. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - May 8. 2002 Page 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MAY 159 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Marc Mylott, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ . ADDroval of Meeting Notes: May 8, 2002: Approval of the May 8, 2002 meeting notes was tabled, allowing committee members the time to review them. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-063 615.621 Case Place Preliminary and Final Remodel 12-unit multi -family residential building as part of condominium conversion. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Andrew Rogowsk Paul Hardej GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Rogowski explained that the only exterior changes to be done include changing windows and the addition of a gate in the front of the property. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked what type of windows would be used for the replacement. Mr. Rogowski stated that the new windows would be double hung vinyl. Chairperson Smith asked if awning windows were considered. She explained that double hung windows would change the appearance of the building, which was built in the 1950's and reflects that era's residential architecture. Mr. Rogowski replied that awning windows were not considered. Chairperson Smith suggested that the appearance of the thru-wall air- conditioning units be mitigated to provide a more aesthetic building elevation. The Committee commented that the existing landscaping is overgrown and should be replaced with new landscaping. Mr. Rogowski stated that new landscaping had not been considered. However, a new wrought iron fence with a gate would be installed and the sidewalks would be replaced. New bushes would be replaced if necessary. Chairperson Smith explained that good landscaping is necessary to attract buyers. Mr. Hardej stated that he would be happy to submit a landscape plan according to the City's regulations. Chairperson Smith inquired as to exterior lighting. Mr. Rogowski stated that the existing lights would be replaced with new fixtures. Chairperson Smith asked that the address on the building be replaced with a nicer address. Committee member Mylott asked if there would be any mechanisms to maintain the dumpsters. Mr. Hardej stated that there would not be any form of containment. Committee member Mylott asked the developers to install wheel stops to contain the dumpsters. ACTION: A motion was made to table pending clarification of landscaping, lighting, the address display, and concrete stops for the dumpster area. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 024)64 1501 Central Street Preiiminary and Final Install wireless communications facility (Cingular Wireless) at Ryan Field PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mark Shinkus Christopher Flick GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Flick explained that Cingular Wireless has been working with Northwestern regarding this project and that the lease has been negotiated and completed with the University. He stated that a neighborhood meeting was held to inform them of this proposal and that Alderman Engleman supports this project. Mr. Shinkus explained that the wireless facility would be flush mounted to the southwest stair tower at Ryan Field. DISCUSSION: Mr. Flick explained that the wireless facility cannot be surface mounted because it needs to rotate on occasion. Committee member Wolinski stated that this location is appropriate for a wireless facility. ACTION: Site Plan and Appearawr Rnlew Alerting -.Nay 15, 2002 Page 2 A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the facility being pulled in as close as possible to the tower. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 02-057 1870 Sheridan Road Revision to Final Construct accessible ramp in street side yard at Alice Millar Chapel (Northwestem University). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Nestor explained that this project received preliminary and final SPAARC approval two weeks ago. However, one of the conditions imposed by SPAARC stated that the handrail should be constructed of stainless steel. He explained that Northwestern is having difficulty maintaining existing stainless steel railings on campus because they become pitted. As a result, Northwestern is requesting that this condition be lifted and that the railing be constructed of painted metal. DISCUSSION: Mr. Nestor pointed out that the area in front of the railing will be re -landscaped and that this landscaping would screen a large portion of this railing. Chairperson Smith stated that she still feels that stainless steel is the most appropriate material for the railing. ACTION: A motion was made to deny the revision to the final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-1). Committee member Mylott voted nay. Mr. Nestor asked if this decision regarding the railing was a binding site plan issue or an appearance issue. The Committee responded that it was an appearance issue. SPAARC 02-068 2104 Central Street Preliminary and Final Review rear addition to retail services establishment (Sparkle Cleaners and Tailors) constructed without permit. . PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kelv lbfiahim GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. lbrhahim presented a picture of the rear addition to his establishment. He reiterated that this addition was built prior to his purchase of the building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith notified Mr. lbfiahim that the existing sign on the building needs to be removed to comply with code. Site Plan and Appearance Review .sleeting - llay 15. 2002 Pw 3 ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the removal of the sign from the wall of the addition. The sign on the door of the addition would be allowed to remain. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Off Menda Item: Committee member Myloit asked the Committee if the City should regulate the GALA green bins in Evanston. These bins are used to collect clothes for charity. Committee member Mylott explained that some of these bins are overflowing. Chairperson Smith suggested obtaining a list of all of the businesses where these bins have been installed. She stated that a property maintenance inspector should require that a business owner maintain these bins. Committee member Mylott stated that he would infomn the individual complaining about these boxes that: - These bins are not under control by the City of Evanston - If there is a problem regarding the maintenance of one of these bins, Stan Janusz, Assistant Director of Property Standards, is the appropriate contact - If one of these bins poses a traffic safety issue, then the City's Traffic Engineering Department should be contacted. Ske Plan and Appearan" Re . !rw Muting - May 15. 2002 Pggr 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE Attendees: Committee Members: MEETING NOTES MAY 22, 2002 Arthur Aiterson, Paul Wafter Hallen, Dennis Nagar, Jim Wolinski D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-063 615-621 Case Place Preliminary and Final Remodel t 2-unit mufti -family residential building as part of condominium conversion. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Paul Hardej Andrew Rogowski GENERA!_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hardej explained that the existing landscaping would be removed completely and replaced. He presented the landscape plan to SPAARC. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith requested that plantings be included along the front edge of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the extensions of planting along the front edge of the foundation of the building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 02-061 1572 Maple Avenue Concept Construct mixed -use building at site of former State Department of Employment ServiceAJnemployment Insurance. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom Roszak Don Wallin Karl Omori Mariano Barragan GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Roszak stated that the proposal would consist of a seven -story condo building, with the first two floors being dedicated to parking. The proposed building would contain 26 units. He stressed that the proposal is completely within all of the zoning regulations for the site. He explained that the building would be built in two phases unless sales of the condos are extremely successful. Mr. Roszak presented the different sizes and bedroom types of units on each floor. DISCUSSION: Committee member Dahal asked about the accessibility of the ramp to the parking garage. Walter Hallen explained that there would not be enough width for two lanes of traffic on the ramp. Mr. Roszak explained that the ramp would not allow for two-way traffic at once, and that it would utilize mirrors and electronic signalization to notify drivers of the ramp's availability. Committee member Aiello asked if the ground floor office space was being provided because of zoning requirements or because of need for more office space. Mr. Roszak replied that the office space is being provided because of zoning requirements. Committee member Friedman asked if one elevator would be sufficient to serve the building. Mr. Roszak felt that one elevator would be more than sufficient. Chairperson Smith explained that glass might not be permitted on the north elevation, as the building would be within five feet of the property line. Mr. Roszak stated that the alley is an easement and that this should not affect windows on the north elevation. Chairperson Smith stated that this issue would have to be worked out as the project progresses. SPAARC reviewed the elevations. Chairperson Smith asked that the pre -cast concrete color be warmer, so that it does not look like C.M,U. She also requested that the south elevation be broken up so to create a more Interesting appearance. Carlos Ruiz asked what type of windows would be used. Mr. Roszak stated that the windows would be aluminum. Mr. Ruiz asked that other window types and colors be considered. ACTION: Site Plan and Appearance Review Aleeting - hlay 11. 2002 Page 2 A motion was made to grant concept site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 01-044 1700 central Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cato (Liquor) Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feel of residential use and outside of Liquor Control Regulations Core Area (Trattoria Truffle). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Doreen Price DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if liquor would be served within the sidewalk caft.. Ms. Price stated that liquor would be served. Chairperson Smith informed Ms. Price that a variation would have to be requested asking the City to waive the no liquor regulation. Chairperson Smith went through the sidewalk caf6 checklist with Ms. Price. Committee member Myiott informed Ms. Price that she would be on the agenda for the Planning Development Committee meeting of June 10, 2002. He also informed her of the notification requirements. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of a sidewalk caf6. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-065 1006 Davis Street Prellminary and Final Remove 2no-floor side and mar windows as part of remodeling above Lemol Hardware. This applicant did not show and this case was not heard. SPAARC 02-066 2668 Green Bav Road Preliminary and Final Construct addition to expand type 2 restaurant (Dunkin` Donuts to include Baskin Robbins). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Janel Mallek GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Mallek explained that the addition would allow for a Baskin Robbins and a Dunkin' Donuts. She explained that a kitchen would not be needed, as the food would be prepared off -site. She passed around pictures and plans for SPAARC review. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith stated that she would like to see less dry-vit on the building. Mr. Hallen asked what the material of the walk-in cooler in the rear would be. Ms. Mallek answered that the cooler would be of galvanized metal. Chairperson Site Plan and Appearance Review ,heeling - .thy 22. 2002 Page 3 Smith stated that an exposed cooler would look inappropriate on the site. Ms. Mallek stated that other communities require that a masonry wall screen exterior coolers and that this could be done in this case. Carlos Ruiz asked that more direction be given to Ms. Mallek so that she would have a considerable amount of information to provide to the Dunkin Donuts corporation regarding the design of the building. Chairperson Smith suggested using spandrel glass in place of dry-vit. Ms. Mallek replied that spandrel glass would make the building appear industrial. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case so that the applicant could have the opportunity to respond to the requests of SPAARC involving both dry-vit and the exterior cooler. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-067 860 Hinman Avenue Prellminary and Final Install wireless communications facility (AT&7). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ed Stapleton GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Stapleton stated that the wireless facility would be installed on the elevator shaft of a seven -story apartment building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if this building had any other antennas on it. Mr. Stapleton stated that he was not aware of there being any other antennas on the building. Committee member Mylott stated that there were approvals for antennas on this building in 1997. Mr. Stapleton stated that he was not aware of these other antennas. Carlos Ruiz wanted to assure that the building was not landmarked. Committee member Wolinski asked to see pictures of the building. Mr. Stapleton replied that he did not bring pictures. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case until pictures of this building were available for SPAARC review. Committee member Mylott also asked that the applicant find out what happened to the previous antenna applications from 1997. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-068 2133 Sheridan Road Concept Construct new 4-story classroom and office building (McCormick School of Engineering Department at Northwestern University). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ron Nayler Site Place and Appearance Review blerling -May 21, 2002 Page 4 Jay Baehr GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Nayler explained that this building would house the Engineering School's Design Program and the Computer Science Program, which is currently housed in the research park. He presented the model of the project to SPAARC. DISCUSSION: Mr. Ruiz asked if the new building would be located on the same lot as the Shakespeare Gardens, which is a National Landmark. Mr. Nayler stated that it is on the same lot of land, but that the plat delineates between the Shakespeare Gardens and the rest of the lot. Mr. Ruiz felt that this case should appear before the Historic Landmarks Commission because it is on the same lot as a National Landmark. Committee member Friedman asked how the building would affect the plants and trees in the garden. Mr. Nayler explained that some shading studies were done and that the building would not cast a shadow on the garden in the summer and that the building would not affect the amount of sunlight provided any more than the existing trees do. Committee member Mylott asked what type of glass would be used on the building. Mr. Nayler explained that the building would consist of limestone, and that the glass would be clear, not reflective. He stated that Northwestern is looking at a certain type of window that removes heat from the building and will be energy efficient. The intent is to allow a view into the building. Chairperson Smith asked how the lighting would be handled. Mr. Nayler stated that pendant lightning would probably be used that would shine light both up and down and prevent a large amount of lighting from emitting through the glass of the building. Chairperson Smith asked if there would be mechanical units on the roof of the building. Mr. Nayler stated that the mechanical units would be tucked into the mass of the building and that a parapet wall would be installed to assure that any small mechanical units that might need to be installed in the future would be screened. Mr. Ruiz asked if there is any possibility to move the proposed building so that it is not so close to the Gardens. Mr. Nayler explained that this was looked into and that moving the building would disrupt the established setbacks in this area. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case so that it can first be submitted to the Historic Preservation Commission and that the comments made by SPAARC are She Plan and Appearance Review Afeefing - .ilay 22. 2002 Page 5 forwarded to the Commission. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-1). Committee member Nagar voted nay. Site Plan and Appearance Review McafrRg - May 11. 2002 Pop 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MAY 299 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Design Professional: Other Staff: Arthur Afterson, Paul Walter Hallen, Dennis Nagar, Jim Wolinski Hans Friedman Jeff Burdick D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat J. Wolinski (acting chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Approval of Meeting Notes: Mav 8.2002: A motion was made to approve these minutes. passed unanimously. (9-0). May 15. 2002: A motion was made to approve these minutes. passed unanimously. (9-0). The motion was seconded and The motion was seconded and Mav 22.2002: A motion was made to table the approval of these minutes, allowing committee members the chance to review them. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-066 2668 Green Bav Road Preliminary and Final Construct addition to expand type 2 restaurant (Dunkin' Donuts to include Saskin Robbins). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Janel Mallek GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Mallek explained that the new proposal is to construct a concrete block cooler that would be painted to match the building. In addition, more detailing would be added to the dry-vit band and more color would be added to the facade. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott asked if a parapet wall could be constructed to screen and block out the noise of the condenser units. Committee member Hallen stated that condenser units used for coolers generally have sheet metal sides and blow out the top and are inconspicuous. Committee member Mylott asked if different materials were explored. Ms. Mallek replied that they looked at improving the appearance of the dry-vit and that this project would greatly improve the appearance of the building and would stand out among the other buildings in the area. Committee member Friedman asked if the colors presented would be the actual colors used. Ms. Mallek answered yes and explained that these are the corporate colors. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the condenser units for sound and appearance by the building division prior to the issuance of a building permit. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-067 860 Hinman Avenue Preliminary and Final Install wireless communications facility (AT&7). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ed Stapleton GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Stapleton presented the pictures of the building that SPAARC requested at the previous meeting. He also presented the drawings depicting the antennas: DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott suggested that the antennas be painted to match the, brick. Mr. Stapleton stated that the specs state that this would be done. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the antenna and the ductwork being painted the same color as the brickwork. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-1). Committee member Friedman voted nay. SPAARC 01-069 515 Dodne Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct detached carport, accessory to single-family residence, requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Wenceslao Rivera Site Plan and Appearance Review .Alerting -May 29, 2002 Page 2 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee member Mylott explained that the variance is due to the proposed carport being located three feet from the principal structure, where a minimum of ten feet is permitted and because the lot coverage would be increased to 42%, where 40% is the maximum in this district. Mr. Rivera explained that he is the owner of the property and that he wants to construct a carport in place of the existing driveway. He stated that there is no existing garage. DISCUSSION: Committee member Nagar asked what type of roof would be used for the carport. Mr. Rivera answered that a corrugated plastic roof would be used. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-071 908-910 Noves Street Preliminary and Final Operate type 2 restaurant (sandwich shop with carryout service). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Paul Camastro GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Camastro explained that he wishes to expand his catering business, which is located next door, and allow for customers to carry -out pre -made meals. He said that there would be approximately four tables in place for eating in the restaurant DISCUSSION: Acting Chair Wolinski asked if Mr. Camastro was planning to do any work to the outside of the store. Mr. Camastro stated that he was not planning any exterior work except for signage. Acting Chair Wolinski informed Mr. Camastro that the signage would have to be approved by the City and that there is a unified signage plan in this area. Mr. Camastro stated that his signage would probably consist of window signage. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and fins, sits plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded aii i passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-070 1132 Florence Avenue Preliminary Construct addition to and remodel office building, requiring major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Bruce Hildner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Site Plan and Appearance Rn;rw dferang -May 29, 2002 Page 3 Mr. Hildner explained that he would like to construct an addition to the existing office building but that the building is located in a build -to -lot line zoning district. This creates a problem in that there is a mature chestnut tree located next to the building that would have to be tom down. Mr. Hildner explained that he is proposing both a one-stecy and a two-story addition. DISCUSSION: Committee member Hallen suggested that a trellis be constructed around the tree with a covering, taus allowing the owner to avoid the need for a variance. Committee member Alterson felt that the easiest solution would be to apply for the variance. Committee member Marino concurred and stated that a trellis might screen the tree, much to the chagrin of the neighborhood. Acting Chair Wolinski asked what type of material would be used for the addition. Mr. Hildner stated that the addition would be constructed of masonry, with face brick on the front and concrete block on the side. Committee member Friedman asked if anything would be done to the house in the rear. Mr. Hildner stated that this house would be sett as is. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval with a strong recommendation to save the tree. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-072 726 Dobson Street Preliminary and Final Retain third dwelling unit within multi -family residential building, requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: James Davis GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Davis explained that there are currently no tenants residing in the basement unit that the owner wants to convert to a living unit He outlined the layout of the building. DISCUSSION: Acting Chair Wolinski asked how much parking is provided on site. Mr. Davis replied that there are three off-street spaces provided. Committee member Mylott asked how much of the unit is above grade and how much is below grade. Mr. Davis replied that the foundation is four feet below grade and that the ceiling heights are eight feet Committee member Mylott explained that the variation would reduce the required lot size per dwelling unit from 1,500 square feet per unit to 1,200 square feet per unit. An additional variation is required because a three -unit building changes Site Plan and Appearance Revww .Ueeraig - Afay 29. 2002 Page 4 the use to a multi --family use and that a 50-foot lot width requirement would be needed. The current lot width is 30-feet. ACTION: A motion was made to deny site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-019 600 Main Street Restore Metra Station Discussion Dave Jennings explained to SPAARC that he has a meeting on Friday morning in which he is to provide comments from the City to Metra regarding this project. Committee member Mylott asked if anything has changed since this last appeared before SPAARC. Mr. Jennings stated that he is not aware of any changes. Committee member Mylott informed Mr. Jennings that he would provide him with the minutes from the previous SPAARC meeting in which this project appeared. Site Plan and Appewnnee Review Meeting - May 29. 2002 Page 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JUNE 5, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Design Professional: Other Staff: Arthur AAlterson, Paul D'Agostino, Walter Hallen, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Hans Friedman Jeff Burdick, Carlos Ruiz 0. Marino (acting chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Approval of Meeting Notes: Mav 22.2002: A motion was made to approve these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Mav 29. 2002: A motion was made to approve these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Projects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-071 737 Reba Place Preliminary and Final Rebuild porches of multi -family residenhial building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Project Representative GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: The project representative explained that the proposal is to replace the existing steel and concrete rear porches and replace them with wood. These porches are not visible from any of the adjacent properties. The representative feels that the new porches will be a dramatic increase In appearance. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott asked if the wood would be treated. The representative replied that the wood is pre-treated. Acting chair Marino asked if each of the units would have a porch. The representative explained that currently each unit only has a catwalk. After the porches are replaced, each of the units would have a porch area. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (M). SPAARC 02-072 1450 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Replace certain windows of type I restaurant (Tommy Nevin's Pub) with folding doors. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kiril Mirintchev GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Mirintchev stated that the doors would open to the inside. He explained that the doors are being installed to allow the wall to be open to the outside when the weather is warm. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott asked if the design of the doors would match the existing windows and doors on the facade. Mr. Mirintchev replied that the design would be the same and that the windows to be used on the doors would be wood. Acting Chair Marino stated that it would be important that the glass be transparent. Mr. Mirintchev replied that the windows on the doors would be transparent. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the use of transparent glass on the doors and that the doors swing in and not out towards the right of way. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-073 532 Westev Avenue Preliminary Remodel 3-unit multi -family residential building and construct underground parking. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: William James GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. James stated that the existing three -unit building is dilapidated. His proposal is to reconfigure and rehabilitate the building. He stated that the design would preserve the north, east, and west walls and replace the south wall to assure a nice elevation. The existing garage would be removed and replaced by Site Plan and Appearance Review .fleeting - June J. 2002 Page 2 underground parking for three spaces. As a result, the lot coverage would be reduced. Mr. James stated that the design would be of Queen Anne style, with nice ornamental features such as a comer turret, projecting bays, porches, and an outdoor terrace for each unit. DISCUSSION: Committee members asked what the exterior treatment of the building would be. Mr. James stated that it would be brick and wood. Committee member Mylott asked if the north, west, and east sides would remain frame siding. Mr. James explained that all four sides would be brick. Committee members asked that photographs of the existing building and surrounding properties be provided. Committee member Alterson asked if there would be new landscaping. Mr. James stated that there would be considerable landscaping. He was informed that a landscape plan would be needed for final approval. Mr. James stated that he would not be using jumbo brick. ACTION: Because photographs were not provided, a motion was made to grant concept approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Site Plan and Appemnwe Review Meeting -- June J.1002 Page 3 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 12, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak D*sign Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. ADDroval of Minutes: June 5, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to table the approval of these minutes due to the fact that they were not yet reviewed by many SPAARC members. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-073 532 Weslev Avenue Preliminary Remodel 3-unit multi -family residential building and construct underground parking. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: William James GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. James provided a brief recap of the project for those members who were not In attendance the previous week. He passed around pictures of the existing house. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if the current house was brick. Mr. James explained that the existing house is siding. Chairperson Smith pointed out that the north face of the wall might be too close to the property line to allow for window openings. Mr. James stated that the north face is less than two feet from the property line. He explained that the City's Building Department informed him that he could match the existing building openings on that wall. SPAARC informed him that this is not true. Several members of SPAARC expressed their concern regarding the potential for the north face of the building being a blank wall with no windows. Walter Hallen suggested that the windows be recessed. Committee member Friedman added that recessing the windows would create a more interesting north fagade. Committee member Mylott stated that he is not comfortable granting preliminary approval at this time prior to resolution of the north fagade. ACTION: A motion was made to table pending resolution of the north fagade. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-075 1114 Colfax Street Preliminary and Final Construct dormers within front of roof of single-family residence, requiring major variations. - PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Douglas larch GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: , i _ Mr. larch explained that the owners of the house would like to install front dormers, which would create a larger bedroom and bathroom space in the attic. He presented pictures of the existing house to SPAARC. He explained that the variance deals with the length and position of the proposed dormers. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith noted that the center dormer appears too wide and that narrowing it would enhance the look of the elevation. ACTION: A motion was made grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the reduction in width of the center dormer as much as possible. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-076 2730-2764 Hamaton Parkway_ Prellminary and Final Possible subdivision of record into one lot of record to construct a single-family residence. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Scott Inbinder Sam Grill GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Inbinder explained that a number of improvements have been made to this site in the past. He stated that the developers wish to construct a single-family Site Plan and iWearance Revt w Muting -June 12, 2002 Page 2 House on an exception lot that was created as part of the condominium development. DISCUSSION: Members of the Committee asked if the exception lot has its own legal description and plat. Mr. Inbinder replied that there is a legal description, but that he did not bring a plat of subdivision. He stated that he was not sure if a subdivision would be required, as he felt one already exists. Committee member Mylott asked if the proposed development required any sort of variances. Mr. Grill stated that no requirements would be needed for the proposed single-family development on the exception lot. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval for a subdivision, if required. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). 1850 Sherman Avenue Off-Anenda Hem PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Marc Malnati GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Malnati explained that he was looking for a revision to preliminary approval from SPAARC. He stated that he would like to change the windows by creating a continuous stretch of windows. A butt -glaze would be done between the panes. The lighting would also be reduced, so that there would be no lighting below the windows. In addition, portions of the sidewalk would be replaced to accommodate handicapped access. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott commented that he felt that frames would be more attractive than butt -glaze between the windows, in that it would reinforce the vertical appearance of the fagade. He also asked why the base near the door is lower than the rest of the base. Walter Hallen explained that part of the area inside is a raised seating area and that the base is shielding this seating area from the glass. Mr. Malnati stated that the exhaust tube in the rear would need to be utilized. Chairperson Smith asked if there was an agreement between the adjacent property owner for the use of the tube, because it is on their property. Mr. Malnati stated that there is not an agreement in place, but that one would be executed if necessary. Committee member Friedman asked how the brickwork would be restored and maintained. Mr. Malnati stated that the necessary steps would be taken to Site Plan and Appearance Review .Sleeting -June 11.1002 Page 3 restore the brickwork. Committee member D'Agostino stated that if concrete cuts were provided along the sidewalk, the City would provide trees. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: • The addition of two 5' by 5' cuts in the concrete for street trees; Matching the base material in terms of detail and height; • Masonry restoration on the two street front sides; The motion was seconded and passed. Vote (6-1). Committee member Mylott voted nay because he would rather have seen frames used between the windows than butt glazing. SPAARC 96-0078 2510 Green Bav Road Recommendation to Sinn Board Install 2 new freestanding signs at retail goods establishment (Domicile Fumiture). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee member Mylott explained that in 1997, this applicant's proposal was denied. He also returned in 1998 with a similar proposal that was denied. Mr. Hallen stated that he is proposing two free standing signs and that these signs are too high for the distance they are from the property line. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith noted that there has been code violation problems regarding this establishment in the past. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial to the SignBoard. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-033 1012 Chicago Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Construct new freestanding sign (AutoBam Mazda of Evanston). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that this proposal appeared before SPAARC a few months ago. At the time, SPAARC denied the request and the SignBoard tabled the issue to determine why so much information was required on the sign. ACTION: Site Plan and Appearance Review dfeering - June IZ 2002 Page 4 A motion was made to recommend denial to the SignBoard. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - June 12. 2002 Page 5 MEETING NOTES SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE June 19, 2002 Room 2404 Members Present A. Alterson, R. Dahal, K. Fujihara, C. Brzezinski, P. D'Agostino, D. Marino, M. Mylott, R. Walczak, J. Wolinski. Members Absent J. Aiello, D. Jennings, K. Kelly, S. Nagar. Design Professional Present None. Other Staff Present: C. Ruiz, M. Robinson, W. Hallen. Others Present: Commencement C. Brzezinski (chair) determined a quorum existed and began the meeting at 3:00 p.m. SPAARC D1-157 2515 Prairie Avenue Discussion Consider alternate building materials for two north stair towers of 8-unit multi -family residential building. ITEM PRESENTED BY: Tom Gourguechon, owner. PRESENTATION: M. Mylott stated that the Zoning Division found a way whereby the stair towers could be brick without creating a zoning violation; however, doing so would prove costly to the developer. T. Gourguechon stated that it would cost an extra $15,000 to clad both towers with brick; he would like to propose two altematives: the towers could be a buff -color smooth -face block with raked joints every third course; or the towers could be a block that is sprayed with a pigmented water -proofing sealant to attempt to match the color of the brick elsewhere on the building. DISCUSSION: C. Brzezinski stated that she understands the need to make choices; the north elevation Is such a long run that she believes that, with the articulation, the buff -color block and raked joints would be OK. M. Mylott agreed. C. Ruiz stated that he is concerned that the size of the block is out of proportion to the size of the brick. D. Marino stated that this elevation will be very visible, especially to the neighbors immediately to the north; he would like the towers to be brick. ACTION: Committee approved a motion (7-2) to avarove a revision to final site Dian and aooearance review aDoroval, acceotino the first alternative (buff -color smooth -face block with raked iointsl. D. Marino and R. Dahal voted nay. ME1=nNG NOTES SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE June 19, 2002 Pap tof2 SPAARC 02-077 812 Davis Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd for type 2 restaurant (Quizno's Classic Subs). ITEM PRESENTED BY: Mr. Lary Castle, owner. DISCUSSION: C. Brzezinski read the sidewalk caf6 requirements as established in the Type II Restaurant Sidewalk Cafe Review form; L. Castle responded that Quizno's Classic Subs would comply with all requirements, and Quizno's Classic Subs would request the waiver to permit disposable beverage containers. C. Brzezinski stated that the applicant must comply with the Procedure and Notice requirements for Sidewalk Caf6s. M. Mylott gave L. Castle the Procedure and Notice requirements for Sidewalk Cafas. ACTION: The Committee approved a motion (9-0) to recommend that the Citv Council approve the ADD kmWn for Sidewalk Caf6 of Quizno's Classic Subs, SPAARC 98-0065 1454 Elmwood Avenue Revision to Final OFF -AGENDA ITEM: Review changes to lighting for addition to and renovation of Evanston Fin%#Wi'ce Headquarters. ITEM PRESENTED BY: Mr. Elliot Dudnik, architect. PRESENTATION: E. Dudnik stated that they have added lights along the south elevation to cover holes discovered in the masonry. E. Dudnik stated that they are replacing a parking lot light with two light packs mounted to the sally port. DISCUSSION: C. Brzezinski stated that, regarding the south elevation, she supports the Idea of lights only on both sides of the door, all others are extraneous. C. Brzezinski stated that none of the styles of fixtures proposed are appropriate to the design of the building. C. Brzezinski stated that, regarding the lights on the sally port, she cannot support these fixtures because the shine light out toward the residential building to the north; these fixtures must focus light down. ACTION: The Committee approved a motion (9-0) to approve the revision to final site clan and appearance review approval, acceptinq two light fixtures fiankina the entrance of the south elevation. The Committee approved a motion (9-0) to table the review of the sally port lightinq Adioumment The meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m Respectfully submitted, Marc Steven Mylott, AICP Ailing Recording Secretary MEET NG NOTES SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMI I I Am 19, 2002 Papa 2 of 2 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 26, 2002 Attendees: Commifte Members: Arthur Atterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Dennis Marino, Marc Myiott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick; -Wafter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began tho meartlng. ADDroval of Minutes: June 5, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to approve these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). One member abstained. June 12, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to approve these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). One member abstained. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-078 1630 Hinman Avenue PrOMINry Reconfigure Church Street entrance for religious institution (First United Methodist Church). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stephen Yas Marvin Juliar Tim Bennett GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Yes explained that the entry for the church would be redesigned so to Increase the size of the entrance that is used most often by the public. He stated that the existing entrance would be mimicked, but just made larger. He also noted that an accessible ramp would be constructed at this entrance. SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 26, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Atterson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff. Jeff Burdick; Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the mNting. ADDroval of Minutes: June 5, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to approve these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). One member abstained. June 12, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to approve these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). One member abstained. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-078 1630 Hinman Avenue Preliminary Reconfigure Church Street entrance for religious institution (First United Methodist Church). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stephen Yas Marvin Juliar Tim Bennett GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Yas explained that the entry for the church would be redesigned so to increase the size of the entrance that is used most often by the public. He stated that the existing entrance would be mimicked, but just made larger. He also noted that an accessible ramp would be constructed at this entrance. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked Mr. Yas to clarify the materials to be used for the new entrance. Mr. Yas stated that the same limestone would be used, however, it would not be the exact same coloration. The same details would be carved into the limestone. Committee member Dahal asked if a traffic pull -off area would be provided. Mr. Yas stated that a pull -off accommodating five car lengths would be included. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to any changes from what has been presented being brought back before SPAARC and that the Department of Engineering review the changes to the public right of way area in front of the entrance. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Committee member Mylott abstained from voting. SPAARC 01-123 1930 Ridae Avenue Final Demolish parking structure and construct four 4-story multi -family residential buildings with underground parking. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stephen Yas Nick Patera Richard Aaronson Raj Shah Joe Macnek Biom Hammer GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Patera began by pointing out any changes to the site plan since this projed last appeared before SPAARC. The pedestrian paving in the courtyard has been extended to join Ridge Avenue. This would discourage people from pulling off of Ridge Avenue and parking in front of the courtyards. Gates with decorative columns would be placed at the entrance of the courtyards. The planters within the courtyards would appear as if it is a permanent part of the landscaping and not appear temporary. He presented the colors of the paving bricks to be used within the courtyard and discussed the project's landscape plan. Mr. Aaronson presented the lighting plan to the Committee. He explained that the centerpiece of the proposed lighting plan is a European origin cable - supported lighting system. Mr. Yas presented the elevations to the Committee. He first presented the wall along Ridge Avenue. He explained that the wall would be stepped at different locations to break up its appearance. -He acknowledged that SPAARC asked him to consider using a complimentary brick above the first floor on the bays. Site Plan and .Appearance Rer ew ,fleeting - June ZG, 2t)02 Page 2 However, Mr. Yas explained that this was looked at and that he felt that extending the base material up the bays would look better. He presented the colors of the different materials to be used. Mr. Yas stated that the handrails would be perforated metal. The balconies would be constructed of wood with an open pattern. There would be no lighting on the balconies. The west elevation would consist of red brick, with a different shade of brick at certain locations. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if bollards would be installed on the site. Mr. Patera stated that there would be no bollards installed. Committee member Dahal pointed out that the fire department might have difficulty in raising ladders considering that the lighting cables may get in the way. Carlos Ruiz felt that the hanging lights might give the impression that the lights are temporary placed and that it should be installed the proper way to keep it from appearing this way. Members of the Committee suggested -that -the base of the balconies be closed to prohibit water and other materials from seeping through. Committee member Mylott stated that the arch above the gate appears traditional, where the binding appears modem. He stated that there is still some tweaking that the development team may wish to do. This includes locations of the utilities, the garage door, the gate, and the opacity of the balconies. Committee member Marino asked the rest of the Committee how it felt regarding the amount of concrete block being used on the elevation of the buildings. Certain members felt that the stone was being utilized carefully by the developers and that it would be detailed to make it appear as attractive as possible. Committee member Marino stated that he is uncomfortable with the material and that the Committee appears to be changing its tune in this case regarding the use of concrete block. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval for the issuance of a foundation permit only so that the outstanding issues could be dealt with. The motion was seconded. The motion failed. (3-3). Committee member Friedman abstained from voting. A motion was made to approval preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to any significant changes needing to come back before SPAARC. The motion was seconded. The motion failed. (3-4). A motion was made grant final site plan approval for the issuance of a foundation permit only. The motion was seconded and passed (6-1). Committee member Friedman voted nay. Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeering - June 26. 2002 Pop 3 A motion was made to grant final appearance review approval for the issuance of a foundation permit only. The motion was seconded and passed (6-2). Committee member Friedman and Marino both voted nay. SPAARC 02-079 1634 Orrinaton Avenue Preliminary and Final Operate type-2 restaurant (Ben and Jeny's lce Cream Partner Shop), requiring special use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ann Jeanett Tera Krigbaum GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Jeanett explained that a Ben and Jerry's Partner Shop is like a regular Ben and Jerry's except that the franchise fee is waived and that it is a non-profit store. She stated that youth from underprivileged backgrounds would work in the store as part of a training program. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if any external changes would be made to the storefront. Ms. Jeanett stated that the only external changes would be the addition of a new awning. Chairperson Smith explained that there may be a unified business center plan for this block and that this should be explored before the awning is installed. Chairperson Smith also noted that trash pick-up is a major issue in the downtown and asked how the trash pick-up would be handled. Ms. Jeanett replied that the store would be kept very clean and that trash would be hauled out to the rear of the building. Carlos Ruiz tried to determine if this building is a landmark building. Mr. Ruiz asked to review the new awning in case this storefront is part of a landmark building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: The posting of a sign in the store notifying employees that they must park in a City garage Review and approval if required by the Preservation Commission. Review and approval by the Building Department if it is determined that this building is part of a unified business center sign plan. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-080 2835 Hartzell Street Preliminary and Final PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Gem Conlon Site Plan and Appearance Review .fleeting - June 26, 2002 Page d GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Conlon explained that she wishes to reconstruct the current garage so that it would comfortably fit two cars. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked what the new dimensions of the garage would be. Ms. Conlon stated that the existing garage is 20' X 18' and that the new garage would be 22' X 22'. Committee member Alterson explained that the variance is needed due to lot coverage. Ms. Conlon explained that the neighbors are very much in favor of this proposal. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-081 1402 Lincoln Street Concept Demolish existing building and construct new single-family residential dwelling, requiring zoning relief. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Lang Bowman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Bowman explained that he is looking to remove his existing house, which is in disrepair, and replace it with a new single-family structure. He stated that he would like to stretch the house out. He explained that the variance he would be looking for would be reducing the 30-foot rear yard setback to 10 feet. His proposal would also exceed the lot coverage. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott made it clear that this proposal would have a poor chance of being approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals because he would be starting with a vacant, rectangular lot. Committee member Mylott did not see what was the hardship; however, he is certainly entitled to have his day in front of the ZBA. Mr. Bowman suggested that he might try to buy the lot to the east of him, increasing his lot size and allowing him to build a 2,400 square -foot house. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Committee member Wolinski stated that he is in favor of the concept of tearing down this house and building in new one, but that he would like to have more information before supporting this particular proposal. SPAARC 02-082 2600 Gross Point Road PreliffdnW Construct attached 2-car garage to 9-story office building. Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - June 26. 2002 Page 5 PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Nathan Kipnis GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kipnis explained that there is already a permit to renovate the building and that the same use would take place within the building. No additional parking would be required; however, there currently is no parking on the site. The proposal would be to add two parking spaces on site. Because the site is angular, the parking would cut into the ten -foot setback. DISCUSSION. Chairperson Smith asked what the materials of the garage would be. Mr. Kipnis replied that the columns would be white panel, and that the awning would be taken down. The windows would be a wood -finished aluminum. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the outstanding zoning issues being resolved. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 01-125 2668 Prairie Avenue Final Raze building and construct 4-unit multiple -family dwelling. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: John Potter GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Potter explained that the side yard setback would now meet the zoning requirements. However, the retention on the back lot has been redesigned. The proper setbacks would be retained. The side yard patios have been removed so that there is no obstruction within the side yard. Mr. Potter stated that the materials of the building would consist of a stone base, and a stucco top, and he presented samples of the materials to SPAARC. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott stated that the front units should not have front patios because lawn furniture and grills could be left out overnight and cause an unsightly appearance. Carlos Ruiz stated that a covered porch would read better with the building. Mr. Potter pointed out that a covered porch would encroach into the front yard setbacks. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: • The requirement that the hedges surrounding the front patios are maintained no higher than 36 inches; Site Plan and Appearance Review dteeting — June 26. 2002 Paget 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 3, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Paul D'Agostino, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum.existed and began the meeting, ADDroval of Minutes: June 19, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to table the approval of these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). June 26, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to table the approval of these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-049 3108-3114 Central Street Preliminary Raze dwellings and construct five attached single-family residences with two off- street parking spaces each. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Troy Mock GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Mock presented pictures of the existing site. He stated that the units would be stepped back from one another to create an appearance of individual units and break up the appearance of one long fagade. He explained that the zoning analysis was not approved for several minor reasons, however, these would be corrected. Each of the units would have a courtyard. Mr. Mock explained that the even -numbered units would have different architectural details than the odd -numbered units. He presented the elevations and stated the materials to be used on the building. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott informed Mr. Mock that he could not sell condo units prior to having the condominium disclosure statement on file with the City. He also requested that a security fence be installed in the rear. Committee member Nagar stated that the existing grade should be maintained. Committee member Mylott stated that if fixture cuts that show the light not emitting outwards could be presented at final review, then a photometric plan would not be needed. However, a landscape plan would be needed at final. Chairperson Smith requested that at final review, a plan for garbage pick-up be presented. Chairperson Smith asked if cedar shingles could be used in place of the stucco on the dormers. Mr. Mock replied that stucco is easier to maintain and that he feels that stucco would lend itself better to the design of the building. Chairperson Smith suggested that Mr. Mock look at the townhomes on Church and Ridge for an example of attractive doors that could be used. Committee member Nagar noted that the addresses should be readily visible and that they should also be placed on the rear of the units. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to the close review of how the fence would be positioned for security purposes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 02-083 928 Noyes Street Preliminary Modify exterior for private education institution. (Midwest Montessori Sch000. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Marty Norkett GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Norkett explained that the inside of the building would be rehabbed to accommodate a retail space. The glass would be replaced, but there would be no exterior changes. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if aluminum frames would be used for the replacement windows. Mr. Norkett stated that aluminum windows would be used. Several Committee members noted that it may be more appropriate to restore the original window systems. ACTION: Chairperson Smith motioned to table due to the fad that this is an important building and that she would like to see drawings of what would be done to affect Site Plan and Appearance Review Aleetnng - July 3, 2002 Page 2 the exterior of the building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-086 2940 Central Street Preliminary, Establish open parking lot for office use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Kihms GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kihms explained that the proposal is to construct 12 parking spaces in the adjacent vacant lot. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith asked if there was a picture of the site available. Mr. Kihms stated that he did not have a picture available. ACTION: A motion was made to table the case pending pictures of the site being provided. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). SPAARC 02-084 1606 Chicago Avenue Preliminary and Final, Expand existing type 1 restaurant (Golden Olympic Restaurant). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Owner of Restaurant and Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The project's architect explained that the entrance would be removed and the exterior would be redone. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz explained that the storefront is part of a landmarked building. He stated that he met with the architect and offered suggestions. The architect stated that he incorporated Mr. Ruiz's suggestions into the design. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the Preservation Commission and Preservation Commission staff. The motion was seconded and passed. (4-1), Hans Friedman voted nay. SPAARC 02-087 1513 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sian Board Install two banner blade signs for retail services establishment (Salon Lamia). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hagen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Site Plan and Appearance Ifeview A/eeting - July 3. 2002 Page 3 Mr. Hallen explained that the owner wished to install two 32-inch square banner signs with the name of the business on them. He explained that the signage would project more than 12 inches from the front of the building and that it is a blade sign and that blade signs are not permitted. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith stated that the Sign Board has reconsidered allowing blade signs. Carlos Ruiz stated that the building is landmarked. Committee member Mylott asked why they needed two signs. He stated that perpendicular signage is more informative when only one is centered on the building. Committee member Friedman stated that the building has many different types of signs. Chairperson Smith stated that there is not a unified business sign plan on this building. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Board hold this application until such time that the landlord files a unified business sign plan that is approved by the Preservation Commission. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 02-086 804 Davis Street Preliminary and Final Modify exterior for type 9 restaurant (Lulu's Restaurant). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Owner Doug Tweedy, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Tweedy explained that the two existing front doors would be removed and that one door would be installed in the center of the storefront. He stated that the new door would require a grill, and that the two existing grills would remain. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott asked if ventilation could be accomplished without the installation of another grill. Mr. Tweedy stated that the proposed solution would be the best option to provide air for the building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Chairperson Smith abstained from voting. SPAARC 02-081 1402 Lincoln Street Concept Demolish existing and construct new single-family residential dwelling, requiting zoning relief. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Lary Bowman Sue Plan and Appearance Review .11erting -July 3, 2002 Page 4 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Bowman explained that lie was here last week and that his new proposal was to keep the house in the same location that it is currently in, but to add 1 stories to the house. The garage would then be part of the house and placed in the front. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott asked if the existing home would be demolished to accommodate the addition. Mr. Bowman stated that it would be demolished. Committee member Mylott stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals would look at this case as an empty lot and the variances would be quite extreme. ACTION; A motion was made to table this case because there is not enough information to review and that the applicant needs to appear before the Zoning Board of Appeals for variance approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - July 3.2002 Poo 5 Draft -- Not Yet Approved SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 10, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Alan Berkowsky, Paul D'Agostino, Dennis Marino, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Smith, Ron Walczak Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. ADDroval of Minutes: June 19, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to table the approval of these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). July 3, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to table the approval of these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously..(7-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-131 101 Asbury Avenue Preliminary and Fina( Construct 1-story retail goods establishment (CVS Pharmacy), including drive. through facility. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: John Wojtila Richard Cook Michele Dodd Steve Gregory GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Wojtila explained that this development has been in the works for the past year. Throughout this year, the developers have worked very closely with the neighborhood and Alderman Rainey in the -design of the CVS Pharmacy. Mr. WojUla presented the landscape plan to SPAARC. Mr. Cook presented the elevations to SPAARC. He noted that there would be two colors of brick, one for the base and the fence, and one for the remainder of the building. This brick would be standard sized brick; it would not be jumbo or modular. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott asked why the masonry wall presented in concept along the north wall would now be a wood fence. Mr. Wojtila explained that there have been several negotiations in the past few months with the neighbors in terms of the bus stop, etc., and from these negotiations, the north wall has changed. The neighbors are fully aware of this change. Committee member Mylott asked Mr. Cook to describe how the screen worked for the signage. Mr. Cook replied that the screen would only be slightly off the facade of the building. Chairperson Smith asked if 12 inches of green space could be provided between the sidewalk along Asbury Avenue and the west facade wall of the building. Alderman Rainey replied that she would not like to see landscaping in this area because of its potential to trap litter along Asbury Avenue. Committee member Walczak asked if the wood fence on the north and east would have slating so that it is not 100% opaque. He is concerned regarding security issues and visibility. Mr. Wojtila stated that the wall would be completely solid. Carlos Ruiz reiterated Committee member Walczak's concern regarding the lack of visibility with the solid wail. Ms. Dodd stated that the parking to the east and to the north would be used for overflow parking and that it would hardly be used at night. Chairperson Smith reiterated that she would like to see some sort of greenery along the west facade of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan approval with the condition that the developer works with the Evanston Police Department regarding security measures outside of the building. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-1). Ron Walczak voted nay. SPAARC 02-088 3612 Thaver Street Preliminary and Final Construct 1-story addition to rear of existing attached garage of single-family residence, requiring major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Michael Stein Dennis Lombardi GENERAL, PROJECT PRESENTATION: Site Plan and Appearance Review .4feering - July 10. 2002 Page 2 1� Mr. Lombardi presented the site plan to the Committee. He explained that his lot is unusually shaped, and that the house sits back far from the front property lot, thus it is close to the rear property line. He stated that the public alley on the plat to the rear of his home is not actually an alley and that he and his predecessors have been taking care of this area, which is City property. The requested variance consists of a 10-foot setback in the rear where a 30-foot setback is required. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson asked what is on the other side of the non -existing alley. Mr. Lombardi stated that it is his neighbor's property. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-085 2940 Central Street Preliminaev, Establish open parking lot for office use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Kihms GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kihms stated that the parking lot would be accessed from the alleyway and it would be a one-way parking lane. He explained that there is existing landscaping next to the building that would screen some of the cars. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino asked if the alleyway could be used for both entering and exiting the parking lot in order to prevent a curb cut along Central Street. Mr. Kihms explained that the lot is too narrow.to support a two-way parking lane. Committee member Marino stated that he would prefer to see a right out only onto Central Avenue to prevent left turn lanes. Carlos Ruiz suggested planting ivy along the wall of the building facing the parking lot to provide more greenery. Mr. Kihms stated that he liked this idea. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: Planting a canopy tree in the yard facing Central Street; - Providing a setback along the west wall of the building to allow for the maintenance of vines; - The posting of a sign stating that only right turns are allowed out of the parking lot; - Providing a catch basin. Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeeling -July 10, 2002 Page 3 The motion was seconded. Chairperson Smith noted that she could not support approval for final approval because she would like to see more accurate drawings regarding landscaping and parking lot layout. The motion was approved. (7-1). Chairperson Smith voted nay. SPAARC 02-089 2115 Ashland Avenue Preliminary Demolish vacant single-family residence and install new commercial parking lot. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Bruce Fossler Roy King GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Fossler stated that more parking space is needed in this area. The proposed parking lot would be used daily for activities related to the church. This parking lot would be a permitted use for this site. DISCUSSION: Committee member Mylott stated that there would be some zoning relief required in relation to setbacks. Committee member Marino asked if there was consideration to lease some of these spaces to nearby commercial property owners. Mr. Fossler stated that he would be open to exploring this opportunity. Committee member asked when the roller gate in front of the entrances to the parking lot would be open. Mr. Fossler stated that the roller gate would remain open during activity hours. Chairperson Smith stated that she has issues with the roller gate blocking landscaping and appearing unsightly. She would like to see another measure used in terms of restricting parking. Committee member Marino explained that a gated type of measure gives the appearance of the neighborhood being unsafe. Mr. Fossler stated that landscaping could replace a fence for security purposes. The Committee members were very much in favor of this option. Committee member Berkowsky asked if lighting would be added to the parking lot. Mr. Fossler stated that lighting is beingconsidered, as long as the lighting does not negatively affect the neighbors. Committee member Alterson pointed out cars parked in parking spaces 1 and 12 would have to back out over the sidewalk and this could create a safety concern. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to removing the fence on the west side of the property, and review and approval by the Traffic Engineering Department. The motion was seconded. The motion passed (5-3), Chairperson Smith, Committee member Alterson, and Committee member Walczak voted nay. Site Plan and appearance Review .!leering -July JO, 2002 Page 4 SPAARC 02-090 1930 Hartrev Avenue Preliminary and Final Install 2 open, off-street parking spaces accessory to new single-family residence, requiring major variation. . PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Applicant did not show ACTION: Applicant did not show and the case was not heard. SPAARC 02-091 2411 Hastinas Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct second -story addition to single-family residence, requiring major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: John Koszba GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Koszba explained that the existing structure is wood -framed wish vinyl siding and vinyl windows and that the addition would match the existing structure. Three bedrooms would be added upstairs. Committee member Mylott explained that the project needs a variance to the 5-foot setback along the north property line. Because the addition is going straight up and the existing building is within this 5-foot setback. DISCUSSION: The Committee informed Mr. Koszba that there couldn't be window openings within three feet of a property line. Mr. Koszba stated that the neighbors to the north have been informed of the proposal and do not have any problems with it. Carlos Ruiz suggested that more fenestration be added to the northwest comer of the second story addition. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the consideration of the suggestion to add another window to the northwest comer of the second story addition. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-092 940 Church Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (Marble Slab Creamery) PROJECT PRESENTED BY: J. Randy Shipky GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeering — Jury 10, 2002 Page 5 Mr. Shipky presented the planter benches that he would use to delineate the sidewalk caf6 from the rest of the public sidewalk. The benches would be moved inside at night. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Smith read through the requirements for a sidewalk cafe. She asked Mr. Shipky if he was going to ask the Council to waive the requirements regarding reusable or disposable containers. Mr. Shipky replied that he would ask for these requirements to be waived because about 10% of the product would be non -disposable. Mr. Shipky explained that his establishment, along with Comer Bakery and Noodles are working on a plan in which each establishment would work at scheduled times to clean up the outdoor caf6 areas. ACTION: A motion was made to grant the recommendation for a sidewalk caf6. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Site Plan and Appxarame Review Afeeting - July 10, 2002 Page 6 Draft - Not Yet Approved SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 17, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihars, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick,_Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ ` ADDroval of Minutes: June 19, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to approve these meeting minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Hans Friedman abstained from voting. June 26, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to approve these meeting minutes subject to the following changes being made: 1402 Lincoln Street: Committee member Mylott made it clear that this proposal would have a poor chance of being approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals because he would be startinq with a vacant, rectanaular lot. M. Mvlott did not see what was the hardship: however. he is certainly entitled to have his day in front of the ZBA. 2668 Prairie Avenue: Condition of approval: at any outdoor furniture or outdoor devices on the patio are removed at the end of the day. and this restriction shall be Included within the condominium declaration and bv4aws. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Hans Friedman abstained from voting. July 3, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to approve these meeting minutes subject to the following changes being made: 3108-3114 Central Street: He explained that the zoning analysis was not approved for several minor reasons: however, these will be corrected. 928 Noyes Street: Chairperson Smith asked if aluminum frames would be used for the replacement windows. Mr. Norkett stated that aluminum windows would be used. Several Committee members noted that it might be more anorooriate to restore the orioinal window systems. 804 Davis Street: Committee member Mylott asked it ventilation could be accomplished without the installation of another grill. Mr. Tweedy stated that #*is4he oronosed solution would be the best option to provide air for the building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). July 10, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to table the approval of these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-080 603 Main Street Final Construct additions, including additional 2 stories and mezzanine and convert use to financial institution, retail, and multi -family residential. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: David Brininstool Kevin Pearson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Brininstool explained that there would be more extensive limestone detailing than what was shown in the preliminary drawings. He stated that the new building would have glass arches to maximize light considering the fact that there would be residential units on the upper floors. On the Chicago Avenue and Main Street elevations, the original building's appearance would be 90% replicated. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that an overhead door for the parking garage would improve the appearance of the building, but understands that this cannot be accomplished due to the proximity to the sidewalk. Committee member Fujihara expressed concern about -the location of parking spaces 1 and 14, stating that it would be difficult to back out of these two spaces. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the parking could be accessed from the rear of the building. Mr. Pearson explained that this could not be done because a loading berth is Site Plan and Appearance Review .fleeting -July 17, 2002 Page 2 needed in this location. Committee member Alterson stated that a loading berth is not required for this development because neither the amount of residential units, nor the type of commercial use triggers it. In response, Mr. Brininstool stated that one-way parking could be provided and many of the Committee's parking circulation issues would be addressed. Committee member Dahal stated that he would like to examine the parking lot circulation for the project. Carlos Ruiz asked why the developers decided to replicate the existing building and not just start over with an entirely different building and design. Mr. Brininstool explained that he originally thought that the building was in better condition. Furthermore, the residents in the surrounding neighborhoods were adamant about restoring the design of the building. Committee member Alterson pointed out that, by keeping the same structure, less restrictive parking requirements are being grandfathered in. Committee member Aiello asked how many types of windows would be used. Mr. Brininstool explained that there .would. be many types of windows used. Committee member Friedman suggested that the windows should be more square to clean up the look o` the building. Committee member Aiello asked if a lighter color could be used for the metal panels. Mr. Brininstool stated that a clearer aluminum could be used. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case in order to allow the developer to redevelop parking and vehicular circulation and reconsider some elevation elements, including windows, and the use of the existing arch motif. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that it is not the Committee's desire to hold up the process and that she would encourage that the case be brought back to SPAARC as soon as possible. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 00-141 1881 Oak Avenue Prellminary and Final Construct 4-story office building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Bob Putsawski Steve Kardell GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Putsawski informed the Committee that they are requesting a foundation only permit for this project. He explained that there have been some minor changes to the design of the building. The stair tower has been lowered, the south side of the building's stem of the T is now four stories instead of three, and the rear of the building would be a brick red color. Chairperson Brzezinski explained that this case received preliminary approval in November of 2000 with the condition that a pedestrian walkway be developed off of Emerson Street and that truck traffic loads be presented to SPAARC. Mr. Putsawski stated that these conditions have been met. Sire Plan and Appearance Revieuv .heeling - Ju v I - 2002 Page 3 DISCUSSION: The Committee members asked if the material of the building is similar to the material of the building at 1880 Oak Avenue. Mr. Putsawski stated that the materials of the building would be the same. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she did not initially like the proposal in terms of the warehouse design of the building and the fact that it does not complete the courtyard. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (I-2). Chairperson Brzezinski and Committee member Friedman voted nay. Site Plan and AM=nce Review Meeting -- July 17.2002 Page 4 Draft — Not Yet Approved SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 24, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Keith Fujihara, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spkx=a C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting.. ADorovai of Minutes: July 10, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to approve these meeting minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (4-0). Sat Nagar and Marc Mylott abstained from voting. July 17, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to table the approval of these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-061 1572 Manse Avenue Preliminary Construct mixed -use building at site of former State Department of Employment/Unemployment Insurance. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom Roszak Karl Omod GENERA!_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Roszak explained that the elevations have been modified since the project last appeared before SPAARC. The building will be seven stories, with the first story being parking and retail and the second story being parking. Floors 3-7 will contain 28 condo units. He presented a sample of the material to be used on the building, which would be white sand pre -cast. The majority of the upper floors would be glass. The balconies will be steel and will be painted a charcoal gray. DISCUSSION: Committee member Aiello asked if the retail was being proposed because of code requirements. Mr. Roszak stated that two businesses are interested in locating in the retail space, including a bank. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the drawings would be more effective if surrounding buildings and the context of the block was depicted. She asked how rooftop mechanical units and transformers would be handled on the site. Mr. Roszak explained that a transformer pad is provided and that the air handling units would be on the roof and should not be more than three feet high. The parapet would be one -foot in height, but the units should not be viewed from a street level. Committee member Mylott noted that the base seems disassociated with the upper floor. Carlos Ruiz asked if the precast material would be easy to clean and keep graffiti free. He also reiterated Committee member Mylott's comments regarding the base of the building. Committee member Brzezinski stated that the south elevation could easily be opened up with some glass or punched openings. Mr. Roszak replied that he liked this suggestion. He also replied that there is a sealer that can be used on brick that helps to control and clean graffiti. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested growing ivy that would climb the wall and help to prevent graffiti. Mr. Roszak stated that he plans to grow ivy on the walls. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that she was not in favor of the alternate site plan depicting the bank drive -through. This would break up the pedestrian sidewalk with several driveways and would not be pedestrian friendly. ACTION: A motion was made deny the alternate site plan. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan approval of the primary scheme. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). A motion was made to grant preliminary appearance review approval with consideration to open the south elevation to more window area. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-2). Committee members Mylott and Alterson voted nay due to their desire to have the south elevation suggestions be a condition instead of a suggestion. SPAARC 01-080 603 Main Street Final Construct additions, including additional 2 stories and mezzanine and convert use to financial institution, retail, and multi -family residential. Silt Plan and Appearance Review Meeling -July 24. 2002 Page 2 PROJECT PRESENTED BY: David Brininstool Kevin Pearson Steve Mullus GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Brininstool explained that this design was pulled together in the past 48 hours and tried to address the Committee's concern from last week. The new plan would pull the addition to be flush with the existing building so to create a more unified mass. DISCUSSION: Committee member Friedman felt that there was an overreaction among the applicants to the Committee's comments from last week. He stated that the Committee did not want the old building to be completely recreated. However, the new design eliminates the design of the original building and is basically a modem building. Other Committee members agreed. He also stated that the new design does not celebrate the comer and that it creates a large amount of mass along the street. Chairperson Brzezinski explained that the Committee was only concerned with the masonry mass, the vertical windows, and the arches at last week's meeting and that there was a miscommunication between the Committee and the applicants in terms of last week's comments. Mr. Pearson felt that the Committee was looking for this type of design solution based on their comments from last week. One of the major sticking points is the mass of the building and the removal of the setback on the upper floors. Mr. Mullus explained that a setback would be a deal breaker from a financial standpoint for the developer. Carlos Ruiz noted that SPAARC does not have binding appearance review. He suggested that the Committee be as clear as possible in terms of what it would like to see regarding the design of the building. Committee member Wolinski felt that it might be necessary at this point to knock down the building and start ever. Mr. Brininstool explained that the grandfathering as it relates to parking requirements would be lost and that more parking would be required. ACTION: No action was taken. SPAARC 02-093 355 Ridge Avenue Preliminary and Final Erect an exhaust fan penthouse for hospital. (St. Francis Hospitao. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Csaba Seekelyhidi Frank Salemi Chris Eugee Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeeting -July 4. 2002 Pagt 3 0 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Seekelyhidi explained that the primary purpose of this project is to upgrade the mechanical systems of the hospital. Fan equipment would need to be installed on the roof to accommodate this objective. Pictures of the installation area were shown to the Committee. Mr. Eugee stated that the color of the penthouse addition would match the existing building. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski stated that there have been some issues with noise generated by these fans. Mr. Seekelyhidi stated documentation would be provided depicting the amount of noise generated. He did not anticipate that the new equipment would generate a lot of noise. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-1). Committee member Mylott voted nay. SPAARC 02-094 355 Ridae Avenue Preliminary and Final Upgrade HVAC system for hospital. (St. Francis Hospitaq. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Csaba Seekelyhidi Frank Salem! Chris Eugee GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Seekelyhidi stated that a new HVAC system is needed to due the age of the building and load concerns. DISCUSSION: Wafter Hallen asked what the color of the new system would be. Mr. Eugee replied that it would be the same color as the penthouse. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that noise generated would need to meet codes. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review dleefing - July 24. 2002 Page 4 Draft — Not Yet Approved SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 31, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Alan Berkowsky, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Stephanie Levine, Marc Mylott, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting, Aooroval of Minutes: July 17, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to approve these meeting minutes. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously. (4-0). Sat Nagar and Marc Mylott abstained from voting. July 24, 2002 Meeting: A motion was made to table the approval of these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Projects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-080 603 Main Street Revision to Preliminary, Construct additions, including additional 2 stories and mezzanine and convert use to financial institution, retail, and multi -family residential. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: David Brininstool Kevin Pearson Steve Mullins GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Brininstool explained that the setbacks of the outside terraces would be retained as originally proposed, however, the building would be five stories instead of six. There would be a projection of glass along Chicago Avenue. Mr. Brininstool presented the type of brick to be used and informed the Committee that limestone sills would be used. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked what the total height of the building would be. Mr. Brininstool replied that the height would be 60 feet, but that an elevator shaft located 25 feet back from the edge of the roof would exceed the 60-foot height. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this design is more in keeping with what the Committee originally suggested of the architect. However, she felt that the contemporary look was a bit dull and that it could be enhanced through greater articulation with the brick and the windows. Committee member Friedman suggested moving a spandrel panel to the top floor to balance the appearance of the facade. Committee member Dahal stated that the new parking lot circulation pattern — one way in from Main Street and one way out onto Chicago Avenue — is favorable. ACTION: A motion was made to grant foundation only site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 02-095 2536 Gross Point Road Preliminary and Final Install antennas for wireless communication facility (VoiceStriePm) on City water tower. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Paul Bonguarts Tom Ebels GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Ebels presented the various existing VoiceStream sites in and around the Evanston area. Mr. Bonguarts presented a map showing signal strength In and around the Evanston area. He explained that this new facility would serve to patch up a coverage hole and to off load traffic from other locations. Mr. Ebels explained that three radio BTS cabinets would be installed in the northeast comer of the property. He presented the elevations of these cabinets. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked if this facility could be located within south Willmette. Mr. Bonguarts stated that a location in south Willmette would not alleviate the coverage hole. Site Plan and Appearance Review• .ileering - July 31. 2002 Page 2 Committee member Mylott suggested that shrubbery be planted to screen the appearance of the cabinets. Mr. Ebels stated that the cabinets would only be visible from the rear of a church. Furthermore, the color of the cabinets would be similar to that of the tower. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 99-148 239 Greenwood Street Preliminary and Final Subdivide portion of lot containing coach house from portion of lot containing single-family residence. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Marc Mylott GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee member Mylott explained that the ZBA denied the variation for the location of parking as it related to this subdivision. The case went to court and the court ruled that the City Council should have been the ruling body. The City Council then approved the variation. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson stated that there would not be any visible changes resulting from this subdivision. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-2). Chairperson Brzezinski and Committee member Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 02-090 1930 Hartrev Avenue Preliminary and Final Install 2 open, off-street parking spaces accessory to new single-family residence, requiring major variations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY ACTION: This case was not heard. Applicant did not appear SPAARC 02-049 3108-3114 Central Street Recommendation to Sipn Board Instaff temporary real estate sign for attached single-family residences. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chairperson Carolyn Brzezinski GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Site Plan and Appearance Review ,fleeting - July 31, 2002 Page 3 Chairperson Brzezinski explained that the sign was taken down immediately upon notice from the City that it violated the ordinances. In a residential district, only a six square foot real estate sign is permitted. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that a big sign would attract drivers and should contain a limited amount of information. If the sign is smaller and aimed towards pedestrians, then the sign could contain more items of information. Committee member Wolinski stated that the new development is positive for the City of Evanston and that residential signs should not be so limited. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the sign board with the condition that the sign be taken down either after all the units are sold or after one year. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-1). Committee member Alterson voted nay, stating that the sign is too big for a residential area. SPAARC 02-096 1943 Dewev Avenue Prellminary Create open, off-street parking area for religious institution (Faith Temple Church of God in Christ). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Anthony Moody, Sr. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Brzezinski requested that this case and the proposal at 1945 Dewey Avenue be reviewed together since they are joint projects. Mr. Moody stated that the current lots are vacant and that parking does occur here, even though it is not a formal lot. He stated that one of the nearby residents opposes a parking lot at this location. The proposed lots have one-way circulation and would exit onto the alley. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if there would be enough room for landscaping between the parking lots and the homes on the adjoining lots. She expressed concern regarding headlights from cars shining into these houses. Mr. Moody stated that landscaping could be provided. Committee member Fujihara stated that the City does not like parking lots to exit into alleys. Mr. Moody explained that cars would exit into the alley, but that the exit would be so close to the street that the cars would be on the alley for a very short length. Other Committee members agreed and stated that exiting into the alley would be preferable at this location. Jeff Burdick asked what kind of fence would be used around the parking lots. Mr. Moody explained that wrought iron fencing would be used. Mr. Moody explained that the construction would be done to City standards with drainage, lighting, striping and landscaping. Chairperson Brzezinski informed Mr. Moody that the handicapped spaces should be close to the building. Mr. Moody agreed. She Site Plan and Appearance Re view .lfceting - July 31. 2W2 Page 4 also informed him that at final approval, he would need to submit more information, such as the location of lighting, a detailed layout of the parking spaces, measurements, and landscaping. ACTION: Chairperson Brzezinski motioned to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. Committee member Alterson stated that he would not vote for this motion and would prefer that only concept approval is granted at this time. He explained that there currently is not a formal parking layout that can be reviewed. Chairperson Brzezinski withdrew her motion. Committee member Alterson motioned concept site plan and appearance approval. He stated that he would prefer that vacant residential lots be used for residential purposes, but if the market ever dictated housing for this site, a parking lot would be easy to replace with housing. He also stated that he would like to see adequate landscaping provided. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-097 1945 Darrow Avenue Prelimfnary Create open, off-street parking area for religious institution (Faith Temple Church of God in Christ). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Anthony Moody, Sr. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: See above. DISCUSSION: See above. ACTION: Chairperson Brzezinski motioned to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. Committee member Alterson stated that he would not vote for this motion and would prefer that only concept approval is granted at this time. He explained that there currently is not a formal parking layout that can be reviewed. Chairperson Brzezinski withdrew her motion. Committee member Alterson motioned concept site plan and appearance approval. He stated that he would prefer that vacant residential lots be used for residential purposes, but if the market ever dictated housing for this site, a parking lot would be easy to replace with housing. He also stated that he would like to see adequate landscaping provided. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Site Plan and .Appearance Review .Meeting - July 3I.2002 Page 5 Draft — Not Yet Approved SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES AUGUST 7, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Morris Robinson, Donna Spicuzza C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Projects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-098 1761 Maole Avenue Preliminary and Final Build -out for 5670 square foot restaurant (Chili's); including doorAidndow replacement. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom White Greg Habken GENERA! PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Habken explained that some of the doors on the north and west fagade would be altered. He also stated that the Chili's sign might not comply with the unified sign plan. He explained that there is an existing set of double doors that would be removed and replaced with a single door. A double set of man doors would be installed at the main entrance to the restaurant at the comer. There will also be a pick-up door for carry out orders. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the doors would be of the same material as the original. Mr. Habken stated that the doors would be the same style. Committee member Walinski asked what proportion of business would be carry out. Mr. Habken guessed that 5% of the business would be cant' out. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-099 821 Foster Avenue Preliminary Construct new 14-unit condo building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Greg DeStefano GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. DeStefano explained that he is proposing to raze the duplexes in this location and replace them with a condominium building containing 14-units. The project architect stated that two lots have been consolidated. One 14-unit building would be constructed on the site entirely within the regulations of the zoning ordinance. Each of the units would be two bedrooms. He explained that there would be a central courtyard entrance and that the front fagade would be broken up to assure that the building did not appear as one large mass on the street. Some of the parking would incorporate tandem parking spaces. The project architect also stated that the building would have two fronts — one facing Foster Street, and one facing the rear of the property. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski informed the applicants that the building would have to be sprinkled. Walter Hallen asked if there would be a roof deck. Mr. DeStefano asked what the requirements would be for a roof deck. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the deck would have to meet live load requirements. She also stated that if the roof deck is public space, then the elevator would have to be continued to the roof. Committee members inquired as to the material of the building. The project architect stated that face brick, renaissance stone, and limestone sills would be used. Chairperson Brzezinski asked what color masonry would be used. Mr. DeStefano stated that he would survey the neighborhood to see what would be appropriate. He would prefer a brown or buff color. Committee member Friedman asked the applicant to reconsider using renaissance stone. He also asked that more glass be used in the link. Chairperson Brzezinski commended the project for its inclusion of green space. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-100 2201 Main Street Preliminary and Final, Remodeling of Interior office (Phase 11) and changing three exterior windows. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Jay Bradarich Site Plan and Appearance Review• .11eeung - August 7. 2(W2 Page 2 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Bradarich explained that the existing office space is going to be remodeled. The windows on the front are the old aluminum kind. He stated that he did not bring pictures, but that he would only be changing the windows on the front. The new windows would match the windows on the side, which are bronze. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that pictures are necessary for the Committee to make the most informed decision regarding this project. She also asked to see a landscape plan. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case pending the submittal of pictures and a landscape plan. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 00-131 1916-1918 Maple Avenue Preliminary and Final Recertification of old plans regarding condo conversion. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Robert Taylor GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Brzezinski explained that this project was previously tabled by SPAARC until all work done on this property without a permit was removed. Mr. Taylor explained that after he purchased the building and applied for building permits, he discovered that the building was a landmark. He received a Certificate of Appropriateness. He then decided that he would convert the building into a 4-unit condominium. Mr. Taylor explained that there is an airshaft in the rear that he bricked in after purchasing the property. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this might not meet the air shaft requirement of BOCA. Mr. Taylor replied that initially it did not meet code, but it now does. He stated that a new roof deck has been installed in the rear. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would like to table this case so that the Committee would have a chance to review any possible exterior changes. Committee member Wolinski added that he would like any code -related matters to be resolved prior to SPAARC review. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case pending the resolution of code violation issues. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review .lfeeting -August ' 2001 Page 3 3 Draft - Not Yet Approved SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES AUGUST 14, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-080 603 Main Street Revision to Preliminary Construct additions, including additional 2 stories and mezzanine and convert use to financial institution, retail, and multi -family residential. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: David Brininstool Kevin Pearson Steve Mullins GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Brininstool explained that there are two schemes that will be presented. Both of these schemes address the Committee's previous concerns regarding this project. The major difference between these two schemes is that one is flat brick and the other is rusticated. He explained that the windows have been aligned to create the three story units. He also noted that the west elevation would not be structurally changed from the original building. DISCUSSION: Committee members agreed that the rustication scheme brings life to the appearance of the building and that it is the better scheme. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if there would be any mechanical units or elevator shafts on the roof. Mr. Brininstool explained that there would be an elevator shaft set back 20 feet from the edge of the roof. Walter Hallen stated that the developer has succeeded in creating an interesting design. Committee member Friedman felt that maintaining the west elevation is not a good idea and that the new design should be continued around the building. Committee member Dahal confirmed that the driveway out of the garage is 16 feet wide. He would still like to see a warning light notifying pedestrians of cars exiting the garage. Chairperson Brzezinski felt that the solid garage door would serve as a warning for pedestrians, because it would open when a car is about to exit. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan approval, which would allow for a foundation permit. The motion was seconded. The motion passed (5-3). Committee members Dahal, Friedman, and Nagar voted nay. A motion was made to grant preliminary appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-3). Committee members Dahal, Friedman and Walczak voted nay. SPAARC 02-101 2201 Oakton Street Preliminary and Final Operate type-2 restaurant (McDonald's Snack Station lGosk) from within retail goods establishment (The Home Depot). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: John Stumbaugh GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Stumbaugh explained McDonald's would be a lease tenant within the Home Depot and that food what not be prepared on site. The McDonald's kiosk would be located in the front of the store, adjacent to the check out stations. There would be no exterior signage related to this operation. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski inquired as to whom would be in charge of garbage. Mr. Stumbaugh explained that Home Depot would provide garbage cans. It was noted that this kiosk would not be visible from the exterior. Chairperson Brzezinski expressed concern regarding the pick-up of garbage generated from this operation in and around the parking lot. She asked if there was a garbage and/or parking lot maintenance plan. Committee member Alterson explained that the normal protocol for type-2 restaurants is that they are responsible for all trash pick-up on the property and 500-feet within the property. He also stated that the Home Depot property, especially the parking lot, is sorely under -landscaped and that the City should bring this to the attention of the property owner. ACTION: Site Plan and Appearance &-view .Meeting — August 14, 2002 page 2 A motion was made to grant preliminary and fiiial site plan and appearance review approval subject to the development of a comprehensive litter plan. The motion was seconded and passed (6-2). Committee members Afterson and Wolinski voted nay. Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - August 14. 2002 Page 3 Draft — Not Yet Approved SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES AUGUST 21, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Sat Nagar, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 01-086 1123 Howard Street Preliminary and Final Change use from restaurant to mini -mart, which involves the extension of the rear of the existing building and a change of the front elevation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Paul Jung GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Jung explained that the existing permit is to allow for the expansion of the building westward in order to allow for an inclusion of a mini -mart. Previously, there was going to be a restaurant opening up in this site. The mini -mart would be approximately 2,500 square feet. The mini -mart would not be a 24-hour operation, however the hours have not yet been determined. Mr. Jung stated that a zoning officer told him that if the store did not stay open past a certain time, then a special use would not be needed. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson stated that he would like to table this case in order to get clarification as to what the business would consist of, what it would sell, and how late it would be open. Alderman Ann Rainey asked a similar question, and wanted to know what kind of food would be served and trash would be generated. Mr. Jung explained that hot dogs and pizza would be served. The Committee asked that the owner to provide a written description as to the nature of the mini -mart. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case. unanimously. (7-0). The motion was seconded and passed SPAARC 02-083 928 Noves Street Preliminary and Final Modify exterior for private education institution (Midwest Montessori School). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Shahed Hydari Mary Norkett GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Norkett presented photographs of the existing storefront and presented the new windows to be used. The wood doors would be retained. Mr. Hydari stated that the new windows would be insulated for energy efficiency purposes. He explained that there is pattern glass on the ceiling and that it would be restored. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz stated that he was not convinced that the new insulated windows would be in keeping with the historical character of the building. Mr. Norkett replied that rehabilitating the windows would not be energy efficient and would not be cost effective. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she could not support historic significance over energy efficiency and is in favor of the insulated windows. Committee member Friedman asked if there would be any exterior signage installed. Mr. Norkett replied that the only signage would be on the glass because this would not be a business. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the restoration of the patterned glass, keeping the original wood doors, and the restoration of the limestone base. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 02-100 2201 Main Street Preliminary and Final Remodeling of interior office (Phase Il) and changing three exterior windows. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chris Barker GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Barker presented the proposed landscaping plan and pictures of the existing fagade of the building. He stated that the changes along the fagade include roof work, and the coping on top of the masonry would be replaced. The windows on Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - August 21. 2002 Page 2 the south elevation would be replaced to be bronze windows, similar to the windows on the other elevations. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if a new sign was going to be installed and if there would be changes to site lighting. Mr. Barker replied that there would be no changes to lighting and that a sign may eventually be installed. Chairperson Brzezinski informed him that a permit would be required for any significant new signage. Committee member Friedman asked if the truck dock on the south elevation would continue to be used. Mr. Barker stated that the docks would no longer be used and that a masonry wall would be installed in this location. He noted that this was not a part of the current plan. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the driveway to the dock should be replaced with grass and landscaping and that the curb cut should be filled in. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case to clarify the landscaping and the work to be done to the truck dock area. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 02-102 3330 Central Stwt Prellminary Establish hand car wash facility. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Antonio Fanizza GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Fanizza explained that the owner is planning on making moderate improvements to the building and turning it into a car wash. This project would require a special use. Mr. Fanizza stated that he talked to the alderman regarding this project. Alderman Moran seemed disappointed that the original concept of a Starbucks did not go through. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen stated that he liked the fact that the two driveways closest to the intersection of Central and Crawford have been removed. Committee member Friedman informed the Committee that allowing cars to enter the car wash from Crawford would have the potential to create traffic back-ups onto Crawford because of the location of the car wash drive -through lane. The potential owner explained that the plan has changed and that there would only be ingresslegress from Central Avenue. The Committee commended this change to the plan. Committee member Nagar notified the applicant that a MWRD permit would be required because of the amount of water to be used on the site. Committee member Wolinski asked if there would be machines on the site that would create Site Plan and Appearance Review llleenng - August 11. 2002 Page 3 a high level of noise. The applicant replied that all of the washing would be done by hand and that there should not be noise generated. Committee member Altersan stated that in order to get a special use for this project, it is very important that the neighbors are in favor of this project. The property should be kept clean and there should be nice landscaping. Chairperson Brzezinski informed the applicants that the site lighting needs to be sensitive to adjoining neighbors and that there are photometric requirements that need to be met. Committee member Wolinski stated that the current sign is non -conforming and cannot be reused. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that the locations where curb cuts have been replaced should be landscaped. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: The removal of the two curb cuts on Crawford Avenue and the one curb cut closest to the intersection on Central Street. - The extension of landscaping in the previous locations of the curb cuts. - The matching of overhead garage doors on the building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-104 2701 Ashland Avenue Preliminary and Final Erect storage shed at Ryan baseball field. (Northwestern University) PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chad Harrell Jack Freeman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Freeman stated that this shed would be placed on a concrete slab. It would be 12 feet by 24 feet and would store football practice equipment. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the shed would have a gabled roof. Mr. Freeman stated that the roof would be flat. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the roof not being a gable. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-105 2707 Ashland Avenue aPreliminary and Final 15,000 square foot addition to existing football practice facility (Northwestern University). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chad Harrell Jack Freeman Sue Plan and Appearance Review Aleeling - Augurl 21, 2002 Page 4 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Harrell stated that this addition was originally planned in 1996. The addition would be located where the current "tennis bubble" is located. He stated that the building is a pre -fabricated structure. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked if this building would be used for any other purposes, such as graduation ceremonies. Mr. Freeman stated that the only other activity that may take place would be graduation ceremonies. Chairperson Brzezinski reminded the applicant that the building needs to meet exiting codes. She also commented that lighting should be added to the comer of the building where the restrooms are as this is a dark area. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-103 815 Howard Street Preliminary and Final Re -surface, re -stripe existing panting lot and install catch basin(s) for outpatient office use (North Shore Same Day Surgery). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: John Krowtzyk GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Krowlzyk explained that there would be no work done to the building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that these small projects are generally brought before SPAARC to assure appropriate landscaping. She noted that some of the landscaping is dead. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the replacement of the dead bushes and the maintenance of the existing elevation. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeeting - Augum 21. 2002 Page 5 Draft — Not Yet Approved SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES AUGUST 28, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Other Staff: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting, Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-100 2201 Main Street Prellminary and Final Remodeling of interior office (Phase ll) and changing three exterior windows. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Jay Bradarich GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Bradarich explained that he talked to the building's owner regarding SPAARC's wishes to remove the loading dock if it is not being used. He stated that the owner submitted a letter to the City asking that the window replacement project be permitted to continue while it is determined how to best improve the front facade of the building. In the letter, the owner stated that he would like to considerably enhance the appearance of the property through a detailed and well thought out plan. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked Mr. Bradarich if a new landscape plan was submitted. Mr. Bradarich replied that he did not have the turnaround time to complete the landscape plan before this meeting. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would be in favor of allowing the front elevation window work to commence prior to the review of a detailed front fagade enhancement plan. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval for the window work subject to the review and approval of the landscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 02-106 702 Madison Street Prellminary and Final Exterior site work to include a new flagpole, landscaping, and new gates. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Frank Kassen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kassen explained that this project would consist of the remaining work that went unfinished when this building was constructed. He stated that the neighbor to the west is encroaching upon the City's property, which is the rationale for the proposed fence along this property line. He explained that the firefighters are concerned about the safety of their vehicles, which are parked on the side of the building. A rolling gate encloses the parking lot. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino felt that the rolling gates would create a gated image for a public facility and that he wouldn't be in favor of their installation. He asked if a camera could be placed in the parking lot for security purposes. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she does not have an issue with the fence and landscaping, but would not be in favor of the gate. Committee member Nagar asked if the parking lot would be repaved. If so, proper drainage would need to be installed. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to there being no gates installed. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-086 1123 Howard Street Preliminary' Change use from restaurant to mini -mart, which involves the extension of the rear of the existing building and a change of the front elevation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Pau! Jung Yong Lee GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Jung introduced Mrs. Lee, the owner of the building. Chairperson Brzezinski asked that Mr. Jung present the detailed plans for the change of use. Chairperson Brzezinski summarized a letter written by Mrs. Lee, which listed the types of items to be sold and explained that the hours of operation would be from 7a.m. until 10p.m., seven days a week. The letter also stated that the third leased space would probably contain a dry cleaner. Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeeling -.August 28, 2002 Page 2 DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the concrete block in the rear would be painted. Mr. Jung answered that it would not be painted. She also asked why there would not be a second gable roof to unify the design of the building. Mr. Jung replied that a gable roof would preclude signage from being installed. Chairperson Brzezinski inquired as to the type of exterior lighting to be used. Mr. Jung explained that the center area of the building would have recessed soffit lights. The Committee felt that the soffit lights would be more attractive than exterior surface -mounted lights. Committee member Walczak asked if the existing parking lot would be improved. Mr. Jung explained that the cracks would be sealed and the lot would be touched up. Mr. Jung explained that his preliminary discussion with Frank Aguado, Zoning Officer, led him to believe that the hours of operation and size of the use would meet zoning standards. Committee member Marino asked how much concrete block would be visible from the front. Mr. ,lung answE-ed that the concrete block would be in the rear. After looking at the elevations, the Committee determined that some of the concrete block would be visible from eastbound and westbound traffic on Howard Avenue. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the brick should be extended to prevent it from being visible from Howard Street. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval, subject to the following conditions: • The Review and approval of the special use request by the Zoning Department • The recessing of the soffit down -lighting under the canopy and the exclusion of exterior surface -mounted lights • The applicant return to present the landscape plan to SPAARC • The addition of brick masonry that matches existing masonry along the east elevation extension • The painting of the concrete block existing on the north elevation • The addition of brick masonry along the exposed portion of the west elevation. Chairperson Brzezinski added that she would reserve the right to visit the site to determine if the existing parking lot needs to be resurfaced. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-1). Committee member Alterson voted nay. SPAARC 02-089 2115 Ashland Avenue Preliminary Demolish vacant single-family residence and install new commercial parking lot. Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting Auguv .&. 2002 Page 3 PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Roy King Samson Campbell GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. King explained that the gate and fence that was originally proposed along the front has been removed. Landscaping has been added to both the front and back of the proposed lot. DISCUSSION: Committee member Dahal stated that he is not in favor of the angled parking spaces that are closest to the sidewalk. He suggested that the parking be angled in the opposite direction and that cars enter from the alley, or that these two spaces be removed. He also explained that he is not sure if the landscaping along the front of the parking spaces would allow enough driving aisle width because the rear ends of cars could stick out into driving aisle. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that a short wood fence be installed between the front of the parking spaces and the adjacent property to mitigate headlight disturbance. Mr. King asked if SPAARC would be in favor of the metal gate from the alley to the parking lot. Committee member Marino stated that the presence of a gate around the parking lot would send the wrong message regarding the neighborhood. Mr. King asked if a chain could be used as opposed to a gate. Committee member Dahal stated that a chain might be the easiest alternative. He also reminded the applicant that a MWRD permit would be necessary for this project. Committee member Marino asked that approval of this project is subject to the review of the controlling measure to be used in place of the gate. ACTION: A motion was made to grant concept site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review Aleeting - August 18, 2002 Page 4 Site Plan and Appearance Review Altering — Augru118, 2002 Page 5 Draft — Not Yet Approved SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 4, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Design Professional: Carolyn Brzezinski, Jeff D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Ron Walczak Hans Friedman Burdick (for Zoning), Paul Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Review and ADDroval of Meeting Notes: Julv 24. 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). One member abstained from voting. Juiv 31.2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Auaust 7.2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Three members abstained from voting. Auaust 14. 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). One member abstained from voting. Auaust 21. 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes subject to changing the name MARY Norkett to MARTY Norkett. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). One member abstained from voting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-108 1501 Central Street Preliminary and Final Expand platform for wireless communication facility. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ed Stapleton GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Stapleton explained that the existing equipment would be removed and a new cabinet would be added. New antennas would also be added. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino asked if the new antennas would be taller than the existing. Mr. Stapleton replied that the new antennas would be the same height as the existing antennas. He also stated that the new antennas would be the same color as the existing. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-086 1123 Howard Street Preliminary and Final Change use from restaurant to mini -mart, which involves the extension of the rear of the existing building and a change of the front elevation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Paul Jung Yong Lee GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION Mr. Jung explained that Ms. Lee needs space for her signage and that this would preclude the addition of another gable. He presented a sketch of the signs that would be proposed. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if there were any drawings depicting the appearance of the building without a gable and with the proposed signs. Mr. Jung stated that he did not have drawings or elevations depicting this. Chairperson Brzezinski felt that the design of the building should be unified and that it would be difficult for the Committee to make a decision without a drawing. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case so that a drawing depicting the building with the signage could be submitted. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeetiag - September 4. 2002 Page 2 1 Site Plan and Appearann Arview Meeting - Sgwmber 4,1001 Page 3 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 11, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. 13mezinski (chair) detarmined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-073 532 Weslev Avenue Preliminary and Final Remodel 3-unit multi -family residential building and construe underground parking. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Bill James GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. James stated that he recessed the windows on the north elevation so to meet the 3-foot window opening regulation. • He pointed out that there would be two glass block windows on the north elevation for bathroom windows that would be within the 3-foot regulation. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen explained that only 15% of an elevation within 3-5 feet from a property line might contain window openings, if the building is sprinkled. As a result, in this case, the recessed portion may only be 15% windows. If the recess was 5 feet, then 25% of the recessed elevation may contain windows. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to working the code issues out in a similar vernacular that was laid out at this meeting. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8- 0). SPAARC 01-135 525 Chicaao Avenue Final Construct 90 attached single-family residences (townhouses) at the site of the former Dominick's grocery store. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stuart Kantoff Tony Di Domanico David Dubin Bernard Citron Jim Plunkard GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Citron stated that this project was preliminarily approved the last time it appeared before SPAARC, with the conditions that the design of the top of the buildings be resolved and utility issues being resolved. He stated that there have been some obstacles regarding Com Ed utility issues. Mr. Plunkard explained that the development team has not had any feedback from the City's Engineering or Planning Department regarding the design of the Chicago Avenue streetscape and that the development's design for the area along Chicago Avenue has remained the same. Committee member Marino suggested that the current plan for this area be moved forward and that today's motion state that the developers and the City work together to assure that the plan for this area of the site is in concert with the final Chicago Avenue Streetscape plan. Mr. Di Domanico provided the details of how the utilities would be handled. He explained that above grade utility units would be constructed in between each row of buildings. The units would be masonry and have a flat roof and would have an 8-foot ceiling. Mr. Plunkard stated that Com Ed would not allow these units to be vaulted because of flooding issues. These units would be the points of distribution for all of the utilities on the site. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if an area of each building could be carved out to provide a space for these utility rooms. Mr. Citron stated that there would not be enough room in each building to provide the space needed. Mr. Plunkard stated that most townhouse developments are being required to have these separate above -grade utility rooms. Chairperson Brzezinski pointed out that these utility units would affect the people in the end units. Mr. Citron stated that Com Ed does not want any building space above the utility units and that carving these units into the building would compromise the living space of some of these units. Committee member Friedman stated that he thought that the original intent of the design was to provide access and a view from Chicago Avenue to the park east of the development. These utility units would negatively affect this intent. Mr. Site Plan and Appearance Review Meeting - September i /. 2002 Page 2 Plunkard stated that the original intent was not to provide access to the park from Chicago Avenue. Chairperson Brzezinski explained that locating these types of utility units in this location is the type of afterthought design aspect that Evanston is trying to avoid with new developments. Committee member Marino asked if Com Ed permitted the vaults, would vaults then be feasible for the developers. Mr. Plunkard stated that vaults would be feasible if permitted. Committee member Wolinski stated that he does not want buyers of these units to come to the City and complain about these utility units and claim that they were not aware that they would be installed in front of their townhouse. Mr. Kantoff explained that the developers would provide a sign disclosure form to the City as proof that these buyers were made aware of these utility units when purchasing their residential unit. Chairperson Brzezinski asked Mr. Plunkard to present the designs for the penthouses. Mr. Plunkard explained that the elevations of the penthouses are setback about 15 feet from the facade of the building. He stated that vinyl siding would be used on the penthouses. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if cedar could be used in lieu of vinyl siding. Mr. Citron replied that cedar is expensive to maintain. Chairperson Brzezinski explained that the maintenance of cedar should not be expensive to maintain. Mr. Citron explained that, because this siding is on the penthouses, only the people that live in these units would be aware that vinyl is being used instead of cedar. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the front doors would be wood doors. Mr. Kantoff stated that they are exploring using insulated clad doors or glazed doors. Chairperson Brzezinski strongly endorsed the use of wood front doors. Committee member Marino stated that a specific meeting should take place between the developers, Planning, and Engineering in regards to the Chicago Avenue streetscape plans. Committee member Nagar stated that there would be many street openings on Chicago Avenue in relation to utility lines and disconnects. Committee member Alterson notified the Committee that house addresses for the project along Chicago Avenue are the same as house addressed along South Boulevard and this could create confusion. He suggested putting the street name under the addresses. Committee member Marino stated that staff should have at least a week to digest some of these changes prior to casting a vote on this project. Walter Hallen suggested granting foundation only approval. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval for foundation only for Building #1 (the southemmost building). The motion was seconded and passed. (6-2). Chairperson Brzezinski and Committee member Friedman voted nay. Site Plan and Appearance Review .Meeting - September 11, 2002 Page 3 SPAARC 02-109 585 Ingleside Place Preliminary and Final Remove existing frame addition; construct 2-story brick addition and 1-story brick garage. Renovate existing 2-car garage to 1-car garage and construct mudroom. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Gary Beyerl Jen Knapp GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Beyerl explained that the lot originally extended to Sheridan Road and that the current configuration of the lot and the desire to maintain the open space between the house and Lake Michigan makes it difficult to construct the addition within the parameters of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed addition would include a new garage and mudroom. The placement of the new garage presents the largest challenge in terms of building with parameters of the Zoning Ordinance. The owner does not want to construct the garage in front of the house. The predominant features of the home are the three gable ends and the proposal would reinterpret the gable end as the face of the addition to be added. The minor details of the existing house would be carried along the addition to create consistency. Mr. Beyerl stated that the new garage and garage door would be in character with the design of the house. DISCUSSION: Committee member Nagar asked what the width of the driveway would be. Ms. Knapp replied that the driveway width would be 30 feet. Committee member Nagar explained that the maximum width of a driveway within the parkway is 25 feet. He asked if an existing tree would be removed to accommodate the new driveway. Mr. Beyerl explained that the existing driveway is fairly large and would be removed and replaced with a new driveway and would not take up as much space in the parkway. Walter Hallen inquired as to the required zoning variations. Ms. Knapp stated that the north setback is 13 inches beyond the required rear yard setback. The front yard setback is also not met. The zoning variations are strictly related to setbacks. Committee member Nagar stated that he would like to work with the applicant to determine that driveway width regulations are being met. Committee member Marino asked if the addition materials are in kind with the existing building materials. Mr. Beyerl stated that the intent is for the new materials to be in kind with the existing materials. Committee member Alterson asked if the neighbors have been informed of the project. The owner stated that the owners are in favor of the project. Mr. Beyerl stated that the State Preservation Agency approved this project. ACTION: Sire Plan anal Appearance Review Ateednq -- September 11. 2W2 Page 4 A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the Evanston Preservation Commission. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 01-086 1123 Howard Avenue Preliminary and Final Change use from restaurant to mini -mart which involves the extension of the near of the existing building and a change to the front elevation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Paul Jung Yong Lee GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Jung explained that gable has been removed and that the new design would not contain gables, thus allowing room for signage. The signage on the building would be aligned. He also stated that the convenience store proposal fell through and there is now consideration to include a restaurant within the plaza. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson explained that if this site contains three tenant spaces, a variance would be required as the width of the lot would not allow for more than two tenant spaces. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would be in favor of removing the gables if the signage would be kept in alignment. Committee member Alterson felt that there was a lot of signage shown on the plans. Walter Hallen explained that the signage proposed is within the regulations. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to: - The alignment of the signs on the far, We - The removal of the middle door so that the approval is for only two tenant spaces - The addition of a honey locust tree in the parkway Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would like the fence in the rear of the property to be wood as opposed to chain link. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-110 1012 Chicano Avenue Recommendation to Sian Boar4 Erect second monument sign at automobile dealership. (AutoBam Mazda). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Site Plan and appearance Review Meeting - September 11, 2002 Page 5 Mr. Hallen stated that this proposal has been rejected twice by SPAARC and twice by the Sign Board, yet the applicant is again applying for two monument signs on the property. The proposed sign would be 20 feet in height, which is the same height as the existing monument sign. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that a second monument sign is not needed on this site. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend that the Sign Board deny a second monument sign. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. V-0). Site Plan and *Wamwe Review MerfLv -- September 11. 2002 Page 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 18, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Stefanie Levine, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezlnski (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Meetina Minute ADDroval: lu ust 28. 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). September 4.2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-113 615 Clinton Place Preliminary and Final Erect new one-story, brick and frame garage (attached), convert existing attached garage into living space, erect adjacent one-story addition, requiring major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Christopher Walker Frederick Harboe GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Harboe informed the Committee that this project appeared before the Preservation Commission the previous evening and was approved. He described the proposal and stated that it is a major variation because the attached garage needs to be 30 feet from the property line. There is also a minor variance in relation to lot coverage. The neighbors were notified of the proposal and none of them opposed the project. DISCUSSION: Committee Nagar asked the applicant to maintain the existing grade during construction. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-070 1132 Florence Avenue Construct addition to and remodel office building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Jonathon McKnight Bruce Hildner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hildner explained that a variance has been granted for the setback and that the existing chestnut tree would be preserved. The dilapidated garage at the rear of the property would be tom down and parking would be provided in its place. This parking will be paved when the rear alley is paved. The new addition is brick on the front and concrete block on the side. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if clear glass windows would be installed. Mr. Hildner stated that clear glass aluminum framed windows would be installed. Committee member Dahal asked if the existing driveway would continue to be used for ingress/egress. Mr. McKnight explained the alley would serve as ingress/egress and that this driveway would be removed. Carlos Ruiz asked about the skylights on the front elevation. Mr. Hildner explained that these skylights would be added to provide light in absence of windows that are prohibited in accordance with the 2-hour firewall requirement. Committee member Levine asked that the tree be protected during construction. Mr. McKnight assured the Committee that necessary measures would be taken to protect the tree. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the removal of the driveway. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Final Site Plan and Appearance Review Afeettng - September 18. 2002 Page 2 SPAARC 02-112 1310 Rosalie Street Pr+eliminary and Final Demolition of existing brick 2-story addition, construction of new 2-story brick addition, requiring major variation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Debra McQueen GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. McQueen explained that the existing kitchen is quite small and will be expanded. She stated that the variation is due to the fact that the detached garage is less than 10 feet from the house. The current distance is just over 3- feet. There is no lot coverage issue. The existing house is a solid masonry structure and the existing garage is masonry and seems to be original to the house. She explained that the addition would be constructed with a 2-hour firewall. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that a 2-hour wall would not be possible because there would be glass openings on the addition. She asked if there were any comments from neighbors. Ms. McQueen replied that there have not been comments from any neighbors as of yet. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-111 2620 Crawford Avenue Preliminary and Final Resurface and re -stripe existing parking lot for mixed -use site (auto service repair, auto vehicle sales). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Omar Khuri Charles Newmayer GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Newmayer explained that the existing parking lot is gravel and that ample paved parking spaces would be provided. He explained that two catch basins would pour out into Gross Point Road. DISCUSSION: Committee member Nagar asked if an MWRD permit has been applied for. Mr. Newmayer stated that the system it would be emptying into is not a combined system but a sewer system. Committee member Nagar explained that an MWRD permit would still be needed. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the existing driveway would be paved. Mr. Newmayer stated that the driveway would be paved. Site Plan and Appearance Revie w dfeeting - September 18. 2002 Page 3 Chairperson Brzezinski explained that lighting and landscaping needs to provided for new parking lots. She suggested planting landscaping In the front to screen the parking lot and some of the building. Committee member Alterson informed the owner that he has been getting complaints regarding noise from work being done in the garages. Mr. Newmayer stated that work is only done during business hours and during the day on Saturday. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the landscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. ("). Site Plan ad Appearance Review Afeeting — September 1$ 2002 Page 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 2, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Paul D'Agostino, Stephanie Levine, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting Apnroval of Summary of Findings: September 18, 2002 Meeting — A motion was made to approve these minutes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02 -115 12134216 Mulford Street Prellminary and Final Construct decks in rear of multi -family residence. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Eric Hoffman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hoffman presented plans for constructing on the north side of the building two one- story high wooden decks anchored over an existing one-story high concrete foundation. The posts would be attached to the foundation with galvanized brackets. The ledger would be directly lag boated to the house. All wiring for utilities would be located below the deck, therefore not easily accessible from the deck. DISCUSSION: Carolyn Brzezinski asked if all the building material would be pressure treated wood. Mr. Hoffman said that the post, beams, and joists of the deck would be treated lumber, the decking, railing/baluster, and wrap over joists would be cedar. ACTION: Carolyn Brzezinski moved to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval for the proposed decks as presented. Judy Aiello seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 00-146 2650 RIdg9 Avenue Final Construct addition to Evanston Hospital (Burch ll). Applicant did not appear and the case was not heard. SPAARC 97-0065 1700 Maple Avenue Final Review of landscaping at Border's site. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom White Bill Duke GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. White presented the revisions for the plaza outside of the Border's store. He explained that the design of the plaza would be very active and public in nature. The utility vaults and areas would be accessible to workers but would not be obtrusive in their appearance. The benches in the plaza will no longer have a granite top but will now be wood with stainless steel rails. DISCUSSION: Committee member Aiello asked if the Borders would have an outdoor caf6. Mr. Duke replied that there will be a caf6 within the Border's on their upper level and that a moveable kiosk beverage station would be utilized during the warmer months. Mr. White noted that this station would require an outdoor caf6 permit. Committee member Aiello stated that if this plaza plan is approved, then an agreement to operate and maintain the plaza will need to appear before the City Council because TIF money will be utilized to fund its maintenance. Chairperson Brzezinski requested that an additional bench be added that creates an'L' shaped bench area. Mr. White felt that this could be done. Chairperson Brzezinski recommended that two 'L' shaped bench areas be included. Mr. White stated that this might mean that a tree needs to be removed. Committee member Marino stated that he would like to see greenery added to the downtown and that he would not like to see trees removed. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that the proposed planting beds should compliment the new planting beds installed downtown. Committee member Friedman suggested locating the benches along Church Street facing the Borders. This would allow for the trees to remain. Committee member Wolinski stated that garbage containers in the area are frequently overfilled and that the City should make sure that garbage would be picked up on a regular basis and maintained. Mr. White suggested adding another four trash containers to try and alleviate this situation. Waiter Hallen asked what the material of the proposed fence would be. Mr. Duke replied that the fence below the building overhang would be a rolling gate. It will be 8 feet in height and will be steel and painted white. He stated that the embankment area SPAARC Meeting Minutes - Oclaher 2. 2002 2 will be patched and that an 8-inch high stainless steel fence will be installed in the planting area to prevent bikes from cutting through the planting area. Committee member Aiello noted that people might trip over this small fence. Committee member D'Agostino stated that the spacing of trees needs to be consistent with the existing spacing of trees in the area. Mr. White explained that a monument sign would be installed at the comer. It will include tenant names and will be constructed of stainless steel. It will be 12 feet in height and 3 feet in diameter. The sign is intended for pedestrians. The plaza will not be illuminated because the building will be illuminated and existing streetlights will be present. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested providing lower level sitting lighting or bollard lighting. Committee member Marino asked if there would be a sign in the area to notify drivers of the parking garage location. Committee member Dahal stated that there would be signs on Church Street. Mr. White stated that Borders is asking for two amendments to the sign district. First, a proposed sign above the front door would be a four -foot letter sign. Second, a proposed sign on the west elevation would be a four -foot letter sign. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the proposed sign on the front would be too high and not necessary. Committee Aiello pointed out that there would be banners containing the Borders logo and that this should be more than sufficient in terms of signage. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual landscape plan approval subject to the applicant considering the following: Modification of the benches so that they are arranged in an V shape Addition of a bench further north on the site Addition of pedestrian -scaled lighting - Waiting for City staff to do value engineering - Final approval not be granted until a maintenance and operation agreement is established for the entire Church Street Plaza area, including trash receptacle locations and the consideration of planting additional trees Committee member Dahal asked if bike racks would be installed. Mr. White stated that bike racks would be installed, but he asked SPAARC where they should be installed so that they are visible but not unsightly. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that bike racks similar to those at Chandler's Plaza may be more attractive and should be considered. Committee member D'Agostino suggested that the City determine where and how many bike racks be installed during its value engineering. This was added to the above - mentioned motion. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously A motion was made to recommend to the Sign Board that the four foot sign above the front door not be allowed, but that the sign on the west elevation be allowed, but at a maximum height of three feet. In addition the signs on the awnings should not be S84ARC Meeting Minutes - October 2. 2002 3 permitted and that the awnings on the end should stay open. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-116 1629 Chicaao Avenue Preliminary and Final Remodeling of interior/exterior storefront PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chris Turley GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Turley explained that this space is the previous locale of the Levy Center. The proposal is to split the space down the middle to accommodate two storefront locations. A new, handicapped entrance would be created. Each space would be about 4,500 square feet. DISCUSSION. Committee member Aiello asked if there are tenants for either of the spaces. Mr. Turley stated that these spaces are currently being marketed. Chairperson Brzezinski notified Mr. Turley that a unified business center sign plan needs to be submitted. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the submittal of a unified business center sign plan. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-117 665 Clark Street Preliminary Install rooftop antenna for ATBT. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ed Stapleton GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION. .. Mr. Stapleton noted that all of the equipment to be installed would be behind an existing screen. The only thing that should be visible is the antenna. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz notified the Committee that the building is not a landmark. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-114 121-123 Callan Avenue Preliminary and Final Replace windows and back porches on multi -family residential building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Laszlo Simovic GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: SPAARC Meeting Minuses — October 2. 2002 4 Mr. Simovic informed the Committee that the owner of the building is not in favor of staining the deck and using the applied muntins on the windows. The owner feels that staining the wood on the deck would create more maintenance issues. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that unpainted treated lumber does not look finished and that stained lumber lasts longer and does not create as many maintenance concerns. In addition, she still supports simulated divided light windows. ACTION: Chairperson Brzezinski pointed out that these are non -binding issues, but that the owner is strongly encouraged to paint the deck and use simulated divided light windows. SPAARC Meaft Mimuts - October Z 2002 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES October 16, 2002 Attenders: Committee Members: A. Afterson, A. Berkowsky, R.Walczak, S.Levine, K. Fujihara, D. Jennings, D. Marino, S. Nagar, C. Brzezinski, J. Wolinski Design Professional: H. Friedman Other Staff: C. Ruiz, W.Hallen C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting= Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of the 9111102 and 9118 meetings and passed by unanimous vote. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-125 1604 Chicaao Preliminary and Final Install seven awnings on two facades of the landmark University Building. For which partial funding will come from the Facade Rebate Program of the City of Evanston. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Martha Koch - Manager GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Replacement of the old awnings is proposed by the tenants of this building. The new awnings will be fabric construction and non -illuminated. A non -original aluminum panel over the existing storefronts will be concealed by the new awnings. DISCUSSION: A Committee member noted that a Unified Business Center signage plan is required for the building and will be apply to any signage on the awnings. It was also noted that a break in the awnings should be made at the architectural pier element on the east wall. The presenter indicated that this was planned... Review of the proposed awnings will be made by the Preservation Commission. All -in -all the.Committee thought that the awnings were well designed. ACTIONS: A motion was made to give preliminary and final approval to the proposed awning arrays as presented and passed by unanimous vote. SPAARC 99.064 Sherman Plaza Revision to Preliminary Presenter(s) did not appear. SPAARC 00-146 2650 Ridae — Burch 11 Addition to Evanston Hospital Final Construct an addition ti ENH Evanston Hospital (Burch ll) PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mssr. Walter Eckenhoff, David Behls, Nick Patera, Elias Saltz, and Bill Lampkin GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: No changes have been made in the design from the preliminary presentation. Neighborhood meetings have been held with normal concerns voiced regarding possible traffic increases; and possible problems with increased light/noise from the area. The architectural design was generally well received by the neighbors. A presentation of the landscape improvements associated with the addition was made. The landscaping will extend to the existing ambulance drive entry and generally be trees along the street parkway. At the Birch-11 addition a court is formed that will have birch and English oak trees together with ground covers, perennial beds, and some evergreens. Containers will house trees and shrubs at the entry to the Women's Hospital at the east end of the courtyard. Some existing trees will be relocated to other areas of the hospital site. Site lighting will consist of four pole mounted arrays in the courtyard and some minor lighting over the loading doors in the service drive south of the addition. A photometric plan was presented for the courtyard portion of the site. A lightly tinted glass is planned for the windows and the exterior brick will match the Women's Hospital brick color exactly. The top floor will use cast stone units that relate to the precast concrete elements on Burch-11. DISCUSSION: The stop light on the Girard/ Central intersection will be re -timed, but not until some interface between the City and IDOT is complete. It was noted that the addition does not increase the building population and will remove a parking area on the building site. This means that the traffic at this end of Girard will decrease and only be the drop-off traffic for the Women's Hospital, which already exists. Construction on this site will require complete traffic and exitway co-ordination with the Fire Department staff before any building permit will be issued. Flagmen will be required on Girard for must of the construction period. The emergency ambulance entry is vital to the hospital operation. With the two levels below grade and the resultant deep sheet piling required for construction, a video survey of surrounding off -site structures must be made before any work is started. Construction is hoped to begin on November 1, 2002 with completion scheduled for early 2004. ACTIONS: A motion was made to give final siita plan and appearance approval to the addition as proposed and passed by unanimous vote. Meeting Notes prepared by Walter S. Hallen SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES October 23, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, Jim Wohnski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Susan Guderiey, Walter Hallen, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting= Committee Business: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of the 9125102 meeting and passed by unanimous vote. Projects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-049 3108-3114 Central Street Final Raze dwellings and construct Fare attached single-family residences with two off-street parking spaces each. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Troy Mock GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Mock explained that there would be no site plan changes from what was previously reviewed by SPAARC. There will be no fences facing the street. He explained that wood - burning fireplaces might be added at the buyer's request. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that copper roofing be used. Committee member Marino asked if all facades would be brick. Mr. Mock stated that the entire building would be brick, except for the gables, which would be stucco. Committee member Walczak asked if there would be any lighting in the rear elevation. Mr. Mock replied that lighting would have to be provided in the rear, but he was not yet sure of where the lighting would exactly be located. Carlos Ruiz encouraged the Mr. Mock to apply the divided lights to the exterior of the windows. Committee member Marino stated that he was concerned with the visibility of the side facades of the buildings from Central Street. Chairperson Brzezinski did not feel that the side elevations would be visible from Central Street because of the proximity of the adjacent structures to the side elevations. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: • The addition of lighting in the rear of the building. • Utilizing of simulated divided lights with exterior and interior applied muntins and a spacing bar between the panes of glass. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-127 724-726 Clark Street Preliminary and Final Presenter(s) did not appear. SPAARC 01-001 1601 Emerson Street Preliminary and Final Construct parking lot on Robinson property. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Wayne Hanson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hanson explained that half of the lot is zoned residential and half is zoned commercial. The proposal is to pave the lot, add landscaping;'an eight -foot high black chain link fence with black slats, rock ground cover to provide wheel protection, and a sliding gate in front of the entrance to the parking lot. DISCUSSION: Committee member Walczak stated that the black slats on the fence would reduce visibility and could create safety concerns. Committee member Aiello asked when the gates would be dosed. Mr. Hanson replied that the gates would be closed at night. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that trespassers could easily get around the gate at night and vandalize the buses. She suggested more landscaping to shield the entire lot from trespassers. Committee member Marino stated that he is not in favor of gated parking lots in general, but that he may be in favor in this case because of the use of the site. Committee member Nagar stated that if this lot is going to be a permanent parking lot, then the appropriate detention would need to be provided. Committee member Alterson felt that it would be more important to gate the entire site so that illegal activity will not take place within the lot rather than gate just the entrances. Committee member Marino urged that the same gating treatment be used on both the north and south entrances to the lot. Committee member Alterson felt that a more "expensive" looking fence, SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 23, 2002 2 such as wrought iron, should be used. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would like to see a detailed landscape plan for this project, with more variety in trees and shrubbery. Committee member D'Agostino concurred. She asked about the lighting of the lot. Mr. Hanson stated that the existing lighting on utility poles seems to provide sufficient lighting to the site at night. Chairperson Brzezinski also noted that an 8-foot high fence would not be needed and that a six-foot high fence would suffice. Finally, she stated that green groundcover would be more effective than rocks, as rocks could be used as ammunition for vandalism. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table this case pending the review of the appearance of the gates and fence and of a detailed landscape plan. In addition, Mr. Hanson was asked to provide a parking lot circulation plan. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-0). Committee member Afterson abstained from voting. SPAARC Meeting Notes — Odober 23, 2002 3 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES October 30, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Arlova Jackson C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum.existing and began the meeting= Meetina Business: October 9.2002 Meetina Notes: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Two members abstained from voting. October 16.2002 Meetina Notes: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Two members abstained from voting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-128 1100 Clark Street Conceo_ t Construction of new residential condominiums. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom Roszak Don Wallin GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Roszak explained that the proposal is to include 344 condominiums, with the required parking for the condominiums included on the site as well as parking to make up for the parking in the existing lot being lost due to this development. There will be two floors of underground parking. The four buildings along both Ridge Avenue and Oak Avenue are six stories, while the other four buildings on the site will be eight, nine, fourteen and fifteen stories. Essentially, the height of the buildings will step back closer to the east and west property lines. The units without views would have terraces. Mr. Roszak stated that the main entrance to the parking would be off of Oak Avenue. The spaces between the buildings will be landscaped, and each of the roofs will be landscaped, excluding the two towers. The project will be built in phases, with the easternmost buildings and parking for these buildings, as well as make-up parking for spots lost being built first. Building A would have three spaces used for retail or office space. Diagonal parking would be provided along Clark Street so that the church on the north side of Clark can use it for its services. The spaces in the proposed garage would not be available to churchgoers. The average square footage of the units would be between 1,000 and 1,100 square feet. There will be some balconies for units without terraces. These balconies will be designed so that they will not protrude from the building. The proposed green roofs could be accessible to occupants of the building. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen pointed out that the Fire Department's input would be very helpful regarding access to these buildings. He also stated that the 3 and 4 story masonry walls along Clark Street and Oak Avenue abut the sidewalk and do not create an aesthetically pleasing experience. Committee member Alterson stated that he does not think that this proposal is anywhere near the zoning requirements in terms of F.A.R. and height. Mr. Roszak replied that he would be applying for a Planned Development. Committee member Dahal asked if a preliminary traffic study has been done in relation to this proposal. Mr. Roszak stated that a study has been done and that it can be presented to Committee member Dahal. Committee member Friedman noted that the proposed density of the site is daunting and that the bottom of the design is too heavy and does not relate to the light appearance of the buildings' upper floors. Committee member Walczak also noted that the project appears too dense. Mr. Roszak replied that other nearby projects are even more dense and that he is trying to create a design that fits in with the surrounding area, as opposed to one or two towers of residential units. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the project is too dense in terms of building coverage as opposed to number of units. She pointed out that some of the lower units in the interior of the development would not receive ample amount of light because of this density. She asked what the developer would give back to the community in exchange for density and height bonuses. Mr. Roszak explained that the City would receive over 2 million dollars in taxes from this development every year. Chairperson Brzezinski agreed, but noted that there would be an additional 344 housing units for the City to serve. Mr. Roszak stated that he is planning on providing affordable housing — 5% to 10% of the development — and has met with the alderman to discuss this issue. Committee member Wolinski stated that there are a number of policy issues present here. First, does the City want to develop this property. He credited Mr. Roszak with his flexibility throughout the development of his proposal and noted that he has decreased the units in his proposal. He did state that the proposal might be better served if it was taller and more open space was provided on the site. Mr. Roszak noted that a phased project is more feasible in today's economy, and that he would not take the risk of developing a towered project that could not be built in phases. Committee member Alterson stated that this is considered the SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 30. 2002 2 edge of downtown and that development on this site should serve as a buffer between adjacent neighborhoods and the downtown. However, this proposal is for a downtown type of development. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table this case. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that SPAARC is in favor of development on this site but that the density and height of this proposal needs to be further studied. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 01-001 1601 Emerson Street Preliminary and Final Construct parking lot on Robinson property. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Wayne Hansen Leon Robinson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hansen explained that wrought iron fencing has been proposed at both entryways, with a sliding gate at each end. Spirea will be planted in front of the fence on each end. The trees along the perimeter of the property are now going to be both hackberry and locust, as opposed to just locust. Stone ground cover will no longer be used. The turning radii in the parking lot will be suitable for the buses using this lot. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked Mr. Robinson when the buses would be coming and going. Mr. Robinson stated that most of the buses will be leaving the lot by 8 a.m. and will return to the lot periodically throughout the day. There should not be any bus activity after 5 p.m. Committee member Dahal stated that he is not in favor of buses exiting onto Foster Avenue. It is a local street and neighbors are upset with the effects of traffic on the local streets. He proposed that a tumaround be installed so that buses enter and exit onto Emerson Street. Committee member Alterson suggested that Foster Avenue, be changed to allow for only east bound traffic. Committee member Wolinski noted that a tumaround would probably have to encroach onto residentially zoned property. This would create major zoning issues. Walter Hallen stated that reversing the enter/exit locations would help because when the buses return to the lot, they do so in a staggered time schedule. As a result a constant stream of buses will not be exiting onto Foster Avenue. Committee member Alterson stated that he would much rather see bus traffic exiting onto Foster Avenue and entering from Emerson Street. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to buses being made to exit onto Emerson Street and enter from Foster Street. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-2). Committee members D'Agostino and Dahal voted nay. SPAARC 02-129 901 Church Street Preliminary and Final, Tenant build -out for a type 11 restaurant. (Baja Fresh Mexican Grill). SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 30, 2002 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Robert Fugman Steve Ottman Greg Hakanen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Ottman stated that Evanston would be the first location in the Chicago area to host a Baja Fresh Restaurant. Mr. Fugman explained that there would be no exterior changes except for signage and the possible addition of a window on the east wall. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked where the trash would be located. Mr. Ottman explained that there is a shared garbage and grease disposal area within the building, but a worker would have to go outside to get to this disposal area. Chairperson Brzezinski notified Mr. Ottman that the City would hold this establishment to a high standard regarding the upkeep of the exterior of the restaurant. Frank Aguado asked if there would be an outdoor caf6 as part of this establishment. Mr. Ottman replied that an outdoor cafe would be established, but that it would not be on City property but rather a part of the lot in which the building exists upon. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 02-130 733 Lincoln Street Preliminary and Final Addition to garage requiring a major variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Penelope Peterson Kevin Barker GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Backer explained that the building owner wishes to make the single -car garage into a two - car garage. The addition will not meet the setback requirements, as the current garage setback also does not meet the requirements. He explained that the style of the addition would match the current garage style. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson asked if this home was in the federal historic district. The owner was not sure. He notified the owner that, because a variance is required, this project would need to appear before the Evanston Preservation Commission if it is in the federal historic district. He suggested that the applicant check with Carlos Ruiz to determine the property's historic district status. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that the applicant look into installing a garage door that is similar to a very nice one that is located on Sherman Avenue a bit south of Central Street. Committee member Friedman informed Mr. Barker that he designed a door that appears as two doors on Church Street and Wesley Avenue. He suggested that Mr. Barker look into replicating this door's design. SPAARC Meeting Notes - October 30, 2002 4 ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Committee member Alterson abstained from voting. SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 30, 2002 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES October 30, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Afterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rejeev Dahal, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Ariova Jackson C. Smith (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting= Meetina Business: October 9.2002 Meetinq Notes: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Two members abstained from voting. October 16.2002 Meeting Notes: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Two members abstained from voting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-128 1100 Clark Street Conceot Construction of new residential condominiums. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom Rosxak Don Wallin GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Roszak explained that the proposal is to include 344 condominiums, with the required parking for the condominiums included on the site as well as parking to make up for the parking in the existing lot being lost due to this development. There will be two floors of underground parking. The four buildings along both Ridge Avenue and Oak Avenue are six stories, while the other four buildings on the site will be eight, nine, fourteen and fifteen stories. Essentially, the height of the buildings will step back closer to the east and west property lines. The units without views would have terraces. Mr. Roszak stated that the main entrance to the parking would be off of Oak Avenue. The spaces between the buildings will be landscaped, and each of the roofs will be landscaped, excluding the two towers. The project will be built in phases, with the eastemmost buildings and parking for these buildings, as well as make-up parking for spots lost being built first. Building A would have three spaces used for retail or office space. Diagonal parking would be provided along Clark Street so that the church on the north side of Clark can use it for its services. The spaces in the proposed garage would not be available to churchgoers. The average square footage of the units would be between 1,000 and 1,100 square feet. There will be some balconies for units without terraces. These balconies will be designed so that they will not protrude from the building. The proposed green roofs could be accessible to occupants of the building. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen pointed out that the Fire Department's input would be very helpful regarding access to these buildings. He also stated that the 3 and 4 story masonry walls along Clark Street and Oak Avenue abut the sidewalk and do not create an aesthetically pleasing experience. Committee member Alterson stated that he does not think that this proposal is anywhere near the zoning requirements in terms of F.A.R. and height. Mr. Roszak replied that he would be applying for a Planned Development. Committee member Dahal asked if a preliminary traffic study has been done in relation to this proposal. Mr. Roszak stated that a study has been done and that it can be presented to Committee member Dahal. Committee member Friedman noted that the proposed density of the site is daunting and that the bottom of the design is too heavy and does not relate to the light appearance of the buildings' upper floors. Committee member Walczak also noted that the project appears too dense. Mr. Roszak replied that other nearby projects are even more dense and that he is trying to create a design that fits in with the surrounding area, as opposed to one or two towers of residential units. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the project is too dense in terms of building coverage as opposed to number of units. She pointed out that some of the lower units in the interior of the development would not receive ample amount of light because of this density. She asked what the developer would give back to the community in exchange for density and height bonuses. Mr. Roszak explained that the City would receive over 2 million dollars in taxes from this development every year. Chairperson Brzezinski agreed, but noted that there would be an additional 344 housing units for the City to serve. Mr. Roszak stated that he is planning on providing affordable housing — 5% to 10% of the development — and has met with the alderman to discuss this issue. Committee member Wolinski stated that there are a number of policy issues present here. First, does the City want to develop this property. He credited Mr. Roszak with his flexibility throughout the development of his proposal and noted that he has decreased the units in his proposal. He did state that the proposal might be better served if it was taller and more open space was provided on the site. Mr. Roszak noted that a phased project is more feasible in today's economy, and that he would not take the risk of developing a towered project that could not be built in phases. Committee member Atterson stated that this is considered the SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 30, 2002 edge of downtown and that development on this site should serve as a buffer between adjacent neighborhoods and the downtown. However, this proposal is for a downtown type of development. ACTIONS: A motion was made to table this case. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that SPAARC is in favor of development on this site but that the density and height of this proposal needs to be further studied. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 01-001 1601 Emerson Street Preliminary_ and Final Construct parking lot on Robinson property. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Wayne Hansen Leon Robinson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hansen explained that wrought iron fencing has been proposed at both entryways, with a sliding gate at each end. Spirea will be planted in front of the fence on each end. The trees along the perimeter of the property are now going to be both hackberry and locust, as opposed to just locust. Stone ground cover will no longer be used. The turning radii in the parking lot will be suitable for the buses using this lot. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked Mr. Robinson when the buses would be coming and going. Mr. Robinson stated that most of the buses will be leaving the lot by 8 a.m. and will return to the lot periodically throughout the day. There should not be any bus activity after 5 p.m. Committee member Dahal stated that he is not in favor of buses exiting onto Foster Avenue. It is a local street and neighbors are upset with the effects of traffic on the local streets. He proposed that a turnaround be installed so that buses enter and exit onto Emerson Street. Committee member Alterson suggested that Foster Avenue be changed to allow for only east bound traffic. Committee member Wolinski noted that a turnaround would probably have to encroach onto residentially zoned property. This would create major zoning issues. Walter Hallen stated that reversing the enter/exit locations would help because when the buses return to the lot, they do so in a staggered time schedule. As a result a constant stream of buses will not be exiting onto Foster Avenue. Committee member Alterson stated that he would much rather see bus traffic exiting onto Foster Avenue and entering from Emerson Street. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to buses being made to exit onto Emerson Street and enter from Foster Street. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-2). Committee members D'Agostino and Dahal voted nay. SPAARC 02-129 901 Church Street Preliminary and Final Tenant build -out for a type 11 restaurant. (Baja Fresh Mexican Grill). SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 30, 2002 3 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Robert Fugman Steve Ottman Greg Hakanen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Ottman stated that Evanston would be the first location in the Chicago area to host a Baja Fresh Restaurant. Mr. Fugman explained that there would be no exterior changes except for signage and the possible addition of a window on the east wall. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked where the trash would be located. Mr. Ottman explained that there is a shared garbage and grease disposal area within the building, but a worker would have to go outside to get to this disposal area. Chairperson Brzezinski notified Mr. Ottman that the City would hold this establishment to a high standard regarding the upkeep of the exterior of the restaurant. Frank Aguado asked if there would be an outdoor cafe as part of this establishment. Mr. Ottman replied that an outdoor ca€b would be established, but that it would not be on City property but rather a part of the lot in which the building exists upon. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 02-130 733 Lincoln Street Preliminary and Final Addition to garage requiring a major variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Penelope Peterson Kevin Barker GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Barker explained that the building owner wishes to make the single -car garage into a two - car garage. The addition will not meet the setback requirements, as the current garage setback also does not meet the requirements. He explained that the style of the addition would match the current garage style. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson asked if this home was in the federal historic district. The owner was not sure. He notified the owner that, because a variance is required, this project would need to appear before the Evanston Preservation Commission if it is in the federal historic district. He suggested that the applicant check with Carlos Ruiz to determine the property's historic district status. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that the applicant look into installing a garage door that is similar to a very nice one that is located on Sherman Avenue a bit south of Central Street. Committee member Friedman informed Mr. Barker that he designed a door that appears as two doors on Church Street and Wesley Avenue. He suggested that Mr. Barker look into replicating this door's design. SPAARC Meeting Notes - October 30, 2002 4 ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Committee member Alterson abstained from voting. SPAARC Meeting Notes— October30, 2002 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES NOVEMBER S, 2002 Aftendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Alan Berkowsky, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Adova Jackson, Carlos Ruiz C. Smlth (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting, Meetina Business: October 23. 2002 Meetina Notes: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). ,. - .. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-131 1010 Greenleaf Street Pr+eliminanr and Final Erect 8" fall storage shed. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Holloway GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Holloway explained that the variation being requested involves erecting a storage shed on the property line. The shed would store fuel for lawn care machinery. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the shed would be a metal pre -fabricated material. Mr. Holloway replied that it would be vinyl pre -fabricated, it would be constructed on a concrete slab, and that it would not be heated. He also noted that the church would like to plant landscaping material around the shed. Mr..Aguado explained that the applicant is also seeking a variance to construct the shed within the 10-feet minimum distance that is required between a principal and accessory building. The proposed shed would be located 6 % feet from the principal building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-132 1319 Leonard Place Prellminary and Final Second story addition to single-family house requiring major variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew Venamore GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Venamore explained that the proposal is to add a second story addition to the rear of the home. This addition would be visible from Wesley Street. The new deck would comply with the five-foot required setback, while the existing deck does not. The variation is to build over an existing non -conforming part of the house. The neighbors have not yet commented but a presentation will be made to them prior to the ZBA meeting of November 19, 2002. DISCUSSION: Committee member Fujihara asked how far the existing house is from the property line. Mr. Venamore explained that the house in anywhere between 2 % feet and 4 feet from the property line. Carlos Ruiz asked what type of material would be used on the addition. Mr. Venamore answered that the current siding is aluminum and that the addition would match the existing. Frank Aguado asked if there would be additional air conditioning equipment installed. Mr. Venamore answered no. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 99-075 515 Main Street Revision to Final Consider aftemative design of emergency generator. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: William Warman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Warman explained that the new proposal is to build a masonry screen wall and a roof over the generator. The roof will have insulation to muffle the noise generated by the generator. There would be detailed stone trim along the masonry wall to match the fagade of the existing building, as well as a small lit window on the south facing wall of the proposed brick enclosure. Removable bronze lowers would be installed so that a door would not be needed to access the generator. The generator will be tested between 15 and 20 minutes each week. The condominium management would work with the community to determine the most appropriate time in which to test the generator. Mr. Warman stated that vines would be planted along the SPAARC Meeting Notes -November B, 2002 2 base of the wall and bushes and trees would be planted in front of and around the generator enclosure. DISCUSSION: Committee member Berkowsky asked if there would be enough airflow with this new proposal. Mr. Warman replied that the project engineer confirmed that enough airflow would be provided with this new proposal. Committee member Berkowsky suggested purchasing a sound abatement system that would reduce the decibels of the generator by at least 25%. He provided the name and contact of the individual who could provide more information about this system. Mr. Warman stated that he would look into this and follow up with the City. Committee member Aiello asked for written documentation from the generator manufacturer assuring that the enclosure would provide enough airflow. Committee member Friedman suggested that the proposed details of the brick facade on the enclosure, along with the lit window, would draw more attention to the enclosure. He stated that the masonry wall should not be detailed so that attention is not focused on the enclosure. Chairperson Brzezinski requested that the applicant commit to utilizing the sound abatement package that was mentioned by Committee member Berkowsky. Chairperson Berkowsky asked to receive a copy of the written documentation mentioned by Committee member Aiello. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant revision to site plan approval subject to the following conditions: 1.) Letter from the generator manufacturer stating that the enclosure is acceptable to maintain the equipment and the warranty of the equipment 2.) The additional sound abatement equipment is installed. 3.) The minimum -testing schedule that meets the manufacturer's requirements be Implemented. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). A motion was made to grant revision to appearance review approval subject to the proposed light and design features on the masonry wall not be included in the construction and that the brick and coping match that of the existing building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-134 2100 Ridqe Avenue Prellminary and Final Construct a handicapped ramp at the frnnt.of the Civic Center building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Elliott Dudnik David Cook GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Dudnik explained that the intent of the project is to provide handicapped access to the front of the Civic Center Building. There are two proposals for this ramp. The first would have a SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 6, 2002 slope of less than 1 to 20 that would not classify it as a ramp, therefore railings would not be necessary. There would be issues in terms of connecting the ramp to the vestibule, as the vestibule would need to be raised seven inches. The altemative is to provide automatic doors and to raise the entrance to the level of the interior floor. The ramp would be extended and would be constructed from both the north and south. There would not be a wall in this proposal and the land would be slightty bermed to provide for the ramp. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen asked if the City is legally obliged to provide this entrance. Mr. Cook stated that although there is a handicapped entrance in the rear of the building, the spirit of the ADA code is to provide an accessible entrance as close as possible to the front entrance of the building. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested extending the ramp straight out from the door, rather than both north and south. Committee member Friedman suggested using a mechanical chaidift. Mr. Dudnik and Mr. Cook replied that chaidifts are problematic and cumbersome. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the second attemative seems to be more technically, aesthetically, and financially feasible. Committee member Walczak suggested requiring buses to service the back of the building. Max Rubin stated that buses would not be able to maneuver through the Civic Center's parking lot. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case pending a site plan with a larger perspective. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 6, 2002 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES NOVEMBER 13, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Keith Fujihara, Dennis Marino, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff,. Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Arlova Jackson, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinsid {chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meetings Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-136 711 Elgin Road Preliminary and Final Install handicapped ramp, misc. interior/extedoralterations (Northwestern University, Music Administration Building). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bill Hellman Linda Cane GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Cane explained that the purpose of this project is to make this building accessible to wheelchairs. The existing doors will be replaced with new doors that will match the existing. A security light fixture will also be added. She did not have photographs of the existing entrance. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz asked if the existing doors could be reused. Mr. Cane explained that they are in poor condition, but that the new doors would be wood, just at the existing doors are. He also asked if the ramp would be visible from the street and what type of material the building is at this entranoe. Mr. Hellman stated that the ramp is not visible from the street and Ms. Cane explained that the building is brick, but the vestibule area was added to the building and is wood. Chairperson Brzezinski notified the applicants that this is a landmarked building and that it would need a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Preservation Commission. Carlos Ruiz stated that he did not feel that it would need Preservation review at this point. Walter Hallen suggested that only one rail be used on the ramp, so that the ramp would not appear industrial in appearance. Committee member Walinski stated that photographs are required for review and that this project should not be approved until the Committee can review photographs of this site. Chairperson Brzezinski replied that she feels comfortable in this particular case to vote without the presence of photographs. She suggested using a stainless steel handrail. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to using a stainless steel handrail and the review and approval of Carlos Ruiz for preservation issues. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-2). Committee members Friedman and Walinski voted nay based on the lack of photographs. SPAARC 02-137 1565 Sherman Avenue Prellminary and Final Install new doors and exit lighting for type 1 restaurant (Vivo Le Crepe). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Debra Nolan Dennis Miller GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Miller stated that the proposal includes installing new lighting, signage, awnings, and sliding doors to be used as windows to replace the existing windows. No photographs were presented. No variances would be required for the new signage. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that the lighting only shine on the sign and not on the dry- vit. Carlos Ruiz asked if the proposed sign would match other signs on the building. Mr. Miller stated that the new sign would compliment the existing signs on the building. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the shape should be more elongated to match the adjacent signs. Frank Aguado notified the applicants that a type 1 restaurant couldn't revert to a type 2 restaurant in the future. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested changing the base of the facade from dry-vit to something that would match the French door look. Carlos Ruiz suggested using a wood panel type of base instead of the dry-vit base. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested using a railing on the outside to give the appearance of a balcony so that the raised french doors does not look awkward. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the consideration of only illuminating -the•sign and using a different treatment on the base of the facade. The motion was seconded and passed (6-2). Committee members Friedman and Walinski voted nay based on the lack of photographs. SPAARC 02-138 820 Church Street Recommendation to Sian Board Install new wall signs for First Bank and Trust SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 13, 2002 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen notified the Committee that a sign variance is required because the top of the sign is 55 feet, where 15 % feet is the maximum allowed. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the Sign Board used to be against high signs in the downtown. However, many new developments have installed high signs, such as the Theatre and the Hilton. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-2). Chairperson Brzezinski and Committee member Marino voted nay. SPAARC 02-003 327 Howard Street Recommendation to Sion Board Install new wall sign for Type 11 restaurant (Subway). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that the sign would disrupt an architectural band on the building and that this goes against the Sign Regulations. However, there are existing sings on the building that disrupt this architectural band. DISCUSSION: Committee member Aiello asked if the sign could be placed on the brown band which is shown on the picture but does not currently exist. She stated that a unified sign plan should be required for this building. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Sign Board subject to lowering the sign to the sign band shown in the picture and to require a unified sign plan. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-139 1900 Dempster Street Recommendation to Sipn Board install new signs for Dunkin' Donuts — Baskin Robbins restaurant. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen stated that this business is within a center with a unified sign plan and that the proposed sign varies from the plan. First, only one sign is allowed per store, this would contain two signs. Second, the proposed sign is the wrong font as dictated by the sign plan. Thins, only the store name can be part of the sign, this sign includes a picture of a cup of coffee. SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 13, 2002 Fourth, this sign's color varies from what is allowed according to the sign plan. Fifth, the depth of the letters can only be 5-inches according to the unified sign plan. The proposed sign's would be 6-inches deep. Sixth, the sign should be centered on the space. The proposed sign would not be centered. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino stated that this is a sensitive comer and that signage should be unobtrusive. Chairperson Brzezinski agreed and stated that this sign is too big. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 02-083 928 Noves Street Revision to Preliminary and Final Modify exterior for private education institution (Midwest Montessori School. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Marty Norkett GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Norkett explained that the windows were replaced from the fagade, but when they were removed, they broke. In lieu of these windows, fluted glass would be installed which matches the fagade of the storefront to the east. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked it samples of the fluted glass could be provided. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case so that a sample of the fluted glass could be provided and pictures could be provided. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes -- November 13, 2002 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES NOVEMBER 20, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Waiter Hallen, Arlova Jackson, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza C. Smezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-135 800 Elkain Road Conceot Construct 36-story, 248 dwelling unit condominium building with retail on the first floor. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tod Desmarais David Hovey GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hovey presented two models showing the site and the entire downtown Evanston area. The underlying zoning of the site would allow 248 residential units in addition to the existing office building and 580,000 gross square feet of building area. He presented a model for each of three different options for the design of the new building. The third option is the optimal development for the site. It would be an elongated building running predominately north -south, thus reducing the amount of frontage along Elgin Road. In addition, a large amount of greenspace would be created between the proposed building and the existing building to the east. The proposed building would consist of different height sections. The tallest portion of the building would be 36-stories, with a section being 28-stories and a section being 6-stories. These different heights would lend a dynamic appearance to the building, with different shadow lines. The greenspace that would be created would contain a large pond with a fountain and extensive landscaping. Also, an open space would be carved through a section of the bottom floor of the building, which would allow views and pedestrian access from the west fagade along Benson Street to the 1.3 —acre greenspace area east of the building. Two stories of storefront retail would be included along Clark Street. The units would be various sizes and prices. 25% of the units would be one -bedroom and would start at 675 square feet. The largest units would be penthouses and would be priced up to $600,000. Bronze, anodized aluminum, and granite would make up a large portion of the building materials. The building will have a rich variety of elegant materials, colors, and shapes. The parking access would be located along Benson Avenue in the same location as the pedestrian opening to the greenspace. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz noted that the Benson Avenue elevation is long and rigid and should be broken up more to create increased visual interest and a less stark atmosphere for pedestrians along Benson Avenue. Mr. Hovey explained that the pedestrian opening was designed to lessen a stark appearance on this side of the building. Chairperson Brzezinski agreed and stated that some alterations of the west elevation could be necessary. Plan Commissioner John Lyman asked how wide the sidewalks would be along Clark Street and Benson Avenue. Mr. Hovey replied that the sidewalks along Clark Street would be approximately 10-12 feet wide and the sidewalks along Benson Avenue would be about 6-feet wide. Mr. Lyman suggested widening the sidewalk along Benson Avenue. Hans Friedman suggested that the pedestrian access through the opening should be provided as a wide lane through the center of the opening with the automobile access to the parking being on either end of the opening. Mr. Hovey favored this idea. John Lyman stated that the Plan Commission might require more parking on the site as part of their Planned Development review. Arthur Alterson suggested that a zoning analysis be done on this project as soon as possible. Carlos Ruiz requested that the treatment of the top of the building be as carefully considered as that of the rest of the building. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that enough information has been provided for a preliminary approval at this time. Judy Aiello suggested that only concept approval be granted because there are still questions regarding parking circulation, etc. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0) Chairperson Brzezinski abstained from voting. SPAARC 01-123 1930 Ridge Avenue Final Construct 4-story multi -family residential buildings with underground panting. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Greg Ratas Nick Patera SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 20, 2002 2 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Patera explained that the pavers from the courtyard would extend to Ridge Avenue at the request of SPAARC. He stated that there currently is an existing davit armed streetlight on the comer of Emerson and Ridge Avenue and that it will remain. Two other davit arms are currently in place. One of the davit arm lights would be relocated to the parkway area of the sidewalk along Ridge. The other davit arm light would be relocated and a substituted tallmadge light would be installed in its place. Essentially, tallmadge lights would be installed along the sidewalk to create a pedestrian atmosphere, while davit lights would remain at busy street comers for more illumination. Mr. Patera pointed out the new location of the transformers. The gas meter would not be visible from Ridge. A trash compactor is no longer needed in a separate location near the entrance of the parking garage and will now be located within the parking garage. The former location of the compactor will now be a loading bay. Fire truck access was provided by adjusting the location to some of the planters in the courtyard. The Fire Department is satisfied with its ability to maneuver through the development. Mr. Ratas presented the change to the gate elevations that were made in response to the previous comments by SPAARC. Two garage doors would be provided, both would match the trim on the building and would be made of steel. The balconies would now be wood and contain solid floors. Mr. Ratas presented the west elevation of the development. He explained that he would like to install wireglass windows with sprinkler heads to this elevation and that the sprinklers should offset the building code violation of windows within. a certain distance of the property line. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that there should be an agreement that the maintenance of the landscaping along the wall would be the responsibility of the developer and not of the City. She also suggested that no gates be installed between the front of the property and the courtyard areas. If gates would be needed in the future, the developer can then come before SPAARC for review and approval. Ron Walczak stated that from a safety point of view, he would like to see the gates to the courtyard remain. Chairperson Brzezinski requested that the window placement on the west elevation be more consistent and have more of a pattern. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: • That the west elevation includes windows (alternative 2 as presented) and that the pattem of these windows be modeled after other elevation sections of the development. • The removal of the pedestrian gates SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 20, 2002 3 a The installation of tallmedge light fixtures along the entire front elevation of the project. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-1). Committee member Walczak voted nay. Committee member Friedman abstained from voting. SPAARC 02-083 928 Novas Street Revision to Final Modify exterior for private education institution (Midwest Montessori School). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Marty Norkett GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Norkett presented pictures and samples of the fluted glass to be used on the fagade. The fluted glass would match what exists on the storefront elevation further east. New clip-ons would be used because the original clip-ons to be used would not be available right away. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she likes the original clip-ons better than the newly proposed clip-ons. Mr. Norkett stated that the original clip-ons could be used and the delay in their arrival should not be a factor. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant a revision to final site plan and appearance review approval subject to utilizing the fluted glass as presented and the original clip-ons. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-140 2017 Harrison Street Preliminary► and Final Renovations of existing multiple family dwellings (3 du's) to accommodate condominium conversion. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom Oakley Tom Rosinski GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Oakley explained that the shell of the building would be left as is, and that the size of the units would be increased. A deck structure will be installed as outdoor space for the three units. The entire front and back would be cedar shingled. New Pella windows would be installed. The new deck would be pre-treated, but not stained. The landscaping plan has not been finalized. Motion lighting would be installed on the rear garage. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would like the decks to be painted or stained. She also requested that the pitch of the roof of the unattached rear garage be increased. A landscape plan would have to be submitted and reviewed prior to final approval being granted. She noted that a visible address is required on the building. ACTION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 20, 2002 4 A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to the condominium disclosure instruments being submitted prior to final approval and the increase of the pitch of the roof of the garage. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 20, 2002 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES DECEMBER 4, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Alan Berkowsky, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, David Jennings, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Other Staff. Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza C.13mazinski (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting, ADDrovai of Meetina Notes: October 2.2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). October 30. 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). C. Brzezinski and A. Alterson abstained from voting. November 6. 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). A. Alterson abstained from voting. November 13.2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously._(8-0). A. Alterson abstained from voting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 2133 Sheridan Road Preliminary Construct new 4-story classroom and office building (McCormick School of Engineering Department at Northwestern University). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bonnie Humphrey Jay Baehr - V .' GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Baehr pointed out that the project has barely changed since it last appeared before SPAARC. The Preservation Commission approved this project the previous week. One change includes the addition of louvers into the curtain wall. The building will be clad in limestone. Clear glass will be used, with a slight tint. The columns will be exposed and will be finished concrete. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski noted that the building would be very bright at night. Mr. Baehr stated that the lighting would be indirect in terms of its emission to the outside. Committee member Wolinski asked whether there would be additional staff and/or students as a result of this building, as this would increase the campus parking requirements. Ms. Humphrey stated that some of the functions provided by this building are currently within the Research Park. The student body will not increase as a result of this building. Frank Aguado noted that a zoning analysis has been done on this project and that the analysis yielded no parking issues. Committee member Marino asked if there would be any innovative energy aspects to the building design. Mr. Baehr replied that the site is constrained and that the building cannot be oriented to accommodate solar energy. However, there will be a significant shading coefficient and it is the goal of the University to create a sustainable building. Committee member Marino inquired as to the impact onto the adjacent Shakespeare Gardens. Mr. Baehr stated that shadow studies were conducted and that the building would throw a shadow on the garden after 5 p.m. Landscape staff at Northwestern feel that there would be a minimum impact on the Garden. Carlos Ruiz pointed out that the Preservation Commission felt that the Shakespeare Garden would not be adversely affected by this development. Chairperson Brzezinski asked how it was confirmed that the parking regulations would continue to be met. Frank Aguado stated that there is a running total of parking spaces on the campus and this was used to determine if additional parking would be needed. Committee member Marino noted that there is no net growth, just consolidation of the campus. Committee member Alterson stated that ,this Committee has purview, from a sighting perspective, over where parking is located on a site. He added that he would not be able to approve this project, as the project does not address the impact on parking throughout the campus and the City at large. Committee member Nagar asked if there would be people from other communities using this building for research. Ms. Humphrey stated that students and faculty would only use this building. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that if she were to vote to grant preliminary approval, she would like to see a detailed analysis on the parking impact of the building. Committee member Marino replied that parking policy is not the purview of SPAARC, but rather the Parking Committee. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-2). Chairperson Brzezinski and Committee member Afterson voted nay. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- December 4, 2002 2 SPAARC 707 Church Street Preliminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling to existing type I restaurant (Flat Top Grill). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jason Golden Walter Gerfen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Golden noted that there would not be any proposed aesthetic changes to the front of the building, but that ductwork would be installed along the alley. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked why the ductwork could not be run through the building as previously done. Mr. Gerfen replied that additional air handling units will be installed and that the ductwork would have to be routed through the adjacent bookstore. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this is a visible area of downtown and that allowing this ductwork would set a dangerous precedent in the downtown area. ACTION: A motion was made to deny preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 1100 Clark Street Concept Construction of 350 residential condominiums over 6 separate buildings. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom Roszak Don Wallin GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Roszak stated that the new proposal consists of six buildings, as opposed to the eight buildings that were previously proposed. The buildings will range in height from six stories to 20 stories. Just over 500 parking spaces would be provided. A 300-car parking garage would accommodate office building parking, which is currently located at grade on the site. 37 diagonal parking spaces would be located along both Oak and Clark. 44 at -grade -parking spaces would be located within the site along the central courtyard. The surface parking on the site has been provided because the two churches that currently use parking on the existing site were concerned that they would lose parking for their members. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if there would be retail on the first floor of the buildings. Mr. Roszak replied that there would not be office space, but there would be a small amount of street -front retail. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested marketing part of this retail space to a small grocery store. Committee member Berkowsky inquired as to the narrowest width of the access drives for fire truck access. Mr. Roszak replied that the narrowest portion would be 20 feet. Jeff Burdick stated that it would be desirable to take advantage of the increased open space being provided in this new proposal by incorporating more greenspace in the interior of the site instead of the proposed surface parking. Mr. Roszak stated that the interior courtyards SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 4, 2002 will be spruced up by landscaping and pavers will be used to lend to a pedestrian atmosphere on the site. Carlos Ruiz stated that he is concerned with the location of surface parking facing Ridge, as it negatively effects the atmosphere of the historic Ridge Avenue corridor. Chairperson Brzezinski complimented the developer's proposal of locating the tallest building in the south central portion of the development, since it would have the least amount of negative impact in this location. Committee member Nagar asked about trash pick up. Mr. Roszak said that the trash would be located in the basement of each building. Chairperson Brzezinski asked Mr. Roszak what would be offered to the City in return for the granting of a Planned Development with zoning relief for this project. Mr. Roszak mentioned both the tax base that this project would contribute to Evanston and the fact that 5-10% of the units would be marketed as affordable housing. Sat Nagar asked if there were plans to improve the street and alley as part of this development. Mr. Roszak replied that improvements to both Clark and Oak would be part of the project. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant concept approvaLfor.the presented proposal. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-1). Committee member Alterson voted nay, stating that this is a good project, but it is going to be hard sell to the community. SPAARC Meeting Notes - December 4, 2002 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES DECEMBER 11, 2002 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Wafter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ AoDroval of Meetino Notes: November 20. 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes, with mention of the correct spelling of Tallmadge lights. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). (December 4.2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that her name was listed incorrectly. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). H. Friedman abstained from voting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-142 605-607 Case Place Preliminary and Final Interior renovation to a multi -family residential structure to increase number of dwelling units from 13 to 14. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jeremy Goldberg' GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Goldberg explained that he is proposing to legalize a 14t' unit for residency occupancy. He stated that it appears that the original intent was to occupy this unit for residency. There are currently 10 parking spaces on the property. The parking spaces are long enough to accommodate tandem spaces. DISCUSSION: Wafter Hallen noted that the parking spaces were not wide enough to qualify as legal parking spaces. Committee member Wolinski notified Mr. Goldberg that this property has been the subject of numerous property standard violations under the previous owner. Mr. Goldberg replied that vacant autos and other trash have been cleaned up from the lot since the new ownership. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if there is a reason why there is fencing in the front of the building. She suggested coming up with a better solution for security, such as landscaping, etc. Mr. Goldberg stated that the fence was there previously. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that each of the units should be sprinkled if a change to the number of units is made. Committee member Wolinski stated that he would vote against this proposal because the density in this portion of Evanston is significant and there is no need for increased density. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case so that an adequate parking plan and better realized building improvement plan be presented. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-1). Committee member Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 02-143 2808 Sheridan Road Preliminary and Final installation of ADA handicap lift for National Louis University. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Samuel Cicero GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Cicero explained that the new lift would tie into the existing front walk to the building. The proposed enclosure will be made of the same anodized aluminum as the building, so to blend in with the building's design. He explained how the lift would work. The building is a secured dormitory. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if clear glass would be used. Mr. Cicero explained that Plexiglas would be used and it would be slightly tinted to protect its appearance over time. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that real clear safety glazed glass should be used. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the use of clear safety -glazed glass on the lift. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-144 917 Madison Street Preliminary and Final Construct an addition to an existing dormer on the upper story of a 1-% story residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Edmund Miller GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Miller explained that the addition to the dormer would be constructed very close to the property line and that a variation would be required. The addition would accommodate a new stairway. The location of the dormer would not be in view of the right of way. SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 11. 2002 2 DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if neighbors have been contacted. Mr. Miller said that they have and that they are in favor of the proposal. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-145 531 Weslev Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct an unroofed treated wood deck X or less above grade with X high railings with a setback of 6 6" from the property line; move air-conditioning unit. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Applicant did not appear SPAARC 02-148 1029 Davis Street (Off -Agenda Item) Preliminary and Final Establish a music venue, requiring a special use. . PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Arthur Alterson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Alterson explained that the owner would like to convert this space to a music venue. He presented the proposed floor plan. He stated that the applicant does not suggest any exterior changes. DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson explained that this will appear before the ZBA next Tuesday and that SPAARC should make a recommendation. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this use would be welcome in Evanston, and that this location could.use some livening up, especially at night. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-147 635 Chicago Avenue Recommendation to Sion Board Install new wall sign for "Kamala Perfumes." PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Walter Hallen explained that the proposed sign differs from the unified business center sign plan in several ways: • The largest lettering permitted is 18-inches; this sign would have a letter that is 19-inches. • The color is green, which is not listed in the plan. • The font is custom, which is not listed as an acceptable font in the plan. • The top of the lettering is not 18-inches down from the fascia, which is required by the plan. SPAARC Meeting Notes - December 11, 2002 DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she is in favor of the font and color change, but would like the lettering to not be more than 18-inches in height. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Sign Board subject to the height of the letters meeting the maximum 18 inches and that the sign be centered in the band. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC Church Street Plaza Recommendation to Sion Board Review revisions to new sign district for mixed -use development (Church Street Plaza). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that the applicants are once again proposing the same revisions to the sign district as previously requested. The proposal would also include blade signs on columns of certain parts of the building, illuminated window signs, banners along the west and north facades of the development, three monument signs in the district, and the inclusion of red as a permissible color within the sign district. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend amending the sign district to allow blade signs on the columns at 1706-1716 Maple Avenue. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-1). Committee member Friedman voted nay. A motion was made to recommend denial of illuminated signs within the sign district. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). A motion was made to not make a recommendation on the banner signs because of lack of information. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). A motion was made to recommend approval of the monument signs at Clark and Benson, and in front of the Wolfgang Puck plaza. This motion included a recommendation to deny a monument sign in front of the Border's plaza. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would like to see the monument signs illuminated from the back. A motion was made to recommend approval of the inclusion of red as a color in this sign district but to not allow exposed raceways. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 11, 2002 4 SPAARC 02-146 1032 Ashland Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct a two-story frame addition to an existing two-story frame single-family residence, with a 37" setback from the south lot line. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Julie Pechico GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Pechico explained that her home is very narrow and that there is not enough room to expand the home to the side, as it currently sits on the property line that abuts an alley. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the neighbors have been contacted regarding the proposal. Ms. Pechico stated that she has notified her neighbors and that they do not have a problem with her addition proposal. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-135 800 Elain Road Pre -application Conference Construct a 36-story, 248 dwelling unit condominium building with retail on the fast floor. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Hovey Todd Desmarais GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: (Alderman Arthur Newman of the 9st Ward and Plan Commission Chairman Richard Cook were present) Mr. Hovey presented a model of what could be built on the site according to its existing zoning. He then presented a model of the proposal. The proposed building would be 297,000 square feet. Because the proposal is for a higher building, more open space can be provided on the site and the building can be configured so that it does not block the south view of residential buildings to the north of Elgin Road. Parking would be provided in the first 5-7 stories of the building and there would be 584 total parking spaces. The parking would serve the residential units within the building and would accommodate the offices in the existing building immediately east. Green roofs would be incorporated on certain roof sections. Approximately 5,000 square feet of storefront retail would be provided along Clark Street and along part of Benson Avenue. The landscape plan would include a series of berms that would represent the waves of Lake Michigan. Various fountains would be included among the landscaping. The building has been moved 11-feet east so that the sidewalk along Benson is SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 11, 2002 5 not right up against the building and a landscaped strip would be provided. The pedestrian space beneath the building would provide a view to the landscaped area from Benson Avenue. The entire north side of this space would be dedicated to pedestrians, while the south side of the space would provide the ingress and egress to the parking garage. The facade along Benson Avenue has been varied at the request of SPAARC so to create a more interesting western facade. Mr. Hovey noted that the unit sizes would vary greatly, so to provide a diverse range of residential price points. He presented the different building materials, which include granite. an anodized dark bronze, a soft gray window frame, and a slightly tinted window. There would be no balconies on the building, only recessed terraces. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked if the City has sufficient water pressure to accommodate a 36-story building. Committee member Nagar replied that the Engineering Department and the developer would meet the following day to discuss this issue. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she is concerned with the number of berms in the landscape plan, as the natural topography of Evanston is flat. She also suggested that the granite be brought down in the area of the west elevation adjacent to the entrance to the parking garage and that the number of columns in the open space under the building be reduced. Plan Commission Chairman Richard Cook stated that he is impressed with the design of the building and that he supports the proposal. ACTIONS: No action was taken. SPAr4RC Meeting Notes — December 11, 2002 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES DECEMBER 18, 2002 Aftendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, David Jennings, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Susan Guderley, Wafter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spk=zza C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meetings Approval of Meetina Notes: December 11. 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-135 800 Elpin Road Preliminary Construct a 38-story, 248 dwelling unit condominium building with retail on the first floor. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Hovey Tod Desmarais GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hovey explained that there were only three changes to the elevation from the last time this project was presented to SPAARC. First, the granite was extended down to the base of the building on the western elevation just to the south of the parking garage entrance. Second, columns were removed from the pedestrian and parking opening under the building. Third, the number of waves in the landscape plan is to be reduced. DISCUSSION: Committee member D'Agostino asked if the walkway from Elgin Road to the eastern entrance of the condominiums would be sufficiently wide. Mr. Hovey stated that the sidewalk is B feet wide. Members of SPAARC suggested increasing the width to 8 feet. Mr. Hovey stated that this could be done. Committee member Wolinski asked if there was a meeting between the developers and the Public Works Department regarding utilities, especially the size of water pipes. Committee member Nagar stated that this meeting took place and that the issue of utility size was straightened out at this meeting. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if building mechanical units would be visible from the outside. Mr. Hovey replied that the mechanical units would be located inside the building, except for transformers, which would be screened by landscaping. Mr. Hovey stated that the developers would be presenting this plan to the neighborhood at 5p.m. this afternoon. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-149 1712 Church Street Preliminary Construct an enclosed waste transfer station (Onyx). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bob Wemeiwski Jim Maher Jerry Callaghan Raymond Strong Carl Klimek GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Maher presented the plans for the pre-engineered waste transfer station. He stated that Onyx wishes to plant ivy on the old railroad embankment. He noted that Onyx is still not sure how wide the buffer should be in the rear of the property and that talks need to be initiated between Onyx and the neighbors as to what they would like to see in terms of a buffered area. DISCUSSION: Susan Guderley stated that some of the neighbors have noted that trailers or containers would be stored on the fomner railroad right-of-way. Mr. Maher stated that these containers are stored there in the summertime, Committee member Walczak inquired as to the hours of operation. Mr. Strong replied that the site is open from 6:30 am to 4 pm. The majority of traffic to and from the site is mid -morning and mid-aftemoon. Walter Hallen asked why the entire side of the building would be opened for the dumping of trucks. Mr. Maher replied that the presence of columns or spaces where there would be no opening would be an inefficient use of storage space. Sue Gudedey asked about odor abatement features. Mr. Klimek noted that there would be a misting system. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that any additional lighting should not shine out, but down onto the site. Committee member Nagar suggested installing three separate door panels instead of one so that that portion of the side that is being dumped into is the only portion that is open. Mr. Klimek stated that he would look into this option. Chairperson Brzezinski asked for public participation permission. The Committee motioned, seconded and unanimously voted to allow public comment. SPAARC Meeting Notes - December 18, 2002 2 John Leineweber. Mr. Leineweber stated that there are four major issues regarding this proposal: Appearance, Odor, Traffic and Cleanliness. He noted that the dumpsters left on the railroad right of way are unsightly and the proposed landscaping and removal of these dumpsters would go a long way in improving the appearance of this location. He also stated that the more open the building would be, the less likely odors could be controlled. Finally, he mentioned that there are unauthorized individuals and companies that use the site and their trucks contribute to traffic and cleanliness problems. Mr. Maher explained that by turning these companies away, he creates a bigger of issue of unauthorized dumping in other locations. He noted that he would try to address this problem with the help of the City. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the existing brick building is attractive and does not need ivy. However, ivy might make sense from a graffiti repellent measure. Committee member Jennings asked if this project would increase the activity on this site. Mr. Maher replied that he does not anticipate an increase in business activity as a result of this project. Wafter Hallen noted that the screening, landscaping and other issues are still unresolved. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that the developers meet with various City Department contacts prior to reappearing before SPAARC, so to shore up some of these issues. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02445 531 Weslev Avenue Prellminary and Final Construct an unroofed treated wood deck 37 or less above grade with 3' high railings and a setback of 6'6" from the south property line, move air conditioning unit to a 37" setback from Me south lot line. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Alan Bema GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Bema explained that he is trying to provide direct access from the rear yard to a rear door that is three -feet above ground level. Because of the unique comered shape of his lot, his proposal will infringe within the required 15-foot comer side yard setback. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino inquired as to the size of the deck. Mr. Berna replied that it would be 12 feet by 10 feet. He noted that his air-conditioning unit has been moved and will be located next to the porch on the comer side. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the neighbors have been notified. Mr. Bema said that he informed his neighbor of his proposal. ACTIONS: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC Meeting !Votes - December 18, 2002 3 SPAARC 02-146 1729 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Requesting a special use to operate a Type 11 restaurant. The project 1s an interior build out of an existing space. (Subway Restaurant). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Richard Dux GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Dux explained that the only proposed exterior change would be as a result of the proposed unified business center signage plan. The existing awnings would be removed in favor of channel lettered signs. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski noted that she would be very unhappy to see the awnings removed. Mr. Dux stated that he would be happy to keep the awnings if possible. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that signage is an independent issue and that the unified sign plan would eventually appear before SPAARC in the near future. She informed Mr. Dux that a door would need to be installed for this storefront and that its placement should follow any sort of existing storefront door pattern on the street. Mr. Dux replied that there is no such pattern on this block. Chairperson Brzezinski informed Mr. Dux that the members of SPAARC are asking all food establishments in downtown to provide Sunday trash pick-up. Committee member Alterson noted that the issue of garbage in downtown is immediate, and that a building wide garbage plan for this particular building would be a very good idea. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the completion of a business wide garbage plan being developed for this particular building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 18, 2002 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES January 8, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzevnski, Paul D'Agostino, James Edwards, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen C. BrmWnski (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. AnDroval of Meeting Notes: December 18, 2002: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-001 1012 Chicaao Avenue Preliminary and Final. Miscellaneous interior/exterior remodeling to automobilelvehicle sales use (Autobam). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Applicant did not appear. Case was not heard. SPAARC 03-005 1480 Chicaao Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Ered three freestanding signs. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Waiter Hallen GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that the new location of the Music Institute of Chicago would like to install three freestanding signs. One of the signs would require a variation because it is 3'8" high and is only 2' from the property line. An illuminated reader board would be installed in place of a former church sign. This reader board sign would be 6' high. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the signs are very discreet and nicely handled. ACTION: tmjw- A motion was made to recommend approval to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 03-006 2201 Main Street Recommendation to Sign Board Erect two freestanding signs. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hagen stated that two companies will be locating in this building and that each of these companies wants to have their own freestanding signs. Each of the signs would be 4' high and would be the proper distance from the property line. However, a variation is needed because more than one freestanding sign would be installed. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that the businesses co -locate the signs to alleviate any confusion regarding the location of the entrance to the businesses. Mr. Hallen stated that co - locating would be confusing and that each business should have their own sign. Committee member Wolinski stated that this building has had trouble renting space in the past and that the City should trust that the businesses know the optimal location for each of their signs. ACTIONS: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 03-002 641 Hinman Avenue Preliminary and Final Miscellaneous site work for City park (Hinman Tot Lot). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Stefanie Levine GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Levine explained that new playground equipment would be installed and a new surface would be installed, which would be engineered wood fiber mulch. The equipment would remain in the same location. Fencing will not surround the park, but will be located near the playground equipment. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the drinking fountain would remain. Ms. Levine replied that the drinking fountain would be removed to reduce maintenance costs. Committee member Wolinski asked if colors have been chosen for the new playground equipment. Ms. Levine stated that colors have not yet been chosen, but that the neighbors are interested in subtle colors such as green, yellow, and/or brown. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 8, 2003 2 SPAARC 03-003 1606 Hinman Avenue Pr+effminary and Final Miscellaneous exterior renovations to multi -family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Applicant did not appear. Case was not heard. SPAARC 03.004 355 Rldae Avenue Preliminary_ and Final Convent demolition at St. Francis Hospital. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Csaba Szekely Katrina Laflin Robert Hauptman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Szekely stated that the new building would follow the architectural design of the existing building. Similar building materials will also be utilized. A light pole will be temporarily removed during construction and replaced after construction. He assured that light standards would be met after construction is complete. Ms. Laflin detailed the landscape plan and stated that the creation of a parkway between the sidewalk and tftie street will be an improvement to the existing pedestrian condition of the site. DISCUSSION: Committee member D'Agostino requested that a different species of parkway trees be planted. He stated that a list of improved parkway trees could be provided to Ms. Laflin. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the planting of parkway trees that are on the Department of Parks and Forestry's list of Improved parkway trees, and the planting of parkway trees that are at least six inches In caliper. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 8, 2003 3 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES January 15, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carla Bush, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, James Edwards, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Susan Guderley, Walter Hallen, Arlova Jackson, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz C. Smazinskl (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-049 1712 Church Street Construct an enclosed waste transfer station. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jerry Callaghan Jim Maher Raymond Strong Preliminary GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Maher stated that a 16-foot high metal fence would be Installed along the western edge of the property. Currently, this fence exists in some locations. The fence may be "greened" through the growth of ivy. He explained that he would like to start on the fencing and the site cleanup as soon as possible. Mr. Maher explained that the colors of the building have been toned down to blend in better with the site. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski suggested using a more residentially styled fence along the western edge of the property. Committee member Alterson stated that a fence variance would be needed for a 16-foot high fence. The maximum allowable height would be 8-feet. Committee member Wolinski stressed that the neighbors should be involved in the screening decision and that he would like Susan Guderley and Raymond Strong to explore setting up a neighborhood meeting regarding this issue. Susan Guderley asked if this operation would be similar to the Northbrook operation and if yard waste would be handled at this location. Mr. Maher replied that yard waste would not be handled at this facility. Committee member Nagar asked if the exhaust fans would dissipate the odors as well as the fumes. Mr. Maher stated that the force of the exhaust would be greater and should dissipate both odors and fumes. Committee member Alterson inquired as to the noise created by the exhaust system. Mr. Maher replied that he has never had a complaint about exhaust system noise. Committee member Wolinski asked if full garbage trucks would be allowed to remain on the property over night. Mr. Maher stated that this might have to happen at times, but that the truck would be covered. Committee member Marino asked Mr. Strong to explain how the site is cleaned up at the end of the day and at what time the site would close. Mr. Strong replied that the site would operate from 6:30 am to 4:00 pm. The site is wet swept at the end of the day and all of the garbage is removed from the site. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the issue of storing containers on the old railroad right of way has been resolved. Mr. Maher stated that the containers could be buffered so that they would not be visible from the road. The other option would be to excavate the right of way so to lower the storage area. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review concerning the building as proposed. This motion would not include landscaping and fencing issues. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-007 603 Main Street Pre -Application Conference Demolish improvements; construct a mixed -use residential/commercial building with 77 dwelling units, 8,400 square feet of commercial space, and 142 parking spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Brininstool Keith Babzich Bryan Henson Dan Martus Luay Abeena Keith Dafcik James Murray GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Brininstool noted that the new proposal includes the two parcels to the north, thus creating a frontage along Chicago Avenue of 279 feet. The frontage along Main Street would be 88 feet. It will be a mixed -use building, with approximately 7.800 square feet of ground floor retail, parking in a lower level basement and partial parking on the ground floor and second floor. There will be 5 stories of residential and the total height of the building will be approximately 78 feet or seven stories. There will be 77 dwelling units. The proposed FAR would be 4.0. The number of parking spaces will meet the underlying zoning requirement. The reason for the Planned Development is that the consolidation of the three parcels results in two zoning districts being straddled. The comer parcel is zoned B3 and the two parcels to the north are zoned CIA. The B3 zoning allows for a maximum height of 125 feet and the CIA zoning allows for a maximum height of 67 feet. The proposal is for a maximum height of 85 feet SPAARC Meeting Notes - January 15, 2003 2 Mr. Brininstool explained that there would be a large retail portion at the comer. The major access for parking is off of Chicago Avenue, at a good distance from the comer. There will also be right in/right out access to parking from Main Street. The sidewalk along Main Street will be widened by three feet. The comer will be opened up for more pedestrian space. The parking area will be completely closed off from the outside and will receive natural air through a ventilation system. Mr. Brininstool explained that the building materials would consist of brick on the principal building elevation and the structure of the building would be 100% pre -cast. The pre -cast color would probably be off-white. The pre -cast columns will be expressed at the comer. There would be a designated sign band for the retail establishments. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz suggested only one point of parking access by eliminating the Main Street access. Mr. Brininstool stated that one access point is preferred, but that interior parking circulation Issues require two accesses. He noted that the Main Street access is only for residential parking. Mr. Ruiz asked if there would be enough room for a car to pull in off of Main Street and out of the way of pedestrians before the garage door is opened. Mr. Brininstool replied that the garage door could be set back far enough from the sidewalk to preclude a situation of a car blocking the sidewalk. This would mean that the garage door would not be located at the base of the ramp. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this would look awkward and suggested an alternative solution. Committee member Nagar asked to review the circulation and loading plans for the development. Mr. Brininstool noted that the overhead garage door at the entrance at Chicago Avenue would allow two cars to pull off of Chicago Avenue, with one of the cars blocking the sidewalk. Frank Aguado asked how quickly the overhead garage door would open. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the overhead garage door at the library opens rather quickly. Carlos Ruiz stated that the elevation does not seem to reflect an emphasis on the comer. He explained that more of a window element would better emphasize the comer of the building. Chairperson Brzezinski agreed, and stated that the mass of the building could be broken down through vertical differentiation. Mr. Ruiz also stated that the east elevation makes the building appear like two different buildings. He stated that he would like to see more architectural consistency throughout this elevation. Chairperson Brzezinski felt that the building's design is rather dull and that there is not enough articulation in the design. Mr. Brininstool noted that the emphasis on the project has been on the site planning side thus far and there is a lot of room for design enhancement. Committee member Friedman reiterated the need to emphasize the comer of the building. He referred to the new Border's building at Church and Maple. Chairperson Brzezinski asked how the air handling units would be configured on the building. Mr. Brininstool explained that this has not been addressed yet, but that two systems were being considered — either a heat pump system or split system. He mentioned that some sort of SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 15. 2003 screening would need to be incorporated. Carlos Ruiz asked that small brick detailing be considered to make the elevation more attractive. Debbie Hillman, a citizen who lives close by, stated that she is very happy to see that the sidewalks have been widened and that a bus station area has been designated at the comer. Lary Widmayer, chairman of the Plan Commission, asked the traffic consultant to examine similar developments to determine the amount of traffic to be generated by this development. Chairperson BrzezkmW dosed the pre -application conference. SPAARC Meeting AWn — January 15, 2003 4 ,7!r- SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES January 22, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Sat Nagar, Jim Wolinski Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Adova Jackson, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Review of Plan Commission Meetina Notes: January 8, 2003: A motion was made to recommend approval of these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Committee member Daha) abstained from voting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-003 1606 Hinman Avenue Preliminary and Final Miscellaneous exterior renovations to existing multi -family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Moshe Calamaro GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Calamaro explained that the north end of the building has three open stair shafts and that the concrete slab that serves as part of the garage needs to be repaired. His proposal is to fill in the stair shafts with stucco to strengthen the concrete wall in the garage. He noted that the project would not be visible from the street. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz clarified that the building is not a landmark and is out of the historic district. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she does not have a problem with the use of stucco in this location. She suggested that two windows be installed instead of one to provide more light in the stairwell. Mr. Calamaro stated that the new windows would match the existing windows in style and material. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (4-0). SPAARC 03-011 2233 Grev Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Demolish an existing garage and rebuild an attached garage with an addition on the second floor. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: J.A. Raval Vaishali Yajnik GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Yajnik explained that the proposal is to demolish the existing garage and construct a larger attached garage. Mr. Raval explained that the new garage would be slightly wider and that a master bedroom suite would be constructed above the new garage. The set back in the rear is currently 5-feet and the new garage would reduce the setback to 3-feet. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked how close the adjacent house is to the garage addition. Ms. Yajnik explained that there is a 20-foot wide alley between the two properties. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the neighbors have been contacted. Ms. Yajnik stated that the neighbors support the proposal. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that the second floor addition be set back to make it seem less dominate. Mr. Raval explained that the design is still being looked at and that he would consider this suggestion. Carlos Ruiz suggested that attention be given to the new garage door. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 03-008 1925 Dewev Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Establish a 10'X 20' concreete parking pad in the front yard PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The owner stated that the concrete pad would require an extra curb cut on the street He stated that he would not want to increase the size of his garage in the rear to solve his parking problem. In the winter, the alleys are not plowed and he and his wife, who is disabled, cannot access the garage. DISCUSSION: Committee member Dahal suggested that the owners wife apply for a spot in front of her home through the City due to her medical condition. Committee member Wolinski stated that allowing additional parking in the front would set a dangerous precedent on the block. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she could not recommend approval due to the fact that the owner has several other options to solve his parking problem. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- January 22, 2003 2 ACTION: A motion was made to deny site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 03-010 2732 Lincolnwood Drive Recommendation to ZBA Install two air conditioning units resulting in a 2'9"setback along the north property line. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Todd Semla GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Semla stated that each of the units would sit on a 3' by 3' concrete pad and would be placed on the north side of the home so that they would not have to located beneath his kitchen window. He noted that the units would not be visible from the street. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked how the neighbor to the north feels about this proposal. Mr. Semla responded that the neighbor supports the proposal with no objections. Mr.Semla noted that he is more than willing to plant landscaping to create noise and visual abatement. He stated that his neighbor's unit is located on this side of the home and that he has not had any Issues with his neighbor's unit in the past. Mr. Semla stated that he would ask the neighbor to write a letter of support for the project to the ZBA. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 03-009 2219 Lvons Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a driveway and establish a one -car concrete parking pad in the rear yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Yolanda Wray GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Wray explained that then: currently is no on -site parking. The building Is a three-family dwelling. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson noted that the plat of survey shows that the owner owns two parcels and that the second parcel should serve as parking according to the plat. Chairperson Brzezinski felt that the plat of survey does not provide enough information and that she cannot support a driveway and parking pad in the rear yard. ACTION: A motion was made to deny site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes - January 22, 2003 3 SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 2Z 2003 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES January 29, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Alan Berkowsky, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Dennis Marino, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinskl Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Susan Gudedey, Walter Hallen, Arlova Jackson, Sally Lufkin, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting; Review of SPAARC Meeting Notes: January 15, 2003: A motion was made to recommend approval of these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). Committee member Dahal abstained from voting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 2400-2440 Main Street Rehabilitation of existing shopping center. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rob Bond Content GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Bond explained that the center would be reconfigured so that some shops will face Main Street. Two out parcels will be added along the frontage of Main Street. The assumption Is that one out parcel will be a bank, while the other one will be a family style restaurant. Mr. Bond explained that he is in negotiations with a major tenant for the anchor space of the shopping center. He explained that a weakness of the center is Its lack of visibility from McCormick Boulevard. He stated that verticality would be used to improve the visibility from the west. He presented proposed elevations, which would include towers on either end of the shopping center. Traffic issues are being studied to determine the impact of this proposal. Mr. Bond stated that the existing canopy would be removed because it creates a dark and dingy pedestrian atmosphere. It would be replaced by awnings. He noted that the west elevation would be articulated, with different elevation heights and so forth to break up the appearance of the center. The existing Marshall's has two years left on their lease and will not part of the project at this time. He noted that signage would be addressed through the Sign Review Board. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz requested that additional landscaping be planted as part of the rehabilitation. Mr. Bond replied that landscaping would be addressed. Chairperson Brzezinski commented that three proposed towers should be constructed instead of two and that the tower concept needs more development because it appears too conical. However, she believes the concept is a good idea. She suggested bringing landscaping up to the building to soften the building edge. She also encouraged that special attention be paid to signage. Committee member Wolinski asked what the strategy would be to lure Sam's Club shoppers to the stores in this proposed center. Mr. Bond replied that various types of stores could benefit from the existence of Sam's Club to the south. Frank Aguado asked if the western entrance off of Main Street could be reconfigured, because the current alignment creates traffic conflicts. Mr. Bond stated that the traffic engineer would look into internal traffic circulation issues. Judy Aiello suggested closing the middle traffic entrance from Main Street to create more green space along Main Street. Committee member Marino asked how truck loadinglunloading would be handled. Mr. Bond replied truck access would be handled in the same way it is handled now — along the east or rear side of the center. ACTION: A motion was made to grant concept site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (12-0). SPAARC 138 Custer Avenue Recommendation to Z13A Demolish garage and construct a detached 3-cargarage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Shalin Kothari GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kothari explained that the existing garage is in poor condition and is quite small (28' x 18'). The occupants' cars cannot fit in the existing garage. The proposed garage would be 28' x 22', wood -framed, with vinyl siding and a gabled roof. The required variances are lot coverage related. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski explained that this garage has been cited by Property Standards and needs to be replaced. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested utilizing one more foot to the south to assure that the garage is workable for three cars. Committee member Alterson noted that the buildings in this neighborhood are mostly brick and that consideration should be given to the appearance of this proposed garage in a mostly brick environment. Mr. Kothari replied that other garages in the alley are sided. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that Mr. Kothari provide pictures of other garages in the alley to the Zoning Board of Appeals. SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 29, 2003 2 ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and site plan approval with the recommendation to extend the proposed garage and additional one -foot to the south. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 2026 Noves Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a second story addition and a rear two-story addition. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Vincent Weber GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Weber explained that the major variations are for a lot coverage, and extension of the legally non -conforming interior side yard setback, and the overhangs along both side yards. The minor variation is for the rear yard setback. The lot coverage requirement is 0.35 in this zoning district. The proposed lot coverage is to be 0.385. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked why the windows in the front portion of the elevation were so small. Mr. Weber replied that the interior space would have to be dormered to allow for taller windows. Committee member Wolinski noted that the neighbor's home is going to be dwarfed by both this proposal and the existing home on the other side of the neighbor's property. Arlova Jackson stated that the neighbor has asked Zoning if she could come in and review this proposal. Carlos Ruiz stated that he is troubled with the proposed fenestration. Mr. Weber stated that he would be open to any suggestions. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested two double hung windows. Mr. Weber once again noted that the ceiling would have to be raised or vaulted in order to accommodate double hung windows. Committee member Friedman stated that the small windows could be removed all together. Walter Hallen noted that adding this kind of mass on a comer lot can be very opposing to the comer street side. Chairperson Brzezinski replied that the comer side elevation is at least broken up to reduce the negative effect of the massing. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend site plan and appearance review approval as submitted with the recommendation to use consistently sized double hung windows in the front elevation. The motion was seconded and passed. (64) Committee members Wolinski, Alterson, Friedman, and Fujihara voted nay. Committee member Aiello abstained from voting. SPAARC 2121 Sheridan Road Preliminary Construct a parking area and other site improvements on Gameft Evangelical Theological Seminary property. SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 29, 2003 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Adolf Hansen Kory Burton GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hansen explained that this proposal has already gone through the Preservation Commission and several improvements to the original proposal have been made. Historic Evanston streetlights would be installed along Garrett Place. DISCUSSION: Committee member Aiello asked how often the parking lot would be used. Mr. Hansen explained that the Seminary is holding its sesquicentennial this year and many special events will be held. Carlos Ruiz asked if the proposed parking lot would still be lowered. Mr. Hansen stated that it would be. Mr. Ruiz asked if the landscaping would extend north of Garrett Place. Mr. Hansen stated that this would be explored. Committee member Aiello asked tf the University could use the parking lot. Mr. Hansen stated that there would be some sort of gate function assuring that parking is only to be used for seminary users. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (11-1). Committee member Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 817 Hinman Avenue Predimintry Construct six -story, eight dwelling unit multiple family dwelling with Ween off-street parldng spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jim Torvik Thomas Engel GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Torvik explained that the existing house would be demolished and an eight unit multi- dwelling building would be built in its stead. Parking would be accessed from the alley. There would be basement parking and surface parking in the rear, for a total of fifteen off-street parking spaces. The exterior materials would consist of brick, glass, and metal panels. A variance would be needed for the canopy covering the front entrance on the side of the building. A zoning analysis has not yet been undertaken regarding this project. The price ranges for the units would be between 450K and 850K. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she likes the contemporary look of the building and is happy that it will be located at the end of the block, as opposed to the middle of the block where such a design would be out of place. Committee member Alterson was concemed that the front door faces the parking lot to the north and not to the west on the street. Mr. Torvik stated that a front entry would compromise the floor plans of the units. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested careful consideration of exterior lighting near the entryway. Frank Aguado noted that by briefly looking at the plans, there appears to be a need for at least three variances: the canopy above the entranceway, a raised terrace within the front yard, and the open parking in SPAARC Meeting Notes - January 29, 2003 4 the rear. Committee member Dahal noted that at least one of the exterior parking spaces in the rear is configured in a way that would cause difficulty in cars pulling out of spots. Committee member Alterson stated that the front setback along Hinman would vary from the setbacks of existing buildings on this side of the Hinman, thus creating a staggered building line along the eastside of Hinman in this block. Mr. Torvik replied that the wastside of Hinman in this block currently has staggered building setbacks. Committee member Friedman suggested lining up the windows on the elevation because there appears to be randomly located window openings on the faQade. Committee member Wolinski felt that he would not be comfortable voting on this project until the zoning analysis was completed so that it could be determined if variances are required. Carlos Ruiz stated that the design of the building negates the existing design character of this block. He noted that he liked the design, but felt that it was inappropriate in this location. ACTION: A motion was made to grant concept site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-4). Committee members Aiello, Alterson, Friedman, and Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC Meet16r1g Notes — January 29, 2003 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 5, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinskl, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Odter Staff: Frank Aguado, Susan Gudedey, Walter Hallen, Sally Lufkin, Moms Robinson, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-140 2017 Harrison Street Final Miscellaneous interior/exterior renovations to existing multi -family residence (three dwelling units) to accommodate condo conversion. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tim Rosinski GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Rosinski stated that the deck would be stained so that the wood would not appear green and the garage would be sided with cedar on one side at the previous request of SPAARC. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz asked why the garage could not be cedar sided on all sides. Mr. Rosinski replied that siding the garage with cedar on all sides would dramatically increase the cost of the project. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that new lighting on the site needs to be directed down and not out towards adjacent property. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of a landscape plan by the Department of Parks and Forestry. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-018 1031 Sherman Avenue Concert Erect two principal buildings each containing five -dwelling units with off-street parking area. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Dwyer Nathan Kipnis GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Dwyer noted that four units would now be constructed instead of two, but there would still be ten units total. This is to increase the amount of greenspace on the site. Each unit would be two bedrooms. Mr. Dwyer explained that geothermal heating and air conditioning would be used for each of these units. He stated that the goal is to create an environmentally and economically friendly development. There is currently a brick warehouse in the front of the site. There is a dilapidated house in the rear of the property. Mr. Dwyer explained that he has an option to purchase the property. DISCUSSION: Committee member Fujihara stated that the entrances to the units seem too high. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the entrances should be made consistent with other entrances along the block. Donna Spicuzza noted that the units need to be accessible if federal funds are to be used to subsidize the affordability of the development. Committee member Friedman suggested combining stairways to units to clean up the appearance. Walter Hallen noted that code requires separate entrances. Mr. Kipnis replied that the stairway entrance appearance would be cleaned up. Carlos Ruiz asked if the solar energy aspects of the development would affect the development's appearance. Mr. Kipnis stated that the appearance should not be affected at all and that the solar aspects of the house could largely be handled by a special type of roof shingle. Committee member Walczak expressed concern with the visibility of the proposed courtyard due to safety issues. Chairperson Brzezinski asked what exterior materials were being considered. Mr. Kipnis replied that cement fiberboard would be considered as an exterior material. ACTION: A motion was made to grant concept site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-019 2423 Main Street Preliminary and Final Fence off parking area to east of building PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Michael Bleier GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Bleier stated that a parking lot is located between two buildings that he owns and that at night, people are dumping garbage in the parking lot and that he would like to erect a chain - link fence to prevent this from continuing. DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meeting Notes -- February 5, 2003 2 Chairperson Brxezinski stated that she would not be in favor of a chain link fence in this location. Mr. Bleier stated that he would be in favor of any measure that would impede people from dumping at night. Committee member Dahal suggested using landscaping in lieu of a fence. Carlos Ruiz stated that combining a wrought iron fence and landscaping might me the best solution. Committee member Walczak suggested keeping the wall mounted lights on at night for visibility and security purposes. Mr. Bleier stated that he would be in favor of keeping the lights on. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan approval subject to the use of a four -foot high wrought -iron -like fence with shrubs that do not exceed three feet in height in front of the fence. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-013 1503 Cleveland Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a two -car detached garage approximately X `from the west property line. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Randall Louis GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Louis stated that the garage would be located six inches from the property line so that the owner can preserve a garden in the rear yard. DISCUSSION: Committee member Jackson stated that there is a letter from the neighbor to the west stating no objection to the project. Committee member Alterson asked how the garage would be maintained, considering its proximity to the property line. Mr. Louis replied that the garage would be vinyl sided and should not be difficult to maintain. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she could not support this project due to the difficulty in maintaining the six inches of property between the garage and the property line. Committee member Alterson stated that if there is an agreement between neighbors regarding maintenance, then this location for a garage is a more efficient use of the land. Committee member Friedman noted that there currently is a fence in this location along the property line. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to a recorded covenant between the neighbors to regulate the maintenance and repair of the six inches of property between the garage and the driveway. The covenant would encompass prohibiting a fence along the property line in this location. The motion was seconded and then the second was withdrawn because the seconder felt that a covenance would be a cumbersome process for both property owners. A motion was made to deny preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-2) Committee member Alterson and Marino voted nay. Another motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval with the recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals that a variance be granted SPAARC Meeting Notes -- February 5, 2003 3 for a 1 Y2 'setback between the garage and the west property line (An even compromise between the required setback of 3 feet and the requested setback of six inches). The motion was seconded and passed. (7-2) Chairperson Brzezinski and Committee member D'Agostino voted nay. SPAARC 03-007 603 Main Street Conceat Demolish all improvements, construct a mixed residendal/commericial building with 77 dwelling units, 8,400 square feet of commercial, and 142 parking spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Dan Martus Kristen Rozycki Kevin Pearson Steve Mullins Robert Matthews Bryan Henson Keith Dafcik James Murray GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Martus stated that the cueing of cars pulling out of the garage along Chicago Avenue has been addressed. The garage door will be pulled back 30 or 40 feet from Chicago Avenue, allowing room for two cars between the street and the garage door in this location. The Main Street garage access will be right in/right out. The Main Street garage door, when closed, will block the visibility of the garage ramp. Mr. Martus explained that the Zoning Ordinance requires one loading dock for residential and one for commercial. However, under the proposed Planned Development, only one loading dock will be provided for this development. Mr. Martus explained that the sign band would be located on a translucent glass panel to provide more light to the street. limestone copings have been added to the building near the comer. Transition glass is also being used. He felt that leaving the outdoor spaces as balconies for units on the upper floors would be desirable. Furthermore, the use of pre -cast concrete precludes a curved design to the building at the comer. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino stated that the sidewalk should comply with the recommendations of the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan. Susan Guderley explained that the Plan consultant is working on a prototype for the type of sidewalk paving block to be used. She stated that the process could be expedited so that the developer could plan accordingly. Committee member Dahal asked if the garage door off of Chicago Avenue would open at the presence of a car approaching at all times, or just during business hours. Mr. Martus stated that the garage door would probably only open for all cars approaching until the end of the business day, at which time the garage would only automatically open for residents of the building. Mr. Mullins suggested that the parking for retail after hours could be handled as valet, so that retail users don't attempt to pull into the garage only to have to back out into traffic on Chicago Avenue when the garage door does not open. SPAARC Meeting Notes — February 5. 2003 4 Chairperson Brzezinski asked how the visibility for cars exiting onto Chicago Avenue could be enhanced. Mr. Martus stated that the garage door would be 20 feet wide, and certain walls would be pulled back, to increase visibility of the north. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if a wall could be pulled back from the south to increase visibility in this direction. Mr. Martus stated that this could be looked into. Committee member Dahal suggested using a warning light for pedestrians at the Main Street garage entrance so to forewarn the presence of any cars exiting the garage. Committee member Alterson asked if there would be bicycle parking on the site. Mr. Martus stated that there would be an interior bicycle room for residents. Committee member Alterson also asked if there would be exterior bicycle parking for non-residents. Committee member Marino suggested looking at utilizing the bicycle parking area at the Main Street CTA station and/or working an exterior bicycle parking plan into the recommendations of the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the comer on the current design still appears rather dull. She felt that a double cantilever would open up the comer and make it more visually interesting. Walter Hallen noted that the comer is recessed and that this is not shown in the drawing. Carlos Ruiz reiterated that the solid paneled comer is not desirable because it does not open the comer properly. Committee member Friedman suggested using curved glass on the first floor only. Mr. Martus stated that the same coping has been extended along the length of the building to reduce the appearance of there being two buildings along Chicago Avenue rather than a unified elevation. Mr. Martus stated that a sign band that is 1-1/2 feet wide would be located 11 feet above the sidewalk. All signs should be located within the sign box according to the regulations of the condominium. Mr. Martus presented the brick being proposed, noting that the balcony railings would be translucent glass. The west elevation would consist of precast panels on the first two floors, with a terrace on the third floor, with a ribbon of windows. Chairperson Brzezinski complemented Mr. Martus on the color palette. Mr. Martus presented the rooftop plan. It would consist of a mechanical room, elevator room, and some exterior mechanical equipment that is screened off. Committee member Marino asked if there would be a back-up generator. Mr. Martus stated that he did not plan on including one. Committee member Marino stated that the City does not want to see utilities serviced along the street elevation. Committee member Dahal asked where trash would be picked up. Mr. Martus stated that there would be a central interior trash chute and that trash storage would be within the interior of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant concept approval subject to compliance with the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan and working out the comer elevation of the building to open up the elevation. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-1). Committee member Friedman voted nay. SPAARC Meeting Notes — February 5, 2003 SPAgRC Meeting Mares — Febnjary 5, 2003 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 19, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Ron Walczak Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Review of SPAARC Meetinq Notes: January 29, 2003: A motion was made to recommend approval of these meeting notes subject to changing the language stating Review of Plan Commission Meeting Notes to Review of SPAARC Meeting Notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7- 0). February 5, 2003: A motion was made to recommend approval of these meeting notes subject to the notes being corrected to read 603 Main Street. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-039 23" Orrinaton Avenue Preliminary Convert detached single-family dwelling to office and classroom for Kendall College, construct a rear two story addition, emergency stairwell, and enlarge parking area and construct accessible ramp. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Paul Jeffrey Steve Economou Phil Davis GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Jeffrey explained that Kendall College is starting a four-year culinary program and that this proposal would service the program. The two existing buildings on the site would be renovated and a stairway area would be constructed to conned the two buildings. The kitchen expansion would take place in the building closest to the campus and furthest from Orrington Avenue. Mr. Economou presented the site plan of the proposal. He stated that landscaping would screen the parking lot in the rear along Colfax Street. This property is within the Northeast Historic District. There have been preliminary meetings with Carlos Ruiz and members of the Preservation Commission regarding this proposal. Thomas Prairie of the Evanston Preservation Commission summarized the discussions between the Preservation Commission and Kendall College. He stated that the Preservation Commission had some concerns and formed an ad hoc subcommittee to deal with this proposal. Through this process, Kendall College has begun to explore combining the two buildings together. The Preservation Commission has not yet seen the latest proposal. Mr. Economou explained that this proposal is actually the second proposal. The first proposal attempted to recreate the look of both houses on the stairway connection facade. However, it was determined that recreating a style that never existed would not be a good idea and instead, a second proposal was created that borrowed designs from each structure, thus creating a link as opposed to a fictional historic appearance. Brick and stone work would match that of the existing two structures. A brand new roof will be installed on both structures. The new roof would have an architectural -cut shingle type. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski noted that the kitchen would require a lot of exhaust. Mr. Economou stated that the exhaust would be visually screened. Walter Hallen asked tf parking would need to be examined for Kendall College as a result of the proposal. Committee member Alterson stated that parking would need to be provided for any useable floor area being created. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that a member of the audience has requested to speak regarding this proposal. The Committee unanimously moved to allow the audience member to speak. The audience member identified herself as Judy Fiske of 2319 Sherman Avenue, Evanston, Illinois. Ms. Fiske explained that she is a neighbor of this project and is concerned with preservation issues in Evanston. She recalled that there might be a covenant on this property regarding kitchens. As a result, Kendall College may not be able to relocate a kitchen to another property. She also explained that the covenant allowing the kitchen stated that the neighborhood has an exclusive right to communicate with Kendall College regarding this unique use in the R1 zoning district. Furthermore, there was an agreement between the College and the neighborhood that the parking lot to the north always be physically separated from the parking lot along Colfax Avenue. She expressed concern with the appearance of this proposal from Colfax Avenue. She stated that it should not negatively effect the appearance from Orrington Avenue. She stressed that the odors from the kitchen at times are strong and that grease traps of the exhaust need to be kept clean. Committee member Alterson thought that the covenant that Ms. Fiske was referring to dealt with restaurants, but not classroom space. Mr. Jeffrey stated that the parking lots on the east side of the property would remain physically separate. Chairperson Brzezinski informed the applicants of the sight lighting requirements for the parking lot. ACTION: SPAARC Meeting Notes - February 19, 2003 2 A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-1). Committee member Alterson voted nay. SPAARC 03-029 1100 Lake Street Prellminary and Final Site improvements to the Merrick Rose Garden. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Stefanie Levine GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Levine explained that existing retaining walls that are not readily visible from the property line and the below grade mechanical pit that service the fountain will be rebuilt. If more funding is made available, low pathway lighting may be installed. An Irrigation system and an ADA accessible drinking fountain will also be installed. DISCUSSION: Jeff Burdick noted that this property is a landmark. Ms. Levine replied that Carlos Ruiz has previously reviewed the project and that a Certificate of Appropriateness was issued for the proposal. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the relocation of the fountain back to its original locale in Fountain Square would be highly desirable. Ms. Levine replied that residents at the Fountain Square Charrette did not express the desire to relocate this fountain back to Fountain Square. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-020 2125 Bennett Avenue Recommendation to ZSA Install air conditioning unit within 3' 10" of the south property line. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kent Marthaler GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Marthaler explained that the unit would not be visible from the street and pointed out its location on the site plan. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked why the unit could not be located outside of the 3' 10" from the property line. Mr. Marthaler replied that a deck is being constructed across the entire width of the yard. The owner to the south has expressed no concerns with this proposal. Committee member Alterson asked about the noise rating and energy efficiency of the proposed unit. Mr. Marthaler stated that he recommended that a Sears 12 unit is used and that noise should be a minimum. Committee member Alterson pointed out that the ZBA will be hearing another air conditioning unit case on the same evening in which the owner and the neighbor are in disagreement over the placement of the unit. As a result, an alderman is requesting that the Zoning Division determine if there is a problem in the Zoning Ordinance in relation to the placement of air conditioning units. He suggested that Mr. Marthaler be able to address noise SPAARC Meeting Notes — February 19, 2003 issues in a detailed manner. He also stated that if the property owners to the south have central air then noise issues should be cancelled out because both units would likely be running at the same time. Barbara O'Connor, the neighbor directly to the east, asked to see where the unit would be placed on the property. She expressed concern that the unit would be close to her bedroom window. Chairperson Brzezinski explained that the unit could legally be placed much closer to her bedroom window, but that the owner is requesting a variance so that the unit can be placed next to the deck. Committee member Friedman suggested that updated photographs that include the current addition be presented to the ZBA. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend preliminary and final site plan approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC M"ft Motes - FeMmvy 19, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Other Staff: SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 26, 2003 Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Walter Hallen, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Rion Walczak Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Moms Robinson D. Marino (acting chair) determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting Review of SPAARC Meetinq Notes: February 12, 2003: A motion was made to recommend approval of these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-024 1715 Church Street Preiiminary Renovate single user commercial building into 7 office units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Leineweber GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Leineweber explained that he is proposing to convert the building into seven individual office units. The orientation of the building will be changed so that its major frontage is on Darrow Avenue as opposed to Church Street. The building is practically on the lot line on the east, west, and south sides and is about 2 feet off of the alley on the north side. The existing cinder block will be removed and replaced with glass block with operable windows above. The existing silver barrel -shaped roof will be partially removed at the first truss to the exterior wall and replaced with a curtain wall of glass and other materials. This will allow access to the roof deck. Dormers will be cut into the roof to allow light and air into the interior mezzanine areas. The dormers will be set back eight feet but the zoning requirement is fifteen feet. Also, the second story addition on the northeast comer of the building will not meet the required zoning setbacks. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen asked if this project would continue to be pursued if the requested zoning variances are not granted. He asked for elevations that would show what the attemate proposal would be if the zoning variances are not granted. He also stated that curb cuts are not shown on the site plan and a more detailed site plan would be needed. Acting Chairperson Marino stated that Mr. Leineweber could return to SPAARC with an alternate proposal if the requested zoning variations are not granted. Committee member Dahal asked if the existing driveway on Church Street would remain. Mr. Leineweber answered that it would remain and that there would be no additional curb cuts or driveways constructed as a result of this project. Committee member Dahal asked that a site plan be provided that includes the location of curb cuts. Acting Chair Marino added that this project is within the Neighborhood Planning Area and is the type of use that the Neighborhood Planning group would Pike to see more of in this area. Committee member Jackson asked why the terms 'mezzanine' and 'second story' seem to be used interchangeably regarding this project. Mr. Leineweber stated that the addition on the northeast would be a considered a second floor, and a mezzanine would be constructed to accommodate it. Walter Hallen responded that building code interpretation would not consider any part of this proposal a mezzanine, but rather a floor. Frank Aguado asked if there would be an overall floor area increase as a result of this pact. Mr. Leineweber stated that the floor area would actually decrease. Frank Aguado asked if medical offices are being considered for any of the seven spaces, because medical uses require more parking. Mr. Leineweber replied that there are still no definites in terms of particular tenants. Acting Chair Marino asked about landscaping. Mr. Leineweber stated that there are significant parkways along both Church Street and Darrow Avenue. He hopes to provide ample landscaping in the Darrow Avenue parkway, but expressed concern with the condition of the Church Street parkway, stating that it collects a large amount of trash. Mr. Hallen inquired as to site lighting. Mr. Leineweber stated that there is wall pack lighting on the alley. Wall - mounted fixtures would be added along the south and west fagade of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-021 1741 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Establish a Type 11 restaurant — Gary Poppins Gourmet Popcom and Frozen Custard — retail establishment. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Gary Seltzer Pete Zullo GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Seltzer explained that he owns a store in downtown Chicago and that this would be a similar establishment. The proposed space is right next to the existing Taco Bell. He stated that he would comply with the approved unified business center sign plan on this particular building. There would not be any changes to the existing glass storefront. DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — Febmwy 26, 2003 2 Acting Chairperson Marino asked how litter would be handled. Mr. Seltzer responded that the store would have its own dumpster on the east side of the building. Three times per day, an employee is going to dean up the general area within 250 feet of the dumpster. He stated that he does not expect this establishment to generate as much garbage as Taco Bell or Subway. Acting Chair Marino noted that downtown Evanston sometimes experiences problems with dumpsters overflowing on Sunday. Mr. Zullo explained that this store would work with both Subway and Taco Bell to procure Sunday pick-up of trash if necessary. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend preliminary site plan and appearance review approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC Meeting NOW -- February 26 2003 3 Chairperson Marino stated that Mr. Leineweber could return to SPAARC with an alternate proposal if the requested zoning variations are not granted. Committee member Dahal asked if the existing driveway on Church Street would remain. Mr. Leineweber answered that it would remain and that there would be no additional curb cuts or driveways constructed as a result of this project. Committee member Dahal asked that a site plan be provided that includes the location of curb cuts. Acting Chair Marino added that this project is within the Neighborhood Planning Area and is the type of use that the Neighborhood Planning group would like to see more of in this area. Committee member Jackson asked why the terms 'mezzanine' and 'second story' seem to be used interchangeably regarding this project. Mr. Leineweber stated that the addition on the northeast would be a considered a second floor, and a mezzanine would be constructed to accommodate it. Walter Hallen responded that building code interpretation would not consider any part of this proposal a mezzanine, but rather a floor. Frank Aguado asked if there would be an overall floor area increase as a result of this project. Mr. Leineweber stated that the floor area would actually decrease. Frank Aguado asked if medical offices are being considered for any of the seven spaces, because medical uses require more parking. Mr. Leineweber replied that there are still no definites in terms of particular tenants. Acting Chair Marino asked about landscaping. Mr. Leineweber stated that there are significant parkways along both Church Street and Darrow Avenue. He hopes to provide ample landscaping in the Darrow Avenue parkway, but expressed concern with the condition of the Church Street parkway, stating that it collects a large amount of trash. Mr. Hallen inquired as to site lighting. Mr. Leineweber stated that there is wall pack lighting on the alley. Wall - mounted fixtures would be added along the south and west fagade of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-021 1741 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Establish a Type 11 restaurant — Gary Poppins Gourmet Popcorn and Frozen Custard — retail establishment. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Gary Seltzer Pete Zullo GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Seltzer explained that he owns a store in downtown Chicago and that this would be a similar establishment. The proposed space is right next to the existing Taco Bell. He stated that he would comply with the approved unified business center sign plan on this particular building. There would not be any changes to the existing glass storefront. DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meeting Notes - February 26. 2003 2 Acting Chairperson Marino asked how litter would be handled. Mr. Seltzer responded that the store would have its own dumpster on the east side of the building. Three times per day, an employee is going to clean up the general area within 250 feet of the dumpster. He stated that he does not expect this establishment to generate as much garbage as Taco Bell or Subway. Acting Chair Marino noted that downtown Evanston sometimes experiences problems with dumpsters overflowing on Sunday. Mr. Zullo explained that this store would work with both Subway and Taco Bell to procure Sunday pick-up of trash if necessary. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend preliminary site plan and appearance review approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC Meeft Notes -- Febnmtty 26, 2003 3 Attendees: Committee Members: Design Professional: Other Staff: SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 5, 2003 Judy AWlo, Arthur Aiterson, Carolyn D'Agostino. Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, James Wolinski Hans Friedman Brzezinski, Paul Arlova Jackson, Jeff Burdick, Susan Gudedey, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ ADDroval of SPAARC Meetina Notes: February 19, 2003: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). February 26, 2003: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Chairperson Brzezinski and Committee member Friedman abstained from voting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-032 2426 Lincolnwood Drive Recommendation to ZBA Establish two (2) In tandem" open parking spaces in the front yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rob Sierzega GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Sierzela explained that a building permit has already been procured from the Building Department to convert the attached garage to a family room. A few years ago, a detached garage was constructed in the rear off of the alley. The owner would like to retain the driveway to the existing attached garage to use as off-street parking. This would require a variance, as parking is not permitted in the front yard. The proposed parking would be for visitors. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if on street parking is a problem in this location. Mr. Sierzela replied that Lincolnwood Drive is quite narrow and presents on -street parking concern. Walter Hallen asked If these parking spaces would be used for overnight parking. Mr. Sierzela responded that parking would not occur overnight. Committee member Wolinski asked if the neighbors have any concerns regarding this proposal. Mr. Sierzela replied that other homes on the block have cars parked in the front driveway during the day, but that he has not yet received any comments regarding this proposal from the neighbors. Committee member Fujihara stated that he does not think of this case as being any different as if the driveway did not already exist. Chairperson Brzezinski concurred and stated that she would like to see the old driveway become increased front yard green space. Committee member Wolinski noted that the applicant deserves credit for going through the proper review channels and not sneaking this proposal through the cracks by not applying for a variance for the existing driveway. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-2). Committee members Jackson and Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 03-015 2121 Sheridan Road Final Construct a parking area and other site improvements on Garrett -Evangelical Theological Seminary property PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Adolf Hansen Kory Burton GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Burton stated that there have been minor changes since this project previously appeared before SPAARC. A landscape plan has been developed along with the input of Stefanie Levine and Carlos Ruiz. There are a few less light fixtures along Garrett Place as a result of a meeting with Public Works. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked how the gating in front of the parking lot would operate. Mr. Burton replied that he is not yet certain how it would operate. Chairperson Brzezinski requested that the gates be pulled away from the sidewalk so cars waiting for the gate to open would not block the sidewalk. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval. The notion was seconded and passed. (7-1). Committee member Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 03-030 2715 Hurd Avenue Prellminary and Final Construct two-story hydraulic wheelchair lift (Second Church of Christ, Scientist) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Leslie Day SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 5, 2003 2 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Day explained that the wheelchair lift would be added to the exterior of the church. She presented pictures and a site plan showing where the lift would be constructed. The existing hedge would be affected by the construction, but it would be repaired upon completion of construction. Bricks to be used in the construction would match the existing bricks on the church's facade. DISCUSSION: Committee member Friedman complemented the applicants on how they are choosing to handle the construction of the wheelchair lift. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-033 1710-1720 Maple Avenue Preliminary and Final Plat of resubdivision of Lot 3 in Church Maple 21Q Resubdivision into 2 vertical lots In Church Street Plaza Zoning Lot A, plat titled "Optima Views Resubdivision." PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Matt Cison GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Cison stated that the resubdivision would separate the retail space from the condominiums above. The retail space is not part of the condominium association. He provided the Committee with an orientation of the subdivision. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked how the utilities would be handled in this scenario. Mr. Clson replied that there would be separate meters for gas and electric and the water utility would be sub -metered. Public works representatives at the meeting stated that they do not have a problem with separate meters in this building. Mr. Cison explained that a restaurant would not be permitted in this location so that the high exhaust ductwork associated with restaurant uses would not encroach into the newly created lot above. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0) Chairperson Brzezinski abstained from voting. SPAARC 03-034 3330 Central Street Concept New owner of "Automobile Repair Service Establishment", Tires, Batteries, Oil Changes, Broke Service, etc. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bud Kerwin Paul Avron SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 5, 2003 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kerwin explained that Cassidy Tires is interested in opening a store on the site. The store would sell tires, and also service vehicles on site. There will be two small additions for the storage of tires. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen asked if the four curb cuts would be retained, or if the two closest to the intersection would be removed. Mr. Kerwin stated that these two curb cuts would be removed. Carlos Ruiz asked if tires would be stored outside or within pubic view. Mr. Avron replied that tires are only stoned inside. Committee member Wolinski asked where old tires are stored until they are disposed of. Mr. Avron answered that these tires would be stored in an interior cage area. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would like to see a layout of how parking would be handled in terms of the locations of spaces and parking aisles. She also notified the applicants that a landscape plan will eventually need to be provided and that proposed signage should be within the requirements of the Sign Ordinance. Committee member Alterson notified the developer that this proposed use is permitted within the zoning district. However, a zoning analysis will eventually be needed. Committee member Aiello asked if cars are kept on the property over night. Mr. Avron stated that most of services provided are basic and quick, but occasionally one or two cars are kept on the site overnight if the car owner arrives late in the day for service. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 02-073 532 Weslev Avenue Final Remodel 3-unit multi -family residential building and construct underground parking. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bill James GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. James explained that there have been a few changes since this project previously received preliminary approval from SPAARC. The building will still consist of a base course of stone, and a brick fagade. The recessed roof terrace area would be cedar siding. The east elevation has been changed in that the base portion will be a common brick, with a coating of painted stucco so that it resembles the stone on the other three elevations. Mr. James presented the stone and brick to be used. The window openings on the north elevation will be changed. Each of the windows will be inoperable and fire rated. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she prefers a brick with more texture. Mr. James stated that he could look into bricks with more texture. Chairperson Brzezlnski also suggested that stucco not be used to cover the brick on the east elevation. Mr. James stated that he would investigate painting over the brick on the east elevation. Committee member Friedman SPAARC Meeting Notes — March a, 2003 pointed out that the glass block window is the only portion of the fagade that does not read with the rest of the building. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that it would be aesthetically consistent to use firelight instead of glass block. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if additional curb cuts would be needed to accommodate the parking. Mr. James stated that one additional curb cut would be needed, and that one existing curb cut would be removed. Chairperson Brzezinski asked where the air conditioning units would be placed. Mr. James replied that the units would be located under the porches. Committee member Alterson asked if the development would be fee simple. Mr. James stated that it would, but that maintenance of the exterior would be provided through the association. He then presented the landscape plan to the Committee. Committee member Dahal asked if the ramp to the parking would begin to slope right after the sidewalk or a few feet back. His concern dealt with line of sight issues. Mr. James stated that the ramp starts a few feet behind the sidewalk. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 02-135 800 Elain Road Preliminary and Final Construct a mixed -use building containing 248 dwelling units with retail on the first floor. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Todd Desmarais David Hovey GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hovey explained that the new proposal would conform to the underlying zoning of the site. The new development would contain 16 stories. The access to the parking remains off of Benson Avenue. There will be an entrance to the residential portion of the development from the south end. Parking would be one story below ground and four stories above ground. Sky terraces would be located off of residential units on the fifth floor. The building would be made of a curtain wall, with an underlying concrete structure. Mr. Hovey presented samples of the building materials to be used. The parking garage would be clad in metal panels that have the same dark brown appearance of the building. Ground floor retail will be located along Clark Street and on Benson Avenue from Clark Street to the entrance of the parking garage. DISCUSSION: Committee member Aiello asked if the same number and size of residential units would be retained in this proposal. Mr. Hovey replied that the number of units would be the same and that the sizes of the units would range from 683 square feet to 2,300 square feet. Committee member Friedman asked if the interior corridor could be broken up so it is not as long. Mr. Hovey stated that the corridor would be segmented so that its appearance is broken up. Carlos Ruiz asked if the balconies would be recessed and if any other plain would be recessed. Mr. Hovey replied that the balconies would be recessed but that no other significant SPAARC Meeting Notes - March 5, 2003 5 portions of the elevation would be recessed. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the condensing units would be consolidated in one location. Mr. Hovey stated that they would be consolidated on the roof. Committee member Aiello asked how much greenspace would be lost with this new proposal. Mr. Hovey stated that this proposal consists of an acre of greenspace, where the first proposal consisted of 1.3 acres of greenspace. Chairperson Brzezinski asked for details regarding landscaping and/or greenspace along Benson Avenue. Mr. Hovey replied that the building has to be built to the lot line along Benson Avenue, thus not allowing room for greenspace, but that the design of the building offers a rich variety of shades and shadows. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if there would be any way of softening the edge of the building so to enhance the pedestrian experience along Benson Avenue. Mr. Hovey stated that the awnings along the storefronts could serve to soften the edge of the building in this location. Committee member Wolinski stated that he would only be comfortable granting preliminary approval at this time because details of the temporary parking plan have not yet been approved. Chairperson Brzezinski entertained a motion to allow a member of the audience to speak regarding this case. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Diane Brown, an employee of an optomology practice in the 1800 Sherman Avenue building, explained that her practice treats several elderly patients who need drop off service and/or handicapped parking. She asked if the parking is currently replaced, would the same number of spaces be provided upon completion of construction. Mr. Hovey stated that the same number of spaces would be provided, and that parking spaces would also be provided for the new retail that is part of the new construction. Ms. Brawn expressed concern with how parking would be handled in the interim. Committee member Aiello explained that the Parking Committee would discuss these issues in more detail at their meeting on March 26, 2003. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Chairperson Brzezinski abstained from voting. SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 5, 2W3 N SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 12, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Arlova Jackson, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Discussion of Planninq and Development Committee's March 31. 2003 Special Meeting on Bindinq Appearance Review: Committee member Wolinski reminded the Committee of Jack Siegel's legal opinion regarding proposed binding appearance review. At a previous Planning and Development Committee meeting, Mr. Siegel suggested looking into requiring certain developments to be Planned Developments, meaning that appearance review would essentially be binding for these particular developments. Committee member Wolinski asked SPAARC members if they felt that this approach would work. He stressed that the Planning and Development Committee would like SPAARC to examine Mr. Siegel's suggestion and determine what an appropriate threshold would be for a mandatory Planned Development. Chairperson Brzezinski presented some negatives to Mr. Siegel's Planned Development suggestion. First, a greater burden would be placed on staff, considering the increased notice requirements accompanied with Planned Developments. Second, requiring Planned Developments on a large scale could lend to an impression among developers and citizens that the City Council will have ultimate say as to what kind of developments occur in Evanston. Committee member Alterson stated that coming up with thresholds for Planned Developments is possible, but he would caution against a situation in which multi -family residential development is being discriminated against. He stated that the current Binding Appearance Review Design Guidelines are excellent and that he would not like to see the hard work put into creating these guidelines go to waste. Committee member Friedman explained that he has been a part of the Binding Appearance Review process for years. Many projects that currently appear before SPAARC could never be considered Planned Developments, such as storefront alterations. The Evanston Sign Ordinance has language stating that "architectural integrity should be protected" and so forth. Signs can be easily altered and/or removed. Buildings cannot. Why then has it taken the City so long to approve Binding Appearance Review and why is the process becoming so complicated? Committee member Wolinski explained that the Planning and Development Committee is struggling with the concept of mandatory appearance review, mostly due to legality issues. The P&D Committee simply want to know if the Planned Development suggestion would wont, and if so, what should an appropriate threshold be to determine if a project must be a Planned Development. Alderman Wynne stated that she personally has not felt that the P&D Committee were adequately briefed as to how Binding Appearance Review as proposed may not be legal. She stated that the P&D Committee would like to see a listing of pluses and minuses regarding attaining Binding Appearance Review through the Planned Development process. Committee member Aiterson stated that most sizeable projects in the past seven years have gone through at least some form of zoning review/public hearing process. This has not put a huge burden on developers and mandatory public review does not reduce the value of property. He suggested a mandatory public review process for all projects over a certain size. Walter Hallen stated that there should be either Binding Appearance Review or nothing. He suggested developing a threshold that utilizes both the Zoning District of a project and the actual size of a proposal and building type. Committee member Friedman stated that there are legal case studies stating that a community has the right to a stake in regarding the appearance of ds developments. The tentative Binding Appearance Review Design Guidelines state that quality design should be a top priority. This has nothing to do with outlawing certain architectural styles. The Guidelines only require quality design and guard against poor design. Chairperson Brzezinski reminded the members that the purpose of this discussion is not Binding vs. Non -Binding, but to discuss Mr. Siegel's Planned Development suggestion. Committee member Wolinski suggested that Committee members consider what types of projects they do not want appearance review for. Committee member Jackson painted out that just because an increased Planned Development process is created, it does not necessarily mean that SPAARC would have any more say in appearance issues than it currently does. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would be concerned with many projects becoming Planned Developments, considering the state of the City's budget and the increase in staff time that would be demanded. Jeff Burdick explained that Planned Developments are generally considered special uses in most zoning ordinances. If almost every kind of development is required to be a Planned SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 12, 2003 2 Development, then what does this render Evanston's Zoning Ordinance? Are there no permitted uses? Committee member Fujihara stated that he does not necessarily agree with Binding Appearance Review. He stated that developers are taking the financial risk and stressed that the City should take this into account when considering Binding Appearance Review. Committee member Alterson stated that the City has received a lot of mileage out of voluntary compliance among developers conceming appearance issues. The key is to make suggestions early in the process before the developer spends a lot of money on drawings. In making all development over a certain threshold a Planned Development, Evanston would still not capture many of the projects that SPAARC are currently seeing. Committee member Wolinski stated that the larger projects tend to be the ones that Evanston would like to capture for Binding Appearance Review. He sited the Dubin project as an example and noted that this project could have been better if it was made to go through some sort of binding appearance review. Committee member Aiello asked SPAARC members to consider what it is about certain projects that are undesirable. Would there be other ways to head off these issues than through an increase Planned Development requirement? She also expressed concern regarding legality challenges under the Planned Development suggestion. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she could not recommend approving Mr. Siegel's Planned Development suggestion solely as a method of achieving Binding Appearance Review. She stated that the skills of a project architect and the pocketbook of a developer need to be considered. Committee member Wolinski scheduled Friday, March 21, 2003 at 9:00 AM as a time to reconvene to continue discussion of this issue. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-035 2320 Pioneer Road Concept Major renovation and three-story addition to "The Swedish Retirement Association." PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Malarkey Ed Kelly Susan Morse Mary Lofquist GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Movie explained that the proposal is to construct a significant expansion to the campus so to modernize the facility and permit it to remain economically feasible. Mr. Kelly stated that the facility needs to be modernized to better serve the resident population and address the trends in senior living. Currently there are 41 units of assisted living. The activity areas are small and SPAARC Meeting Notes -- March 1 Z 2003 the dining room is in the basement and receives little light. Most of the units do not have bathrooms and kitchens and are quite small. He noted that there currently is a driveway that traverses this facility that serves deliveries and drop offs. The public sometimes uses this driveway as a through drive. One of the current buildings on site is pleasant in appearance and quite old, while the other building, constructed in 1976, is quite unattractive to many of the neighbors. The existing buildings can both be preserved. There is a significant amount of open space on the site, especially on the south end. The applicant wishes to preserve some of this open space. The facility is presently licensed for 120 units. The proposal would add 80 apartments. 20,000 square feet of new community space would be added, including a new library. The kitchen would be moved to where the new dining room would be. There will be an 18-20 unit Memory Impaired facility constructed on the southeast portion of the property. The two existing buildings on the site are very different in terms of design. The new buildings will pick up details from both buildings but will not resemble the mansard -roofed structure built in the 1970's. The existing through driveway will be eliminated and made into a drop off area. Underground parking will be provided through the construction. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen stated that the proposed site design is excellent. Committee member Alterson noted that this proposal would probably trigger some sort of zoning hearing. He stated that the applicant should come in for a zoning analysis. Committee member Friedman agreed with Mr. Hallen regarding the site design, but urged the applicant to develop a design that is compatible with the existing older building on the site. Carlos Ruiz noted that the landmark status of the existing building applies to the entire lot of record and that this project would probably need to appear before the Preservation Commission for review of how the proposal would affect the current landmark building on the site. Committee member Marino asked if the applicant considered townhouse type construction. Mr. Kelly replied that a townhouse configuration would not yield as many new units. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the long grand entrance that is being preserved off of Grant Street seems isolated and under utilized. Committee member Aiello asked if the parking on the west side of the site would be for staff and visitors. Mr. Kelly answered that it is for visitors and staff and that the underground parking and the parking on the west will reduce the on street parking in the area. Frank Aguado asked how many employees would be added upon completion of the proposal. Mr. Kelly replied that 40 employees would be added. Mr. Aguado asked if public aide would be provided for some residents. Ms. Morse replied that public aide provisions are currently not being planned for. Committee member Friedman suggested using decorative fencing to enclose the large open space so that it can be used as part of the activity area for the residents. Mr. Kelly explained that neighbors frequently use this space and that the facility wants to continue to encourage the use of this space by area residents. Committee member Marino expressed concern with a potential large-scale institutional expansion in a predominately single family neighborhood. He would like to see a smaller scale expansion altemative. SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 12. 2003 4 1p- . ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-3). Committee members Alterson, Marino and Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 03-037 801 Davis Street Recommendation to Sian Board Three new freestanding real estate signs. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Haden explained that three signs are being proposed. Two of the signs are 8' x 20' and one sign is 8' x 40'. The Sign Ordinance allows for 200 square feet of space for a freestanding sign. These three signs total 640 square feet of signage. At least one of the signs is on the property line and exceeds the maximum height permitted and the items of information on the signs exceed the requirement_ DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson stated that he does not have a problem with the sign facing the train, as long as there is a time limit on it. However, the signage facing Fountain Square seems pointless. ACTION: A motion was made to deny the request for this signage. This motion was seconded and then withdrawn. A second motion was made to recommend approval for signs that are Y2 the size as the current proposals and that economize the items of information on the signs. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-4). Committee members Alterson, Dahal, Friedman and Kelly voted nay. SPAARC 03-038 2123 Harrison Street Recommendation to Sign Board Replacement of Institutional Identification Sign and changeable copy board `Covenant Methodist Church." PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairperson Brzezinski explained that this sign is illuminated, has changeable copy, and is too close to the property line. Walter Hallen noted that the sign was already erected because the applicant was mislead into believing that a permit was not required to install the sign. DISCUSSION: A neighbor explained that the sign is far too bright, especially considering the fact that it is in a largely residential neighborhood. Furthermore, the design of the sign is more commercial than residential. She presented pictures of the sign taken at night. ACTION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 12. 2003 s A motion was made to recommend denying the sign. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 03.031 1603 Orrington Avenue Concept Raze and construct a mixed -use building consisting of 23 dwelling units, off street parking spaces and retail space(s). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Michael Aufderheide Stephen Yas Bruce Armstrong Michael Newman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Yas explained that the existing Border's building would be razed, the rotunda that is part of the bank building will be retained, the underground parking lot ramps on Orrington will be removed and new ramps will be constructed. Storefront retail will be established across the entire frontage of Orrington from the exiting Border's to the comer at Davis Street. The new parking ramp will be perpendicular to Orrington and will be located on the north side of the property. Four stories would be built on top of the parking structure where the existing Border's building currently exists. The second and third floor of this building would consist of condominiums, and the fourth floor would be terraced and contain residential units. 36 parking spaces would be provided for the 23 condominium units and would be located off the north/south alley on the east side of the property. Some of this parking would be accommodated with tandem spaces. Each of the units would contain a balcony. DISCUSSION: Committee member Aiello asked if the parking would take into account the new storefront retail. Mr. Yas stated that the total retail would be 32,000 square feet. The existing Border's Is around 32,000 square feet, so no additional parking would be required. A planned development would be pursued for the entire project. Committee member Friedman stated that the City required the existing ramps on Orrington when the bank building was developed so that cars entering and existing parking would not traverse the sidewalk. Committee member Dahal asked if there would be a garage door at the entrance of the ramp, and if so, how would pedestrian/automobile conflicts be handled at the sidewalk. Mr. Yas replied that this has not yet been decided, but that a mechanism of some sort would be installed. Chairperson Brzezinski asked how the roof would be treated. Mr. Yas stated that a green roof is being considered for the development. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this development is a huge departure in terms of appearance for this site. She expressed concern regarding the proposal to completely enclosure the rotunda. Committee member Friedman noted that the connecting link between the rotunda and the building is now thicker according to the proposal and increasing this linkage's width would impair the character of the bank building. Committee member Wolinski stated that concept issues have not yet been settled and that the applicants should be invited back so that they can address the comments provided at this SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 12, 2003 6 qrr meeting. Committee member Alterson suggested that the applicants provide a model of the project and Its surrounding areas when they next appear before the Committee. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 03-041 1314 Ridge Avenue Preliminary Renovation of former District 65 headquarters into 17 dwelling units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: James Murray Mike Niazmond Scott Prestangea GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Murray explained that the proposal is to develop the site with residential single-family attached dwellings, convert the existing coach house to two single-family units, and rehab and redevelop the existing Dryden Building into four single-family units. Eight single-family attached units would be constructed along the Dempster side of the property. Cars would access the site from Asbury, with one right in/right out access point onto Ridge along the north side of the property. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked if the Dryden Building would be affected by significant design changes. Mr. Murray stated that some exterior staircases would be removed. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the Preservation Commission has reviewed this proposal. Mr. Murray stated that this proposal is slated to appear before the Preservation Commission on April 15, 2003. Walter Hallen pointed out that the vehicular access onto Ridge would be hazardous. Committee member Aiello asked about parking. Mr. Murray replied that parking would be provided in garages behind the Dryden Building. Committee member Aiello stated that the drive onto Ridge and the paved turnaround on the south end of the site do not seem necessary. She stated that this paving would take the focus away from the Dryden Building from the Ridge Avenue perspective. Carlos Ruiz agreed and also expressed concern about the fact that a portion of the townhomes along Dempster would extend further east than the Dryden Building and would block the view of the Dryden from the comer of Dempster and Ridge. Mr. Prestangea stated that the paved turnaround would serve to move interior vehicular traffic easily through the site and back out onto Asbury. Committee member Aiello suggested that the site be developed in a denser manner along Dempster and Asbury to maintain the vista of the Dryden Building from Ridge Avenue and the comer of Ridge and Dempster. Committee member Friedman stated that there are advantages to having the front entrances to the townhomes be located off of Dempster Avenue. Mr. Prestangea stated that Dempster Avenue is far too busy to warrant front entrances off of it and that the facade along Dempster SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 1Z 2003 Avenue would read more as a front facade rather than the rear of a residential building. Alderman Bernstein stated that his opinions regarding the proposal are consistent with those of the Committee. Committee member Aiello requested that a pre -application conference be held after this project appears before the Preservation Commission. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 03-039 1805 Howard Street Recommendation to Sign Board New freestanding illuminated sign, for "Quick Stop Food Mart." PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee member AlterSL n explained that the City had the owner remove the previous freestanding sign on this property because it did not comply with the Sign Ordinance regulations. The owner is requesting the installation of a new freestanding sign, ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of the sign. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 03-040 1813 Lyons Street Recommendation to Sign Board New free standing real estate sign. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen explained that this type of real estate sign is routinely approved. However, the proposed sign has 42 items of Information instead of the seven items of information that Is permitted. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval subject to the Sign Board reviewing the items of information on the sign to determine if they are relevant items of information. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 12, 2003 8 SPMRC Meeting Notes — Marsh IZ 2003 9 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 19, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spic:uzza C. Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-128 1100 Clark Street Pre -Application Conference Construction of residential condominiums. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom Roszak Liana Leach Mariano Barragan GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Roszak explained that the proposal consists of six buildings of various heights, and 348 condo units total. The buildings surround a central courtyard, and there would be an underground garage off of Oak Avenue consisting of 300 parking spaces, serving the 1007 Church Street building. The building heights would range between six and twenty stories. The buildings have large roof terraces starting at the fourth floor. These terraces would be landscaped. Building materials would consist mostly of masonry and glass. Diagonal parking is being proposed along Clark Street and Oak Avenue to serve the church on Clark Street. Over 500 parking spaces would be provided for the condo units. Entrances to these spaces are through the inner drive off of Oak Avenue. The roofs of the different buildings will each have theme gardens, including a passive garden, a play garden, a cutting garden, etc. Mr. Roszak presented a phasing diagram, depicting how the project would be developed over time. There will be a few small retail spaces along the streetfront — a 2,100 square foot retail space akxV Clark Street and an 840 square foot retail space along Oak Avenue. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen asked if the at grade landscaping would be in containers, due to the presence of parking below. Mr. Roszak replied that at grade landscaping would be in large concrete, waterproofed structures. This would not limit plant selection. Committee member Aiello asked if the retail spaces would be service oriented. Mr. Roszak replied that they probably would be, due to their small size. Committee member Wolinski asked Mr. Roszak if he would be willing to accept a condition that the retail space not be used for a type II restaurant. Mr. Roszak replied that he would be willing to accept such a condition. Committee member Aiello asked if the exterior parking along Ridge Avenue would serve visitors. Mr. Roszak stated that it would. Committee member Aiello suggested that this parking be removed for increased greenspace, unless the parking was required. Mr. Roszak stated that the parking is not required and that he would be in favor of removing it to accommodate more greenspace on the site. Chairperson Brzezinski also suggested removing some of the parking spaces on the northeast portion of the site in order to accommodate more greenspace. Committee member Dahal asked about the fire access from Ridge Avenue shown on the site plan. He suggested providing this access through the use of a mountable curb, which makes the access appear as a sidewalk. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would prefer to see an entry/exit garage, rather than a separate entrance and exit, which would require two curb cuts. Committee member Alterson asked about the status of office parking after hours. Mr. Roszak stated that the parking would currently be locked after hours, but this could be discussed with the office use, since it would be their parking lot. Jeff Burdick asked if the central drive along the spine of the development that provides access to condo parking would be paved with decorative pavers. Mr. Roszak stated that it would and that there would be sidewalks on either side of this central drive. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if provisions have been made for bicycle parking. Mr. Roszak replied that this would be looked into, but only for condo residents, not office users. Larry Widmayer, Chairman of the Plan Commission, explained that the office currently provides bicycle parking. Chairperson Brzezinski asked how roof top mechanical units would be handled. Mr. Roszak replied that screened mechanical enclosures would be incorporated on each roof. Committee member Alterson asked how office parking would be provided while construction was occurring. Chairperson Brzezinski notified Mr. Roszak that an interim parking plan would need to be provided and reviewed by the City's Parking Committee. Committee member Kelly asked if one pump would be used for each of the buildings to provide fire protection service. Mr. Roszak stated that one pump would be used. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about the building materials being proposed. Mr. Roszak explained that the brickwork would contain striations to provide architectural detail. The east and west sides would predominately consist of a curtain wall enclosure, consisting almost entirely of glass. The brick to be used would be utility -sized. Committee member Friedman SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 19, 2003 stated that the pedestrian view would not be desirable because the design of the building is not being brought down to street level. Mr.Roszak disagreed with Mr. Friedman's assertion, and further noted that the alley elevation would be 'greened' through the planting of vines on the wall. Committee member Alterson agreed with Committee member Friedman. Mr. Roszak stated that there would be landscaping at the pedestrian level and that the elevation would reflect what is actually being built — a parking garage with condominiums above. He also pointed out that the building would be curved, which would create a more dynamic appearance from the pedestrian perspective. Carlos Ruiz encouraged the use of regular sized brick. as opposed to utility sized brick. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that utility sized brick might not be a problem at higher elevations, but she suggested roman sized brick be used at the base. Committee member Aiello suggested that Mr. Roszak provide greater design detail when this project appears before the Plan Commission. Plan Commission Chairman Widmayer asked if shadow studies have been done to assure that the development would not cast a shadow over buildings across Ridge Avenue. Mr. Roszak stated that these studies have been done. Plan Commission Chairman Widmayer strongly urged Mr. Roszak to provide the results of these studies to the Plan Commission. Chairperson Brzezinski asked Mr. Roszak to address the affordable housing component of the project. Mr. Roszak explained that 10% of the units would be affordable, and these units would be interspersed throughout the project. The units would be provided at 66% of market rate, with the balance of the cost being funded by the developer. A qualification program is currently being proposed. Committee member Alterson stated that if this project goes forward, then the Hearn office use should be required to open their parking after hours, even if it is just for valet use. ACTION: The preapplication conference was closed and no action was taken. SPAARC 03-043 220 South Boulevard PreliminarvlRecommendation to ZBA Demolish existing residential structure, construct three story single family attached townhomes (four dwelling units). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Ratner Jeff Goulette Mark Jesse GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Ratner explained that the units would be oriented towards Forest Avenue, which is a deeded street in this location, but appears as an alley. There are a few old trees along Forest Avenue in this location. Four townhomes would be developed on the site. Mr. Goulette explained that two car garages would be located in the rear from an access drive that comes off the alley on the south side of the site. Balconies would be located off of the kitchen, and would be east facing. There would be a penthouse on the roof of each unit, with a small terrace provided for each unit. The rooftop mechanical units would be screened so not to be visible to surrounding properties. SPA ARC Meeting Notes - March 19, 2003 3 Committee member Alterson informed the Committee that the partially underground first floor of the units would not count towards the overall height of the structure. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the developers are planning to improve the portion of Forest Avenue in front of the development. Mr. Ratner explained that he is currently discussing this option with the Public Works Department, but the neighbors in the area do not want Forest Avenue to be improved so that traffic would not be encouraged to cut down the alley along the Cemetery. Alderman Wynne confirmed this neighborhood sentiment. Walter Hallen asked what type of construction would be used. Mr. Goulette stated that brick veneer over wood frame would be used. Mr. Hallen responded that sprinklers might be required. Committee member Alterson stated that the arrangement of the site might not be taking full advantage of the location, in that the south vista would be the most desirable and would only be available from one of the four units. Mr. Goulette stated that the way the lot itself is laid out, this proposal's orientation is the best possible solution. The Committee questioned which side of the proposal would be the front and requested more information regarding the proposed sunken terraces adjacent to the front entrances. Committee member Friedman suggested not using utility sized brick and to explore using real limestone as opposed to renaissance stone. Chairperson Brzezinski echoed Committee member Friedman's suggestions and stated that the pedestrian scale of the project lends itself more to a smaller brick size. Committee member Friedman also suggested installing attractive garage doors. ACTION: Committee member Alterson motioned to reject the project due to the fact that it does not take advantage of the site. The motion was not seconded. Chairperson Brzezinski motioned to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to the paving of Forest Avenue. The motion was seconded. Committee member Alterson disagreed, and stated that he would rather see Forest Avenue converted into a low usage alley. Chairperson} Brzezinski withdrew her motion. She stated that this is one of the many unresolved issues. She motioned to table this case until further resolution regarding Forest Avenue, the front entrances to the units, and the building materials. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-016 817 Hinman Avenue Preliminary Construct a six -story, eight dwelling unit multi family residential structure with fifteen off street parking spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom Engel Jim Torvik GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 19, 2003 Mr. Torvik explained that the building has been flipped at the request of SPAARC. Parking is now provided inside the building. The canopy along the north side has been removed, since it was encroaching into the side yard. Mr. Torvik presented samples of the brick and metal coping to be used on the building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if changes have been made to the north elevation. Mr. Torvik stated that the window orientation on the north elevation is now more symmetrical at the request of SPAARC. A motion was made to allow members of the audience to speak regarding this case. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. First Audience Member. Stated that she is song to see the removal of the existing house, and is not happy with the modem design of the proposal, especially the dark colors of the elevation. Mr. Torvik stated that he feels that the building does fit in with the neighborhood, and that it is a handsome design. Second Audience Member. Explained that she lives directly across the street and that she does not agree with Mr. Torvik in that the design fits in with the neighborhood. Alderman Wynne asked Chairperson Brzezinski why she thinks the proposed brick is handsome and questioned Mr. Torvik regarding the dark color of the brick. Chairperson Brzezinski replied that she likes brick with iron spots and lots of texture. Mr. Torvik replied that a lot of the building is glass, so the dark brick will not be the predominate material, and the building design is open, sc, the brick will essentially be an accent material. Committee member Friedman stated that this brick is a bit too dark, and that this type of attractive brick comes in other colors. Mr. Torvik stated that he would consider a lighter brick. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that the mortar color has a lot to do with the appearance of the brick. Carlos Ruiz stated that he does not dislike the building, but that he does not believe the building fits in with the context of the neighborhood. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 19, 2003 SPAARC Meeting Notes — Mamh 19, 2003 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW SPECIAL COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 21, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, .lames Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Bmazinski determined that a quorum did not exist and began the meeting_ Discussion of Plannina and Develoament Committee's March 31. 2003 Slaecial Meetina on Bindina Anaearance Review: Walter Hallen did some research prior to the meeting and determined that implementing Jack Siegel's recommendation to require all developments except single family to be Planned Developments as a method of triggering binding appearance review, would produce up to 55 Planned Development cases per year. Currently there is only 4-5 Planned Development cases per year. This would obviously increase the workload of staff and would not be possible considering the current staffing. Furthermore, requiring small projects such as storefront alterations to be Planned Developments would be burdensome on these projects. Committee member Wolinski pointed out several projects, such as 525 Chicago Avenue, 800 Davis Street, 800 Elgin Road, that should have been Planned Developments, considering their size and prominence. This would assure appropriate site planning and appearance design. He stated that we should discuss thresholds in which to qualify a project as a Planned Development. Chairperson Brzezinski noted two projects — 1930 Ridge (a Planned Development) and 525 Chicago Avenue (an as of right development) that ended up quite similar. She stated that, upon comparing these two projects, the Planned Development process did not produce a superior result in terms of site design and building design. Committee member Friedman stated that the Planned Development process would leave all appearance issues in the hands of the Plan Commission and residents rather than design professionals. However, the Plan Commission, though it has some members who are design professionals, follows a different agenda and, on appearance issues, often capitulates to residents rather than support its own design professionals. Committee member Jackson stated that if the major problems with developments are zoning related, then Planned Developments are an appropriate way of requiring Binding Appearance Review. However, if the major problems were purely appearance -related, then the proposed Binding Appearance Review ordinance would be a more appropriate way of dealing with the problem. Committee member Alterson stated that the idea of making projects of a certain size a Planned Development has merits on its own, regardless of appearance issues. Committee member Wolinski stated that one approach might be any project within the D Districts, the R4, R5, or R6 Districts should be a required Planned Development. Committee members did not support this proposal. Committee member Alterson stated that River Forest requires all projects greater than '/2 acre to be Planned Developments. This requirement would have captured projects such as 525 Chicago Avenue. Committee member Friedman reminded the Committee that this Planned Development discussion is only under consideration because of Jack Siegel's suggestion at a Planning and Development Committee meeting. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would consider favoring a Planned Development requirement for certain size developments because the amount of greenspace in the project could then be dictated. Carlos Ruiz stated that if the Planned Development process was to be used to require binding appearance review, then a set of design guidelines should still be used to advise the Plan Commission regarding design issues. Chairperson Brzezinski warned that the Planned Development process is not a guarantee of a better design, and could end up simply being another level of beauracracy. Committee member Alterson stated that utilizing the Planned Development process for binding appearance review would not necessarily address the appearance of buildings. He finds value in taking the review authority out of the hands of legislative bodies and placing them in the lap of a citizen advisory committee, much the same way the Preservation Commission and the Sign Board are handled. Committee member Nagar stated that current members of SPAARC should be a part of Binding Appearance Review. Carlos Ruiz noted that the Preservation Commission does not regulate architectural styles, but just requires that the applicant follow an established set of preservation -related guidelines. He stated that there have been no legal challenges regarding this method of operation and asked why Binding Appearance could not be handled in a similar manner and noted that it would be less cumbersome than utilizing the Planned Development process. Committee member Alterson suggested that the Planning and Development Committee be provided with quantitative figures on how the Planned Development process would increase time costs on staff in terms of meeting preparation and meeting note writing. Committee member Jackson stressed that the drafted Binding Appearance Review Design Guidelines should be implemented, regardless of the City's method for implementing Binding Appearance Review, as these guidelines would inform developers of City expectations ahead of time. Committee member Wolinski stated that the Planned Development process would require that the Zoning Ordinance be reworked to accommodate the increased Planned Development threshold. Committee member Alterson noted that there would not be a need to rework the Zoning Ordinance, as any development over an established threshold would be a Planned Development and underlying zoning would be rendered useless in this case. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that increased staff would be required if Binding Appearance Review is implemented. SPAARC Special Meeting Notes — March 21, 2003 Committee member A€terson stated that Binding Appearance Review would not necessarily result in beautiful buildings. Chairperson Brzezinski agreed, and stated that the skill of the architect and the project's budget are the two most important factors in developing a beautiful building. Committee member Aiello asked if the City should stress the types of materials that are not desirable in new development, such as dry-vit or utility faced brick, and ban these materials through the passing of an ordinance. Committee member Friedman stated that the banning of materials would not hold up legally and that often the materials are not the problem, but the way they are used. Committee member Wolinski suggested an official motion (with the absence of a quorum), that projects greater than Y2 acre be planned developments. Committee member Aiello stated that she would second such a motion. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that requiring a project of this size to be a planned development may not be a bad idea, but it should be noted that this requirement would not necessarily address the binding appearance issue. Committee member Marino agreed, stating that he is not confident that the planned development process always produces a better project from an appearance and bulk perspective, especially considering the fact that planned developments go through an extensive public hearing process, where suggestions by SPAARC are often changed. He suggested producing a list of prohibited materials and possible zoning changes to address site coverage and bulk issues. Walter Hallen stated that if Binding Appearance Review is to be triggered through the Planned Development process, then guidelines need to be drafted to deal with this process. Committee member Jackson stated that staff should provide information regarding what the Planned Development Binding Appearance Review process would cost the City in terms of staff time. Committee member Alterson stated that he would not be in favor of formulating a banned material list because the use of materials should be looked at on a project to project basis. Jeff Burdick stated that research showing if the original Binding Appearance Review proposal would be legally vulnerable should be provided to the Planning and Development Committee. This proposal has been worked on for several years, and suddenly altering the proposal because of a possible concern regarding legality would be a waste of several years of hard work. Committee member Friedman agreed, and explained that he suggested to an alderman that a certain attorney who has a wealth of experience regarding these issues should be asked to present his knowledge on the issue to the Planning and Development Committee. Walter Hallen followed up by suggesting that SPAARC recommend to the Planning and Development Committee that it reevaluate whether there should be stand-alone Binding Appearance Review. Walter Hallen stated three items that the Committee seems to have agreed on: 1.) The Planned Development process is not the correct method of triggering Binding Appearance Review. 2.) Adoption of an independent Binding Appearance Review Ordinance should be investigated and reconsidered. SPAARC Special Meeting !Votes — March 21, 2003 3 y. .... .wry i" � _ n .. ♦ � lr . ... f .. i r .. .. ' ,. i i t r� i i � � �t . 4 r y � �i i ' .. 3.) Some of the current appearance issues facing Evanston could be resolved by changes to the Zoning Ordinance (Example: Not requiring residential projects in Commercial Zoning districts to "build to lot line.") Committee member Marino suggested that this subject be placed on the Wednesday, March 26, 2003 SPAARC meeting agenda so to provide a synopsis of this discussion and possibly develop a formal response to the Planning and Development Committee meeting. The members of the Committee in attendance agreed with this suggestion. SPAARC Special AfeeUng Notes — March 21, 2003 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 26, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, James Edwards, Keith Fujihara, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, James Wolinski Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen C. Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Discussion of Planninq and Development Committee's Scheduled March 31.2003 Special Meeting on Sindinq Appearance Review: Committee member Jackson presented a worksheet she put together depicting a rough estimate regarding the staff cost of the current SPAARC process. She found that with all regular members attending SPAARC meetings, SPAARC costs the City over $1,000 per week and over $53,000 per year. Committee member Wolinski stated that he does not agree with Walter Hallen's assessment at the March 21, 2003 special SPAARC meeting that Planned Developments cannot be used to trigger Binding Appearance Review. He stated that it is probably the only way that Binding Appearance Review can be triggered and that the City Attorney does not support the proposed Binding Appearance Review ordinance process in that It would not be protected from legal challenges. The Planned Development process can require large projects to receive Binding Appearance review if a threshold is established that requires certain sized projects to be Planned Developments. Committee member Alterson felt that Mr. Hallen did not state that Planned Developments couldn't be used to trigger Binding Appearance Review. He believed that Mr. Hallen meant that Planned Developments are not necessarily the best way to trigger Binding Appearance Review. Binding Appearance Review can be triggered through the Planned Development process, in that the City can ask for anything within reason from the developer when reviewing Planned Developments. Mr. Hallen clarified his statement of the meeting of March 21. He explained that he does not believe that Planned Developments are an appropriate way to require Binding Appearance Review on small projects such as storefront alterations and minor building additions because the process is cumbersome considering the relatively minor nature of such projects. He reiterated the comments of Committee member Friedman's on March 21 that Binding Appearance Review occurs in several other communities and that it can be legally defensible if implemented correctly. Committee member Wolinski stated that he does not know how to deal with Binding Appearance Review for a minor project such a storefront. However, he is in favor of requiring projects that are greater than '/2 acre in lot area to be Planned Developments. Chairperson Brzezinski agreed with Mr. Hallen in that the Planned Development process is a cumbersome way of reviewing the appearance of a development. Furthermore, the Planned Development process raises several questions. If there were an increase in the number of Planned Developments, would SPAARC continue to be the reviewing body in terms of appearance? If so, would SPAARC membership remain consistent or would the current proposal of more design professionals on SPAARC be implemented? Committee member Alterson reiterated that Planned Developments would trigger Binding Appearance review. However, requiring every project that currently appears before SPAARC would not be appropriate for the reason Mr. Hallen previously stated. Walter Hallen stated that requiring Binding Appearance Review through Planned Developments with the absence of design guidelines would leave appearance and design decisions in the hands of Plan Commissioners and City Council members, many of whom have littie to no design background. Committee member Aiello stated that when applicants come in with a Planned Development proposal, they are asking for something out of the ordinary, which gives the City the authority to ask for what it wants from the project in terms of appearance. Committee member Wolinski stated that it could be required that SPAARC be the body that performs Binding Appearance Review on Planned Developments. Mr. Hallen stated that this would be a good idea if Design Guidelines were implemented. Committee member Aiello suggested that certain Zoning Ordinance requirements that affect appearance issues, such as Build to Lot Line and Ziggurat Setback requirements could be reexamined. Committee member Wolinski made a motion that all projects that are over 'X acre in site area be Planned Developments, that the Council pass an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to insure that in the Planned Development process there is mandatory Appearance Review by SPAARC for such Planned Developments, and that the proposed Design Guidelines be reconsidered. The motion was seconded and discussion ensued. Committee member Aiello asked if the current proposed Design Guidelines are acceptable. Committee member Wolinski stated that Mr. Siegel believes they are too broad and that Committee member Friedman suggested more specific Design Guidelines. Committee member Alterson stated that the '/2 acre threshold is not based on studies done by staff members. He suggested that staff look at recent projects in Evanston to determine what the appropriate size threshold should be. He suspected that the % acre threshold would be too large considering recent projects. He reminded the Committee that the purpose of Binding Appearance Review is to keep design above a certain minimal quality threshold. Committee member Wolinski slightly altered the previous motion: All projects that are over 20,000 square feet in site area be Planned Developments, that the Council pass an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to insure that in the Planned Development process there is mandatory Appearance Review by SPAARC for such Planned Developments, and that the proposed Design Guidelines be reconsidered. The motion was seconded and did not pass. VOTE (4-5). SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 26, 2003 WWI Committee members Alterson, Dahal, Jackson, and Wolinski voted in favor. Committee members Aiello, Brzezinski, D'Agostino, Fujihara, and Marino voted nay. Committee member Marino stated that he is not convinced that SPAARC could consistently follow the same set of Design Guidelines when reviewing projects. He felt that it would be much easier for an individual to consistently follow an established set of guidelines. Chairperson Brzezinski expressed concern with the possible increased staff time required for SPAARC to provide Binding Appearance review for Planned Developments. Committee member Alterson stated that he is not in favor of SPAARC being the body providing Binding Appearance Review. He would rather see a separate citizen appointed committee in charge of Binding Appearance Review. Committee member Wolinski made a motion stating if Binding Appearance Review is implemented in any fora, then an additional staff person be required to staff such review. The motion did not receive a second. Committee member Marino stated that he is not comfortable with requiring projects that currently would be as of right in terms of zoning to be Planned Developments. Committee member Alterson reiterated that he does not know what the appropriate threshold for a Planned Development should be, but that a project of a certain magnitude should be required to be a Planned Development for a myriad of reasons besides just capturing Binding Appearance Review. Committee member Marino moved to table this discussion to a future meeting of this Committee. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. VOTE (9-0). SPAARC 03-018 1031 Sherman Avenue Preliminary To construct, via planned development, two 2-family dwellings and two 3-family dwellings (attached single family) for a total of 10 dwelling units with 15 off-street parking spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Dwyer Nate Kipnis GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Dwyer stated that the first floor elevations have been lowered in response to SPAARC's previous comments. The stairs to the front porch have also been reconfigured to address previous SPAARC comments. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski complemented the developers on their alterations, especially the lowering of the porches. However, she expressed concern with the narrowness of the porches. She suggested pulling the porch out, so that the stairs come into the mass of the porch. Walter Hallen suggested making the guardrails on the porches appear as fences. Committee member Alterson notified the Committee that this project is coming in as a planned development in the MUE Zoning District, and that the project is slightly above the gross floor SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 26. 2003 3 area requirement of .45. This project's gross floor area requirement is .46. Committee member Fujihara reminded the developers that there is a stormwater detention requirement. Committee member Wolinski asked about the green building aspect of this development. Mr. Kipnis replied that making this project energy efficient and environmentally friendly is a huge priority. He explained that this project would utilize several of these elements. He added that the monthly energy costs for these units would be much less than those of surrounding buildings. Committee member Marino asked the developers to describe the proposed building materials. Mr. Dwyer replied that cement fiberboard, integrity windows, and panelized wood are examples of some of the materials. Committee member Marino followed up with a question about affordable housing opportunities. Mr. Dwyer stated that there is an interest in providing affordable housing in this development, and that the developers have not yet formulated a plan for the provision of affordable housing. Walter Hallen asked if Custer Avenue would be resurfaced as part of this project. Mr. Dwyer stated that this would be considered. Committee member Aiello stated that if the affordable unit aspect of this project is achieved, then the City could possibly assist in the paving of Custer Avenue. Chairperson Brzezinski agreed, and added that there should be some recognition of the energy efficiency aspect of this project. Mr. Kipnis suggested making Custer Avenue the first permeable street in Evanston. He explained that a certain type of permeable paving would be used on the site. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she still has some concerns regarding security issues, especially pertaining to the guardrail and courtyard area. A condition was added to the motion that the developers meet with the Police Department and address any subsequent security concerns, and meet with the Fire Department regarding site access and building interior access issues. The added conditions to the motion were seconded and the motion passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-042 211 Custer Avenue Preliminary and Final Interror/exten'or alterations for condo conversion of existing multi -family (6 dwelling units) residence. Construct addition to existing fourth floor attic. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mircea Tiran GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr.Tiran explained that the current attic is not large enough to be useable, which is why it would be extended. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski noted that this would be a minor exterior change to the roof. Mr. Tiran noted that the new gabled roof would have a decreased pitch. He explained that the new windows would be vinyl. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about landscaping. Mr. Tiran stated that he does not have this information at this time, but noted that the landscaping would remain SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 26, 2003 4 largely the same. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested a planting bed with perennial plants and flowers. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of a landscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-044 2935 Central Street Concept Develop a former Brown's Chicken site with a ground floor non -medical once space and 13 dwelling units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Brad Lewis Bill Schear GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Lewis explained that the building would be three stories in height, with parking located below. Office uses would be located on the first floor of the development, there would be just shy of 6,000 square feet of office space. The average size of the residential units would be 1,500 square feet. The building would be setback about one foot from the lot line abutting Central Street due to the design of the building. The entrances to the offices would be on the Central Street side, while the entrances to the residences would be on the west side of the building. DISCUSSION: Committee member Fujihara expressed a possible future scenario, in which a retail user replaces an office user in one of the proposed first floor spaces. This would increase the parking requirements. Committee member Marino asked the developer if retail and/or medical office use was being considered for these spaces. Mr. Lewis replied that only non -medical office uses are being considered at this time. Committee Dahal asked how wide the parking ramp would be. Mr. Lewis stated that it would be 12 feet wide. Committee member Dahal noted that it would not be possible to accommodate two-way traffic. Mr. Lewis explained that there would be a garage door at the top of the ramp and the ramp would be designed in a way that allows drivers to see whether the ramp is currently being used. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that the side elevation is not as handsomely designed as the front elevation and that she would like to see the building better turn the comer in terms of design. Mr. Schear agreed with this assessment. Mr. Lewis presented samples of the building materials. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the choice of brick is not consistent with the architectural style of the building. She strongly encouraged the developer to use standard sized brick. Walter Hallen stated that the pier elements of the building design could be used to add detail to the west elevation of the building. Committee member Marino expressed concern regarding the width of the sidewalk along Central Street. Committee member Alterson stated that the developer would have to donate a strip of land to widen the sidewalk due to the built to lot line provision. Chairperson Brzezinski SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 26, 2003 suggested that the developer consider planting trees along the Central Street elevation. Committee member D'Agostino stated that the narrow width of the sidewalk would not accommodate tree grates. Chairperson Brzezinski notified the developer that the stairway exit door onto Hurd Avenue cannot swing out over the property line and the doorway on the Central Street side should be recessed so that it does not swing out over the sidewalk. She suggested that the developer consider replacing the brick underneath the arch at the front elevation with glass to better highlight the arch, that a signage band be incorporated into the architecture, and that the windows be simulated divided light. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 03-045 500 Main Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for a sidewalk cafd for a type 11 restaurant (Cafd Express) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nack Paik DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson noted that the applicant has a litter control plan that he must be following. He asked if the applicant is following this plan. Mr. Palk stated that he is picking up trash around his business twice a day. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of the sidewalk caf6 with the condition that the applicant pick up trash around his property a minimum of three times per day. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 28, 2003 6 rf-e�, SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 2, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, David Jennings, Kevin Kelly, Stefanie Levine, Sat Nagar, James Wolinski (Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen C. Bmezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-M 3003 Park Place Recommendation to ZBA Establish an air -condensing unit in the front yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Len Sciarra GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Sciarra explained that the proposed location for the air -condensing unit would be In the side yard, not the front yard, which is what was noticed. A variance is required because the unit would be placed within 10 feet of the property line. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen asked if the neighbor is supportive of this new proposed location. Mr. Sciarra declared that the neighbor is in support of this location. Chairperson Brzezinski asked why the backyard would not be an optimal locale for the unit. Mr. Sciarra replied that locating the unit in the rear would exceed the manufacturer's distance requirements from the furnace. Committee Aiello expressed concern regarding the language of the notice, considering the fad that it stated that the unit would be located in the front yard. Committee member Alterson felt that the ZBA would take issue with the proximity of the unit to the property line. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend to the ZBA that the side yard location proposal be approved subject to a letter of support from the neighbor and the installation of the best possible noise abatement equipment available. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-1). Committee member Alterson voted nay. SPAARC 034MA 1700 Maole Avenue Preliminary and Final Public improvements to the Border's Plaza PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom White Judy Aiello GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. White presented the new public improvements to the Border's Plaza. He explained that a series of bollard lights would be located in the tree wells. DISCUSSION: Committee member Friedman asked why the planters would be so high. He was concerned that the height of the planters would block the view of individuals sitting on the benches. Mr. White stated that the planters are proposed to be stainless steel and that they could be located in such a manner that they would not block views of those sitting an benches. Committee member Levine asked who would maintain the landscaping in the plaza. Committee member Aiello replied that a maintenance agreement is currently being drafted. Committee member Levine stated that the choice of pear trees is a bit boring, and that there are other omamental trees that could provide more excitement. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested the addition of another bench. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: • Following Stefanie Levine's recommended tree and planter selection; • The addition of another bench; • The City Council approval of the maintenance agreement. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (M). SPAARC 03-017 Main Street Commons Rehabilitate existing shopping center PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rob Bond Prallminary GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Bond presented the latest iteration of the project to the Committee. He explained that the front elevation of the stores has been raised to increase visibility of the center. The heights would vary to provide an interesting look and draw shoppers into the center. Traffic studies have been undertaken and the center entrance to the shopping center would now be right in/right out onto Main Street. Landscaping has been added to the plan, bicycle racks would be added, and the interior traffic circulation would be altered to slow down vehicles. Mr. Bond presented elevations of the shopping center. Different sized towers would be added to the elevation, and the elevation varies to attract shoppers from one end of the center to the other. SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 2, 2003 2 DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson suggested the installation of landscape strips between the rows of parking to reduce the heat island effect and further discourage cut through traffic. Mr. Bond replied that the fact that the parking lot would be filled after the center's rehabilitation and the addition of landscaped endcaps at the end of each parking aisle should discourage cut through traffic. Committee member Friedman stated that the design of the center is monstrous and corporate. Chairperson Brzezinski complimented the developer on the north elevation, but stated that the major tenant elevation is out of scale with the rest of the elevation, and suggested smoothing the transition between this tenant's elevation and the rest of the center's elevation. She also suggested forming an arcaded walk along the front of the center to encourage shoppers to walk from one and of the center to the other. Mr. Bond replied that the existing arcade structure has been removed because it makes the center dark and dingy. Committee member Woiinski asked if the proposed bank could be a sit down restaurant instead of a bank. He noted that restaurants provide a draw to the shopping center. Mr. Bond replied that the easternmost outlot would be a sit down restaurant, while the westernmost outlot would be a proposed bank. Committee member Dahal asked that a pork chop or island be Installed at the newly proposed right Wright out so cars cannot physically turn left. He also asked if a sidewalk would be installed along Main Street in front of this center. Mr. Bond replied that a sidewalk currently exists but that it can be improved as part of this project. Committee member Dahal asked the developer to improve the eastbound Main Street right turn lane into the center. Committee member Aiello stated that if Marshall's chooses not to renew their lease, then SPAARC should impose a condition that the Marshall's facade be incorporated into the rest of the facade of the center. Committee member Alterson stated that the parking lot behind the shopping center should be secured in some way, especially to prevent fly dumping during evening and night hours. Committee member Wolinski asked Mr. Bond if he was concerned that this center would be directly competing with the Dodge/Dempster retail center. Mr. Bond replied that the two centers would have different retail tenant mixes and that neither center should be negatively affected through this competition. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan approval subject to the developer considering SPAARC comments regarding pa,*ing lot elements such as landscape aisles, the sidewalk along Main Street, and the right in/right out onto Main Street. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). A motion was made to grant preliminary appearance review approval subject to the developer considering the use of canopies on the facade, and further refinement of the design of the outlots and the major tenant space when these particular tenants are determined. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-1) Committee member Friedman voted nay. SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 2, 2003 SPAARC 03-050 1911-1917 Church Street Final Renovation of existing storefront. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Leineweber Kiril M€rintchev GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Leineweber stated that only Phase I of the project is to be addressed at this time. The existing two-story building would be remodeled into four livetwork units on the second floor with three storefronts on the first floor. He explained that Commonwealth Edison owns a lot just to the west of the site, in which they have power -generating equipment in the rear. He Is proposing to construct a small building to house this equipment in exchange for the sale of the front portion of this lot. The front portion of the lot would be used for additional greenspace or parking space. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked what would happen to the vacant lot to the east where phase II would eventually occur. Mr. Leineweber stated that this area would be fenced off for the time being. Eventually, a second building would be constructed in this location and a proposed plaza would exist between the two buildings. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that for final approval, the Committee would want to see more details regarding the building materials and details of the fence in front of the vacant lot to the east. Committee member Aiello asked that Mr. Leineweber provide a rendering or photo composite of what would be new and what would be existing, just in case the entire project is not completed. Mr. Leineweber stated that he could provide this at final review. Committee member Levine asked if there was consideration to integrate landscape material into the plaza area. Mr. Leineweber replied that this would be considered, but that a finalized landscape scheme in the plaza could not be completed until the phase to the east is completed. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested a trellis or the planting of ivy on the wall adjacent to the plaza. Committee member Aiello asked if a new fence would be constructed in the back. Mr. Leineweber stated that there would be a new fence installed as part of Phase I. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval for Phase I. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-043 220 South Boulevard Preliminary Demolish existing structure; construct a three-story attached single family dwelling (4 townhomes). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Ratner Richard Rovnick GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: SPAARC Meeting Notes -- April 2, 2003 Mr. Ratner explained that the Forest Avenue improvement issue has been resolved. He also stated that he might be willing to eliminate the sunken terraces in the front of the building. There have been no revisions to the elevation of the building. DISCUSSION: Committee member Jennings explained that the City would pay for the vacation of the Forest Avenue right of way, and that the right of way would be improved as a paved alley. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she likes the idea of a covered entryway. Mr. Ratner stated that, in order to avoid the need for a variance, he is considering recessing the doorway so to provide a covered entryway to the units that would not encroach into the setback. Chairperson Brzezinski liked this idea, but suggested using a double column to support the covered entryway. Committee member Friedman suggested leaving the pier in the middle, thus eliminating the need for a column. Mr. Ratner asked the Committee if it favors terraces in the front yard. Chairperson Brzezinski replied that she would favor a terraced area that is well defined, through landscaped borders for example. Frank Aguado noted that sunken terraces would require a variance, where at grade terraces would not. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that the developer deal with sunken terraces at a later date, as opposed to up front. She also urged the developer to use garage doors that compliment the style of the building. Details of the garage doors, the turning radii of the driveway, and the location of air handling units would need to be provided at the final review of this project. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-1) Committee member Aiterson voted nay. SPAARC 03-052 1745 Sherman Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Sidewalk Cafd for Type H Restaurant (Einstein Brothers Bagels). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Richard Shore DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson noted Mr. Shore that the City and the First Ward Alderman are being very diligent regarding trash in the downtown. He also informed Mr. Shore of the notification requirements for a sidewalk caf6. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of a sidewalk caf6. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-053 2100 Greenwood Street Concept Create open parking in the front yard of lot within the 1-2 District. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Muller Nir Jean Baucom SPAARC Meeting Notes -- April Z 2003 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Baucom explained that Mr. Nir owns a building on Greenwood, which sits on property that is landlocked. There is currently no off-street parking provided on the lot and the proximity of the high school to the property results in students parking on the street, thus leaving little parking for employees or customers utilizing his building. Ms. Baucom presented a map depicting the locations in the neighborhood where students park, and where there are parking restrictions for residents only. She noted that the property to the east has a grassy area where cars park, but that this property owner is not willing to lease this area to Mr. Nir for parking purposes. Mr. Nir stated that a marble slab business is interested in locating within his building. He presented his proposed solution to the parking problem, which would provide angled parking stalls in front of his building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this proposal would create a large impact in exchange for a few parking spaces. She expressed concern regarding the width of the curb cut, which would be essentially the width of the property, to accommodate this parking proposal. She asked if two loading berths would be needed. Mr. Nir stated that both loading berths would be needed, so parking could not occur in one of these loading berths. Committee member Dahal suggested enforcing a two-hour parking zone in front of the building in order to deter students from parking there. He also suggested a configuration in which a one-way drive in front of the building would accommodate parallel parking. Six parking spaces could be provided in this configuration. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this item should be tabled until the Mr. Nir could reappear with an accurate drawing depicting this parallel parking scenario. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case pending an accurate drawing of the proposed parking scenario. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes - April 2003 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 9, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Arlova Jackson, Kevin Kelly, Stefanie Levine, Sat Nagar, James Woiinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman CHher Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Buroick. Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. l3rzezinski determined than a quorum existing and began the meetingw Aooroval of Meetina Notes: March 5.2003: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). March 12, 2003: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-053 2100 Greenwood Street Prellminary Create open parking in the'front yard oflot within the 1-2 Dkirfct. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nir Muller GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Muller presented a more specific drawing depicting the proposed parking lot in front of his building. Six parking spaces will be provided in a parallel fashion in front of the building, and the parking lane would allow for one way traffic flow. Landscaping would be provided between the parking area and the sidewalk. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked about how an accessible parking space would be provided. The Committee discussed possibilities. Committee member Kelly suggested having the cars park on the north side of the parking area (closest to the street), so that handicapped users, and any users for that matter, would be able to access the front of the building without having to walk in between cars. Committee member Friedman suggested narrowing both of the driveways off of Greenwood so that more parallel parking could be provided. Mr. Muller replied that the driveways need to be at least as wide as they currently are so to accommodate semi truck access to the loading berths. Committee member Alterson pointed out that part of the parking area would encroach into the right of way. Chairperson Brzezinski notified Mr. Muller that he would need to get an easement agreement with the City in order to use part of the right of way for parking. Mr. Muller suggested moving the parking area closer to the building so that it would not be encroaching into the right of way and so that an easement agreement would not be needed. Committee member Alterson stated that the only buffer between this industrial user and the residential neighborhood across the street is the narrow parkway on either side of Greenwood Street. He expressed concern that this parking arrangement would lessen the property values of the residential properties across the street. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that residential property values are no more important than industrial property values. She stated that times have changed since this building was constructed, high school students drive more frequently to school and parking is harder to come by. Committee member Alterson noted that the Zoning Ordinance requires that any front yard parking in an Industrial District be only permitted with appropriate landscaping as determined by SPAARC. A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review of this scheme. The motion was seconded. Committee member Alterson expressed concern that sometime in the past, the City granted a variance for this property to build over its parking lot. Frank Aguado stated that there may have been an addition to this building in the past, and that parking may have been required based on the number of employees as opposed to square footage, which may explain the lack of parking on the site. Committee member Friedman reiterated his suggestion of narrowing the driveways in order to extend the landscaping and add at least another parking space. Committee member Alterson urged that only conceptual approval be granted at this time, as the ward alderman has not been communicated with and a zoning analysis has yet to be done. Chairperson Brzezinski withdrew her motion of preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-2). Committee members Alterson and Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 03-056 901 Church Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Sidewalk CaM for a Type 11 restaurant, Baja Mexican Grill. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Megan Philbin DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — Apri19, 2003 2 Chairperson Brzezinski read through the checklist regarding provisions for sidewalk cafes. Ms. Philbin stated that Baja Fresh does not utilize reusable dishware. Committee member Alterson explained the notice requirements to Ms. Philbin. Chairperson Brzezinski explained to Ms. Philbin that trash and litter in the downtown is a major issue and that the City will be diligent about making sure that businesses are picking up their trash. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of the sidewalk caf6 with the waiver allowing the use of disposable flatware, dishware and beverage containers. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-054 1243 Maole Avenue Preliminary Subdivide one lot of record into two lots of record. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Genny Hilbert GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Hilbert explained that the only exterior change to the property would be the addition of a new fence. The main proposal is to subdivide the existing lot. The existing two -flat on the lot would have to be converted to a single-family structure if this property is subdivided due to parking restrictions outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz explained that because the existing lot is within an historic district. the Preservation Commission would have advisory review of the subdivision to the City Council. Ms. Hilbert stated that she was not aware of the fact that this subdivision needed to be approved by City Council. Committee member Alterson replied that If the property were being subdivided along the old lot line, then this would not technically be a subdivision and would not have to appear before Council. He further added that State Law allows a one-time division of a lot in an existing subdivision, and this may be what is happening in this case. He deferred to the Engineering Department to decide if a subdivision is necessary. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-050 1911-1917 Church Street Final Renovation of existing storefront. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Leineweber Kiril Mirintchev GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Leineweber explained that a portion of the lot has been eliminated as part of this development. He presented pictures and a site plan of the new proposed development area. The fence along the edge of the property would remain wood picket. Landscaping has been SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 9, 2003 3 added and vines will be planted to climb the wall of the development. Mr. Mirintchev presented samples of building materials. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski suggested pianbng bushes or landscaping in front of the fence along the south edge of the property in order to soften the edge. Mr. Leineweber agreed with the suggestion, and assured the Committee that the fence along the south and east edge of the property is temporary, as phase two of this project would occur in the area of the fence. Chairperson Brzezinski inquired as to the appearance of the awnings. Mr. Leineweber replied that the awnings would be steel blue, just as the accent on the building. He added that the brickwork would be cleaned. Chairperson Brzezinski asked Mr. Leineweber to think about where business signage would be placed, especially considering the existence of the proposed awnings. Committee member Alterson asked where the air handling units would be located. Mr. Leineweber replied that air -handling units would be placed on the roof and would be not be visible from the street. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-031 1603 Orrington Avenue Concert New construction of a mixed use building consisting of 23 dwelling units, off suet paring spaces, and retail spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Stephen Yas Mike Aufderheide Bruce Armstrong Michael Newman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Yas explained that the parking ramp on the north end of the site has been reconfigured so that the Orrington Avenue sidewalk is wider and the angle of vision for exiting cars is greater. The number of parking spaces in the lot would slightly increase as a result of the new ramp configuration. The new residential would now consist of 19 larger dwelling units. The loading dock would be rebuilt so that the trucks can adequately pull into the space and not block the alley. The new retail space along Davis Street would be designed so to appear similar as the rotunda. A trellis and rooftop garden would be designed to serve the new residential uses. Mr. Yas presented a model of the proposal. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would not prefer to see signage on the proposed awnings, as the awnings would be a building element. Committee member Levine commented on the landscaping of the proposed south plaza. She stated that the space is urban, and the large amount of landscaping would limit the urban use of this plaza. Furthermore, the building SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 9, 2003 4 is modem and the landscaping should be modem as well. She suggested looking at the design of the building when considering the landscape design of the site. Committee member Wolinski stated that he is in favor of the north side of the proposal, which includes the residential portion of the development. However, he expressed concern with the south portion of the project, which includes the development around the rotunda. He asked if the project could be separated, so that the likely controversial southern portion of the project would not hold up the residential portion of the project. The developers replied that they do not wish to divide this project into two separate projects. Committee member Friedman felt that the bank building is well designed and that this proposal would compromise the integrity of the building. He stated that this scheme would alter the environment of Fountain Square by taking away open space in the downtown. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she is not enamored with the existing plaza from a user-friendly standpoint. However, she believes the openness it provides is important from an aesthetic standpoint. She suggested anchoring the comer of Orrington and Davis with a one-story pavilion building in order to improve the functional aspect of the plaza. Committee member Kelly suggested bringing the existing plaza down to street level so to make it user -friendlier. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review of the north side of the project and not grant conceptual site plan and appearance review of the south side of the project. The motion was seconded. Committee member Aiello stated that this is a whole project and that if there is a problem with the south side of the project then this would effect the entire project. Chairperson Brzezinski withdrew her previous motion. Committee member Aiello made a motion to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval of the north end of the project and to request further study of the south end of the project, including a possible refinement of the proposed retail aspect of the south end of the project. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-2) Chairperson Brzezinski and Committee member Friedman voted nay. SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 9, 2003 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW SPECIAL COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES APRIL 14, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Kevin Kelly, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen C. Brzezinskl determined that a quorum did NOT exist and began the meeting. Motions are to indicate consensus for recommendation only. Chairperson Brzezinski explained that the discussion at the March 31, 2003 Planning and Development Committee led to a proposed two tiered approach of addressing Binding Appearance Review. A certain size threshold would be developed and any project over this threshold would become a required planned development, thus triggering Binding Appearance Review. A project below the size threshold would be subject to the proposed Binding Appearance Review process. Committee member Wolinski suggested a size threshold of %: arse lot size, or 25 or more residential units. Committee member Friedman stated that the number of unit aspect of this threshold would not address large commercial or retail projects. The Committee discussed the possibility of including single family and two family residential units in the Binding Appearance Review process. Several Committee members noted that the major adverse affects of these developments are related to height, lot area, and setback issues, which can largely be addressed through the Zoning Ordinance. Committee member Jackson stated that zoning issues are very closely related to appearance issues. Chairperson Brzezinski felt that amending the Zoning Ordinance in the necessary manners would be a better way of dealing with the design -related concems of new single-family and two-family residential developments. Committee member Dahal noted that Planned Developments would provide the City with the opportunity to require developers to completely resurface streets that are damaged during project construction. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this should be handled through an impact fee requirement. She stated that this should be a separate ordinance, as the Committee would want impact fees on all new developments, not just planned developments. A motion was made to recommend that the Planning and Development Committee not Include single-family and two-family residential construction in the Binding Appearance Review process, and to encourage the Planing and Development Committee to recommend that the Plan Commission examine the teardown issue Involving residential structures and possibly develop revisions to Zoning regulations to control excessive bulk and height of these structures. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). A motion was made to recommend that the Planning and Development Committee ask the Plan Commission, in conjunction with the Public Works Department, to study the Implementation of impact fees for any development within the City. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). A motion was made to recommend that the Planning and Development Committee establish the following size thresholds for required Planned Developments; - New construction in excess of 30,000 square feet of lot area, OR - New construction of ResidentiaUMixed Use in excess of 25 residential or rooming units. The motion was seconded and did not pass. (3-3) (Committee members Brzerzinski, Friedman, and Kelly voted nay). Additionally, there was discussion by the Committee regarding the change in philosophy if the City Council mandates any Planned Developments. Currently every property in Evanston has underlying zoning that dictates, among other things, the value of the parcels. If a property owner wishes to exceed the zoning in someway (density, setback, height), they have a voluntary option of a negotiated process through a Planned Development. In that process, there is a willingness on the part of the applicant. If the City Council would now mandate that a certain size property be a Planned Development, that essentially eliminates any underlying zoning (there would be no guarantee that what might be underlying zoning would be approved). This could create the undesirable impression that the Zoning of these parcels is as desired by the then current City Council. Property owners throughout the City may be concerned with the impact of this mandated process on the value of their property, and ultimately on their neighborhoods. Before the P&D Committed would make this change in the basic philosophy in the Planned Development process, they might first consider identifying a few of the problem areas within the current Zoning Ordinance that has caused some of the concerns that have brought them to examine city processes. That being stated, and with the charge from the P&D Committee to a recommended threshold at which to require a Planned Development, the Committee approved the following recommendation: A motion was made to recommend that the Planning and Development Committee establish the following size thresholds for required Planned Developments: - New construction in excess of 40,000 square feet of lot area, OR - New construction of Residential/Mixed Use in excess of 36 residential or rooming units, OR - New construction of retztt/commercial space in excess of 20,000 square feet of footprint floor area. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC Special Meeting Notes — April 14, 2003 2 • SPAARC Special Meeting Notes — Apd 14, 2003 3 7k<t_ SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 16, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski (Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ ADDroval of Meeting Notes: March 19. 2003: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 00-058 711 Church Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for Sidewalk Cafii for type 2 restaurant (Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Miro Kostov DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson noted that Chipotle's sidewalk caf6 had a litter issue last year. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the City has stepped up its enforcement of sidewalk caws especially considering the litter created by these cafes. Mr. Kostov stated that Chipotle will hire an employee to bus and clean the sidewalk caf6 and that the liners for the food baskets would no longer be used, which should decrease the amount of blowing paper in the area. Chairperson Brzezinski notified Mr. Kostov that he would be requesting a waiver to allow the use of disposable items. Mr. Kostov agreed that this waiver would be requested. Committee member Alterson suggested that Mr. Kostov contact Alderman Newman to discuss the litter concerns generated by Chipotle. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the sidewalk cafe standards and the Committee agreed that this cafe would meet each standard. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk cafd. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0) SPAARC 02-060 600 Davis Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for Sidewalk Cafd for type 2 restaurant (Cafd Mozart). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Fayez Hiasat DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson noted that sidewalk caf6 chairs and other hardware need to be brought in each night. Mr. Hiasat stated that the tables are too big to bring inside and that the tables are currently staying outside overnight. He stated that he would have to buy smaller tables. Chairperson Brzezinski notified Mr. Hiasat that he would be requesting a waiver to allow the use of disposable items. Mr. Hiasat agreed that this waiver would be requested. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the sidewalk caf6 standards and the Committee agreed that this cafe would meet each standard. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk caf6. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0) SPAARC 02.059 2545 Prairie Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for Sidewalk Cafd for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use (Jacws Bistro) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jacky Pluton DISCUSSION: Mr. Pluton stated that the layout and proposal of the sidewalk cafe is the same as previous years. Committee member Dahal asked Mr. Pluton to update his valet parking permit since he is now using an additional parking lot for valet purposes. Chairperson Brzezinski asked Mr. Pluton if he would be requesting the waiver requirement to serve alcohol in the sidewalk caf6. Mr. Pluton replied that he would be asking for this waiver. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the sidewalk caf6 standards and the Committee agreed that this caf6 would meet each standard. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk cafe. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 03-057 143-149 Callan Avenue Preliminary and Final Miscellaneous interior/exterior remodeling to accommodate proposed condo conversion of existing 18-unit multi -family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Faraq Sehwail SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 16, 2003 2 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Sehwail apologized for not bringing photographs of the building. He stated that the windows would be replaced and landscaping and fencing would be provided. These would be the extent of the exterior changes to the building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the window openings would change. Mr. Sehwail replied that they would not change. He explained that the new windows would be aluminum double hung, replacing the existing casement windows. Committee member Alterson asked if central air would be installed. Mr. Sehwail stated that the units are too small to accommodate central air, so window units would be provided for the units. Committee member Friedman asked why casement windows are not being used. Mr. Sehwail replied that his decision for double hung windows is due to fire code issues. He also Noted that casement windows are not as sturdy as double hung windows. Chairperson Brzezinski asked Mr. Sehwail to bring details on exterior lighting when this project appears before the Committee for final approval. Committee member Dahal asked if parking would be provided. Mr. Sehwail stated that garages would be rehabbed and provided for new residents. Chairperson Brzezinski encouraged directional lighting on the garages. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-058 355 Ridae Avenue Preliminary and Final Upgrade electrical service at St. Francis Hospital PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rick Sabatello Kim Carpenter Eric Thunstedt Jim Pritchett GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Pritchett explained that a new service courtyard would be provided for the hospital campus. Below grade vaults and substructures would be kocated within this courtyard. Mr. Sabatello stated that subterranean duct banks would be installed along the perimeter of the campus. DISCUSSION: Committee member Dahal asked if the subterranean dud banks would located under public right of ways. Mr. Sabatello stated that there are a few locations where this would occur. Committee member Fujihara stated that Ridge Avenue is under state jurisdiction and that a letter from IDOT is required granting permission to construct within the right of way prior to a permit being issued from the City. Walter Hallen asked if the sidewalk along Ridge would need to be closed to accommodate this construction. Ms. Carpenter stated that the sidewalk would be closed during construction and that it would be reconstructed immediately after the SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 16, 2003 3 installation of the duct banks. Committee member Dahal asked the petitioner to look into the impact of the construction on the alley that runs along the south perimeter of the campus. Committee member Friedman asked about the proposed utility courtyard. Mr. Pritchett stated that a poured in concrete wall that would be covered in brick would enclose the courtyard. The style of the wall would compliment the appearance of the campus buildings. He presented the landscape plan for the project. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review subject to the following conditions: • Review and approval of the landscape plan by the Department of Parks and Forestry, • Review and approval of the public right of way construction by IDOT and the Traffic Engineering Department. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. V-Dj SPAARC Meeting Notes — Apr!! 18, 2003 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 23, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Alan Berkowsky, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, James Wolinski, Mark Younger Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Morris Robinson, Donna Spicuzza C. Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. ADDroval of Meetina Notes: March 26.2003: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03.061 1130 Elmwood Avenue Recommendation to ZSA Construct a two-story addition. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Steve Knutson GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Knutson explained that the one-story wing in the rear would be removed and a new two- story wing would be constructed. The variation requested is for the side yard setback. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked the owner if he has received any comments from his neighbors regarding this proposal. The owner replied that the neighbor on the north supports the plans, and a few neighbors to the south have issued their support. Committee member Alterson asked how the alley side of the building would be maintained, considering that the house directly abuts the alley. The owner stated that he has not experienced problems maintaining this side of the house in the past and Chairperson Bizezinski added that the fact that this house abuts an alley is less of a problem than if it directly abutted another private property. Committee member Alterson noted that the proposed central air unit would be within ten feet of the property line, which would require an additional variance. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend site plan and appearance review approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals with the condition that the air condensing unit be located less than ten feet from the property line on the alley side. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-050 1450 Sherman Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for sidewalk cafd with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential zone (Tommy Nevin's Pub) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jamie Fritz DISCUSSION: Committee member Dahal stated that the chairs in the sidewalk caf6 sometimes protrude Into the sidewalk. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she observed that tables and chairs were not brought inside at night on several occasions. Mr. Fritz replied that he would take care of these situations. He also explained that only cloth linen will be used this year, and that a busser would be responsible for the cleanliness of the sidewalk caf6. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that a waiver would be required for the serving of liquor in the sidewalk caf6. She informed Mr. Fritz that the Council would want to know whether or not Nevin's has a Sunday trash pick-up. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the sidewalk caf6 standards and the Committee agreed that this caf6 would meet each standard. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk cafe. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0) SPAARC 03-064 2121-2129 Dewev Avenue Preliminary Ptaliminary approval for phase 4 to convert warehouse to commerclaMight industrial uses. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew Spatz GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Spatz explained that phase 1 has already been completed and that this project has been a huge success in attracting unique small businesses to west Evanston. He enthusiastically presented the model of the project to the Committee. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked if the crime situation was under control in this location. Mr. Spatz replied that he has been working closely with the Police Department to prevent thefts. A steel plate has been installed next to each of the windows, which seems to have helped alleviate crime. Chairperson Brzezinski inquired as to the type of garage doors. Mr. Spatz stated that he is not yet sure what the garage doors would consist of. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested dressing up the garage doors, since they will be located adjacent to the street and SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 23, 2003 2 be highly visible. She also asked about exterior lighting. Mr. Spatz explained that there would be recessed lighting under the bays, and armed fighting along the alley facade. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about parkway landscaping. Mr. Spatz explained that the landscaping has not yet been decided on, but that a landscaping plan would be provided for final SPAARC review. Committee member Berkowsky asked if addresses would be depicted on the front and back of the building. Mr. Spatz replied that the addresses would be depicted on both sides of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02.077 812 Davis Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for sidewalk cafd for type 2 restaurant (Quizno's Classic Subs) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Lawrence Castle DISCUSSION: Mr. Castle stated that the layout of his sidewalk caf6 would be the same as last year. He added that the condominium association has a worker who cleans the area around the building three times a day and Quizno employees would also clean outside the store throughout the day. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if a waiver for non -reusable flatware would be requested. Mr. Castle replied that this waiver would be requested. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the sidewalk caf6 standards and the Committee agreed that this cafd would meet each standard. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk cafe. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0) SPAARC 014344 1700 Central Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for sidewalk caM with liquor for type 9 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of Liquor Control Regulations Core Area (Trattoria Truffle) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Doreen Price DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if a request would be made of the Council to waive the requirement for no alcohol to be served in the sidewalk caf6. Ms. Price stated that such a request would be made. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the sidewalk caf6 standards and the Committee agreed that this cafe would meet each standard. ACTION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 23, 2003 A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk cafd. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0) SPAARC 02-079 1634 Orrinaton Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for sidewalk cafd for type 2 restaurant (Ben and Jeny's Ice Cream Partnershop) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ann Jennett DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if a waiver for non -reusable flatware would be requested. Ms. Jennett replied that this waiver would be requested. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the sidewalk caf6 standards and the Committee agreed that this carfd would meet each standard. Chairperson Brzezinski informed Ms. Jennett that the Council is very stringent on litter and trash -related issues this year in the downtown. Ms. Jennett stated that the Ben and Jervis corporate folks would check the store once a month for cleanliness. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk cam. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0) SPAARC 03-057 143-149 Callan Avenue Final Miscellaneous interior/exterior remodeling to accommodate proposed condo conversion of existing 18-unit multi -family residence PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Faruq Sehwail GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Sehwail presented the Committee with a landscape plan and details of the window changes. He stated that the existing double hung windows would be replaced with clear glass windows without dividers. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the doors would be replaced. Mr. Sehwail stated that the doors were originally to be replaced, but would now be refinished. He also presented the window air conditioning units to be installed in each of the condos. These units would be located in a uniform location. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the landscape plan by the Department of Parks and Forestry. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-047 707 Church Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for sidewalk cafd with liquor for type 2 restaurant (Flat Top Grill) SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 23, 2003 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Megan Addington DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski notified Ms. Addington of the need for a waiver request to allow the serving of alcohol In the sidewalk cafe. She also informed her of the Council's increased diligence regarding litter and trash -related issues this year in the downtown. Ms Addington informed the Committee that bus tubs would no longer be kept outside. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the sidewalk caf& standards and the Committee agreed that this caf6 would meet each standard. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk caf$. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0) SPAARC 03-018 1031 Sherman Avenue Pre -Application Conference To construct, via a planned development, two 2-family dwellings and two 3-family dwelling units attached single-family dwellings to house a total of 10 dwelling units with fifteen off-street parking spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Dwyer Nate Kipnis GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kipnis stated that the character of the buildings would try to complement the character of the homes in the surrounding neighborhood. He explained that the size of the porches have been slightly increased. Bike parking has been provided, and each unit would have a rain barrel to hold stormwater. This water can be reused for watering plants. The barrels will be covered, so to alleviate any concerns regarding mosquito infestation. Cement fiberboard will be used on the exterior of the building, which would look and feel like wood. Several other aspects of the building will utilize environmentally friendly and energy efficiency building techniques. Mr. Kipnis added that utilizing these techniques would not incur greater costs on construction. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked about the types of pavers to be used in the courtyard. Mr. Dwyer replied that permeable pavers would be used on all of the walkways and in the courtyard area. Chairperson Brzezinski asked the developers to elaborate on the affordability of the units. Mr. Dwyer stated that an affordable housing proposal is being worked on with Dennis Marino and Donna Spicuzza of the Planning Division. Donna Spicuzza added that if Home funds are used for part of the affordable housing component, then the City would strongly encourage that at least one unit be handicapped accessible or adaptable. Mr. Kipnis pointed out one unit that is largely handicapped accessible and could be further adapted to provide accessibility. Lary Widmayer, chairman of the Plan Commission, asked if the developers have presented this plan to the neighbors. Mr. Dwyer replied that a formal neighborhood meting has not been held, but that informal conversations have taken place SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 23, 2003 with several neighbors. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that the porch railings be designed to be more distinctive. ACTION: No action taken. SPAARC 02-051 1932 Central Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Caft Review application for sidewalk calld with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of liquor Control Regulations Core Area (The Bluestone) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jennifer Hoffman DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski notified Ms. Hoffman of the need for a waiver request to allow the serving of alcohol in the sidewalk caf6. She read through the sidewalk caf6 standards and the Committee agreed that this caf6 would meet each standard. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk cafe. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0) SPAARC Meeft Notes — Apr1123, 2003 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING NOTES April 24, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Alan Berkowsky, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick C. Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-135 800 Elain Road Final Construct a mixed -use building containing 248 dwelling units with retail on the first floor. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: T.J. Lenick GENERAL_ PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Lenick stated that there are no changes to the building proposal, and reiterated that the project was approved with the condition that the Parking Committee approved the temporary parking plan. DISCUSSION: Committee member Dahal stated that the staircase on the north side of the parking garage would encroach into the drive aisle by seven or eight feet. Mr. Lenick stated that he would address this issue. Committee member Berkowsky added that the Fire Department would come in from Benson Avenue as opposed to Clark Street. Committee member Wolinski stressed that no form of permit would be issued for this project until the temporary parking plan is approved by the Parking Committee. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final Site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the landscape plan by the Department of Parks and Forestry and the review and approval of the temporary parking plan by the Parking Committee. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0) SPAARC 03.135 800 Elgin Road Preliminary and Final Plat of resubdivision for Optima Horizons. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: T.J. Lenick ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval of the plat of resubdivision. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC Special Meeting Natea — Apr1V 24, 2003 2 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 30, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Ariova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezlnski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ ADDroval of Meetintt Notes: April 2.2003: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). April 9.2003: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Projects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-062 2749 Lincolnwood Drive Recommendation to ZBA Construct a two-story rear addition and new front porch. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Edward Lott GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Lott stated that the only required variance is for the north overhang, which exceeds the minimum setback allotment. DISCUSSION: There was no discussion regarding this item. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 02-060 2016 Keenev Street Recommendation to ZBA Demolish and rebuild existing one-story family room. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Donnalee Floeter GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ms. Floeter explained that the requested variance is for the side yard setback. The addition would align the building with what is existing, whlch will trigger the variance. DISCUSSION: There was no discussion regarding this item. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-004 355 Ridge Avenue Preliminary and Final Convent demolition at St. Francis HospitaL PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: James Pritchett GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Pritchett stated that a wall that would match the appearance of the building would screen the large transformers. Landscaping would be planted In front of the wail. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if this wall enclosure would prevent any future building expansion. Mr. Pritchett stated that it would. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval for this revision to the original permit drawing. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-053 2100 Greenwood Street Preliminary and Final Create open parking in the front yard of lot within the 1-2 District with required landscaping. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nir Muller GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Muller presented his revised plan to the Committee. Six parking spaces have been provided. Greenspace will be provided along the street and the plan would not require an easement encroachment agreement. DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 30, 2003 2 Chairperson Brzezinski asked Committee member Dahal if he reviewed this plan for turning radii requirements. Committee member Dahal stated that he reviewed and approved this parking plan. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-044 2935 Central Street Preliminary Develop former Brown's Chicken site with a ground floor non -medical office space and 10 dwelling units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: William Schwarz GENERA!_ PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Schwarz explained that several of the comments made by SPAARC members at the previous concept meeting have been taken into account and added to the design of the building. The central arch has been enhanced along the Central Street elevation, two different colors of brick will be used, the design of the building will now turn the comer, and the residential entrance along Hurd has been aesthetically enhanced. An opening has been left in the building along the Hurd elevation to allow light and air into the rear parking area and to provide more fenestration along the Hurd elevation. Mr. Schwarz presented samples of the brick to be used. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski and Committee member Friedman discouraged the use of utility brick and encouraged a brick size that works with the design of the building. Walter Hallen asked if a signaling device would be used at the driveway into the parking. Mr. Schwarz replied that signaling would be used. Mr. Hallen also noted that the building opening along the Hurd elevation is quite awkward in appearance. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested using a stone sill and other stone treatment to break down the scale of this opening. Committee member Alterson stated that the alderman of the ward wishes for the building to be setback off of Central Street. He asked if the applicant has spoken with the alderman and representatives of the neighborhood. The developer stated that he has not yet spoken with the alderman. Mr. Schwarz noted that it would be preferable to setback the building off of the street, however, the build to lot line requirement in this location would require that a variance be requested for the setback. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested arcading the area along Central Street. Committee member Friedman asked if the signage being shown is what is being proposed. He stated that the signage shown is not consistent with the building design. Mr. Schwarz explained that the signage shown is just an example. Committee member Friedman suggested carving the signage into the limestone. He also suggested that the residential condominium signage follow the shape of the arch. SPAARC Meeting Notes — Aprll 30, 2003 3 ACTION: A motion was made to table this case pending a neighborhood meeting with the alderman present regarding this proposal. The motion was seconded and discussion ensued. Committee member Wolinski stated that he would support this motion because it is important for the neighbors to be aware of what is being proposed in their neighborhood. Committee member Fujihara stated that it is not a requirement for the developer to speak to the neighborhood and that it is beyond SPAARC's authority to require a neighborhood meeting. The motion did not pass. (2-8). Committee members Brzezinski, Jackson, Marino, Fujihara, Friedman, Walczak, Dahai, and D'Agostino voted nay. A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review with the following conditions: e The architectural treatments suggested for the Hurd Avenue elevation be implemented; e The architectural treatments suggested for the east side of the building be implemented; a Strong consideration of the arcade proposal, a Consideration of a meeting with the alderman and possible neighborhood meeting. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-2). Committee members Alterson and Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 03-055 705 Milburn Street Recommendation to ZBA Enlarge attached garage to north. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Michael Lee Kathren GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Chairperson Brzezinski explained that this garage is already built, but that a variance was needed and never applied for. The project finally appeared before the ZBA, and the variance request was denied. Mr. Kathren stated that his attorney recommended that he appear before SPAARC for formality's sake, even though the variance has already been denied by the ZBA. He explained that the garage was expanded four feet to the east and the north. The eastern portion already received a variance, but the northern portion is not in zoning compliance. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski stated that the need for the garage is important, in that it removes an additional car off the street. He also stated that the construction of the garage addition is of high quality. Carlos Ruiz explained the rationale to the Preservation Commission's decision regarding this case. Committee member Alterson stated that this case should be tabled, as the City Code requires that SPAARC review a variance request prior to a permit being issued. In this case, the variance request already has not been received, so there is no purpose behind SPAARC's recommendation. Committee member Wolinski disagreed, and stated that a ruling from SPAARC might be important if further outside review of this case occurs. ACTION: SPAARC Meeting Notes - April 30, 2003 A motion was made to table this case. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-4). Committee members Wolinski, Brzezinski, D'Agostino, and Walczak voted nay. SPAARC 03- 1611 Simpson Street Preliminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling of commercial structure (replacement of windows). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Victor Freise GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Freise explained that an artist wishes to move into this building and establish a studio. He stated that glass block windows currently exist and will be replaced. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz stated that this project needs to appear before the Preservation Commission because it is a Landmark and will appear on May 20. Committee member Marina notified the applicant that a landscape plan would be needed for final SPAARC review and approval. He also suggested that a window treatment beside glass block be considered so to better open up the appearance of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval pending the decision of the Preservation Commission. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 96-0074 1724 Sherman Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Cafd for type 2 restaurant (Starbucks). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Karen Alexander DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski notified Ms. Alexander of the litter issues In downtown Evanston. She stated that it is very important that the litter control requirements be followed. She also noted a waiver would be requested to allow the use of disposable items. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the sidewalk caf6 standards and the Committee agreed that this caf6 would meet each standard. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk cafe. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0) SPAARC 01-048 1700 Orrinaton Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe, Review application for sidewalk cafr# for type 2 restaurant (McDonald's). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Marcella Beon SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 30, 2003 40 DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski notified Ms. Beon of the litter issues in downtown Evanston. She stated that it is very important that the litter control requirements be followed. She also noted a waiver would be requested to allow the use of disposable items. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the sidewalk caf6 standards and the Committee agreed that this caf6 would meet each standard. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk cafe. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0) SPAARC Meeting Notes — Apdfl 30, 2003 6 Attendees: Committee Members: Design Professional: Other Staff: SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 7, 2003 Arthur Aiterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, James Wolinski Hans Friedman Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick. Carlos Ruiz C. Brzexinskl determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. ADDroval of Meetino Notes: April 16.2003: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). April 23. 2003: A motion was made to approve these meeting notes. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-061 1572 MaDle Avenue Final Construct a 7-story residential and commercial building with a type 1 restaurant and 28 dwelling units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Thomas Roszak Liana Leach Karl Omari GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Roszak explained that more windows have been provided on the south elevation, per SPAARC's previous recommendation during preliminary review. He provided more details of the masonry finish on the building and oriented the Committee members through the presented color elevation sheets. The courtyard in the center of the building could accommodate larger trees. The units with private balconies would contain planter areas on the terrace and the developer would provide plantings. He presented the landscape plan, showing that an additional tree would be planted along the Maple Avenue streetscape. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if a restaurant would be located in this building. Mr. Roszak stated that he has talked to some interested parties, and the space would be designed to accommodate a restaurant if necessary. She asked what size brick would be used. Mr. Roszak stated that utility sized brick would be used. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the choice of brick is handsome and that the size of this building should be able to handle utility sized brick. She also suggested that the base of the building be finished with stone. Committee member Friedman stated that a solid metal screen for the balconies would hide storage items that many residents place on their balconies. Mr. Roszak replied that the condominium declaration would prohibit the use of balconies as storage areas. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the declaration would provide a uniform window treatment for the entire building. Mr. Roszak stated that the declaration would address uniform window treatments. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested increasing the width of the sidewalk along Maple Avenue from fire feet to seven feet. Committee member Afterson suggested placing a window in the north elevation where the exercise room is located. He felt that this would help to alleviate the "building on a pedestal' look. He also encouraged the use of a cornice on the top of the building in order to provide more definition to the design. Committee member Friedman suggested opening up the base a bit more with windows to relieve the appearance of the heavy base of the building. Mr. Roszak stated that he likes this idea and would look into incorporating it. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about exterior lighting and site detention. Mr. Roszak pointed out the locations of exterior lighting, noting that lighting would be placed along the alley. He stated that site detention would be provided on the roof of the building. Committee member Kelly asked where the fire connection would be. Mr. Roszak stated that it would be located in one of two areas in the front of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Committee member Jackson abstained from voting. SPAARC 03-068 1330 Ridae Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct one-story storage addition (Unitarian Church). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mark Miller GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Miller explained that the church is improving its accessibility and will install a chaidift in the building. As part of the proposal, the small outdoor storage area between the sanctuary and the lobby would be enclosed. The material of the new enclosure will match the material of the existing building. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- May 7. 2003 DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz noted that this project is in the Ridge Historic District. He asked how visible the building would be from the right of way. Mr. Miller stated that the proposed enclosure is tucked behind the sanctuary and should not be visible from the right of way. Mr. Ruiz stated that he would visit the site to determine if he could grant a Certificate of Appropriateness in house. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review subject to the review and approval of either the Preservation Coordinator or the Preservation Commission. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 01-087 505 Main Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for sidewalk cafd with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of Liquor Control Regulations Core Area (Oceanique). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Renee Andre DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski notified Ms. Andre that the Planning and Development Committee might review Oceanique's litter control plan when reviewing its application to renew the sidewalk cafe. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the sidewalk caf8 standards and the Committee agreed that this caf6 would meet each standard. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this sidewalk cafe. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0) SPAARC 03-070 715 South Boulevard Recommendation to ZBA Construct a two -car garage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Robert Tupy GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Tupy stated that the variance is related to the side yard setback; a three-foot setback is required, but the new garage would be located one -foot from the side yard property line. He added that parking is difficult on South Boulevard due to the presence of the CTA station and that increasing the size of his garage would allow one car to be taken off the street and parked in the garage. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked Mr. Tupy if his neighbors approve of the proposal. Mr. Tupy replied that the neighbors are very much in favor of the proposal. Committee member Aiterson noted that the Zoning Board of Appeals would ask how the east side of the garage would be maintained, given that only a one -foot wide sliver of property would be available. He also SPAARC Meeting Notes — May 7, 2003 3 noted that stormwater would run off of the roof and into the neighbors yard. Carlos Ruiz suggested switching the gable so that water runs off in a north and south direction. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-071 636 Church Street Recommendation to Sign Board Unified Business Center signage plan. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Carolyn Brzezinski GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the signage plan is for proposed awnings accompanying a couple of restaurant uses within the building. Carlos Ruiz explained that there are outstanding Preservation Commission issues with this proposal. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case until the Preservation Commission issues involving this case are resolved. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-072 1825 Dodae Avenue Recommendation to Sion Board Free standing sign variations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Carolyn Brzezinski GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the proposed sign for this church is illuminated and will exceed the foot-candle maximum at the property line. Furthermore, this sign is in a residential district, DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski noted that the design of this sign is also questionable, considering that it Is in a residential district. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of this proposal. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 01-052 2416 Dempster Street Recommendation to Sian Board Free standing sign variations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Carolyn Brzezinski GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The proposed signage requires the following variations: SPAARC Meeting Notes -- May 7, 2003 • The height of the sign is over the maximum 15'6" (15'10' proposed); e A freestanding sign is not permitted on a property with less than a 30 foot setback; • The sign area of 64 square feet is over the maximum permitted area of 12 square feet. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski stated that the City is trying to eliminate pole signs and there is no reason that the owner cannot erect a wall sign. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of this proposal. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-024 1640 Maple Avenue Recommendation to Sipn Board General and specific variations to a Unified Business Center signage plan (Focus Development and Harris Bank). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Carolyn Brzezinski GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The proposal is to change the existing wall sign mounting from a 2-Inch channel to a 20-Inch aluminum plate. Furthermore, the proposed wall sign would not follow the Unified Business Center Sign Plan and would be 16'6" in height. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this proposed mounting blocks the detail of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of both requests. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-073 1710 Maple Avenue Recommendation to Slgn Board Wall sign variation from the Special Sig►i District requirements. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Carolyn Brzezinski GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The developer is seeking an increase in sign area. 25 square feet is permitted, but the proposal is for 48.5 square feet. DISCUSSION: Committee members felt that there is no reason for this sign area to be larger than the rest of the sign area on this block. ACTION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — May 7, 2W3 5 ,spry-ra+r.� ..., ... . �. •... _ - _ .. � w � .. - . A motion was made to recommend denial of this proposal. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — May 7.2003 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 14, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezlnski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Prolect Reviewed: SPAARC 1009 Davis Street Prellminary and Final Rebuild portion of existing collapsed garages `In kind" for multi -family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Don Wallin Justin Heinz GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Heinz presented the plans for the new garages. The garage would be concrete block with a wood frame roof. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the concrete block would be painted or sealed. Mr. Heinz replied that the sealant or paint would probably be used. Walter Hailen pointed out that the proposed garage does not have a man door. A man door would be required by the Building Code for egress purposes. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that the parking spaces in the garage need to be 18' in length according the Zoning Ordinance. However, this is replacing a preexisting condition and there would be no possibility of increasing the length of the parking spaces from the proposed 171". Chairperson Brzezinski requested the installation of glass block on the east wall to provide more natural light. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the installation of a man door and the installation of glass block on the east wall. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — May 7. 2003 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 21, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Kevin Kelly, Sat Nagar, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. SPAARC Meetin4 Note Aoaroval: April 30.2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of April 30. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Mav 14.2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of May 14. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Committee member Nagar abstained from voting. Protect Reviewed: SPAARC 03.077 640 Church Street Recommendation to ZBA Establish a Type 2 restaurant (Sashimi Sashimi) In the D3 Downtown Core Development District. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: William Ng GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Ng stated that he originally planned on installing colored canopies, but was made aware of the unified business signage plan for the building and has since decided not to incorporate exterior changes. He explained that the restaurant would be mostly carryout, but there would be counter top sit down space for about fire people. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked about window signage and noted that the window signage should conform to the unified business center signage plan. Mr. Ng replied that he would be proposing window signs. Carlos Ruiz noted that the unified business center signage plan has been approved, but that the plan did not take Into account window signage. Committee member Wolinski stressed that this area of downtown is in need of more activity -generating businesses such as this. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-078 1227 Leon Place Recommendation to ZBA Construct a two-story addition approximately 2.89' from the west property line. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Michael Mordinger GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Carlos Ruiz noted that this project appeared before the Preservation Commission the previous evening and was approved with the condition that the siding be wood rather than vinyl or aluminum. Mr. Mordinger explained that the proposal is to build on top of the existing rear of the home. The variation would basically continue the existing non -conforming side yard setback condition of the home. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the neighbors have been informed of the proposal. Mr. Mordinger replied that the neighbors have been Informed and are in favor of this project. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 02-099 819-823 Foster Street Flnal Construct a 14 dwelling unit condo building with 21 off-street pa►l ng spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mike Greco Gary DeStefano GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Greco stated that the only significant change to the proposal from the first time it appeared before SPAARC deals with the removal of at -grade patios in the front of the building. This would eliminate a lot coverage issue and need for a zoning variance. in addition, the building would be entirely brick, with no cast stone. The shorter portion of the building would consist of utility sized brick, while the modular sized brick would be used for the taller portion of the building. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz suggested switching the locations of the utility brick and modular brick. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the tall and slender brick columns appear awkward. She SPAARC Meeting Notes — May 21, 2003 2 J suggested the inclusion of a wing wall to clean up the appearance of the building. Committee member Friedman stated that this is a handsome project, but that modular brick would make the building that much more attractive. Mr. Greco replied that a change of color scheme in the brick could help to shore up the appearance of the building and that he would like to explore this option prior to considering using modular brick on the entire building. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about exterior lighting. Mr. Greco replied that exterior lighting would be located above each of the garages. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the landscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department, with the strong recommendation to use modular brick on the entire building and make a wing wall with cut -in openings. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 01-049 720 % Clark Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cate Review application for sidewalk caf6 for type 2 restaurant (JK Sweets). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Y. Young Cha DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski explained that the major issue this year regarding sidewalk cafes is trash generation. Committee member Alterson stated that trash 250 feet away from the operation needs to be picked up by employees of the store. This would include the small triangular park across Clark Street. Committee member Wolinski noted that chairs and tables have been left outside during the past few weeks. Ms. Young Cha stated that these would be removed and brought to the rear of the building. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that a waiver would need to be requested to allow disposable flatware. She read through the standards for sidewalk cafes and the Committee determined that this sidewalk cafe met the standards. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of the sidewalk caf6. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-076 1640 Chicano Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Application for sidewalk cafd (Whole Foods Market) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Victoria Reed DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that a waiver would be required to allow for the use of disposable flatware. She asked if a garbage can would be located outside. Ms. Reed stated that garbage containers would be placed outside. She also noted that workers would maintain the sidewalk caf6 and check it every 45 minutes for litter. Committee member Alterson stated that a staffperson should be stationed outside at all times to assure litter pick-up, as opposed to the planned maintenance of the area every 45 minutes. Chairperson Brzezinski read through the standards for sidewalk cafes and the Committee determined that this sidewalk SPAARC Meeting Notes — May 21, 2003 3 cafd met the standards. Committee member Alterson encouraged Ms. Reed to establish contact with Alderman Newman regarding this sidewalk caf6. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of the sidewalk caf8. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-079 8524354 Ridqe Avenue Preliminary Intedor/exterior remodeling to allow condo conversion for existing mufti -family residence (8 dwelling units) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Irene Zemenides GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ms. Zemenides stated that the exterior of the building would not change, except for the installation of new windows. The decorative windows would remain, but the double hung windows would be replaced. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz suggested that the decorative portion of the windows not be covered with aluminum. Committee member Aiello asked if garages existed for this building. Ms. Zemenides stated that there is no parking for this building and that a variance would be requested to allow temporary parking along the side of the building. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that the awning above the door be partially decorative metal, or something that Is more consistent with the residential style of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to the installation of an awning that is more consistent with the style of the building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes -- May 21. 2003 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 28, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Adova Jackson, David Jennings, Stefanie Levine, Sat Nagar, James Wolinski Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Joanna Benjamin, Jeff Burdick, Susan Gudedey, Moms Robinson, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ SPAARC Meeting Note Avvroval: Mav 7, 2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of May 7. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). Committee member Levine abstained from voting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 02-149 1712 Church Street Final Construct an enclosed waste transfer station PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jerry Callaghan Peter Sarin Raymond Strong GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Callaghan stated that the one outstanding issue regarding this project is the buffer treatment along the westem edge of the site. Through meeting with the community and City staff, a sound wall has been proposed. The wall is pre -cast concrete, and would be 14-feet in height. The tallest truck would be 13'6", so all vehicles would be obscured. The existing alley where this wall would be placed does not serve a purpose. Onyx would clean up the alley in conjunction with the construction of the buffer wall. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked about the responsibility for maintenance of the wall. Mr. Callaghan stated that Onyx would be responsible for maintenance and that this would be clarified in the easement agreement. Committee member Alterson notified the applicants that a fence variance would be required. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested using landscaping measures, such as the planting of ivy, to spruce up the appearance of the wall. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the issuance of a fence variation and the granting of the easement. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 03-065 1611 Simpson Street Prsliminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling of commercial structure (replacement of windows). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Applicant not present ACTION: A motion was made to table this case, as the applicant was not present. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — May 28, 2003 2 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 4, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Altenson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Keith Fujihara, David Jennings, Stefanie Levine, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Joanna Benjamin, Jeff Burdick, Mark Franz, Walter Hallen, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz C. Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. SPAARC Meetim Note Approval: Mav 21.2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of May 21. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-080 1017 Mulford Street Recommendation to ZSA Construct a I %-story addition. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Chris Turley GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Turley explained that the variance is in relation to a non -conforming existing condition of the building's side yard setback. The addition would continue this non -conforming setback vertically. The material of the addition would be stucco. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the neighbors have been informed of this proposal. Mr. Turley stated that the homeowner has talked to the neighbors and that they do not object to the proposal. Carlos Ruiz asked why the height of the building needs increase as much as proposed. Mr. Turley stated that the owners of the home like the current slope of the roof and want to maintain this slope with the addition. Mr. Ruiz stated that he is concerned with the fact that the character of the existing structure would change significantly. Mr. Turley stated that he would inform the homeowner of Mr. Runs concern. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-081 Main & Chicaaio & Custer Preliminanj Replacement of Main Street Viaduct. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kimberly Beattie Michael Ross Magued Zaglama GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Beattie explained that three concepts for the viaduct replacement have been developed and that CTA hopes to get feedback regarding these proposals from SPAARC. Mr. Ross presented a slide show depicting the different conceptual plans for the viaduct replacement. He explained the three schemes, each of which having a different abutment wall. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that landscaping or vegetation of some sort would be ideal in the abutment. Mr. Ross stated that vegetation would not grow under the bridge, but it would be ideal along the side of the bridge. Committee member Friedman asked if the developers have considered altering the design of the trestle. Mr. Zaglama replied that a large truss would not fit into the character of the area. Committee member Friedman discouraged using any fancy designs on the girder because that would not complement its clean design. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that there is an opportunity to apply a decorative aspect to the viaduct, but she strongly dk,couraged the placement of "CTA" on the viaduct. Chairperson s3rzezinski suggested scheme A on the south side, which includes a sloped abutment, and scheme B on the north side, which would match the flush aspect of the future condo development abutting Main Street to the east. Committee member Jennings suggested using a knee wall to discourage people from climbing up the embankment of scheme A. Jeff Burdick asked about the proposed light pipes that may be used to light the area under the bridge. Mr. Ross replied that light pipes would provide a consistent level of light across the entire width of the area under the bridge. Laura Saviano. representing Evanston's Public Art Committee, stated that the Committee would be more than happy to provide its resources to help enhance the appearance of the viaduct. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval with the recommendation to utilize Scheme A on the south embankment and Scheme B (sans the tower element) on the north embankment. Furthermore, the motion included the condition of a light well between the tracks, and incorporating landscape materials wherever possible. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes - June 4, 2003 2 SPAARC 03-071 636 Church Street Recommendation to Slqn Board Unified Business Center signage plan. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Hallen explained that arch awnings would be placed on the Library Plaza Building so that the design of the awnings would match the design of the arched openings in that portion the first level. The original motion from SPARC was to make all of the awnings rectangular to match the rectilinear openings in most of the building. Because the Library Plaza building and the Carlson Buildings are two different buildings with two different shaped openings at the first level. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski suggested notifying the applicant that this motion does not include provisions for window signs. If window signs were requested, then this request would need to reappear before SPARC and the Sign Board. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of the Unified Signage Plan to the Sign Board subject to the Library Plaza Building having the rectangular shape of awning that matches their windows, but a different color than the awnings on the Carlson Building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPMRC Meeting Notes - June 4, 2003 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 11, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Aiterson, Keith Fujihara, Walter Hallen, Arlova Jackson, David Jennings, Stefanie Levine, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff., Frank Aguado, Joanna Benjamin, Jeff Burdick, Moms Robinson, Carlos Ruiz Acting Chair Marino determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting: SPAARC Meeting Note Approval: Mav 28.2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of May 28. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). June 4.2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of June 4. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 03.016 817 Hinman Avenue Final Construct a six -story, eight dwelling unit multiple family dwelling with frtteen off-street parking spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jim Torvik GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Torvik stated that minor changes have been made to the proposal since the last time it appeared before the Committee. The exit stair on the south side of the building has been altered and made accessible. DISCUSSION: Committee member Levine noted that Parks and Forestry would like details of the species and spacing of trees to be planted on City property north of the property line. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the photometric plan by the Public Works Department and the review and approval of the landscaping plan by the Parks and Forestry Department. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 03-083 601 Linden Place Preliminary Install sanitary sewer lift station in Custer Avenue right -of --way, install back-up generator in existing parking lot (one space to be eliminated), erect 6' masonry wall. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Acting Committee member Hallen presented the proposal in lieu of the applicant, who was not able to attend the meeting. He explained that the existing sanitary lift station causes water to collect in the building. The applicant is proposing the construction of a six-foot high wall with an emergency generator located within. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen noted that the proposed location of the emergency generator is not ideal from a noise and visibility standpoint. Committee member Jennings stated that the sanitary sewer station would be located within the Custer Street right of way, while the proposed emergency generator would be located on private property within an existing parking space. Committee member Alterson felt that removing a parking space would not be ideal in this location. Acting Committee member Hallen pointed out several other possible locales for the emergency generator, including the area of the building abutting the CTA rail line. ACTION: A motion was made to deny preliminary site plan and appearance review approval with the recommendation to consider an alternate location for the emergency generator, preferably not the courtyard area of the building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. Committee member Friedman abstained from voting. SPAARC 03-065 1611 Simpson Street Final Inferior/exterior remodeling of commercial structure (replacement of windows). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Victor Freise GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Freise stated that the latest proposal includes two new glass block windows in the front of the building. DISCUSSION: Acting Chair Marino requested the use of clear glass instead of glass block. Mr. Frelse stated that the tenants wish to have glass block for security reasons. He also noted that the tenants are considering changing the front door to a double door. Carlos Ruiz stated that this must be SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 11, 2003 2 noted, either through the submittal of new plans or the signing off on the plans by the architect. Committee member Friedman asked Mr. Ruiz if the Preservation Commission approved the use of glass block. Mr. Ruiz stated that the Preservation Commission approved glass block and that it currently exists. Committee member Walczak stated that there is other security altematives besides glass block. Mr. Ruiz stated that the glass block exists and that the City cannot force the owner to replace the glass block. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the upper part of the floor windows and the glass area around the front door being clear glass. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-2). Committee members Friedman and Walczak voted nay. SPAARtr 03-082 2610 Grant Street Recommendation to ZBA Demolish existing garage, construct two -car detached garage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Adova Jackson GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ms. Jackson stated that the owner wishes to use the existing concrete slab to construct the new garage. However, this slab is only 1.5' from the alley, which encroaches within the required setback. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson noted that the alley is 20% wider than standard alleys, so this encroachment should not negatively effect ingresslegress. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-048 801 Chicago Avenue Pre -application Conference Construct a 52-unit multiple family dwelling with a 2,000 square foot retail space. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Neil Omoff David Haymes James Murray GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Murray stated that the existing improvements on the site would be razed and replaced with a building consisting of one underground story of parking, three stories of retail space consisting of 1,300 square feet. 45 residential units are being proposed, rather than the original 52-unit proposal. This decrease is a result of meetings with the alderman and members of the community. SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 11, 2003 3 'Yr_ _ ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the photometric plan by the Public Works Department and the review and approval of the landscaping plan by the Parks and Forestry Department. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 03-083 601 Linden Place Preliminary Install sanitary sewer lift station in Custer Avenue right-of-way, install back-up generator In existing parking lot (one space to be eliminated), erect 6' masonry wall. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Acting Committee member Hallen presented the proposal in lieu of the applicant. who was not able to attend the meeting. He explained that the existing sanitary lift station causes water to collect in the building. The applicant is proposing the construction of a six-foot high wall with an emergency generator located within. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen noted that the proposed location of the emergency generator is not ideal from a noise and visibility standpoint. Committee member Jennings stated that the sanitary sewer station would be located within the Custer Street right of way, while the proposed emergency generator would be located on private property within an existing parking space. Committee member Alterson felt that removing a parking space would not be ideal in this location. Acting Committee member Hallen pointed out several other possible locales for the emergency generator, including the area of the building abutting the CTA rail line. ACTION: A motion was made to deny preliminary site plan and appearance review approval with the recommendation to consider an alternate location for the emergency generator, preferably not the courtyard area of the building. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Committee member Friedman abstained from voting. SPAARC 03-065 1611 Simpson Street Final Interior/exterior remodeling of commercial structure (replacement of windows). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Victor Freise GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Freise stated that the latest proposal includes two new glass block windows in the front of the building. DISCUSSION: Aging Chair Marino requested the use of clear glass instead of glass block. Mr. Freise stated that the tenants wish to have glass block for security reasons. He also noted that the tenants are considering changing the front door to a double door. Carlos Ruiz stated that this must be SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 11, 2003 noted, either through the submittal of new plans or the signing off on the plans by the architect. Committee member Friedman asked Mr. Ruiz if the Preservation Commission approved the use of glass block. Mr. Ruiz stated that the Preservation Commission approved glass block and that it currently exists. Committee member Walczak stated that there is other security alternatives besides glass block. Mr. Ruiz stated that the glass block exists and that the City cannot force the owner to replace the glass block. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the upper part of the floor windows and the glass area around the front door being dear glass. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-2). Committee members Friedman and Walczak voted nay. SPAARC 03-082 2610 Grant Street Recommendation to ZBA Demolish existing garage, construct two -car detached garage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Arlova Jackson GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ms. Jackson stated that the owner wishes to use the existing concrete slab to construct the new garage. However, this slab is only 1.57 from the alley, which encroaches within the required setback. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson noted that the alley is 20% wider than standard alleys, so this encroachment should not negatively effect ingresslegress. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-048 801 Chicago Avenue Pre-aualication Conference Construct a 52-unit multiple family dwelling with a 2,000 square foot retail space. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nei! Omoff David Haymes James Murray GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Murray stated that the existing improvements on the site would be razed and replaced with a building consisting of one underground story of parking, three stories of retail space consisting of 1,300 square feet. 45 residential units are being proposed, rather than the original 52-unit proposal. This decrease is a result of meetings with the alderman and members of the community. SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 11, 2003 3 Mr. Haymes stated that the retail has been slightly pulled off the property line along Chicago Avenue, with an arcade feature being introduced. Ingress for vehicle parking will be from the alley. A temporary parking space for small delivery vehicles has been provided off the alley. The base treatment of the building would be two stories, with a four-story middle treatment, and a belt course on the top floor. The height of the proposed structure is 72'6', five and one/half feet greater than the permitted height in the CIA Zoning District. Moreover, 37 living units are permitted on this site in accordance with its size and zoning, so eight more living units are being requested. DISCUSSION: Committee member Friedman stated that the comer design of the building needs to be stronger, but the overall design of the building is quite handsome. Mr. Haymes stated that the comer could be further articulated. Committee member Friedman asked if true windows would be used on the parking garage portion of the building. Mr. Haymes stated that these would be true windows. He also noted that standard sized brick would be used. Committee member Levine stated that it is doubtful that suitable light could be provided in the proposed courtyard to support most plant material. Mr. Haymes stated that the type of plant material to be used would be able to grow in this location. Committee member Hallen stated that the small delivery spaces off of the alley are awkward and not needed. Committee member Jackson asked that a north elevation be produced. Committee member Fujihara notified the applicants of the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan. Mr. Omoff stated that this project would coordinate with the Streetscape Plan. Committee member Atterson stated that he is uncomfortable with the amount of the second floor that is being devoted to parking. He also inquired as to an affordable housing component of this project. Mr. Murray stated that the starting price for the units would be under $200,000. Acting Chair Marino stated that if a backup generator were required, the basement would be an ideal location for its location. ACTION: No action taken. SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 11, 2003 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 18, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostlno, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, James Wollnskl Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Joanna Benjamin, Jeff Burdick, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz Chairperson Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 601 Linden Place Preliminary Install sanitary sewer lift station in CusterAvenue right-of-way, install back-up generatorin existing parking lot (one space to be eliminated), erect 6' masonry wall. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Lida Miller Charles Murphy Michael Picone GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ms. Miller stated that the ground floor units are flooding. She noted that the back-up generator would be located in the second parking space off of Linden Place from Custer Avenue because this space is close to the gas line and will reduce the cost of installing the generator. A masonry wall will screen the generator. The condo association owns this location. DISCUSSION - Chairperson Brzezinski asked if other locations have been considered. Ms. Miller stated that the proximity to the gas line would reduce costs. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that running a gas line should not be more expensive than constructing a masonry -screening wall. Committee member Alterson stated that a variance would be required for the reduction of parking caused by this proposed back-up generator. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that placing this generator in the parking space would adversely affect more people than if the generator was located along the rail line but outside of someone's unit. She suggested placing the generator on the roof. ACTION: No action was taken. SPAARC 2814 Central Street Preliminary Construct two, four story buildings, consisting of 9 dwelling units each and 1, 779 square feet of retail space within each building with 13 off-street parking spaces per building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Robert Graettinger GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Graettinger stated that the concept includes two separate distinct buildings, with each building containing retail on the first floor and residential on the remaining floors. A variation would be requested for the parking, as it will encroach into the side yard setback. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson noted that a zoning analysis has not yet been performed on this Project. Committee member Marino felt that two buildings on this site would be out of character for the area. Mr. Graettinger replied that the two building scheme would provide more windows in most of the units and would make these units more desirable. Chairperson Brzezinski disagreed with Committee member Marino and stated that she is in favor of breaking down masses and permitting more light in units. Committee member Marino asked about speck building materials. Mr. Graettinger replied that real limestone would be used along with modular sized brick. Committee member Friedman suggested constructing a short link between the buildings to provide the perception of continuance in design without sterilizing the appearance of the development. Committee member Marino urged the inclusion of a restaurant and/or other character -giving retail use in the first floor retail spaces. Carlos Ruiz suggested a sort of cornice element or other design aspect to crown the buildings. Committee member Alterson stated that the balconies appear too small and that they should be recessed Into the building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded. Committee member Marino felt that a zoning analysis should be completed prior to SPAARC taking any sort of action on this case. Committee member Alterson concurred and noted that he is uncomfortable with the parking aisle width. Chairperson Brzezinski withdrew her motion to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. A motion was made to table this case pending a complete zoning analysis. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 1133 Fowler Street Recommendation to Zsq Construct an addition to a detached private garage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Adova Jackson SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 18, 2003 2 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Jackson stated that the owner started to construct an addition to the garage without a permit. The neighbor to the north is not happy with the effect the addition would have on his property. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked why the addition is needed. Ms. Jackson stated that the owner wants to enclose a trailer. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that there is not a compelling reason to grant this variance. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of the variance. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (M). SPAARC 1642 Matte Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Establish a cafd, type 11 restaurant, within the Race Log& mWti Vort retail establishment. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Linda Mailers Bill Mallers GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Mailers stated that she is interested in opening a caf6 within her existing outdoor sporting store. She stated that athletes visiting her store generally have to get together at coffee shops to socialize and that this caf6 would provide a meeting place. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked about the handling of litter. Ms. Mailers stated that she has not yet developed a litter plan, but that she does not expect this use to generate as much traffic or trash as most other establishments. Committee member Alterson informed Ms. Mallers of the type II restaurant requirement to pick up all litter within 250 feet of the store. He also stated that it is nice to see a homegrown business expand in the downtown area. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this type II restaurant. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 18, 2003 3 Y r; SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 25, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Ariova Jackson, Dennis Marino. Sat Nagar, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Joanna Benjamin, Jeff Burdick, Waiter Hallen, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz Chairperson Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting' Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 852-854 Ridge Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Establish a short loading area for a multifamily residential building (condo conversion). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Surender Puri Saroj Puri GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Puri stated that there is no place for residents to park for load ingfunloading purposes. Ms. Puri noted that the property is completely landlocked and is located on a busy comer. Mr. Puri stated that zoning requires a parking pad to be the length of 35 feet. He is proposing a parking pad with the length of 32 feet. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen stated that the proposed parking pad, which would require a curb cut, is rather close to a busy intersection. Chairperson Brzezinski expressed concern with the fact that cars using the parking pad would need to back out, and that visibility could be hindered by the location of adjacent buildings. Committee member Nagar stated that he would need to go to the site to determine if visibility and turning radii would meet City standards. Committee member Marino stated that the parking pad would have to be labeled in the condo declaration as a limited common element with a special restrictive purpose for loading and unloading. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA with the conditions that the Department of Public Works approve the parking pad proposal and that the parking pad area be recorded as a limited common element with a special restriction purpose for loading and unloading. SPAARC 2526 Hurd Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Convert attached garage into habitable space and maintain open parking space in the front yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Molly Zoitan GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Zoitan stated that her attached garage is going to be converted to a family room. She wishes to retain the existing driveway for use as a parking spot. She stated that a spot is needed because it is too crowded to park on the street. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she does not feel comfortable with additional curb cuts along this block, especially considering the proximity to a school. She added that there is no compelling hardship requiring this variance. Ms. Zoltan showed examples of other homes in the neighbofiood with similar front driveways. ACTION: A motion was made to not recommend approval to the Zoning Ordinance. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPMRC Meeting Motes — June 25, 2003 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 2, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Afterson, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Kevin Kelly, Stefanie Levine, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Joanna Benjamin, Jeff Burdick, Moms Robinson, Carlos Ruiz Acting Chair Marino determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. SPAARC Meeting Note Approval: June 11.2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of June 11. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). June 18, 2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of June 18. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-091 605 Davis Street Concept Construct a two-story building with 3,900 square feet of retail space and three dwelling units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nancy Schlosberg Martha Robert Koch John Shutleworth GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Shutleworth stated that the west elevation would most likely be masonry and concrete block. The new concept is for a two-story building. DISCUSSION: Acting Chair Marino expressed concern with the lack of articulation of the west elevation, especially considering that this side of the building would be readily visible. Carlos Ruiz ►r'Tf'' " requested that documentation be provided that this lot is a separate parcel from the lot the east, which is a landmark property. Ms. Koch stated that it is a separate lot and that she would provide documentation to the Preservation Commission. Committee member Alterson stated that an easement is needed prior to the project being developed so that access could be provided to the proposed parking area. Ms. Koch stated that she just completed a lengthy process with the City in order to determine that there is no easement on the property. She does not wish to place an easement on this property at this time. Committee member Alterson stated that an easement would be needed if this lot were legally a separate lot from the lot to the east. Committee member Friedman asked if limestone was considered. Mr. Shutleworth stated that budget constraints would probably not permit limestone to be used on all sides of the building. Committee member Friedman suggested the use of pre -cast concrete as a compromise. He also suggested stepping the building back slightly along the west elevation to create shadow lines and more articulation on this fagade. Acting Chair Marino stated that the project seems appropriate for the location, but that action could not yet be taken due to questions about the easement issue. He also discouraged the use of renaissance stone. ACTION: No action was taken. SPAARC 03-092 1640 Maole Avenue Preliminary, Mount a four-sided wall clock on the Harris Bank storefront. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Dennis Griffin Jeff Harwood Don Courington GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Courington stated that Harris Bank wishes to install a four-sided clock on the building. He felt that the design of the clock would be in keeping with the design of the building. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson asked if the clock extends over the right of way. This was not determined. Acting Chair asked why the bank wishes to install a clock. Mr. Courington stated that it enhances the appearance of the building and would provide a public service to rail commuters using the nearby Metra station. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend preliminary approval subject to the review by the Public Works Department to determine if an easement is needed and that an accurate depiction of the size and location of the clock be presented for final Site Plan and Appearance Review Approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-095 1900 Demoster Street Recommendation to ZBA Establish an lntemet cafd. SPAARC Meeting Notes — July Z 2003 2 -+rle ' " PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Dan Okonmah GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Okonmah stated that the proposed business would serve as an Internet cafe, and the menu would consist of beverages and packaged chips and popcom. There would not be work done to the exterior of this building to accommodate this business. A variance is needed because the business is considered a type II restaurant. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson asked Mr. Okonmah to further explain the proposal, as he is concerned with discerning this business from an arcade and the potential for underage loitering. Mr. Okonmah stated that the aim of the business is for Internet use and computer game access. He did not envision problems with loitering. Committee member Alterson noted that his questions most likely resemble those to be asked by members of the ZBA. Acting Chair Marino inquired as to the hours of operation. Mr. Okonmah replied that, at least during the first year of operation, hours would be from 3pm to 11 pm on weekdays, and 11 am to 10pm on weekends. Acting Chair Marino expressed concern regarding the later hours of operation and how residents across the street might be affected. Mr. Okonmah stated that the City is considering locating a mini police station in the shopping plaza. Committee member Alterson stated that garish signs should not be placed in the windows. Mr. Okonmah stated that he is limited to what the center's owner allows him to install in terms of signage. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-094 2531 Pavne Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a second story addition to a one-story single family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Holbert GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Holbert stated that the variance is for the side yard setback, although the addition will be straight above the existing non -conforming structure and will not encroach further into the setback. DISCUSSION: Acting Chair asked if the neighbors have been notified. Mr. Holbert stated that the Immediate neighbors have been notified and do not have concerns. Acting Chair Marino also asked about building materials. Mr. Holbert stated that existing brick face and cedar shingle would be used. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — July Z 2003 SPAARC 03-093 300 Dodae Avenue Soccer field renovation, installation of irrigation system. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Stefanie Levine Prellminary And Final GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ms. Levine stated that the existing soccer field would be renovated through seeding, irrigation and regrading. In addition, an existing open field within the park would be transformed into a soccer field. DISCUSSION: Committee member Kelly asked how close the new soccer field would be to the street and asked if there was a concern that a soccer ball could be kicked into the street. Ms. Levine stated that this should not be a ooncem, as the street is at least 75 feet from the edge of the soccer field. Furthermore, the existing field is currently being used as a soccer field, but not under program supervision. Acting chair Marino asked about installing a bench on the sidelines. Ms. Levine replied that the soccer fields are moved around from season to season, so removable bleachers are preferred. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Committee member Levine abstained from voting. SPAARC 03-096 1312 Chicago Avenue Install a perpendicular wall mounted sign. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Dennis Marino Recommendation to Sian Board GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Acting Chair Marino explained that the request Is for a perpendicular sign, which Is not permitted. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial to the sign board. The recommendation was seconded and passed. (9-1). Committee member Alterson voted nay. SPAARC 03.074 Sherman Plaza Recommendation to City Council Plat of subdivision in 3 dimensions of portions of block bounded by Sherman, Davis, Benson, and Church into four lots. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Judy Aiello John Terrell GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — July 2. 2003 4 Committee member Aiello explained that this request is for a vertical subdivision. Mr. Terrell described in detail each of the lots. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of the subdivision plat to the City Council. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). Committee member Friedman abstained from voting. SPAARC MwVng Not" — July Z 2003 W SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 9, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Walter Hallen, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff,. Frank Aguado, Joanna Benjamin, Jeff Burdick, Alexis Gomez, Moms Robinson, Carlos Ruiz Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. SPAARC Meetinq Note Approval: June 25.2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of June 25. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-097 1571 Maple Avenue Preliminary Construct a new funeral service facility, "Donnellan Funeral Services." PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Doug Reynolds GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Reynolds stated that the new funeral service facility would partially front onto Davis Street, but that the main entrance would still be on the south side of the site. He stated that the front elevation would be articulated to provide visual interest and create separation between funeral service rooms and the sidewalk abutting Davis Street. Cut limestone would be used on the base and detailing. with the predominate building material being a reddish, orange brick. Parking lot circulation would still be provided off of Maple Avenue. Brick pavers would be used for sidewalks and entrance areas. DISCUSSION: Committee member Nagar asked if the two curb cuts onto Maple Avenue could be consolidated. Mr. Reynolds stated that consolidating curb cuts would effect parking requirements. Chairperson Brzezinski encouraged Mr. Reynolds to develop a plan that could accommodate the consolidation of the curb cuts. She also favored the decision to have the building address Davis Street, but requested a front door with windows. Frank Aguado stated that the existing plans would require several variations, including the built to lot line issue. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about the light fixtures on the front of the building. Mr. Reynolds stated that these would be typical coach lights. Chairperson Brzezinski also informed Mr. Reynolds of the signage requirements. Carlos Ruiz asked about the size of the brick to be used. Mr. Reynolds stated that an engineering size brick would be used. Several members of the Committee stated that they would not be in favor of this size brick. Committee member Friedman stated that several architectural elements of the proposal conflict with one another. Carlos Ruiz suggested switching the rectangular windows on the third floor with arched windows to create a more complimentary building facade in terms of architectural elements. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary approval subject to the use of a front door with some area of glass, the consolidation of the driveways, and the resolution of zoning violations. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-1) Committee member Marino voted nay. SPAARC 02-019 600 Main Street Preliminary and Final Remodel Main Street Meira Station. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Peter Pieroni Whitney Jacobson Paul Jacobs Maurice Covington Josel Gonzalez Manny Quilatan Donald Moygec GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Moygec addressed the previous issues brought up by SPAARC when this project appeared for preliminary approval. These included landscaping and its maintenance. Mr. Moygec stated that the Custer Street Fair administration would maintain the landscaping. Committee member Marino requested a letter stating this responsibility of the Custer Street Fair. Another previous issue was the dumpster screening. He stated that the screening of the dumpster would be accomplished through a six-foot high painted steel picket fence. A right turn only would be required off of Railroad Avenue onto Main Street. Railroad Avenue would be one way northbound. The newspaper boxes would be organized in a certain location on the property and the oven has been removed from the kitchenette per the recommendation for SPAARC during preliminary approval. DISCUSSION: Frank Aguado asked about the location of bicycle racks. Mr. Moygec stated that there would be three locations of bike racks on the site. Chairperson Brzezinski notified the applicants that Fire Marshall Alan Berkowsky would be the contact person regarding the possible installation of a fire hydrant on the site. Carlos Ruiz asked about the bars around the windows being shown on the plans. Mr. Moygec stated that these bars are for security reasons. Several SPAARC Meeting Notes — July 9, 2003 2 members of the Committee stated that these bars should not be used, as they would diminish the appearance of the building. Chairperson Brxezinski stated that she would not have a problem with the use of bars on ground level windows. Mr. Moygec asked if the bars could be removed from the windows at the platform level. Members of the Committee agreed to allow this removal. Committee member Friedman requested viaduct improvement to correlate with the proposed Main Street CTA viaduct. He strongly encouraged the painting of the viaduct. Ms. Jacobson explained that Union Pacific owns the viaduct and would need to grant permission to paint the viaduct. Mr. Moygec stated that Union Pacific would be contacted and asked if the viaduct could be painted. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about the ramp railing material. Mr. Gonzalez stated that the ramp material would match the existing. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval of the landscaping maintenance agreement by the Department of Parks and Forestry, no bars being placed on the windows at platform level, and a strong encouragement to paint the CTA overpass. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC Ma6v Notes - July 9, 2003 3 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 16, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Frank Aguado, Arthur Alterson, Alan Berkowsky, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Kevin Kelly, Stefanie Levine, Sat Nagar Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ SPAARC Meetina Note ADDroval: July 2.2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of July 2. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Chairperson Brzezlnskl abstained from voting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 624 Davis Street Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior (new storefront) remodeling for Wol Restaurant", a type 1 restaurant. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mike Radis Bing Zhou GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Radis presented the proposed remodeling of the storefront. He noted that proposed signage would be placed above the required maximum height of 15'50 . DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski complimented the applicants on the appearance of the remodeled mahogany storefront. She suggested that the sign be relocated to above the door so to not require a variance to the sign regulations. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 2201 Oakton Street Preliminary Various renovations to existing big box retail center (Home Depot), including rest ping parking lot, installation of directional signage, repainting of canopy areas, installation of new parking lot lighting, replacement of rooftop mechanical units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Paul Machalek GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Machalek presented the proposal to the Committee. DISCUSSION: Several members of the Committee suggested the inclusion of additional landscape islands In the parking lot. Mr. Machalek stated that this would be considered. Committee members stressed the need for irrigation and or a watering plan for this additional landscaping. It was also suggested the cart corals be shown on the site plan, and that glazing be added to the tool rental door. Committee member Kelly stated that the Fire Department connection on the building needs to be unobstructed. Committee member Friedman stated that the entrance/exit signs at the vestibules are confusing and need to be made clearer. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: The addition of landscaping in the parking lot with a watering plan; Cart corral locations be added to the site plan; The Fire Department connection be unobstructed; - The tool rental door be glazed; - Investigation of changing the existing enter/exit sign at the vestibules to eliminate confusion. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 1517-1537 Lvons Street Conceat Improve parking area from gravel to asphalt. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rick Vamos Alisa Tilson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Tilson stated that the soil in this location is contaminated and that the proposal is to encapsulate the area in asphalt to assure that the soil cannot be exposed to human contact. Essentially, a parking lot would be created on top of the site. DISCUSSION: Committee members asked if the parking would serve any purpose. Mr. Vamos stated that, as of right now, the parking would not be leased to any surrounding property for use. Several members of the Committee expressed concern regarding the potential for loitering and the tacit SPAARC Meeting Notes - July 16, 2003 2 • of security. Furthermore, concern was expressed regarding the addition of impervious surface in the area leading to further stormwater runoff and the lack of proposed lighting in the parking lot. The general consensus of the Committee was to recommend that the soil be removed from the site instead of being covered up. ACTION: A motion was made to table the case so to allow the applicants to return with an environmental remediation plan for removal of the contaminated soil. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 1904 Jenks Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a second -story addition. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Donnalee Floeter Katie Kelly GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Floeter stated that the zoning variance is for the rear yard and front yard setback. The lot is only 53' x 60'. The house currently has only one bedroom. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the neighbors have commented on the proposal. Ms. Kelly stated that the neighbors have made no comments. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 300 Dodae Avenue (Levv CenterlRecommendation to Sign Board Erect a new freestanding changeable copy board sign. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Doug Gaynor GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Gaynor stated that two signs are being proposed. The first sign is to be placed on the comer of Mulford and Dodge. This sign would be 5' in height and would be lit from within. The second sign will be an LED sign and will be located on the north end of the site. This LED sign is relatively simple when compared to the High School sign. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski asked what type of information would be transmitted on the sign. Mr. Gaynor replied that the sign would promote activities occurring in the center. Mr. Gaynor stated that the sign would be perpendicular to Dodge Avenue, so it would not shine into the residential area across the street. Committee member Kelly asked if a different color LED light could be used that would not be as bright as the sign at the High School. Chairperson SPAARC Meeting Notes — July 16, 2003 3 Brzezinski stated that it is the levels of light that is the problem, not the color. Mr. Gaynor noted that the sign would be turned off after 10:30 or 11 p.m. at night. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 1103 Garnett Place Preliminary and Final Demolition of bicycle storage addition to existing detached garage. Construct new covered stepsAandings. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Robert Taylor GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Taylor stated that the house is a four flat. He is concerned about the safety of the stairs in the rear, especially when wet. He wishes to cover the stairs to protect them from the weather. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the current conditions of the stairs are not code compliant, they are far too steep and there is more than a 12-foot rise without a landing. Mr. Taylor stated that he is going to consider just replacing the treads on the stairs for the time being, and have a Property Standards Inspector review for compliance. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0)• SPAARC Meeffrp NOW — July 16, 2003 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 23, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Frank Aguado, Judy Aiello, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agosbno, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Morris Robinson, Donna Spicuzza Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-075 2949 Harrison Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct an attached garage addition. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Avery Pham GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Pham stated that the existing garage is for 1-Y2 cars. The proposal is for a 2-car garage. The new garage would extend five feet further to the north and would encroach Into the setback. He talked to the neighbor to the north and the neighbor did not have any concerns regarding the proposal. DISCUSSION: Committee member Dahal asked if the driveway would have to be widened. Mr. Pharr stated that the driveway is already widened. Mr. Pharr stated that the Preservation Commission approved this proposal, but for only an extension of four feet. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-101 1600 Dodaie Avenue Concept Mount (12) cellular antennas on the existing smokestack and new equipment shelter on the building rooftop. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mike Bieniek GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Bieniek explained that the antennas would be located at the 110-foot level of the existing smokestack. This would be approximately 213 of the way up the tower. The equipment shelter would be located on the lower roof that faces Dodge Avenue. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked what material the equipment shelter would be. Mr. Bieniek stated that it would be dry-vit. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if a mesh material could be used. Mr. Bieniek explained that this would have to be done after the fact, as the shelter is pre- fabricated off -site. Mr. Bieniek explained that the equipment would be serviced once a month and the lease through the school would permit access. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the equipment would be removed if technology were advanced in the future. Mr. Bieniek stated that it is part of the lease to remove any equipment that is no longer in use. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval based on the proposed location of the antennas. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-108 1044 Elmwood Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Convert an existing church into a single-family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Troy Henikoff Kristin Henikoff Foster Dale GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Dale passed around photographs showing the existing church. He stated that the concept Is to retain the appearance of the building, but to add an addition to the west A variance is needed because the proposal exceeds the permitted lot coverage and does not meet yard setbacks. The addition will consist of a garage with two bedroom spaces located above. He stated that this property was made smaller in the past when the parsonage house lot was subdivided. The appearance of the building from Elmwood would not change. The addition would compliment the existing building, using similar brick. A synthetic slate shingle would be used if permitted by the project's budget. DISCUSSION: Committee Dahal asked if a streetlight is located where the proposed driveway is to be constructed. Mr. Dale stated that there is not a streetlight located here. Mr. Henikoff stated that there is a small tree in the parkway at the location of the proposed driveway. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that a driveway permit would be required, She supported the reuse of this building and appreciated the need for an addition to make it a viable single-family structure. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — July 23, 2003 2 SPAARC 03-107 1021-1027 Dodqe Avenue Concept Deconvertion from 16 dwelling units to 8 and exterior alterations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Uri Raanan GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Raanan's architect stated that the intent of the development is to convert the 16 apartments into 8 condominium units. The only changes to the exterior of the building would be the removal of exterior stairs, additional landscaping, and changes to the masonry. The exterior stairs would be replaced with interior stairs. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked what would remain of the masonry wall after the exterior staircase is removed. The architect stated that the underlying masonry would be repaired to match the existing masonry on the building. Frank Aguado stated that a zoning variance would probably be required as condo units need to face the street, and certain units in this development would not face the street. Furthermore, the parking requirements would not be met. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that a landscape plan would be required for final SPAARC review. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Committee member Jackson abstained from voting. SPAARC 03-102 2812-14 Central Street Preliminary Construct a building consisting of a 1, 779 square foot retail goods establishment with 9 dwelling units (condominiums) above. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Steven Bellew Rob Graettinger GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Bellew stated that because the amount of required parking could not be fulfilled with the inclusion of the required parking drive aisle width. The required width is 24 feet, but this would be reduced to 22 feet. A variance is required for this issue, as well as for the build to lot line requirement, because the entire front of the building is not located up to the lot line. The brick would be taken down to the three-story level, with limestone be carried the rest of the way down to reduce the perceived height of the building. The balconies have been reconfigured to be larger and recessed into the building, based on SPAARC comments during concept review. A pate orange brick would be used on the facade. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski complimented the changes made to the elevation. Mr. Graettinger stated that the buildings would remain separate in appearance to break up the mass, but that SPAARC Meeting Notes - July 23, 2003 3 an archway would be designed to link the two buildings together. He added that a terrace might be planned in the rear where planters could be placed and the greenery could be added to the development. Chairperson Brzezinski requested setting the curtain wall in a foot to create the impression of width between the sidewalk and the building and form a softer edge to the sidewalk. Committee member Nagar informed the applicants that underground retention would be required. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she in not in favor of constructing an arched connection between the two buildings and suggested more landscaping in this area. She also asked about the permanent, French -style awning -like structure being proposed. Mr. Graettinger stated that this permanent structure would replace the awning and also reflect sounds from the sidewalk away from the first level units. Chairperson Brzezinski replied that she likes this proposal better than an awning, which would require more frequent maintenance. Committee member Dahal stated that he would review this aspect of the development to assure there are not any right-of-way encroachment issues. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval to both 2812 and 2814 Central Street. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-110 222 Hartrev Avenue Concoct Construct 174 attached single Family dwellings (Townhouses) and 49 off-street guest-Pa►ldng spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Dubin GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Dubin stated that some condo units would be affordable. Each of the units would face into each other so to not face the CTA line or the Target store. This project would be a planned development. Mr. Dubin stated that a TIF would be required to fund this proposal. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski suggested using different architects for different buildings to create diversity in appearance and eliminate monotony. She also suggested more open space. Donna Spicuzza stated that the odor from the canal needs to be considered when planning a residential development in this area. Committee member Wolinski stated that TIF would probably not be feasible in this location. ACTION: No action was taken. SPAARC 03-109 2005 Lee Street Concoct Construct 92 attached single -Family dwellings (Townhouses) and a play area. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Dubin SPAARC Meeting Notes — Juty 23, 2003 4 GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Dubin stated that five units of affordable housing would be proposed for this development. He did not have a site plan, as this is currently conceptual. DISCUSSION: Committee member Aiello stated that the design of the proposal seemed monotonous. Chairperson Brzezinski once again suggested utilizing various different architects for the project's design. Committee member Marino felt that this would not be the right time for this site to convert its use to multi -family residential. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that more detailed information, especially regarding the surrounding site, would be required. ACTION: No action was taken. SPAARC 03.111 1227 Dodae Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct an exterior fire exit, assembly area and ramp for the disabled. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Wertymer GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Wertymer explained that a second fire exit is being proposed, as well as a ramp for accessibility along the driveway to the north. The ramp would be covered. DISCUSSION: Frank Aguado stated that the stairs along the south side of the building need a one -foot setback from the property line, but only six Inches is currently provided. Mr. Wertymer stated that this could be fixed during the proposed renovation. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes - Jury 23, 2003 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 30, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinskl, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Adova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. SPAARC Meetinq Note Approval: July 9, 2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of July 9. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-112 1711 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Change of use, CVS Pharmacy in fomper Warehouse Records site. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Wojtila Ed Konstant Evan Menk Michele Dodd GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Wojtila explained that the entrance door would be relocated and awnings would be installed. Mr. Menk stated that the existing storefront would be removed, and a new storefront would be installed. The new windows would include lifestyle images on them, thus blocking the views into the store. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino stated that this new storefront goes against the recommendations of the Downtown Plan in that a clear storefront that allows views into the store from the street would not be provided. He asked 9 merchandise shelving could be pushed back off the window. Ms. Dodd stated that she would have to check with operations to see if this is possible. Chairperson Brzezinski agreed with Committee member Marino and strongly urged a storefront that is more engaging to pedestrians by allowing for more visibility between the sidewalk and the store. Committee member Friedman stated that making residentially styled windows on this storefront is completely inappropriate in the heart of the downtown commercial area. Chairperson Brzezinski vehemently opposed the lifestyle signage proposal and stated that there is plenty of lifestyle images on the street itself in the form of pedestrians. Committee member Walczak stated that he would prefer that the interior of the store be visible from the outside for public safety purposes. Committee member Fujihara stated that during construction, the developer is going to have to work closely with the City to develop a sidewalk -closing plan. Mr. Wojtila asked if the Committee had a preference about the location of the front door, the current plan is to move the front door to one side of the storefront. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would like the front door to remain in the center of the storefront so to avoid a long, uninterrupted frontage along the sidewalk. A suggestion was made to keep the storefront as is, with the signage being the only change. Walter Hallen stated this would be preferable, as long as merchandise shelving did not block the view of the interior of the store. Committee members wholeheartedly agreed that this would be a preferable option. Ms. Dodd asked if awnings would still be acceptable. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that there is no problem with awnings, unless they contained excessive signage. Committee member Marino asked if CVS actively recruits area residents for employment opportunities in the store. Ms. Dodd replied that the Human Resources Department holds job fairs in the area and does actively recruit area residents for employment. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case so that the applicant can reappear with a more desirable exterior storefront design. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 03-113 1450 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Install ATM of Tommy Nevins Pub. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ken Hammon GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hammon explained the ATM would be located inside the existing vestibule, but there would not be a door to the vestibule, so essentially, the ATM would be located outside. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson asked if the ATM locale would allow enough room for wheelchair access. Mr. Hammon stated that this location is more accessible, as locating the ATM outside would require a removal of a slope in the pavement. Committee member Marino asked how the ATM would be accessed during live concert performances. Mr. Hammon stated that the ATM would be located outside the exit door. Committee member Walczak expressed concerns regarding security issues. Mr. Hammon stated that the ATM would comply with State safety regulations, and that increased lighting and cameras would be installed. sPAARC Meeting Notes -- July 30, 2003 Committee member Aiello asked how Zoning would classify this ATM. Committee member Alterson replied that it would probably be considered an accessory use to the restaurant. Committee member Aiello felt that this would be an accessory use to a bank, but not a restaurant. She expressed concern with the precedent this would set, in that Evanston could eventually be saturated with ATMs. Committee member Walczak stated that he would be much more comfortable if this ATM was accessible only during business hours. Committee member Aiello requested that the Zoning Committee examine the issue of placement of ATMs. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval with the condition that the ATM only is operable during Nevin's business hours. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-5). Committee members Aiello, Brzezinski, Dahal, Jackson, and Walczak voted nay. SPAARC 03-114 2205 McDaniel Avenue Recommendation to Z13A Construct a two-story rear addition with decking. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Saundra Murtz GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Murtz stated that the proposed rear addition would require a setback for the rear setback. The current rear setback is 21 feet, which is legal non -conforming. She explained that a rear addition is being proposed because the rear lot abuts a vacant lot, so the addition will not have as much of an affect on the adjacent house. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the neighbors have been informed of this proposal. Ms. Murtz stated that the neighbor to the north has been informed and is in favor of the proposal, but the neighbor which adjoins the vacant lot and the neighbor to the south have not yet been informed. Committee member Jackson stated that there have been no comments from the neighbors regarding this project. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 01-117 2000 Sheridan Road Preliminary and Final Install accessible ramp for Women's Center, aRlliated with Northwestem University. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Paul Howard GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Howard explained the proposal and stated that Northwestern University would install the landscaping related to this project after the completion of the ramp. There will be lighting over the lamp. SPAARC Meeting Notes — July 30, 2003 3 DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the lighting would be accomplished through fixtures, or if it would be stand-alone. Mr. Howard did not know the answer to this question. He stated that this proposal has been reviewed and approved by the Preservation Commission. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC Meef ft Notes — July 30, 2003 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES August 6, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Aiterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Bob Domeker, Keith Fujihara, Adova Jackson, Ron Walczak Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting; SPAARC Meeting Note Approval: July 16. 2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of July 16. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). July 23. 2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting notes of July 23. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). Committee member Friedman abstained from voting. Projects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-116 2734 Ridae Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct a one-story addition and two -car detached garage. Create one open parking space in the rear yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mark S. Wallace GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Wallace stated that there is not parking on the side of the street where the house is located. The increase in parking is predominately for guest parking. The variations concern lot coverage and the side yard setback. The maximum lot coverage is .30, but .35 is being proposed. The minimum side yard setback is 5 feet, but 3.07 feet is being proposed. Mr. Wallace noted that the size of the lot is smaller than most of the surrounding lots. DJSCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if neighbors have been notified. Mr. Wallace stated that neighbors have not commented on the proposal. Committee member Jackson stated that this project has not yet been noticed, so the City has not heard any comments from surrounding neighbors. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-115 1604 Greenleaf Street Recommendation to ZBA Establish an open parking space in the rear yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Cynthia Archer GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Archer stated that she does not have alley access, and that a parking space would be extremely helpful in terms of loading and unloading. Because her lot is zoned 131 and the neighboring lot is zoned residential, a setback of 12 or 15 feet is required. The driveway would encroach into this setback and only allow for a 3-foot setback. She asked her neighbors if they had any problems with her proposal and they stated they did not. DISCUSSION: Committee member Dahal asked if there is a tree in the parkway in the location of the proposed curb cut. Ms. Archer stated that there is a nearby tree, but that the tree should not be affected by the curb cut. Carlos Ruiz asked if the existing gate in the location of the proposed driveway would remain. Ms. Archer explained that it would remain, but that she would eventually like to replace it with a nicer gate. Chairperson Brzezinski expressed concern with the pedestrian disruption that a curb cut could cause. Committee member Dahal stated that he could support this proposal as long as the gate does not swing into the sidewalk. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested removing the fence or gate altogether. Ms. Archer stated that the gate is needed for security purposes. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-1). Chairperson Brzezinski voted nay. SPAARC 03-118 939 Ridge Court Recommendation to ZBA Construct roofed front porch. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kiki Demopoulos David Hessert GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Hessert explained that the house was built and then moved to this location. It currently has a non -conforming status. At one time, the porch was removed, and he would like to rebuild the porch on the front. The porch would exceed the lot coverage allowance and encroach into the setback. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- August 6, 2003 2 DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the neighbors have been informed of the proposal. Ms. Demopoulos stated that the neighbors are strongly in favor of the proposal. Carlos Ruiz asked about the type of siding to be used. Ms. Demopoulos stated that the siding is the highest quality vinyl siding available, similar to the vinyl siding used on the adjacent house. Carlos Ruiz expressed concern that the details around the windows would be lost due to the covering with vinyl siding. Ms. Demopoulos stated that the windows would be capped and that detail would not be lost due to the siding. Committee member Friedman asked if wood siding was considered. Ms. Demopoulos replied that wood siding would be too expensive at this time. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-117 1553 Dewey Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct a two-story rear addition. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kevin Johnson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Johnson explained that a room addition is being proposed on the rear of the house. The property is a comer lot, and this house is currently legal non -conforming in terms of the comer side yard setback. Mr. Johnson stated that the addition would be flush with the existing wall of the house. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she is in favor of aligning the addition with the rest of the house. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-089 1809 Chicano Avenue Preliminary and Final Miscellaneous exterior renovation to Debate Club building at Northwestern University. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rick Nemec Ryan Nestor GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Nemec stated that the renovation is to remove the existing porch, which Is in poor condition and is falling off the building. The two doors will be replaced with a window. DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 6, 2003 3 Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the new windows would be wood. Mr. Nestor stated that the windows would be wood, with muntins. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-120 1710 Orr[naton Avenue PreaDDI[cation Conference Construct a SO" floor conference center on the Orrington Hotel and twenty-seven dwelling units at 1717-1 725 Sherman Avenue. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Greg Randall David Reifman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Reitman stated that the Hotel would be closed down while it is rehabbed, and a ninth floor conference center is completed. This would increase the marketability of the Hotel. In addition, new restaurant concepts would be included in the proposal. Mr. Randall explained that the streetscape would be addressed, and the storefronts would be cleaned up. The ninth floor would be extended to include 18,000 square feet. The addition would restore the original appearance of the building. The addition would not add any height to the existing structure. The guest room count would reduce slightly from the current 282 units to about 260 units. Larger moms would be created in some instances. Mr. Randall presented the residential component on Sherman Avenue. The residential component would consist of three stories. He stated that it has not yet been decided it this would be rental or condo. The existing parking garage would continue to exist underneath the new residential units. The existing number of parking spaces in the garage is over and above the requirement for the Hotel and would accommodate the proposed residential units. The residential units would contain a central courtyard. DISCUSSION: Committee member Friedman asked how much the setback would be of the residential building above the parking garage. Mr. Randall stated that the setback would be 12-feet. Committee member Friedman explained that it is important to keep the low building profile along this block of Sherman Avenue. Both Chairperson Brzezinski and Committee member Friedman stated that the facade of the building at the pedestrian level along Orrington needs more mass and appears too light. Chairperson Brzezinski requested more fenestration on the south elevation of the proposed ninth floor of the hotel. Mr. Randall stated that the current elevations are preliminary and would increase in detail as the project continues to move forward. Chairperson Brzezinski also stated that a signage plan is critical for this project. She discouraged a roof -mounted sign. She also encouraged further articulating the comer area of the building outside the existing McDonald's. Public art was suggested for the area, especially considering that a Planned Development is being requested, which should grant some sort of public benefit in exchange for zoning relief. Mr. Reifman stressed that the restoration of the Orrington Hotel with no financial assistance from the City is a substantial public benefit. SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 6, 2003 4 Chairperson Brzezinski asked why the entry feature on the Sherman Avenue residential proposal needs to be so much higher than the rest of the building. Mr. Randall stated that the height is needed for an elevator overrun. Chairperson Brzezinski felt that the height of this entrance feature would take away from the proposed setback and infringe upon the character of this block of Sherman Avenue. Carlos Ruiz encouraged that overhanging balconies not be included on this building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval so to provide more information for the Plan Commission to consider when reviewing this project. The motion was not seconded. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she could not second this motion until the entry feature and other aspects of the Sherman Avenue residential proposal could be resolved. The pre -application conference was dosed and no action was taken. SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 6, 2003 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES August 13, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Sat Nagar, Jim Wolinski Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting, Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-126 1910 Demoster Street Recommendation to Sign Board Erect three (3) freestanding signs at Evanston Plaza. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen stated that the plaza owner is offering two bike lids if three freestanding pole signs are allowed to be placed on the plaza property. There would be advertising on the signs and the signs would be 11-feet in height. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of the proposal concerning the signage to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 03-124 624 Grove Street Recommendation to Sion Board Mount new wall sign for M. C.L. Home Ddcor. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen stated that the applicant is proposing a small blade sign. The sign is too high to meet the Sign Regulations. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this proposal to the Sign Board with the condition that the top of the sign be lowered to be the required 15'6" in height. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 03-125 705 Main Street Recommendation to Sian Board Mount new wall sign for Evanston Lumber. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Hallen stated that the signage is far too large in area —136 square feet instead of the required maximum of 56 square feet in size. There will be symbols on the signs. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the symbols do not add any useful information, and, in fact are confusing. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of this proposal to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 03-122 3330 Central Street Concept Demolish building and construct a one-story 3,335 square foot building to house a Starbucks type 11 restaurant (1,400 s.f.) and a retail goods establishment (1,935 s.f.) with 13 off-street parking spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Douglas Bean R.G. Walker, Jr. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Bean stated that the proposed Starbuck's would be 1,400 square feet, with a drive -through on the east side of the street. 13 parking spaces would be included. Two of the curb cuts on the property will be eliminated, so two will remain. Mr. Walker stated that the building materials would consist of face brick, black aluminum clear glass windows, and black metal trim. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that pedestrian traffic access from Central Street is not desirable, in that pedestrians would need to walk up the drive aisle to get to the Starbuck's. He suggested moving the parking a bit further to the west to allow for a sidewalk. Committee member Aiterson asked if the four parking spaces in front of the building are the required width. Mr. Walker stated that they are 8'6", which is the required width. Mr. Alterson noted that the speakers for the drive -through will be facing the adjacent school and that this may create some concern. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the rooftop mechanical units would be visible from the street. Mr. Walker stated that the units would be hidden behind the parapet wall. Committee member Wolinski asked if the extra retail space in the building would ever become a restaurant. Mr. Bean stated that this would not be possible, as there is not enough parking. Committee member Dahal requested that the pork chop median in the ingresslegress to Crawford Avenue is removed to alleviate pedestrianlautomobile conflicts. Mr. Bean agreed to remove this pork chop. Carlos Ruiz suggested the possibility of locating the building up to the SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 13, 2003 lot line and locating the parking behind the building. This would create more presence on the street and alleviate pedestrian/auto conflicts. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this suggestion would be desirable on a more urban site. She stated that the proposed landscaping along the street and comer are desirable in this location. Committee member Alterson stated that Mr. Ruiz' suggestion should be explored. He also asked if left turn lanes would be permitted onto Central Street. Mr. Bean stated that the previous traffic studies show that these left turn lanes would be feasible. Committee member Alterson stated that he would vote against this concept because he believes more detail needs to be provided regarding traffic flow and conditions. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-1). Committee member Alterson voted nay. SPAARC 03-129 824 Emerson Street Conceat Drive -through banking facility for "First Bank & Trust." PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Robert Yohanan James Murray GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Murray explained that the site is currently occupied by an automobile service station. The site has been given an IEPA clean bill of health. The proposed building would be 2,000 square feet. It would consist of a glass front. The brick color would be similar to that of the new Border's on Maple Avenue. A special use would be required for this proposal. DISCUSSION: Committee member Dahal stated that the driveway off of Elgin Road is too close to the intersection. Mr. Murray noted that the driveway would be a strict right -out at this location. Frank Aguado stated that the Zoning Analysis has been completed and that the only change In this proposal is that the parking spaces are not deep enough. Mr. Murray stated that the space depth, plus the overhang allowance, should provide enough depth for cars to park. Committee member Alterson stated that parking for the adjacent restaurant would be an issue. Mr. Murray stated that the restaurant would not be permitted to use the parking associated with the banking facility. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that her initial reaction is that this proposal is a drive -through looking for a building. She expressed concern with the amount of pavement on the site and how this proposal would effect pedestrians in the area. She suggested narrowing the driveway and adding significant amounts of landscaping that would not impede motorists in terms of site angles. She also encouraged possibly reconfiguring on -site parking, creating parallel parking and allowing for a pedestrian walkway up to the building. Committee member Dahal asked if one of the drive -through lanes could be removed in favor of a bypass lane. Committee member Wolinski stated that he is glad that this proposal is not for a larger building, and that this proposal provides relief for the possible overbuilding of this area. Committee member Alterson expressed concern regarding the amount of stacking spaces being provided for the SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 13, 2003 drive-throughs. He stated that if the parking is for employees only, then the concern regarding cars backing out into a drive -through lane would be somewhat alleviated. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). SPAARC 03-120 1710 Orrinaton Avenue Conceot Construct a r floor conference center and twenty-seven dwelling units at 1717--1725 Sherman Avenue. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Greg Randall David Reifman Greg DeStefano GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Randall presented the changes to the ninth floor conference center elevation made since this project last appeared before SPAARC. These changes are based on comments made by SPAARC. The mass has been set off the edge of the building. The base of the building, as well as landscaping and paving would remain the same. The curia cut off Orrington Avenue would be slightly extended to allow for better vehicular drop off access. As far as the Sherman Avenue residential development, the elevator entry portion has been pushed back in fine with the front face of the residential portion, as previously suggested by SPAARC. The relief to the ziggurat setback is still being requested for a setback of 13 feet. The previous balconies, which jutted out from the elevation, are no longer being proposed. Mr. DeStefano stated that setting the elevation further back than 13 feet would seriously compromise the feasibility of locating residential units in the space. Furthermore, the units would add significant street life to Sherman Avenue. Mr. Randall stated that the residential proposal along Sherman Avenue would not effect the low streetscape of Sherman Avenue, as it would be setback enough to not be obtrusive. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked where the building mechanical units would be placed. Mr. Randall replied that the units would be located interior in both the area of the elevator override and in the tenth floor mechanical section of the building. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that aligning the elevator entry with the rest of the residential building is very successful. However, the massing of three stories on top of the garage along Sherman creates too much vertical mass and takes away from the Sherman Avenue streetscape. She suggested setting the third story even further back than the bottom two stories. Walter Hallen disagreed, noting that other buildings along Sherman Avenue, notably the Marshall Fields and Fountain Square Building, already impede into this perceived low streetscape. Mr. DeStefano stated that other downtown buildings, such as the Carlson Building, are seven stories high without any sort of setback. Carlos Ruiz agreed with Chairperson Brzezinski, stating that this is a distinctive block in Evanston and it deserves to be preserved. He also asked if the Church Street elevation of the Orrington Hotel could be designed to basically restore the original appearance of the Hotel. SPAARC Meeting Notes —August 13, 2003 Mr. DeStefano stated that this elevation would be restored once an agreement is met with a tenant for the ground floor retail space. Committee member Wolinski asked if the rehabilitation of the Hotel would not be able to proceed if the residential portion of this proposal was not approved. Mr. DeStefano replied that the Hotel is under his ownership so it will be refurbished in some fashion, but not to this great extent if the residential portion of the project does not go through. Committee member Wolinski inquired as to the building material of the Sherman Avenue residential building. Mr. DeStefano stated that the material would be stucco. Committee member Wolinski replied that he would like the proposed residential to match the existing fagade below as closely as possible. Committee member Alterson offered some design suggestions to reduce the mass appearance of the residential fagade, such as mansarding the third floor of residential. Mr. DeStefano stated that he would explore various options in order to produce a result that would best satisfy all parties. Committee member Jackson informed the applicants that the Plan Commission is going to carefully review this project and that great detail in terms of design and building materials should be presented to the Commission. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-2). Chairperson Brzezinskl and Committee member Jackson voted nay. SPAARC 03-043 220 South Boulevard Final Demolish existing; construct a three-story attached single-family dwelling (4 townhomes). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Ratter Richard Rovnick GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Rovnick stated that the entire project would now be built as of right, as the sunken terraces have been removed. The west elevation of the building has been changed in that the porches have been refined with columns, so those three columns have been added to support a porch roof at each entry. A few feet have been added to the north end of the driveway so that the northernmost garage could be accessed easier. Mr. Rovnick presented samples of the building materials to be used. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the design is very nice and that she would encourage a way to accentuate the design. Mr. Ratter stated that there is some metal work on color on the north fagade and that more accentuation would be explored if zoning permits. Chairperson Brzezinski requested that mitigation measures be employed to reduce the effect of lighting on surrounding properties. Walter Hallen suggested using a downward emitting light fixture. ACTION: SPAARC Meeting Notes - August 13, 2003 A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the mitigation of excessive lighting in the rear and the addition of walkway lights. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). SPAARC 03-123 1930 Ridae Avenue Recommendation to S1gn Board Multiple variations for freestanding and wall signs. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen stated that there are eight proposed signs, referenced as signs A-F and I-J. Sign A is too close to the property line and is larger in size than permitted. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that there is no reason that an address could not serve the same purpose. Signs B and C are no trespassing signs, which need approval by the Sign Board because they also have "The Reserves at Evanston" printed on them. Signs D, E, and F will be temporary signs on wheels that read "Future Resident Parking." Signs I and J would be placed on the doorway and would denote the name of the development. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of Sign A. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (4-0). A motion was made to recommend denial of Signs B and C. The motion was seconded and passed. (3-1). Committee member Alterson voted nay. A motion was made to recommend denial of Signs D, E, and F. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (4-0). A motion was made to recommend approval of Signs I and J with the condition that the 1930 Ridge should be placed on the sign and the letters should be smaller. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (4-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes -- August 13, 2003 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES August 20, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Afterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Waiter Hallen Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-130 1213 Oak Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct a front bay window and enclose the front entry poach. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mary Gleason GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Gleason stated that a variance is needed because the proposal will encroach into the front yard and side yard setbacks. The side yard abuts a park. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked about the neighbors' comments regarding this proposal. Ms. Gleason stated that all of the neighbors on the street are in favor of this proposal. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this proposal to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-132 806 Dempster Street Preliminary and Final Interior/exterior (new storefront) remodeling for retail sales use (La Malson Rugs). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Donnalee Floeter Reza Ekhtera GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Floeter stated that the storefront is in definite need of repair since it has been damaged. The proposal is to replace the storefront with in -kind materials. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski noted that a six-inch step is located at the doorway. She stated that the Illinois Accessibility Code would require an accessible entryway. Ms. Floeter stated that the door could be setback a slight amount and the pavement could be ramped to meet the doorway. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the ramp should occur inside the store, not outside. She also asked about signage. Ms. Floeter noted that there currently is no signage, just rugs hanging in the windows. Committee member Marino asked that a few more planters be placed in front of the store. Mr. Ekhtera stated that he would place more planters in front of his store. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the installation of new planters on the sidewalk and the approval of the accessible entranceway by the State. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-079 852-854 Ridue Avenue Construct roofed front porch. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Building Owner Final GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The owner stated that the rear porches have been removed so to allow enough room for a loading dock to be legally located behind the building. She explained that the rear stairs would be located inside the building. She also stated that the Public Works Department approved the curb cut for the loading dock. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson noted that the Zoning Board of Appeals did not approve this project, largely due to the fact that the curb cut is located too close to the Ridge/Main intersection. Chairperson Brzezinski expressed concern regarding the exit way to the rear stairs and how much room a person would have to exit to the outside if a truck was parked in the loading area. Committee member Alterson stated that he could not support this proposal considering the fact that the curb cut is far too close to the Ridge/Main intersection. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if a new awning has been installed that fits architecturally with the building as was requested the last time this project appeared before SPAARC. The building owner stated that a new awning is being proposed, but she could not assure that it would be different from the existing awning and more architecturally consistent. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if landscaping was being addressed. The building owner stated that some new landscaping would be added. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that a formal landscape plan is required for approval. ACTION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 20, 2003 60 A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: - Compliance with all applicable ordinance, regulations, and codes; Approval of the awning by the Building Department; - Approval of a landscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-4). Committee members Aiterson, Jackson, Walczak, and Wolinski voted nay). SPAARC 03-128 2400 Sheridan Road Preliminary and Final Install roof top air conditioner. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Brad Borcherz GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Committee member Alterson noted that this building is not within the Northeast Evanston Historic District or the National District. Mr. Borcherz stated that the unit is a two -ton. and is 29 inches high. He presented where the unit would be located on the building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she does not favor exposed equipment on rooftops. However, it was noted that this would not profoundly affect the appearance of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 20, 2003 3 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES August 27, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Stefanie Levine, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Otter Staff: Jeff Burdick. Susan Gudedey, Walter Hallen, Morris Robinson Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting_ Aooroval of Meetina Minutes: July 30.2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes of July 30, 2003. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). must 6. 2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes of August 6, 2003. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). &pust 20. 2003: A motion was made to approve the meeting minutes of August 20, 2003 subject to changing the word "awning" to "canopy" in the discussion section of the 852-854 Ridge Avenue case. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Committee member Dahal abstained from voting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-131 1227 Maple Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct a two-story rear addition. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Healy Rice Annette Rehmke GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Rice stated that the major variation exceeds the lot coverage allowance of 30%. Currently the home is legal non -conforming at 39%. and the addition would push the coverage up to 43%. A large part of the lot coverage is due to the open porch, which extends around the house. The porch contributes 8% to the lot coverage. The three -car garage contributes another 8% to the lot coverage. Ms. Rehmke stated that she wishes to remove the existing driveway. Ms. Rice stated that the Preservation Commission approved the project. The existing aluminum siding will be removed and the existing siding would be restored. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson asked if the removal of the driveway would be offered up during the variation process, as this would have a significant mollifying effect on the property. He also noted that a neighbor has responded in an unfavorable manner to the proposed lot coverage increase. However, this neighbor may form a different opinion when he is aware of the full scope of the project, including the removal of the driveway and the fact that a large amount of the lot coverage is due to the porch size and garage size. In addition, Committee member Alterson noted that the removal of the driveway would produce more greenspace than the addition itself would take away. Other members of the Committee agreed, and favored the removal of the existing driveway. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 03-134 1515 Pavne Street Prellminary and Final Construct a two-family dwelling. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bryan Henson GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Henson presented the site plan and elevation of the proposal. He stated that a storefront window will be placed in the front and a security system will be installed for theft deterrence. The brick will be either Norman or modular sized. The window sills will be limestone. A fence will be installed in the front, and the fence will probably be steel and six -feet in height. DISCUSSION: Committee member Dahal asked Mr. Henson if the garage entrance would be from the alley. Mr. Henson replied that the entrance would be from the alley. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that the contemporary design is well-done, but she encouraged wrapping the brick material around the building so that the building does not appear to be a mid -block building. Mr. Henson suggested using a round faced block on the side elevations, in that it would be more cost effective. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this may work, and strongly suggested turning the comer of the elevation in a graceful manner. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the applicant reappearing before SPAARC with an acceptable landscape plan prior to occupancy permits being issued. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7- 0). SPAARC 03-135 1601 Simpson Street Preliminary Interior and exterior remodeling of commercial building into six retail offices✓storefronts. SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 27, 2003 2 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Leineweber Kiril Mirintchev GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Mr. Leineweber explained that the proposal is to create four storefronts and two upper level livetwork loft spaces. The square footage of the building would not be expanded, but an exterior staircase would be added. Three of the storefronts would face Simpson Street. Landscaping has been added to the parking lot. The parking lot aisle width would be 22.5' instead of the 24' that is required. A parking lot plan will be submitted to the Engineering Department for their review. The proposal is to turn the comer storefront and the second storefront into a Southem/New Orleans style restaurant. The third storefront may be a nightclub of sorts, but this is not yet certain. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the comer element is a bit uninviting in that it creates too dark of a space. She suggested that it be opened up more. She also expressed concern with the mix of materiats, in that it creates an unorganized, chaotic situation from an elevation standpoint. Mr. Leineweber stated that the materials are mostly metal, and that the color elevation is not completely accurate, especially in terms of color. Chairperson Brzezinski also noted that the round window depicts a 70's style of architecture, which was not a notable era of architecture. Committee member Levine asked if a certain section of the proposed parking lot could be used as open space, possibly for an outdoor seating area for a restaurant. Mr. Leineweber stated that this area would be needed for loading. He stated that a proposal is being considered for outdoor seating. Chairperson Brzezinski asked if signage location has been considered. Mr. Leineweber stated that the round window would be used for the primary location of signage. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 27, 2003 3 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 3, 2003 ARendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Aiterson, Carolyn Brlezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Jim Wolinski (Design Professional: Hans Friedman Ottwr Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Moms Robinson Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. ADoroval of Meeting Notes: &gust 27. 2003: A motion was made to approval the meeting minutes of August 27, 2003. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). Committee member Friedman abstained from voting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-099 2201 Oakton Street Preliminary and Final Various renovations to existing big box retail center (Home Depot), including restriping of panting lot, installation of directional signage, repainting of canopy areas, installation of new parking lot lighting, replacement of rooftop mechanical units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Paul Machalek Tim Costello GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Machalek stated that the entire front parking lot would be restriped. Stop bars would be painted on the pavement at the end of each driveway to slow down traffic movement in the parking lot. Based on the comments of the previous SPAARC meeting, additional cart corals have been added in the parking lot. Moreover, landscaped islands will be installed halfway down each parking aisle. The islands will consist of a pair of trees and ground cover. New trees would replace existing dead trees on the site. The pylon sign at the entrance would be changed and certain trees near the entrance would be removed to Gear automobile visibility. Mr. Machalek stated that the parking lot lighting would be replaced in the Home Depot parking lot area only. Mr. Machalek stated that building signage would be altered. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if two trees could be added in place of the trees to be removed along the entranceway to the center. Mr. Machalek agreed to prune these trees to allow for increased visibility without having to remove trees. Committee member Marino asked about the vacant outlot next to the PetSmart store and whether it could be maintained to prevent illegal dumping that is occurring with great frequency in this location. Mr. Costello stated that PetSmart owns this site. Committee member Marino stated that Home Depot's position, as entire site developer should grant them authority in requiring PetSmart to maintain this site and prevent further dumping. Committee member Aiello stated that she is uncomfortable with the use of two different colored lights on the entire site parking lot. Other members agreed, and requested that the lighting be uniform across the entire center. The Committee once again requested that the entrance/exit signs on the doors be removed to eliminate confusion. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the following conditions: • The existing planters in the parking lot have the same groundcover as the new planters' groundcover, • The lot adjacent to the PetSmart be cleaned up and seeded, if this is not permitted to happen due to ownership issues, then the City needs to be informed of this; • Parking lot lighting throughout the entire site should be consistent; • An inspection by Planning staff of the east landscaping strip and the gate that is required to be shut on the east of the site; • The trimming of trees and shrubs near the pylon sign in lieu of removing these trees and shrubs. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-1). Committee member Jackson voted nay. SPAARC 03-136 2450 Main Street Concept Installation of automobile service (gas, 6 pumps) station at Sam's Club. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Steven Cecil GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Cecil stated that the proposal would take up eight parking spaces. He presented the plans for the proposed gas station. DISCUSSION: Committee member Aiello asked why the area near the truck dock was not considered. She felt that the proposed location is far too close to the park located to the west. Committee member Marino agreed, suggesting a separate meeting to discuss the location of the proposed gas station. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would not object to this proposed locale, SPAARC Meeting Notes - September 3, 2003 2 especially if considerable landscaping was added around the gas station. She noted that this gas station could potentially break up the large amount of parking lot space. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case to allow for a separate meeting between the developer and the City to discuss the possible location of the gas station. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-137 515 Main Street Preliminary and Final Install rooftop wireless antenna system (T-Mobile). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Al Lehto Tim Michalik GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Lehto presented coverage maps showing why these antennas are needed in this area. He stated that the equipment would be entirely screened and that the antennas would be attached to poles on the penthouse units of the building. The only aspect that will be visible from street level would be the top of the antennas, which will jut up above the penthouses. DISCUSSION: Committee member Aiello asked if there were other buildings considered. Mr. Lehto stated that another building was being considered, but it was not as desirable. Committee member Marino suggested that the Zoning Committee examine the trend of antenna possibilities in the City, especially along the Chicago Avenue corridor. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested that the antennas be flush with the height of the penthouse. Mr. Lehto stated that this possibility could be examined. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case so that the applicant could return with a proposal possibly lowering the height of the antennas so that they are square with the height of the penthouses. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 03-127 1503 Emerson Street Conceot Construct six townhouses on vacant site. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Neil Davidson Gary Joyce GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Davidson stated that four of the townhouses would be affordable. A curb cut would be added off of Emerson, allowing for one-way access into each of the units' two car garages. Exiting of the site would occur onto Jackson Avenue, which is one-way southbound. Mr. Joyce stated that this proposal would require some sort of zoning relief. DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 3, 2003 Committee member Aiello suggested the further enhancement of the south elevation of the development to better address Emerson Street. Mr. Joyce strongly agreed with this suggestion. Committee member Marino explained the possible strategies to be used to provide affordable housing within this development. Committee member Friedman stated that this scheme is very intriguing, but suggested a more contemporary design on the front elevation. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested incorporating a porch into the unit entrances. Mr. Joyce very much liked this idea. Committee member Altersorr felt those six units was too many for this site. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-1). Committee member Atterson voted nay. SPAARC Ahw6 Q Notes — September 3, 2003 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Adova Jackson, Kevin Kelly, Stefanie Levine. Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar. Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen, Moms Robinson, Carlos Ruiz Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-138 1516 Greenleaf Street Construct dormer addition to third floor. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Elizabeth Beckman Prellminary and Final GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Beckman explained that the proposal is to extend an existing dormer to provide more space in the units. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the same material would be used. Ms. Beckman replied that the same building material, windows and roof would be used on the dormer. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-140 1741 Sherman Avenue Prelifninary and Final Interior/exterior (storefront) remodeling for a change of use to a Type t restaurant (dba Camille's). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ed Schulze GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Schulze stated that the awnings would be removed and new signage would be added to the fagade. A new door would be added where a door currently does not exist. DISCUSSION: Committee member Alterson asked if this proposed restaurant was in fact a type I restaurant. Mr. Schulze stated that carryout is offered, as well as sit down service. Committee member Alterson stated that this proposal appears to be a Type 41 restaurant. Chairperson Brzezinski asked what the finish of the door would be. Mr. Schulze replied that the door finish would match the existing finish, in bronze aluminum. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval of the new door. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 03-144 423 Greenleaf Street Allow boat parking in the street side driveway. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Arlova Jackson Recommendation to ZBA GENERA!_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Jackson presented the proposal on behalf of the property owner. She explained that a violation was issued for his boat, which is parked in his driveway. The property owner is appealing the violation and requesting a variance to allow for the parking of his boat in his driveway. He claims that the fact that he does not have alley access and that his garage is too small for storage of the boat is a hardship. The Parking Systems Department would allow him to park the boat attached to the tow vehicle on the street, but he does not wish to do this, as it would block the view of cars exiting the alley. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski stated that this is not allowed in any driveway throughout the City, and that variances should not be granted for these requests. He further added that the owner should be able to find an alternative location for the storage of his boat. Ms. Jackson explained that the owner does not feel it feasible to store his boat miles away when he lives right down the street from the lake. Committee member Aiello asked if the owner could build a larger garage. Ms. Jackson replied that the house is within the Historic District and that the garage is an original structure. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of this proposal to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed. (9-1). Committee member Alterson voted nay, and Committee member Jackson, serving as the presenter for the applicant, abstained from voting. SPAARC 03-139 122-130 Callan Avenue Prellminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling for condo conversion. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Karl Oriofski SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 10, 2003 2 John Gonzolez GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Odofski presented two possible landscape plans for the courtyard. New windows would be installed. These new windows would be double pane wood windows with aluminum clad to match the building. The existing windows are double hung. Mr. Orlofski stated that the adjacent empty lot is planned to be a parking lot for the development. The parking lot would require a variance, and it would be landscaped with gates. DISCUSSION: Committee member Levine stated that a more detailed landscape plan would be required, with plant species and spacing designation. She suggested a landscape plan that better compliments the historic style of the building. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the landscape plan should include lighting. She also asked that pictures of the site be brought in when final SPAARC review occurs. Committee member Alterson asked where the condenser units for the air conditioning would be placed. Mr. Orlo€ski stated that the units would be located on the roof. Committee member Marino stated that he is not in favor of the rolling gate in front of the proposed parking. He would like to see the parking lot remain gate -free. Committee member Walczak stated that security lighting should be located in the parking lot, but this lighting should not negatively effect the adjacent property owners. Committee member Marino Inquired as to the possible removal of the parking, if granted, and if this would be permitted. Committee member Alterson stated that once parking is provided for the building, it becomes required parking. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 03-137 515 Main Street PmIlminary and Final Install roof -top wireless antenna system (T-Mobile). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Al Lehto GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Lehto stated that he would be able to make the antennas flushed with the penthouse, with just a little cell coverage being lost. This is in response to SPAARC's comments the previous week. He presented the drawings depicting this new proposal to the Committee. DISCUSSION: Committee member Wolinski stated that because this proposed antenna is to be placed on the Legacy Building, which has not followed the City's recommendation for screening of the at - grade generator on the property, no additional permits should be issued relating to this building. Mr. Lehto stated that this deal for the antenna is with the Condo Association, who now owns the building. SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 10, 2003 Committee member Marino asked if this antenna would be visible to someone standing at the southwest comer of Main and Chicago. Mr. Lehto stated that it would not. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the only location where this antenna would be partially visible is from locations looking south along Chicago Avenue. Committee member Wolinski stated that he would be willing to support this proposal if Mr. Lehto approached the condo association and told them that the City is requiring that the generator be screened in order for the antenna to be approved. Mr. Lehto stated that he would be willing to serve as a conduit between the City and the condo association in order to achieve the appropriate screening of the generator and the installation of the antenna. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the compliance with the previous SPAARC approval of the screening of the at -grade emergency generator. The motion was seconded and approved (9-2). Committee members Aiello and Jackson voted nay. Committee member Aiello made a motion that SPAARC request that the Plan Commission studies the issue of cellular antenna placement In Evanston with the goal of creating a central policy regarding this placement. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 03-112 1711 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final CVS Pharmacy in former Wherehouse Records site. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Wojtila Michele Dodd Richard Cook Ed Cook GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Wojtila stated that the entrance door will be replaced with a revolving door and relocated to the south end of the storefront. The ADA-compliant door will be located next to the main door and recessed so it does not extend into the right-of-way. Mr. Cook presented the new storefront window configuration. He explained that cherry wood finishes would be placed inside the window, with smaller lifestyle graphics in the center of the windows. Essentially, 50% of the windows would allow for visibility into the store. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen stated that he believes this is an excellent compromise between the desires of the City and the need of the retailer. Committee member Friedman disagreed, stating that storefront windows in downtown areas should be open and that the merchandise racks should be pulled significantly away from the windows to provide this openness. He felt that the issue has not been addressed through this solution. Committee member Walczak stated that this proposal still denies open visibility from a safety perspective in that only 50% of the window SPAARC Meeting !Votes — September 10, 2003 4 area allow for visibility. Committee member Marino stated that, while he appreciates the effort of the applicant to address SPAARC's concerns, he still does not like the fact that this could send a precedent in the downtown area for less visibility into storefronts. Chairperson Brzezinski agreed, noting that the Osco store at Asbury and Oakton has a much more visible storefront and, unlike this store, is not located in a high pedestrian area. She felt that there should not be anything located behind the windows. Committee member Alterson stated that he would like to see product in the windows instead of the proposed lifestyle signage. Committee member Aiello agreed, and noted that she would not mind if product were displayed or visible in the storefront windows. Ms. Dodd stated that an entire aisle of product would be lost if merchandise wasn't located along the storefront wall. She noted that the storefront windows have been opened up significantly. ACTION: A motion was made to deny site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (9-2) Committee members Aiello and Alterson voted nay. SPAARC 03-143 1160 Dodge Avenue Prellminary and Final Interior/exterior (installation of security grill) remodeling for retail sales use (dba Gamestop). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rodrigo Gutierrez GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Gutierrez stated that sliding grills would be installed. These grills will be open and only be used when the store is closed. The grills are on the interior of the store. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked why electronic modes of security are not used in lieu of this grill. Mr. Gutierrez replied that all Gamestop stores employ this method of security. Committee member Wolinski stated that Gamestop is assuming that there will be crime problems at this location. Committee member Walczak stated that there are many other options for security. ACTION: A motion was made to deny preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 03.017 2400-2440 Main Street Prellminary and Final Site work improvements to shopping center. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rob Bond GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Bond explained that he is looking for a site work permit to start work only on the parking lot and outer site improvements. He presented the landscape plan to the Committee. DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 10, 2003 s Chairperson Brzezinski asked if landscaping would be introduced at the building line, as she previously requested. Mr. Bond stated that landscaping would not be introduced in this location, as it would impede into the width of the sidewalk in front of the store. He also stated that more glass is being provided at the storefront. Committee member Levine stated that there are ample opportunities to plant low shrubs and trees adjacent to the building that would not block the windows into the store. Chairperson Brzezinski requested that the parking lot be pushed back to accommodate more landscaping at the building. Mr. Bond explained that this would cause a reduction in parking. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she would prefer landscaping to parking. Committee member Aiello disagreed, noting that this rehabbed commercial center will draw shoppers due to quality stores and good parking. Committee member Wolinski stated that although he would like to see the best possible project developed, it is important to get this project moving, and it would be a shame to hold up the project due to landscaping issues. Committee member Friedman asked if this project coordinated with Sam's Club proposed gas station on the adjacent parking lot, because the drive aisle will be crowded and create dangerous traffic situations. Committee member Marino replied that Sam's has agreed to move the station further east and that this should alleviate some of these concems. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval of the site work on this center subject to the sidewalks in front of the stores being at least 8 feet in width and the consideration of providing landscaping at the building line. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-3). Committee members Brzezinski, Friedman, and Levine voted nay. Committee member Aiello made a motion that SPAARC develop a set of standards for commercial parking lots In Evanston and bring these standards to the Plan Commission for review. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 03-141 1001. 1012 Chicaao Avenue Concevt Exterior renovations to be done on the AutoBam and Hollywood Video. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mark Schaefer Richard Fisher GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Schaefer stated that the existing Hollywood Video would be rehabbed into a new automobile showroom. The building envelope would stay as is. The building exterior would be substantially cleaned up. An entrance would be located off of Lee Street to provide a viewpoint for an additional showroom. The service center across the street will be rehabbed In a similar fashion. The service center would be extended to two stories in the rear of the building. DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meeting Notes - September 10, 2003 Committee member Wolinski stated that this auto dealership is one of the most delightful in the City in that signage is well done and the problems are quickly addressed. Committee member Marino requested that the owner meet with the Public Works Department to coordinate work with the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan recommendations. ACTION: A motion was made to grant conceptual site plan and appearance review approval with the recommendation that plans be coordinated with the Chicago Avenue Streetscape Plan recommendations. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 03-145 1633 Central Street Recommendation to Sion Board Propose installation of a sign (on the east wall) not on the fagade parallel with the public thoroughfare as required by the Sign Regulations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hagen stated that a variance is being required for a sign that is perpendicular to the right of way, which violates the Sign Ordinance. This is the only variance being sought. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-1). Committee member Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 03-147 2737 Central Street Recommendation to Sian Board Proposed re -facing of an awning with a 2-foot projection, rather than the 3-feet minimum required by the Sign Regulations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Waiter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen stated that the variance being sought is for a 2-foot projection of an awning, which should be a minimum of 3 feet according to the Sign Ordinance. DISCUSSION: Committee member Aiello stated that the minimum 3-foot regulation should be followed. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-2). Committee members Aiello and Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 03-146 2201 Oakton Street Recommendation to Slgn Board Proposed sign 9 is larger and higher than permitted by Sign Regulations Proposed signs 2 and 3 are mounted higher than permitted by the Sign Regulations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen SPAARC Meeting Notes - September 10, 2003 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen stated that the signs are higher than permitted by the Sign Ordinance. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that this is a significant improvement over what Is there now. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 10, 2003 8 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 17, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Sat Nagar Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Walter Hallen Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting, Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-139 122-130 Callan Avenue Final lnteriorlexterior remodeling for condo conversion. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Karl Orlofski Glenn Porter GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Orlofski presented the landscape plan for the project. He explained that the plan follows the recommendations of Stefanie Levine, in that it compliments the building by not being extremely contemporary. Mr. Orlofski also presented the plans for the proposed parking lot. He stated that the gates have been removed at the request of SPAARC. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that the parking lot would require a separate permit approval and would also require a variance. She asked where the condenser units would be located. Mr. Orlofski replied that the units would be located on the roof. Chairperson Brzezinski requested that the parking lot lighting be directed so not to negatively effect the adjacent properties. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval for the interior/exterior remodeling subject to the review and approval of the landscape plan by the Parks and Forestry Department. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (5-0). A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval for the proposed parking lot. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 01-086 1123 Howard Avenue Preliminary Resurface portion of parking lot, creating three new parking stalls. Add landscaping to commercial strip center, install a gate/fence at the northeast portion of property and remove concrete ingress/egress from Barton Avenue, replacing with sod. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Chris Lee Randolph Liebelt GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Liebelt explained that the ingress/egress off of Barton would be removed, three parking spaces would be added to rear portion of the parking lot, and new trees would be added to the landscaping. DISCUSSION: Waiter Hailen asked where the trash area would be located. Mr. Liebelt replied that it would be relocated to the front, at the request of the City. Committee members countered that the City would not want to see the trash area located in the front. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that a single parking spot could be added and the trash area could continue to be located in the rear. This would also eliminate the need for the additional parking spaces to only accommodate compact cars. Mr. Liebelt stated that the additional parking is not required by code. Chairperson Brzezinski noted that a wood fence was required by SPAARC in the rear when this case last appeared and that these plans show no fencing in the rear area. Mr. Lee stated that landscaping would be more aesthetically appealing in this area. Chairperson Brzezinski also inquired as to the location of the tree in the parkway where the Barton ingress/egress was located. Jeff Burdick relayed Alderman Rainey's concern regarding the burglar bars on the windows of the building. Mr. Lee stated that these bars are necessary for security purposes. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that these bars create a negative atmosphere in the area and she suggested that Mr. Lee contact Alderman Rainey to discuss alternative security measures as well as the proposed location of the trash area in the front of the building. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case so that the applicant can follow up with the Alderman regarding trash area location and security measures and so that the status of the building permit for this proposal could be resolved. The motion was seconded and passed. (5-1). Committee member Friedman voted nay. SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 17, 2003 2 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 24, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Aiterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Ingrid Eckersberg, James Edwards, Arlova Jackson, Stefanie Levine, Dennis Marino, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Jeff Burdick, Wafter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existing and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-112 1711 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final CVS Pharmacy in former Wherehouse Records site. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Michele Dodd Richard Cook John Wojtifa Hanley Wheeler GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Wheeler presented a compromise, which includes a five-foot high gondola with product. The space above the gondola would be completely dear of obstruction. Product displays would be presented at each of the four storefront windows. Each display would be themed, with health, beauty, food and beverage, and specialty themes. Softer colors would be used In these presentations. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked how often the displays would be changed. Mr. Wheeler envisioned the displays possibly be seasonal. He stated that it is in the store's best interest to change the displays regularly to keep it fresh and attractive. Committee member Aiello asked If the backdrop of the displays would be real wood. Mr. Wheeler stated that this backdrop would be a sort of wood laminate. Committee member Friedman commented that it appeared to be Formica. Committee member Marino stated that he walked past the CVS store in Chicago on Michigan Avenue, and felt that it was successful in opening up the storefront. He noticed that clear glass was used on the edge of the windows at this location and he asked if this could be incorporated into this design. Mr. Wheeler explained that the configuration of that store is different than this one and that using this clear glass on the edge of the window would not be possible at this location. Committee member Friedman asked why the products along the window could not be placed in a clear glass case so that visibility is increased into the store. Mr. Wheeler replied that the back of product racks would not be as attractive as a product window display. Committee member Aiello agreed, and stated that the product window display proposal would be much more effective in addressing the sidewalk. Chairperson Brzezinski reiterated her concern about the window displays being maintained. Mr. Wheeler stated that this is key store for CVS and it will be maintained to the highest of standards. Committee member Wolinski felt that this was an acceptable compromise. He asked for a commitment from CVS that there would not be paper signage in the window. Mr. Wheeler agreed to this stipulation. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about details of the lighting in the display. Mr. Wheeler replied that this level of detail has not yet been achieved, but assured that the lighting level would be appropriate. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (9-2). Committee members Friedman and Marino voted nay. SPAARC 03-152 315 Howard Street Recommendation to ZBA Type 2 restaurant — Quizno's PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kevin Magnuson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Magnuson stated that no exterior work is slated to be done. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked about the trash removal plan. Mr. Magnuson stated that trash is taken out to the dumpster at least twice a day. He was not sure how often a hauler would pick up the trash. Committee member Aiello asked if this case could be tabled until the franchisee is able to attend. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case until the franchisee could attend the SPAARC meeting. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 03.154 1916-1918 Maple Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Demolish existing and construct new rear porches, construct rooftop addition, establish three off-street open parking spaces in the rear yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew Venamore GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: SPAARC Meeting Notes - September 24, 2003 2 Mr. Venamore explained that the proposal is to remove the existing rear porches and replace with slightly smaller covered porches. The proposal exceeds the lot coverage regulation. The new parking would be accessed from Garnett Place. Cars would reverse out of the spaces onto Garnett Place. DISCUSSION: Carlos Ruiz stated that this building is an individual landmark and that the Preservation Commission supported this proposal so long as the proposed parking does not affect the historic nature of the building. Walter Hallen asked what the exterior material of the porch would be. Mr. Venamore replied that the original material was to be vinyl siding, but the Preservation Commission is requiring hardy plank siding. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she could not support the inclusion of the parking spaces, in that spaces will be sold to people who will not be able to pull in and out of the spaces. She requested additional infomnation that would show how these parking spaces are reasonably accessible. Committee member Aiello asked that the Traffic Engineering Department review the proposed parking layout. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about the window replacements. Carlos Ruiz stated that the Preservation Commission did not review the window replacements. Committee member Aiello requested that the windows be changed back to a more appropriate style. ACTION: A motion was made to table this case so that the Traffic Engineering Department could review the proposed parking spaces and so that a solution to the window situation could be developed. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-4). SPAARC 03-157 619 Emerson Street Preliminary and Final Intedor/exterior remodeling for now ADA concrete ramp to main entrance and front porch. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Brian Kittle David Wickmire GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kittle stated that the ramp would be placed on the Emerson side of the building. The building has been used as an office for Northwestern University. The existing porch staircase would be replaced, as it is too steep. The ramp would be concrete with concrete foundation. The side of the ramp will have the same masonry as exists on the building. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski inquired about the possibility of landscaping on the east side of the ramp to soften the appearance. Mr. Kittle stated that he would be in favor of adding this landscaping. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about illumination. Mr. Wickmire replied that there is plenty of street lighting in the area. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the review and approval by the Parks and Forestry Department of the additional landscaping to be added to the east side of the east leg of the ramp. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes - September 24, 2003 3 SPAARC 03-150 1549 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Requesting a special use to operate a Type 11 restaurant, 'The Italian Coffee Bar", with no exterior alterations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Christopher Casas GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Casas stated that the awning would remain, but the signage on the awning would be changed. DISCUSSION: Committee member Marino asked about the hours of operation. Mr. Casas replied that it would be open until probably 8p.m. Committee member Aiello suggested staying open later to take advantage of Music Institute patrons. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about the trash pick- up plan. Mr. Casas stated that trash would be removed at least three times daily, and the area within 150 feet of the store will be cleaned periodically throughout the day. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 03-156 1722 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Reface facade. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kellie Ponlos GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Ponlos stated that the facade will simply be refaced, and the sign would probably remain the same, but the material behind the facade would be changed. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she is happy to see this building facade improved. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 03-159 1732 Central Street Preliminary and Final New front facade design. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nate Kipnis GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kipnis explained that the existing stonework would remain on the facade, and columns would be added to encase the existing columns. The facade would receive a modem, 21' century look. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- September 24, 2003 4 DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen noted that the columns would be located over the property line. Mr. Kipnis was not sure if there is an easement for this encroachment. Committee member Marino asked if dear glass would be used. Mr. Kipnis stated that it would, and plants would be placed in front of the office on the second floor. Chairperson Brzezinski stated that she is not in favor of lighting being located on each column. Committee member Marino disagreed, stating that the lights fit nicely into the context of the block. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (11-0). SPAARC 03-153 613 Michigan Avenue Construct rear porch. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: O. Brent Gilbertson Recommendation to ZBA GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Gilbertson explained that the back porches of this three flat would be removed and replaced with a livable area that has a foundation. This needs ZBA approval for lot coverage purposes. The size of the porches would increase from approximately 90 square feet to 144 square feet. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked if the neighbors have commented on this proposal. Mr. Gilbertson stated that the only neighbors affected may be concerned about the shift of the staircase, but he has not yet heard from neighbors. Chairperson Brzezinski asked about the building materials. Mr. Gilbertson stated that brick is being considered. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (10-0). SPAARC 03-041 1314 Ridoe Avenue Pre Aoalication Conference Renovation of the former District 65 headquarters into 17 dwelling units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: James Murray Scott Prestangen Mike Niazmand GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Murray stated that this proposal appeared before the Preservation Commission. He stated that the existing driveway onto Ridge Avenue would be maintained. The Preservation Commission does not wish to see parking permitted in the front yard, as this would diminish the historic significance of the mansion from the Ridge Avenue perspective. As a result, a turnaround area will be provided so that vehicles traveling in opposing directions can pass one SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 24, 2003 another. The mansion will be divided into four dwelling units; the coach house into two units, and 11 units would be constructed along the periphery of the property. A four -foot high fence would be placed along the Dempster Street frontage. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen asked why the driveway onto Ridge Avenue is being maintained. Mr. Murray replied that the Preservation Commission is requesting the maintenance of the driveway. Carlos Ruiz clarified that the Preservation Commission does not want parking in the front yard, but did not make any recommendations regarding the existing driveway. Committee member Friedman suggested that the driveway be maintained, but that the curb cut onto Ridge Avenue is removed. He noted that the port co share is historically significant and should be retained, but the driveway could easily be removed from an historic standpoint. Committee member Dahal expressed concern regarding the line of sight of vehicles exiting onto Ridge Avenue considering the presence of the retaining wall. Mr. Murray replied that the traffic lights along Ridge Avenue are timed in such a fashion to create gaps in traffic and that the driveway should be regulated as a right out only. Plan Commission Chairman Widmayer asked where visitors would park. Mr. Murray stated that visitors would park in front of the garages. Committee member Aiello asked if it would be possible to reduce the number of units in the project to 15, so to eliminate the two units along Dempster Street that are located closer to Ridge Avenue than is the mansion. Mr. Niazmand replied that he already has moved these two units as far west as possible in response to the Preservation Commission concerns. Chairperson Brzezinski suggested deferring to the Preservation Commission on this particular issue. Committee member Aiello disagreed, stating that this is a site issue, not just a preservation issue. Chairperson Brzezinski strongly urged the use of wood garage doors. Committee member Aiello expressed concern regarding the size of renaissance stone to be used. She suggested a smaller size stone to reduce the chance of the stone appearing as concrete block. Committee member Friedman did not favor the semi Palladian windows on the third floor. He felt that it created a jarring note to the elevation. Committee member Levine stated that the random arrangement of the garages on the property appear odd. Mr. Prestangen stated that this issue was thought through thoroughly, and noted that this solution seemed preferable to massing the garages together to create a monolithic building. Committee member Aiello once again suggested eliminating the driveway onto Ridge just after the port co share. Chairperson Brzezinski summarized SPAARC concerns as the following: • The driveway onto Ridge Avenue • The amount and size of renaissance stone on the elevation • The design and materials of all of balcony railings • The material of the garage doors ACTION: No action taken. SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 24, 2003 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 9, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Carolyn Brzezinskl, Rajeev Dahal, Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, Jim Wolinski (Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Susan Gudderly, Walter Hallen, Donna Spicuzza Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed. A motion was made and seconded to approve the minutes of August 13, September 3, September 10 and September 17, 2003, and passed 9-0, with Committee Member Friedman abstaining, SPAARC 2400-2440 Main Street Final, Site work improvements to shopping center. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Robert Bond Federico Vidargas Robert Bond Alan Chapman Jim Harrington Jeremy Green Greg Reynolds GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The developers and architects addressed concerns from the last meeting. Mr. Bond and Mr. Vidargas said the landscaping would be against the building, allowing about an 8' clearance on the 12' sidewalks. They said they are working with the City on exact location of curb cuts. They showed the lighting and noted the towers would be intemally illuminated. Any signage as part of the tower would be reviewed and approved separately. A committee member was opposed to individual retail signage in the towers. Additional lighting suggestions were made and parking lot landscaping was discussed. The presenters noted that the height of the north elevation was increased and the unattached retail fronting Main Street will be shorter, but is not part of this process. Committee members discussed the arched openings and the material of the Food for less and the Marshall's spaces, expressing reservations about the different shaped arches and the amount of dryvit above them. The developers said they would consider and discuss the suggestions but the concem would be supporting the brick above the arches on the Marshall's facade. ACTION: A motion was made and seconded to grant final site plan approval subject to the landscaping materials being approved by Parks, Forestry and Recreation. The motion passed unanimously (1'i -0). A second motion was made and seconded to grant final appearance approval. The motion passed (8-3). C. Brzezinski, H. Friedman and R. Walczak voted nay. SPAARC Various Locations Discussion and Recommendation Discussion about erecting banners in front of rive CTA viaducts. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kimberly Beattie GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Representatives from the CTA presented an idea to place banners and plantings in front of viaducts at Church, Davis, Grove, Dempster, and Greenleaf, in response to a request by Mayor Morton for an interim beautification measure until the CTA replaces the viaducts. The banners would not further deteriorate the structures or compromise the structural integrity. Ms. Beattie said beautification measures do not alter funding availability or priority ratings for replacing the viaducts. The CTA would provide for the wire, banner and plantings but the City would be required to maintain them. DISCUSSION: The Committee looked at concept drawings. It was pointed out that the banner on the Howard Street viaduct is too short to cover the bad steel behind it. Members discussed the appearance of the banners and whether the public art committee should be involved and commented that advertising would be inappropriate, a plain color could attract graffiti, and a graphic design might look nice. They discussed the appearance, maintenance and safety of the proposed container planting. They mentioned the possibility of having one pilot viaduct or simply leaving the viaducts as they are until they can be replaced. They said a small group committee should be formed to make recommendations. ACTION: A motion was made and seconded to recommend concept approval of a viaduct cover- up,subject to review and recommendations of a banner committee. The motion passed (6-2). H. Friedman and J. Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 829 Case Preliminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling of existing mufti -family residence (7 dwelling units) for the purpose of a condominium conversion. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Leroy Turman GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 10, 2003 2 Mr. Turman said he owned the building for seventeen years and In the course of remodelling and upgrading the electric he decided to convert to condominiums. The exterior changes involve replacing the windows and the garage doors. DISCUSSION: Members said exterior changes also entail landscaping considerations. Mr. Turman said landscaping was already in place and showed pictures. Members complemented the existing landscaping. When asked about the windows, Mr. Turman said they would be double hung vinyl, probably white. Members suggested a brown shade would be less of a contrast to the building. They recommended that all air conditioning elements be placed on the roof top rather than on the ground. He said there would be no changes to the existing four parking units, which he plans to assign by lottery. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval conditioned on submittal of the documents required by the condominium ordinance. The motion passed unanimously (10-0.) SPAARC 1600 Dodpe Concept and Preliminary, Mount 3 cellular antennas for US Cellular on the existing smoke stack and place a new equipment panel on the building rooftop. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mike Bieniek GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Bieniek said the antennas would be at the 127' level, above the existing antennas at 110'. DISCUSSION: Members confirmed this is a lease agreement with the high school. They recommended the antennas be painted. ACTION: It was moved and seconded to grant preliminary approval to the project with the condition that the antennas be painted to match the masonry. It passed unanimously (10-0). SPAARC 1604 Greenleaf Street Prellminary and Final Establish open parking space in real yard, install patio and deck in rear yard, and erect WWI wood fencing with a 6' tall wrought iron gate. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Cynthia Archer GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Archer said the project went to the Zoning Board. DISCUSSION: Members discussed the conditions of the Zoning Board, which were that the wrought iron gate swing inward and that the parkway tree be preserved. ACTION: It was moved and seconded to grant preliminary and final approval subject to compliance with the Zoning Board conditions. It passed unanimously (10-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes - September 10, 2003 3 SPAARC 315 Howard Street Operate a Type 2 restaurant — Quizno's PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kevin Magnusen Ray Patel Recommendation to ZBA GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This was previously on the agenda but presenters were unable to answer questions at that time. DISCUSSION: Members asked for information on garbage pick-up, and presenters said it would be Monday, Wednesday and Friday. It was suggested that Sunday pick-up be added if necessary and it was recommended they use locking dumpsters. Members asked about the franchisee's experience. Mr. Patel said he had no experience but would be helped by his friend who operates two stores and spoke from the audience. Mr. Patel said the store hours would be 11 am to 9 p.m. There were no exterior changes planned. In response to a question about window signage, Mr. Magnusen said there would be two neon signs. He responded positively to the recommendation that the store have only one because it is a small space. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals with the condition that they close at 9 p.m. and the suggestion that they have only one neon window sign. The motion was seconded and passed (6 —1). J. Woiinski voted nay. SPAARC 1560 Sherman Preliminary and Final Replace phone equipment with 1 ' x 1' microwave antenna PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Gil Adams GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: They have existing two-way equipment which talks to ComEd trucks and vehicles in the area but it ties in through phone lines to the dispatch center in Joliet. They have had problems with the phone lines and want to set up a microwave link from the building to one of their substations. DISCUSSION: Members asked if this could speed response time. ACTION: It was moved and seconded to grant preliminary and final approval. The motion passed unanimously (10-0). SPAARC Mee ft Notes — September 10, 2003 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES October 8, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Ingrid Eckersberg, Arlova Jackson, Stefanie Levine, Dennis Marino, Jim Wolinski Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Susan Gudderiy, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed. The minutes from October 1 were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1231 McDaniel Recommendation to ZBA Construct a roofed front porch and stairs. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Thony Daye Wilner Daye GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The owner's sons explained the construction would address some sinking problems due to ground saturation from the canal and expand the view from inside. DISCUSSION: Asked how much of a variation was required and the neighbor's reactions. Was told neighbors were not opposed. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 1916-1918 Maple Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Demolish existing and construct new real porches. Establish three off-street open parking spaces in the rear yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew Venamore Seymour Turner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This was previously tabled pending information. The roof -top addition was withdrawn. The proposal for three parking spaces involves an ingress and egress easement from adjacent property, owned by same owner. Spaces 1 and 2 would be accessed from alley, space 3 via the easement. Mr. Venamore said he spoke recently to Rajeev Dahal, Senior Traffic Engineer, who was uncomfortable about access to space 3. It is shown as an 18', 0 degree reverse parking space and the zoning ordinance requires 21'. Chairperson Brzezinski said Mr. Dahal said 18' was absolutely not possible and while a 21' space is required in zoning ordinance, he is still doubtful because the configuration of adjoining lot with angled spaces makes it difficult to get into space 3. She said Mr. Dahal felt 21' would be potentially possible but still difficult with space #2 there and felt it's more appropriate to have just 2 spaces for the area. The proposal calls for a car to forward in, reverse park, then reverse back in the easement. Mr. Venamore said they want to modify the proposal, leaving 2 spaces on the subject property, and maybe increase 2 spaces off site as part of the proposed ingress/egress easement. DISCUSSION: Chairperson Brzezinski asked about backing out over a sidewalk with new configuration. Mr. Venamore said it is similar to existing spaces on adjoining property that back out. Ms. Brezezinski said while they recognized existing spaces already back out, in reviewing new proposals they try to avoid backing out over a pedestrian way. Prank Aguado asked about the zoning, which is R-4, and said the 2 new parking spaces would create additional violations of the zoning ordinance by not being within the last 30' of the property. He said three spaces were noticed, and didn't satisfy the setbacks. Mr. Alterson asked if proposed adjacent spaces were new or existing and the answer was new. Mr. Aguado suggested a new zoning analysis to pick up anything else and verify that the module works according to the ordinance. He also said he would hate for both properties to be tied up only for an easement for parking on an adjoining parcel. Carlos Ruiz said if the parking proposal is revised it might need to go to Preservation Commission again because they approved a different configuration. The presenters clarified two other spaces would be connected to subject property, which currently holds 7 cars. The proposal eliminates one in order to provide access to the two spaces on subject property, for a net increase of 1 on the adjoining property. Ms. Brzezinski noted they have heard from condo purchasers about size, type, access of space and they are expecting the City to look beyond the vanguard. She said meeting the technicality of the zoning ordinance is not always enough, you have to take into account the manipulations of getting to spaces, and the issue of public safety crossing the sidewalk. She said she is not In favor of exacerbating the situation in any way. SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 8, 2003 Ingrid Eckersburg noted the proposal reduces the amount of impervious surface, and Walter Hallen said the proposal has two additional strikes against it in addition to changing soft surface to hard surface, it also violates yard requirements and creates an additional hazard going across the sidewalk. Window replacemens, infill lightwell and the proposed porches were briefly discussed. James Wolinski commented that prior to any permits being issued for the project, the wall which was constructed illegally must be taken down. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of the rear porches as configured on the site plan and proposal, subject to changing out windows to match entire building and allowing only a single parking space or a tandem space for the same owner, (not two separate spaces), with access from the alley. Motion was seconded. It was clarified that the motion did not approve making use of the proposed easement. The motion failed. Another motion was made to recommend rejection of the current plan as noticed and any plan that involves backing up over the sidewalk. The motion was seconded and passed (6 —1). Ms. Jackson voted no. Another motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA of the porch replacement based on the recommendations of the Preservation Commission and subject to removal of the illegally constructed wall. The motion was seconded and passed (6-1). Mr. Alterson voted no. SPAARC 2415 McDaniel Recommendation to ZBA Construct a one-story addition with deck PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Roxanne Went GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Family room, previously a porch, is starting to fall away from the house and is sinking on wood piers. They want to rebuild with a similar look and adding a mudroom entrance off the driveway. DISCUSSION: Asked about variances which are Lot coverage and rear yard set back; 2.5% lot coverage change. Asked about neighbors response and Ms. Went said she had 3 letters of support from neighbors. She said it would be same stucco material as the house. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this proposal to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 8, 2003 SPAARr, 900 Chicano Avenue Preliminary and Final Demolish all improvements; construct mixed residentiaUcommercial with 77 dwelling units. 8400 square feet commercial, and 142 parking spaces. For Foundation Only. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Dan Martus Bill Thomas Brian Henson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This was formerly known as 603 Main. Applicants are seeking a foundation permit. This has received planned development approval, based on the drawings presented at this meeting. DISCUSSION: The last approval from SPARC was for concept. Mr. Wolinski said that since the project has received much scrutiny and has four pages of conditions that are part of the planned development ordinance, he doesn't feel this committee needs to discuss it and possibly contradict something in the ordinance. The presenters were asked if there were any changes between what was approved for the planned development and now, and Mr. Martus said they were not aware of any but noted the overall height was reduced after neighborhood meetings. Members discussed the streetscape plan and were told the developers will give $70,000 for landscape/streetscape project. Sue Gudderiy said the streetscape plans are not developed yet. Mr. Martus said their budget only has a concrete sidewalk in order to get occupancy. Marino requested that the sidewalk to be put in conforms to the streetscape plan. They hope they don't have to do the sidewalk first although they will put in a vanilla sidewalk if needed until the streetscape plan is known in order to get occupancy certificates. They will supply $70,000 towards the streetscape plan and the City will pick up the balance. If a temporary sidewalk is necessary, Committee members would like to discuss it Mr. Hallen asked if traffic review was part of the planned development process, and the answer was yes. He thought the 9' radius on the drive was very tight. Mr. Wolinski said that was seen. It was also noted that the vaulted sidewalk will get filled in. Mr. Wolinski said it is critical that people on crews know what is in the ordinance and comply with what was passed. It will be determined who on City staff will be responsible for ensuring complete compliance, and the builders should meet with that person when they come in for permits. It was also noted they should light the existing canopy. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final approval for the whole project, subject to coming back to this committee to review temporary streetscape plans if the City's streetscape program is not ready at time of occupancy. It was seconded and passed (6-0) with Stephanie Levine abstaining. SPAARC 626 Emerson Street Preliminary and Final Install exterior access ramp and landings. SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 8, 2003 4 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor Rick Nemec GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The project is to install a small accessible ramp in a courtyard of a building on Northwestern campus. They will remove small flagstone steps and replace them with two concrete steps and a ramp, parallel to the building on the east. The concrete will be color tinted to match the stone of the building. The landscaping will be replaced. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen asked if they could grade up to the ramp and have a sloped grassy surface, thus eliminating the need for handrails. Members said accessibility regulations requires handralls unless the slope is 1:20. Carlos Ruiz said he will view the property to see if if is visible from the street and thus would need to go to Preservation Commission. They were asked if they could do a stainless steel handrail. They will not but plan to paint the rail to blend better with the building. When asked about using limestone on edge of steps, Mr. Nestor said it would not be smooth enough. He said there is a concern about tripping when stone is used. Committee members agreed it was unfortunate to lose the tools of the flagstone and encouraged further consideration to making flagstone steps. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final approval. The motion was seconded and passed (6-1). Stefanie Levine voted no. SPAARC 1700 Maple Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Installation of freestanding monument sign I& Border's Plaza PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom White GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. White said the existence and placement of a monument sign was previously approved at Sign Board but they wanted to see detail before final approval. The sign will be metal with lit, punch -through letters saying Church Street Plaza at two points on the sign. The tenant signs will be flat and changeable, and will be used to identify smaller shops down the street as well as the hotel and parking lot. The sign will be 12' high, the same height as the lower portion of the parapet at Borders. Mr. White said they would also like to install a similar sign across the street. DISCUSSION: Members discussed the plans for a sign across the street and whether all or only some of the tenants on both sides would be included on both signs and whether that was confusing. Mr. SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 8, 2003 5 Hallen said it is an "existence" sign and doesn't indicate location. Ms. Brzezinski suggested using the international parking symbol on top to indicate public parking. ACTION: Motion made and seconded to recommend approval of one sign on the west side of the street. The motion passed (6-0). Stefanie Levine and Ingrid Eckersberg voted no. SPAARC 1729 Sherman Preliminary and Final inferior/exterior (new storefront) remodeling for retail service use (hair salon, dba Omni Spa.) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Gordon J. Magill GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Magill said the remodeling would involve matching the store front with others on the property. He said each store will use single channel letter sign with matching raceway, as discussed at sign board. DISCUSSION: Members asked about new doorway. Mr. Magill said it is recessed, so the opening stays within store line. He said it swings out, although that is not shown on the plans. He said the stores have a ramp. Mr. Hallen said if that is the case, there has to be a level portion on the inside. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final approval with the requirement that: if the door is in -swinging as shown, that it allow for clearance; or, if the door is out -swinging, that it be recessed, not swing over the public way, and comply with BOCA and Illinois accessbility codes. The motion was seconded and approved (7-0). SPAARC 2500 Greenbav Road Concept Demolish and construct a four story, eight dwelling unit building with underground parking. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: James Chambers GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The developer would like to build a condominium on an R-5 zoned lot. It is right next to another district. The plans have a center entrance on the south side, with a 6' set back from the property line. There would not be any curb cuts from Green Bay Road. It is adjacent to a two story building. They hope to build a courtyard and raise first floor to give them more privacy and help with necessary distance for the ramp. A 12 space parking garage would be accessed from the alley. SPAARC Meeting Notes - October 8, 2003 6 DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen asked if the building would be sprinklered and pointed out some distance measure which didn't appear to be adequate. Carlos Ruiz expressed concern about the building's impact on the context of the block due to its height. Dennis Marino thought more appropriate uses in the future along the Green Bay Road corridor might be more four story buildings like this. Frank Aguado said the developer has not submitted a request for zoning analysis, but he could see problems with the parking as shown and offered to discuss it later with him. Ingrid Eckersberg said it would need a stormwater detention on site. Carolyn Brzezinski said she was concerned about width of building and how it fits on the site, because it is not a very big site for this size building. Arthur Alterson asked if, aside from parking issue, they thought the proposal would be as -of -right, because it appears massive. He also said southern exposure could change with new development. Stefanie Levine expressed concern about the entries off the side along a narrow corridor. Mr. Marino asked if they could consider additional sidewalk in front to help make Green Bay Road more pedestrian friendly. Mr. Ruiz suggested the unit on the east side have an entrance on the front to address the street. Ms. Brzezinski said that sometimes makes it appear the entrance for the entire building is there. She suggested they consider a central lobby to an interior walk; even though it would make the first floor unit smaller, it would increase the street presence and eliminate problems with outside narrow walkway. ACTION: A motion was made to approve the concept, subject to a final zoning analysis and addressing the main building entrance issues. It was seconded and passed unanimously (6-0). SPAARC 2447 Lincolnwood Drive Recommendation to ZBA Construct a one-story addition PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Steve Knutson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Knutsen described the one story addition for his clients. They have an enclosed sun porch on the east of their house, site has no back yard. The variation requested is for lot coverage and rear yard. They could winterize that porch, but wouldn't be able to build a vestibule. They will rebuild the porch essentially the same size, which will also allow the floor to be level with existing adjoining room. DISCUSSION: Asked if heard from neighbors. Three closest neighbors responded enthusiastically. ACTION: A motion was made and seconded to recommend approval to the ZBA. It passed unanimously (6-0)• SPAARC Meeting Notes - October 6, 2003 7 SPAARC 1503 Chicaao Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Site work improvements to shopping center. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Waiter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen this is for a blade sign, perpendicular to the facade which is not permitted by regulation, but has been permitted in cases recently. It is small, 2 x 3 feet oval. The sign board is considerting making them permitted by ordinance. DISCUSSION: The members discussed other blade signs. Mr. Wolinski said he like them, but think it's good to keep them exceptions so they have more control over their appearance. Members asked if it was a landmark property, which it is, and if so perhaps it should go to Preservation Committee. ACTION: Motion to approval subject to the recommendation of the Preservation Commission or Preservation Planner. It was seconded. The motion passed (5 — 2). Members Aiterson and Marino voted no. SPAARC 1910 Dempster Recommendation to Sign Board Erect three (3) freestanding signs at Evanston Plaza. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This is a request for four 6' x 4'9' double faced signs scattered in the field in the parking lot along with two bicycle huts on site for securing bicycles. DISCUSSION: Members discussed the bicycle huts and current shopping center signage, which has three free standing signs. This is not coming from shops or developer per se. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial and was seconded. It passed unanimously (7-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 8, 2003 8 SPAARC 2400-2410 Main Street Recommendation to Sign Board Erect a freestanding sign. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Wafter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This is a temporary sign to advertise rental. A 4' x 8' sign is allowed, and they are requesting 16' x 8', which will be set back far enough from the property lines and contains more items of Information than allowed. DISCUSSION: Members discussed how long the sign would be up. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval as a temporary sign until a certificate of occupancy is issued for the grocery store. It was seconded and unanimously approved. (7-0). SPURC M" ft Woes - Odober 8, 2003 E, Attendees: Committee Members: Design Professional: Other Staff: SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 22, 2003 Arthur Alterson, Alan Berkowsky, Carolyn D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Ariova Jackson, Jim Wolinski Hans Friedman Brzezinski, Paul Dennis Marino, Frank Aguado, Ingrid Eckersberg, Susan Gudderiy, Walter Haden, Moms Robinson, Donna Spicuzza Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the September 24, 2003 meeting were approved. The minutes of the October 8, 2003 meeting were approved with a correction on page 7 to Indicate the developer had not yet submitted a request for zoning analysis. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 1100 Claris Street Concept. Prue-Aoolicatlorl Conference Construction of new 8 story, 237 dwelling unit residential condominium building PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Thomas Roszak Don Wallin GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Carolyn Brzezinski said this was listed for concept and there was a question whether it could qualify as a pre -application conference for a Planned Development. She said that there were adequate drawings to describe the proposal, but there needs to be a clear line of communication between this Committee, the Plan Commission and the alderman of the ward. Arthur Alterson said Lary Widmayer of the Plan Commission might come and that Alderman Jean -Baptiste would not be here but met with the developer the day before. Ms. Brzezinski said after they see who attends, they could determine whether it meets the pre -application requirements. Thomas Roszak walked through the renderings of the revised proposed project with the committee. It will have 237 units comprised of 222 condo units in four buildings and 15 townhomes. The two-story townhomes will be set back 12' from the Clark Street sidewalk, with gardens and porticos in front. Behind them are 8 story condo buildings that have set -back rooftop units with gardens. They will used Norman sized brick and windows with anodized aluminum frames. The exterior also has copper panels and limestone horizontal accents. The four L-shaped buildings are set around a landscaped interior courtyard with many water elements, including a water fountain in the center which turns on and off based on motion sensors. The exteriors have more glass on higher floors. There is a grassy fire lane coming off Ridge that will serve as a pedestrian area. Office and residential parking entrances are on Oak, with two doors in and two doors out. That building is the only one on the lot line, the others are set back. The vehicular entrance to the center courtyard and the units is off Oak. The courtyard area includes a driveway, loading berths, fire lane, poolhouse, benches, waterfall and landscaped areas. He said there are also roof top gardens on terraces. Two condominium buildings have 48 units and the other two have 61 and 65 units. Mr. Roszak said there would be a pocket park in the northeast comer that would have a public sculpture. There is a system of sidewalks so pedestrians can walk through from Ridge, Oak or Clark. There are townhomes with private patios and screening with vegetation in between the townhomes. They will provide diagonal parking on Oak and will work with the City on that. There is garbage access off the alley. Mr. Roszak said the project has a FAR of just over 2. It will be constructed in four phases taking about three years total. The first phase will have temporary parking for the office building. Garage parking will be usable starting in the Phase Two. He said that landscaping will get installed as much as possible during each phase. The condominiums units will vary from 700 to 2700 square feet. The townhomes will have from 1800 to 2400 square feet. There will be a small amount of commercial space on the first floors of the condominiums. Summing up the benefits, Mr. Roszak said they are proposing 12 affordable units. He said the gross tax revenue would be $1.8 million, with a yearly net tax benefit of $700,000 to the City and School Districts. He said the development provides 1.5 levels of underground parking, intensive landscaping, and a mixture of housing types. DISCUSSION: Committee members asked about the firelane and were told it might be "grasscrete." Mr. Berkowwky said that presents a maintenance issue for snow removal. He said the fire lane Is indicated at 16' and it should be 18'. Mr. Afterson asked about the loading berths at the edge of the fire lane, noting if two trucks are there at the same time they would block the fire lane. Members asked whether there would be a curb cut or mountable curb on Ridge, and Mr. Roszak said either, and suggested if a low shrubbery was placed there a fire truck could drive over. Mr. Berkowsky said grasscrete wouldn't worts and bushes were not a good idea. Mr. Roszak said he would defer to how the City wants it done. Members asked where the generator would be. Mr. Roszak said it wasn't high rise code, because it was not 75'. When asked about storm water detention, Mr. Roszak said they would SPAARC Meeting Notes - October 22, 2003 have detention vaults. Mr. Berkowsky said they would probably need a fire hydrant on the grounds. Ms. Brzezinski asked about the slope of the ramp, noting anything above a 1:20 slope is considered a ramp and would need a handrail. Mr. Roszak said it was a 10% slope. The Committee discussed the building height and whether it meets fire department code. The fire requirements state there can't be more than 75' from fire truck access to the top habitable floor. Mr. Roszak said the building met that standard. They discussed windows on the garage near the alley and visitor parking. Mr. Roszak said the Hearn Company is considering a parking management system that would make that parking available 24 hours. Committee members asked about the private space of the townhomes, which will have patios as part of the common area, not private deeded space. Ms. Brzezinski said it was a very pedestrian friendly development which is laudable. She complimented the developer on all the opportunities for landscaping, and on concealing the parking, just suggested doing something architecturally to break up the long alley wall. She said the set backs on the higher buildings are nice, and she liked that the four buildings are not identical although they have a nice symmetry. Issues about the loading berths, moving trucks and the fire lane were discussed. Mr. Dahal asked if the number of parking spaces was the same, and Mr. Roszak said there were 306 spaces for office use and 362 condo spaces, which is the same ratio as the prior proposal. Mr. Alterson said he was very enthusiastic but would like to hear people's comments about the garage doors on the Oak Street side because they bothered him a bit and wondered about the doors and material. Mr. Friedman complimented Mr. Roszak for getting away from the pedestal type building. He said he wished the garage doors were not on Oak Street, because the street has a different connotation. He said he didn't understand why they were introducing traffic into the landscaped courtyard. Mr. Roszak said it was important to have some limited vehicular access for quick drop offs or pick ups for this size project. Committee members said perhaps they needed more work to see how to limit the parking use, and commented that there should be adequate outside lighting throughout. A member of the audience complimented the project and questioned whether there would be adequate space for root structures of trees. Committee members said the project was a vast improvement over the last proposal. Mr. Berkowsky said he also liked the project but before he was comfortable with it they would need to address logistics of fire department access. ACTION: A motion was made and seconded to grant concept approval. The motion passed unanimously Ms. Brzezinski asked whether the Committee agreed this meeting met the requirements of the pre -application conference, subject to confirmation by the Ward Alderman and the Plan SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 22, 2003 3 Commission Chair that they are satisfied with the meeting minutes and reserve the right to have a distinct meeting. The consensus was 8 — 1 in favor, with James Wolinski opposed. Mr. Wolinski said he would rather have another meeting since it was not publicized as a pre - application conference. Ms. Brzeainski said the consensus that it met the pre -application requirement could be overruled by the Zoning Board of Appeals. SPAARC 1932 Maole Preliminary and Final Stomfront improvements and fagade renovation PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Sally Lufkin Carlos Ruiz Roy Holmes GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Sally Lufkin explained that this property was going through the City's fagade rebate program using CDBG funds, so the owner would be working with City staff on the exterior renovations. Previous repairs to the building used bricks of various colors and sizes. Two commercial tenants will occupy the ground floor store fronts, but they each preferred different styles of windows. DISCUSSION: Committee members supported the suggestion of Carlos Ruiz to match the window styles, with operable sliding windows for ventilation. Members asked if the tenant was aware that open windows will require screens or an air curtain and Mr. Ruiz said he was. The windows will be aluminum, and Committee members suggested they consider windows that are aluminum dad outside and wood inside, as an alternative that is not too expensive. The owners wanted to paint the exterior brick all one color because of the different colors of the brick. Ms. Lufkin said they asked them to consider staining the bricks instead. Mr. Holmes said that that all the new doors will match. Members asked about the existing steps and noted they will need to provide handrails for the steps on each side. Both businesses would need to be accessible because they are replacing the doors. One storefront is accessible, but the other with the caf6 may be more difficult. Committee members noted that the State has allowed accessible back doors if there is an accessible path through the kitchen. They said they would need a letter from Doug Gamplel of the State of Illinois. It was also noted the address was missing on the drawings, but must be displayed. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance approval, subject to the same operable window scheme for both storefronts. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Respectfully submitted Donna Spicuzza SPMRC Meeting Notes — October 22, 2003 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 29, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Frank Aguado, Keith Fujihara, Waiter Hallen, Adova Jackson, Stefanie Levine, Donna Spicuzza, Ron Walczak. Chairperson Jackson determined that a quorum existed, with Frank Aguado sitting In for Arthur Alterson, Waiter Hallen sitting In for Carolyn Brzezinski, and Donna Spicuzza sitting in for Dennis Marino. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1945 Central Street Preliminary and Final Reface "Symphony's" Restaurant storefront PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Waiter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen said the owner wanted to remove the existing facade material, and return to the masonry which they will tuckpoint and rebuild. They will not change the openings below, but will change out the front door. There were no construction drawings with the permit application. Mr. Hallen said the appearance will be similar to other storefronts on the block. DISCUSSION: Members discussed information needed for permit issuance. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously ("), with Committee member Hallen, sitting in for the owner, abstaining. SPAARC 118 Florence Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Install an accessibility ramp in front and street side yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Michael Buck GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The stairs at the home's entrances present a problem for the owner, who is confined to a wheel chair. Mr. Buck said his company, Extended Home Living Services, proposed to construct a ramp at the front door, but it doesn't meet the requirement for a 12" setback from the building line for additional structures. The ramp will extend 7' from front of the home, which is the distance to the building line, so it will be right on the fine. There is a small concrete pad that will provide a nice surface for transition from ramp to sidewallk. They are requesting a variance to allow the ramp to be built. DISCUSSION: Members discussed the removal of a tree and rear access and noted that since the parkway Is very deep, the ramp with handrails and guardrails probably will be relatively unobtrusive. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of variance to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (7-0). SPAARC 11414 Elmwood Avenue Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior remodeling of multiple family dwelling for condo conversion, new roof and front entry doors. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Drew Heindel GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The current owners are planning to convert the 3 story, 22 unit building to condominiums and have submitted paperwork to begin the process. Before going through the code assessment, they want to make modest improvements to the exterior, which have little to do with the conversion process but which they want to do before winter. They propose to replace the wood shingles on the mansard roof with aluminium standing seam metal roof, in an aged copper green color. They will also change the canopy entrance and replace the existing front door with a full glass door and retain the existing outside lights. In the late fall, they want to upgrade landscaping in front of the building Further into the conversion process they will replace windows with aluminum double hung windows, replace wrought iron support columns for front canopy. in late fail they will upgrade the landscaping. DISCUSSION: Committee members noted there were no drawings or permit application so perhaps the request should be for concept approval. Mr. Heindel said they were going to submit the roofing permit next week, so if anything could be done to give approval for that, he would appreciate it. Members noted the Committee meets every week. He was asked what the extraordinary circumstances were for requesting preliminary and final approval before applying for permits. Mr. Heindel said when they realized they wanted to get the roofing done because they had an opportunity to line up a contractor, they realized they'd have to go to this Committee so they called to get on the docket as soon as possible. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- October 29, 2003 Members discussed whether it should be in for building permit and zoning. Mr. Heindel said they weren't going to submit drawings for the roof work, just get a roofing permit. Members asked if the point where the roof stops is visible from the street. Mr. Heindel said it still is, they are just changing the material. After the vote, Mr. Heindel mentioned they will later discuss their plans for fencing in some of the side yards with private garden areas with some hard paving. Committee members discussed when terraces at grade level are allowed. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary approval to the entire proposal and preliminary and final approval for changing the facing on the mansard roof. The motion was seconded and passed (6-1). Ms. Spicuzza voted nay. SPAARC 2133 Sheridan Final Construct 4-story classroom and office building (McConnick School of Engineering Department at Norfhwestem University.) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jeff Baehr Bonnie Humphrey GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Baehr said they are in for a foundation permit. There have been no changes since preliminary approval last December. He said one question from the zoning review was regarding the auto bay and shop space, which say "receiving" on the drawings but are not the receiving areas. Landscaping and site fighting are described in the building permit. The only lighting, in addition to the existing street lighting, will be in the planted area in front. The landscape plan has new trees and ornamental shrubs forming a barrier, similar to the existing Tech Building. DISCUSSION: Members asked about types of plant material, and Mr. Baehr said they typically are not identified until further into construction. They just want to do foundation now. Asked about parking requirements, Ms. Humphrey said this accomodates existing students and faculty, so they are not increasing the demand. Members asked about lighting to ensure security for students. Ms. Humphrey said a lot of light will spill out of the building because of its glass construction and the interior lights will remain on. The building will be open 24 hours, 7 days a week. There is lighting at garage entrance, and under canopy. There will be no dark holes. They also discussed the limestone and clear glass materials. SPAARC Meetings Notes — October 29, 2003 3 ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance approval, subject to a review of the landscaping plan before a final building permit is issued. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (7-0). Respectfully submitted Donna Spicuzza SPAARC Meeting Notes -- Odober 29, 2003 4 and DRAFT APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE NOTAPPROVED MEETING NOTES November 5, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Roger Crum, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahai, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff and Commissioners: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Ariova Jackson, Lalrry Widmayer. Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the October 22 meeting were approved with minor corrections noted. The minutes of the October 29 meeting were approved as written. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1600 Dodae Avenue Final Mount Cellular antennas for US Cellular on the existing smokestack and new equipment panel on the building rooftop. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nolan Ming GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This received preliminary approval in October. This Is the second one on the existing smokestack. DISCUSSION: Confirmed that the antennas will be painted to match the masonry. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 1915 Dewev Recommendation to ZBA Demolish existing two-family residence and detached garage. Construct a new two-family building with a front porch and an open parking pad. NO ACTION: Owner did not appear SPAARC 1806 Dodge Recommendation to ZBA Second story addition to detached single family dwelling. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rodolfo Hernandez Aracely Canchola, translator GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Aracely Canchola, with the City of Evanston, appeared with the owner to translate. The owners is proposing a second floor addition, with exterior siding, to be built on top of the existing one story brick dwelling. DISCUSSION: The variances sought have to do with the side yard and front yard set backs. Members asked if the applicant talked to neighbors and he said they were going to write letters in support of the project. Committee members noted there is an issue with window openings in bedroom #4 and bathroom #2 being less than the required 3' from the property line. They discussed possible solutions and the need to meet the fire department's requirement for an egress window in a sleeping room. They noted this design issue would have to be addressed. James Wolinski asked Ms. Canchola to caution Mr. Hernandez about predatory lenders who are known to prey on homeowners with limited English. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA, subject to recessing a bedroom window to meet the code. The motion was seconded and passed 7 — 2 with Carolyn Brzezinskl and Arlova Jackson voting nay. SPAARC 1427 Greenleaf Street Recommendation to ZBA Demolish existing and construct new two-family residence with attached parking. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Thomas Draus GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Thomas Draus said he was the owner, architect and contractor of the comer property. which is zoned for two units. He is proposing tearing down the existing farmhouse dwelling, currently in non-conformance with the zoning code, and replacing it with two attached, side by side dwellings with two attached garages. He would retain the existing 2-car masonry garage with a separate driveway in order to meet the parking requirements. The new dwellings would front on Ashland rather than Greenleaf. The dwellings will each have 4 bedrooms, with about 1,950 square feet of space, not counting the basement. DISCUSSION: Committee members asked what the requested zoning variances were, and why this new construction could not meet the zoning set back requirements. Mr. Draus said the variances were needed in order to keep the inside configurations the same for each unit, based on the building's footprint and dimensions, and changing it would cause a loss of quality. SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 5, 2003 2 Committee members suggested that the vacant space should provide enough opportunity to design something that conforms. They said even though the lot is zoned for two units, the proposed design with two dwelling units may be too much for the site. Members also discussed safety issues concerning the driveway being so close to the comer, the width of the curb cuts, and having two driveways when the policy is one driveway per property. They said the design provides the potential for vehicular pedestrian conflicts. Ms. Brzezinski told Mr. Draus she has received numerous a -mails from neighbors objecting to issues such as the curb cuts and questioning whether it was a hardship, and she said he would have to respond to those at the ZBA hearing. Three people in the audience asked to speak about their concerns. Brian Muller, a neighbor, said he felt having both driveway entrances on Ashland was not appealing and all the other houses had entries on Greenleaf. He said the driveways eliminate green area, present a problem of where to put shoveled snow and also present a safety issue because drivers pulling out of the garage won't be able to see up and down the street. Melissa Green said the neighbors have an issue with driveways on the comer as the street is a straight shot to Washington school and many kids are in the area. Dale Good said he agreed with the safety issues raised and also did not see where there was a hardship because it was essentially a vacant lot. He did not think the prime feature on a comer lot should be a garage. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (14-0). SPAARC 1567 Maple Avenue Pre -Application Conference and Concept Construct a mixed -use twenty-one story Residential building with 143 dwelling units and 4,509 square feet of Commercial Space PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: James Murray Robert Homer Pat Fitzgerald Jay Hubbel Ibrahim Shihadeh GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The Plan Commission Chair was present. James Murray introduced the project, saying it presumes to develop the sight at its maximum point with the allowances granted pursuant to Planned Development ordinance, which is the differential between the zoning analysis distributed and the plans to be presented. SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 5, 2003 3 Jay Hubbel said the site is presently occupied by Jung Institute, on a block bound by Davis and Grove, on Maple and Elmwood. The proposal is for 143 residential units, a change from the 153 indicated. Ground floor commercial space will run the entire length of Maple. The next seven floors are an enclosed garage, then setbacks begin for the residential units, with 12 to 10 to 8 units per floor. The fagade will be clad in face brick with some limestone detailing. The numerous set -backs give the skyline view a tapering appearance from all angles. A standing seam mansard roof on seventh floor will help screen the garage. There is vehicular access for 12 parking spaces for the commercial space. The residential parking lot, loading berths and garage entrance for residential parking enter off Maple. The building along Maple on the first seven floors is all the way to the lot line, then set backs begin. The entry is turned a little as it gets to Elmwood. The base is basically lot line to lot line The east side along Elmwood has landscaping. He said most of the commercial buildings on Maple are lot line to lot line. They are trying to do something more traditional, not designed exclusively for first time buyers. The average size will probably be 20 — 25% greater than recent new buildings, with upgraded standard finishes, targeting existing Evanston, North Shore population, a large component being empty nesters. Members asked about height and unit size, zoning exceptions compared to as of right. The allowable height is 85' plus 4 parking, without the allowance for Planned Unit Development The proposal is 220'. Mr. Alterson summarized differences As of right Proposed Dwelling units: 75 143 FAR 4.5 7.99 Height 85, 180' excluding 40' of parking Build to lot line issues on Elmwood, aisle width issues The average square foot per unit is 1,100 square feet Judy Aiello asked what the development would give back to the City in the context of a Planned Development, what would be the benefit to the City. They responded it was not an issue at this poii it but when pressed Mr. Murray said the developer has several things in mind, such as cleaning up that portion adjacent to the downtownin terms of buildings that are reaching anar;ironisity and are out of touch. He said design of substantial quality suggests the 1920's P,-.a 30's development along Lake Shore Drive in Chicago, and it a remarkable piece of ae:.:detic work. He said there is an outstanding issue in terms of giving something of specific. Mr. Hubbel said possibly cleaning up the embankment between Davis and Grove would be beneficial. Specific details such as whether it would include concrete work and regular maintenance would have to be addressed. Mr. Friedman said it would benefit the project because the embankment area facing Elmwood is now a mess. They discussed their reasons for placing the entrance on Elmwood, including having commercial on Maple, and also discussed getting permission from Union Pacific to work on the embankment. Ms. Brzezinski SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 5, 2003 said before this is could be offered as an item under consideration for Planned Development, some clear direction, such as a letter of commitment from Union Pacific that they are willing to work with them, might be appropriate as part of the proposal Ms. Brzezinski asked about parking coming all the way to Maple Avenue, which is commercial space. Mr. Hubble said that parking is designated for commercial use. The cars would pull -in, turnaround and go back out. The entrance for residential parking is a ramp on the other side, over the top of that. Ms. Brezinski said there is an interesting opportunity with two fronts and thinks the project could successfully liven up Elmwood as a residential entrance, but asked why they were introducing any vehicular passage at Maple. She suggested making the Maple facades truly storefronts to work with the streetscape better and possibly combine the commercial parking with the residential and somehow split if off. The south elevation was discussed and noted that the parking will all be enclosed, but it won't look just like a blank wall. Ms. Brezinski asked how the development would handle trash removal, loading and unloading, with its two fronts and no opportunities on north and south side. Mr. Hubble said there is a loading berth coming off of east side of building, shared by commercial and residential, creating two adjacent curb cuts. There was discussion about the impact on pedestrian friendliness of four curb cuts on the block. It was suggested they try to combine the parking garage door with loading so there would only be one door. Ms. Aiello asked why the development had to be so big. Mr. Murray said they wanted to hear from the City why not. He said the site is in a centralized downtown district and complements and balances other developments. He said it is appropriately sized for that particular location and is smaller than existing Optima structures and presents a contrast in terms of architecture and design. Mr. Fitzgerald said they tried to develop a building that would appeal to a more upscale market, so it has amenities like full time doorman, a theatre screening room, health dub, swimming pool and guest suites. The amenities require a larger population in the building to support them. There was discussion about the amenities, and the average size of the units, which is 1100 square feet. Mr. Friedman pointed out that the other tall buildings referred to are comer buildings, so they can dominate a comer. He said this building is planned for a narrow sitet, without any relation to anything around it. He said he felt it is overscaled for that site. Rajeev Dahal asked how they planned to construct the building and if they would they need half streets closed. They said yes, because the construction company would need a crane on one end of the building and would need one lane on either street at some point. They can delay constructing a part of the building on Maple until the end, which essentially gets the crane tower off the street. The construction will be a concrete structure, masonry with block back-up for the tower, using traditional construction methods which are more substantial because the target market is more SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 5, 2003 noise sensitive. It will have a heavy wall structure with punched windows as opposed to a curtain wall structure with all glass. The ceilings are 10'. Ms. Brezinski said she is not particularly bothered by height, which is set in from the street level, but rather by the mass in the north -south direction. She suggested they use a model to better convey the concept and design. Mr. Hubble said with the bend in the middle of the building, you never see the whole building at one time within a few blocks, unlike the view in the elevation. They intend to do a high level of detail and use a mixture of materials on the facade. Commenting on the rounded comer features, Ms. Brezinski advised against faceted comers, suggesting that if they are going to make a curve, they make a curve. Mr. Wolinski observed that this building, and to a lesser extent the Roszak building across the street, would begin the redevelopment of West Davis Street. The parking was discussed. The mansard roof shields the garage and the parapet. The garage has a roof. The idea of masking the parking by putting some units facing the street was presented, but developers said that would necessitate adding floors to the garage, and they couldn't push the garage down a level because the necessary ramp structure would require another garage entrance. There will be 12 or 13 guest parking spaces. The pre -application conference portion of the meeting was closed and turned back to the Committee for action on Concept review. Ms. Brezinski said she couldn't vote on the concept due to issues about access, pedestrian and vehicular traffic, and clarification on the railway easement or what they will give to the City. Mr. Alterson agreed he would like to see something more as a give back, and said perhaps something should be looked at in terms of an affordable component. He was hesitant, however, because of the need for everyone to weigh whether this amount of density in terms of bodies and bulk is appropriate for this location. Ms. Aiello said she had a problem with the height and the density and felt it would begin the destruction of the pedestrian feel of the commercial area west of the track. She said she would like to see something more in scale with what is permitted, rather than a planned development. There was discussion about whether building residents would be walking in the area and whether they would buy the parking spaces. Ms. Brzezinski said it would be interesting to do an ongoing survey of new developments to learn how many parking spaces are back on the market, and that with the change in the City's parking requirements, buildings will go taller. ACTION: A motion was made to table concept approval of the proposal. The motion was seconded and passed unaimously (11-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 5, 2003 6 SPAARC 1228 Emerson Street Concept Construct a seven story, sixty dwelling unit condominium building, with seventy-four off street parking spaces PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew Ferris John Kneck David Szafarz GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: DavidSzafarz said they are proposing a purely residential condominium development on Emerson and Green Bay Road. They received a final version of the traffic study, and have been working with City traffic engineers. Some of the issues have been discussed although not decided, because it is a challenging site in terms of access. They are proposing 66 units in 6 stories over parking. They feel the height fits in the area and noted that if they worked within the current Zoning, they couldn't even do a townhome development because the site allows only about 18' in the middle. So they are doing a Planned Development. Andrew Ferris said his company does smaller infill housing projects and they have worked in Lake Bluff, Highland Park, Glenview, Northbrook.. John Kneck said the site borders Emerson and Green Bay and an alley. He said they looked at various site planning options, and felt hugging the street was the best. He said the lower and ground levels are parking. The first floor parking level has 33 spots and is entered off Emerson. The lower level also has 33 sponts, and is entered off Green Bay, with 33. There will be 10 surface spots in the back, for a total of 74 total spots, with 66 interior spots. Both garage entrances and in and out. He also noted they are proposing to use a chunk of land on the comer that is owned by the City of Evanston, only a part of which is roadway, and the rest is landscaped. They would landscape and maintain the land. They are proposing set backs of 30' off alley, 20' off Emerson, and a range approximately 30 — 60' off Green Bay. They have not submitted for zoning analysis and said that before even submitting for a Planned Development, they wanted to get Committee comments. Ms. Brzezinski asked if they considered curving the buildings in the other direction. They said if they did that, many of the buildings would face other buildings to the south, whereas facing the street maximizes the views and pushes the building farther from the other residential. Ms. Brzezinski said the design made it difficult to figure out how to enter the development, and she thought it would be more approachable if it was in the other direction.. Mr. Marino said he liked the fact that they moved it in that direction, thinking the single family neighbors in the back would prefer that it was pushed farther east. The architect said access to the site made it difficult. Members expressed concern about traffic safety with the design, especially turning in off Green Bay, and thought it could be confusing. The developers said they are conscious of those issues. Describing the elevations, Mr. Kneck said that it features inset balconies where building curves. The construction is a pre -cast base with masonry above that. They tried to break it up SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 5, 2003 into different pieces, using masonry for the apartments and metal for the balconies. Divisions in the glass will break it up a little and give it a loft building look. Mr. Szafarz said they didn't see a strong architectural context immediately adjacent to the site, so they looked around Evanston and decided on the masonry building. The actual height is about 70' but based on topography and grading of the site, the top of it won't be any higher than the four story building down the block. It is also pretty close to the peak of the roof and the single family homes behind it. The difference between grade elevations is almost 15' . Residences around the alley range from 36' to 33.75'. It is 360' from comer to comer. Judy Aiello suggested they present a model showing the project and or other residential buildings when they go before the Plan Commission, and they said they would use either a traditional model or a computer model. She asked if they considered a smaller building. They said yes, and also a larger building. They felt it would be difficult to make the project work if it was reduced by a floor, or 10 units. They said townhouses can't work economically because of land costs and development costs. Also, having the multi -family units about the garage gets most of them above the well traveled street. They were asked if they considered affordable units and said that if they are going for a Planned Development, they will be asked what they are offering back to the City. Mr. Szafarz asked if there were ready guidelines in terms of number and sales prices for affordable units. Taking care of the viaduct was also mentioned. Carlos Ruiz said he did not find the design very exciting and noted that while it is in a difficult location, he didn't fee the buildings successfully addressed the geometry and didn't have a prominent design. He suggested some breathing space between the buildings so it would be less repetitive and monotonous. Mr. Szafarz said that would make it less uneconomical because of the need for two sets of everything, such as elevators, but admitted the building is a lot of frontage. Mr. Marino said he appreciates the effort with a difficult site and likes the fact that they attempted the curvature approach, but he moved disapproval on a concept basis, because it is too large for the adjacent neighborhood to the west. There was no second to the motion. Following up on Mr. Ruiz' comments, Mr. Friedman said rather than build a heavy masonry, building they have an opportunity for an exciting glass building in the same shape. They asked if the Committee would respond favorably to a more contemporary and open building and many members responded positively. Mr. Friedman said the shape fends itself to that beautifully and Ms. Brzezinski said the design should reflect the curve but the punched openings don't reflect the big design idea. She felt it would better reinforced with a contemporary solution and materials that are more faceted and convey lightness. Arthur Altenson felt that they still needed to address the crucial problem with the site, which Is automobile access. Ms. Brzezinski agreed and said she didn't support the earlier motion to disapprove, not because of density, which she feels is better on comers, but because they SPAARC Meeting (Votes — November 5, 2003 8 didn't solve the overwhelming problem of access to the site. She made a motion to deny concept approval based on lack of resolve on vehicular and pedestrian access to the site. The motion was seconded and members again discussed traffic issues and possibly using the alley. Everyone concurred it would not be good to have people making left toms in or out on Emerson. Members said they would also need to address how people would walk to the train stations or downtown Evanston. The vote on the motion to deny was a tie, with 5 Ayes, and 5 Nays. The developer asked about fire truck access and was told it was okay with the proposed. 32' driveway. ACTION: A motion was made to table concept approval because vehicular and pedestrian access was not resolved. The motion was seconded and passed 9 —1 , with Ms. Brzezinski voting Nay. Respectfully submitted, Donna Spicuzza } SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 5, 2003 9 SITE PLAN and DRAFT APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE NOTAPPROVED MEETING NOTES November 12, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Arlova Jackson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski, Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Moms Robinson, David Jennings, Susan Gudedey Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-181 1168 Dodae Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Type 2 restaurant, Gold Coast Dogs PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rafiq Ghaswala, Barrat Virani GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Gold Coast Dogs is a franchised operation, with multiple restaurants in the region. Those nearest to the proposed location are at the Old Orchard shopping center and on Howard Street. The proposed restaurant will be corporately operated. DISCUSSION: The committee asked the applicants to discuss the restaurant's trash removal plan. Mr. Ghaswala stated that the company contracts with Waste Management Systems to do pickup. Two dumpsters will be located on the stores westem elevation. The frequency of this service is dependent upon the location. At its Old Orchard operation there is daily trash removal. Staff indicated that this would be highly desirable at the proposed restaurant. Staff informed him that Type 2 restaurants are required to provide the city with a litter control plan. The applicants were asked how Gold Coast Dog's corporate offices would convey all of the City's rules and regulations and the specks of their own litter control plan to the manager of this operation. Mr. Ghaswala stated that each operation is provided with a document stipulating the standards of operation, including trash removal and cleanliness standards. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- November 12, 2003 Staff also asked about the hours of operation. Mr. Ghaswalla stated that these hours of operation would be from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., seven days a week. The inside seating capacity will be 32 places. Arthur Alterson asked Mr. Ghaswala if he had spoken with the alderman or any of the neighbors. Mr. Ghaswala had not yet spoken with the alderman and was advised to do so. He was also advised do some outreach to the adjacent neighbors, across from the parking lot. Ron Walczak advised that the neighbors would be concemed about youth hanging out at the location. The opportunity for this type of behavior is heightened when a business is open much than 10:00 p.m. Chairman Brzezinski suggested that the applicants have the store manager present to speak at the Council proceedings because they will want to make sure that the concerns about litter, hours of operation and hanging out have been communicated to them. Mr. Ghaswala said that they haven't yet hired a manager. Mr. Virani added that there is a corporate trainer, who will be responsible for this function. Staff suggested that the corporate trainer be present to address these types of questions. No exterior changes are proposed to the exterior of the building, with the exception of a change in the color scheme of the signage. The unified plan calls for red and green. The applicant will request a change to red and blue. The committee informed them that It would address this matter separately. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of this proposal to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-0). SPAARC 03-165 1100 Clark Street Pre-AQullcation Conference Construction of new residential condominium buildings containing 237 dwelling units PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Thomas Roszak GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Roszak stated that the development plans presented at today's pre -application conference had only minor changes from those last presented to the committee. He further stated that he had previewed the project with the alderman. DISCUSSION: The proposed development contains 222 condominium units in 4, 8-story L-shaped buildings and 15, 2-story townomes. The townhomes are sited along the project's Ridge Avenue and Clark Street frontages, at setbacks of 12 to 30 feet. The condominiums are situated twenty feet behind the town homes, in the center of the site. The seventh and eighth stories of the condo buildings are principally glass. The eighth story will be set back ten to fifteen feet from the lower floors, and these units will have rooftop terraces. Mr. Roszak noted that these SPA4RC Meeting Notes — November 12, 2003 2 design features are intended to lessen the impact of the condominium buildings' height and mass. A main vehicular entrance into the site, from Oak Avenue, is still shown. It leads to a central circular drive, with a fountain in the middle. This access is intended for taxi pick-ups, drop-offs and FedEx type deliveries. Three loading berths are now shown along the side of the eastern entryway. These berths are 10 feet wide, leaving a Gear lane of 18 feet, which is adequate for a fire lane. There is also a dedicated fire lane entering the project from Ridge Avenue. The final design details of the fire lane are being worked out with A. Berkowsky and a team of EFD personnel. Instead of the open paver system originally proposed, two concrete `swaths' with grass in between, will serve as the driving surface for fire equipment. Fire hydrant locations are also being reviewed. Staff questioned the need for the fire lane, given the entrance from Oak Avenue. Mr. Roszak said that while ambulances could turn around in the central drive, larger fire equipment could not. Staff asked him to provide 'visual dues' to ensure that the fire lane does not look like another vehicular access point from either Ridge or the central turnaround. Mr. Roszak noted that the previous presentation documents had incorrectly shown the height of one of the condo buildings as 6 stories. In fact, all four buildings are 8 stories, with unit counts of 65, 48, 48, and 61 for Buildings A, B,C, and D, respectively. He said that the alley elevation is 2-stories. The entries to both the residential and office parking are from Oak Street. This is as it was shown in the last presentation to SPAARC. The total number of parking spaces for the condos is 362, total spaces dedicated to office use is 306. The landscape plan shows an east -west axis formed by a boulevard of trees. A north south axis is defined by a series of water features. These include, from south to north, the pool house, waterfall, central fountain, and a waterfall that is intermingled with steps down to Clark. A round pocket park will be developed in the northeast comer of the project. This area will Include landscaping, paving and a piece of public art. A portion of this area, approximately 20 feet in from the curb fine, has a ComEd easement. There is also landscaping around the perimeter and the central fountain. In total, there is approximately one acre of landscaping proposed in the project. Staff observed that the concrete wall in the ramp area might be susceptible to graffiti. They asked whether he might consider masonry. Arthur Alterson asked whether there was consideration given to church parking? Mr. Roszak stated that the development provides 29 angled parking spaces, which is more than is currently provided by on -street parallel parking. Sue Walton, neighbor, directed her concern about wrong way traffic in the project's adjacent alley to the City. She estimates 2 occurrences per day. She felt that some sort of traffic mechanism was needed to prevent this. She also asked about the height of pool house, and was told that it was approximately 30 to 35 feet. Donna Spicuzza asked about the public give back of affordable housing units. She noted that the last proposal was for 10% of the units to be affordable and it is now 5%. She expressed SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 1 Z 2003 the desire to speak with him about targeting different markets and his proposals on affordable financing. Jim Wolinski recommended that another public give back by this project should be the repaving of Clark and Oak Streets. He observed that both are in terrible condition. Such an improvement would benefit both the city and residents of his project. Mr. Roszak noted that in terms of public give back, this project would have a $700,000 net tax benefit to the schools and city and provide 12 affordable units. He agreed to staffs request to resurface Oak and Clark. SPAARC 03-178 1711 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sinn Board New wall sign for CVS Pharmacy PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Douglas Manitt GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Applicant is seeking two variations to the sign ordinance. One would permit the top of sign to reach 19 feet in height, rather than 15 feet, 6 inches. The second variation is an increase in individual sign area from 125 to 133.66 square feet. DISCUSSION: Mr. Montt noted that the increased height is necessary so that the wall sign has adequate clearance from the top of the proposed awnings, as well as the street tree canopies. If allowed to reach 19 feet, the applicant felt that the sign would be adequately separated from the awnings and more visible. Staff asked if he had considered lowering the awnings from the proposed 9 feet by one foot. He stated that the proposed height is a precaution for people grabbing onto and hanging from the awning frames. Staff noted that this is not a problem in the downtown and that the proposed height of the awning allows glare from the store's fluorescent fight to spill out onto the sidewalk area. Chairman Brzezinski noted that the area of the signage was more in keeping with a shopping center and not a pedestrian streetscape. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend to the Sign Board that the area of the sign be reduced by 10%. but that the requested height of 19 feet be allowed. The motion was seconded and passed. (8-0). SPAARC 03-179 101 Asbury Modification to two freestanding signs PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Recommendation to Sign Board Douglas Marritt SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 12, 2003 4 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Walter Hallen stated that variations are being sought for two existing signs. Sign A, Is a freestanding sign on Howard Street that currently meets the permitted height of 15 feet, 5 inches. The company is proposing to raise this sign to 18 feet, 4 inches and to add a commercial, variable message section. A height variation is also being requested for Sign B, located on Asbury, in order to raise it two feet, to a new height of 9 feet, 4 inches. This sign already has received one variation for being within 20 feet of a circulation lane. This variation is being sought to correct a problem related to its siting; it is currently obscured from northbound traffic by a brick wall. It is visible to southbound traffic. DISCUSSION: The applicant noted that this location has been chosen as a 24-hour location and is seeking to advertise this fact. Staff noted that the store's Asbury elevation also has a large wall sign. It was further noted that Ald. Rainey had emailed staff stating her opposition to more signage and to the addition of a message board. ACTION: Regarding Sign A, there was a motion to recommend to the sign board that the proposed design changes be denied. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0) Regarding Sign B, a motion was made to deny the requested change. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-180 500 Dodae Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Modification to existing canopy, wall and free standing signs. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Changes are proposed to existing canopy, wall and freestanding signs to update the Shell gas station's signage to conform to the new corporate identity. DISCUSSION: Proposal calls for changing from three freestanding signs to one, and to change the height of the canopy signs to 17 feet height, rather than 15 feet, 6 inches high. Discussion of landscaping observed the need for visibility for students crossing at this location. This same factor was also an argument for removing the lower signage panels (stating auto care, foodmart) in the freestanding sign. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of the design, subject to the elimination of the three lower signage panels on the free standing sign. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-178 1901 Green Bav Road Recommendation to Sign-„8oaro Modification existing wall and freestanding signs SPAARC Meeting Notes -- November 12, 2003 5 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The requested variation is for the currency exchange business at this location. It currently meets the old signage regulations, which allowed 15% of the wall area in signs; the new requirement permits only 10%. This business now wants to change the face panel of their signage, without bringing the area into conformance with the current regulations. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of the proposed signage. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-1). Arthur Alterson voted nay. SPAARC 03.177 900 Chicago Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Erect temporary wall signs. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The proposed signage requested is for two temporary wall signs to advertise condo sales at this location. The applicant requests a 64 square foot sign; only 32 square feet in area is permitted. One each will face Main Street and Chicago Avenue. DISCUSSION: The applicants have cited many properties for which similarly sized signs have been granted variations for a similar purpose. The location, setback and means of erection of the two signs could not be determined from the submitted plans. ACTION: A motion was made to table this matter for further consideration, pending more explicit information regarding the exact placement of the requested signage. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-089 2115 Ashland Avenue Final Install new commercial parking lot. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Samson Campbell, Jr., Roy King, Bruce Fossler GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The project is in for a building permit and not subject to any other review other than traffic review and review of the landscape plan. DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 12, 2003 6 It was noted that the addition of handicapped parking has changed the configuration of spaces such that they no longer intrude upon the sidewalk area. Plans show some landscaping on both sides of the property and at the front of the lot. However, staff stated that they would need more specific plans showing location, types and quantities of plant materials. Jim Wolinski noted that the Planning and Development Committee, in their discussion of the request for a special use to establish this parking lot, had expressed concerns about the aesthetics of this lot. Therefore, this committee will need to carefully consider and address these concerns. ACTION: It was moved and seconded to table discussion of this project, subject to review of a more complete landscape plan. During the discussion that followed, it was noted that the Alderman of the ward had specifically stated that the landscape plan should not be a condition of granting special use approval because. The motion and second were withdrawn. It was moved and seconded to approve final site plan and appearance review approval for the parking lot, as approved by ZBA and Council, with the condition that a landscaping plan be submitted for approval by April 1, 2004. The motion passed unanimously. (8-0). Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderfey SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 1 Z 200 7 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES November 19, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Adova Jackson, Paul D'Agostino, Dennis Marino, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski, Rajeev Dahal Design Professional: Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Moms Robinson. Keith Fujihara, Sally Lufkin, Donna Spicuzza, Susan Gudertey Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the November 5, 2003 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-183 700 Hinman Avenue Preliminary and Final Rebuild enclosed porch PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Anthony Pietrzyk, Dan Schermerhom GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Pietrzky and Mr. Schermerhom explained that the proposal is to demolish the existing brick and steel stairway on the northern side of the building and to rebuild it with pressure treated wood. DISCUSSION: This work will leave the nine units served by this stairwell with only one means of ingress/egress for approximately ten days. The applicants stated that they would be notifying the users of this fact. Chairman Brzezinski suggested that they also notify the fire department that there will only be one exit for these units for this time period. ACTION: Chairman Brzezinski moved to grant preliminary and final site plan approval subject to the treatment of the wooden stairway with either opaque stain or paint. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously. (8-0) SPAARC 03-018 800 Davis Street Revision to Final Revisions to loading berth area by installing an overhead door. SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 19, 2003 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tod Desmarais, Optima GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Desmarais stated that the proposed action is to enclose an existing loading, located on the northwest comer of this building. DISCUSSION: In its present, open state, the loading area is frequently subject to the accumulation of trash and packing refuse from unmonitored deliveries to the ground floor retail storefronts. If approved, the plans call for the enclosure of the loading area with a retractable door and new concrete block wall. Waiter Hallen asked whether there was an existing trashroom adjacent to this area. Mr. Desmarais stated that there is currently a trashroom. While this space would continue to function as such, its exterior wall would be removed to make it easier to stone and access the trashcans. A new wall would be constructed, in line with the interior columns opposite the existing wall. Mr. Desmarais stated that the individual storeowners would need to open the door for their expected deliveries. ACTION: A motion was made to grant approval, subject to painting the new wall. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 01-131 101 Asbury Preliminarvand Final CVS Consolidation of Plat PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Arthur Alterson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Alterson displayed the plat, noting that it consolidated numerous lots and land subdivisions. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 96-0025 1615 Emerson Street Discussion Replacement of sidewalk PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Arlova Jackson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Arlova Jackson stated that representatives of the Jacob Blake senior building had contacted the city regarding the replacement of the sidewalk along its Dewey Street frontage. Upon investigation, staff discovered that the five foot concrete sidewalk shown on the old plat is no longer in place. SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 19, 2003 2 DISCUSSION: There was uncertainty as to when or whether there was a sidewalk in this location. It was believed that this area could have been used as a staging area during the construction of the senior building. The approved site plan for the building also shows a sidewalk in this location. After checking aerial photos for the site, which showed no sidewalk in this location, staff agreed that the city would replace the sidewalk along the property's Dewey frontage. SPAARC 03-171 711 Universitv Place Preliminary and Final Purpose PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rick Nemer, Ryan Nestor GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The proposed improvements are within an interior courtyard, not visible from any adjacent rights -of -way. The proposed plans call for the reconstruction of an old flagstone patio to match the elevation of the finished floor of the building. The plans also include the construction of a concrete ramp down to meet an existing sidewalk. DISCUSSION: The demolition will entail the removal of two flagstone steps and a portion of a flagstone planter. In their place, using concrete tinted to match the stone, the steps will be rebuilt to code, together with a ramp down to an existing sidewalk. There will also be a painted metal handrail installed. Chairman Brzezinski observed that the handrail should be turned 90 degrees at the end of the ramp. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to the turning of the end of the hand rail 90 degrees. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-086 1123 Howard Street Reconsider Previous Action Remove extra doorway. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Adova Jackson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Arlova Jackson stated that final site plan approval had been previously granted with the condition that one of the three front doorways be removed, in order to match the approved number of retail spaces (2). Instead, the owners have removed an interior wall so that there are now only two storefronts, one of which is served by two doorways. ACTION: A motion was made to approve the proposed change. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-0). Committee member Jim Wolinski abstained. SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 19, 2003 3 SPAARC 03-184 911-913 Maale Avenue Preliminary and Final Condominium conversion PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mike Tiran GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Tiran stated that plans call for the conversion of the existing building into a 6-unit condominium. DISCUSSION: Mr. Tiran stated that this project has not appeared before the committee previously. He told the committee that the building is currently occupied and those residents have been noted of the conversion action. There will be no parking provided. There is a driveway to the rear of the building for garbage service. Chairman Brzezinski noted that the site plan showed a wood porch on the rear of the building. Mr. Tiran stated that they had originally proposed to enlarge this structure in order to provide a private deck at the rear of each unit. This had to be changed on the basis of the zoning analysis finding that it exceeded lot coverage. The subsequent design for the new porches seeks to add some deck space by reorienting the stairs so that they are perpendicular, rather than parallel, to the building. Chairman Brzezinski stated that the rise and run of the stairs must meet code. The only other exterior change proposed is on the front elevation of the building. It is proposed that the windows in the front sun porches be enlarged and that in -swinging, French doors with railings be added. Staff observed that some of the plans presented at the meeting did not reflect the current construction plans and would need to be resubmitted to show the final project. Staff asked to see the landscape plan and Mr. Tiran stated that he did not have one. Chairman Brzezinski informed the applicant that staff would need to see a final landscape plan showing the location, type and number of proposed plant materials. Chairman Brzezinski asked whether the wood used for the rear stairway would be treated. Mr. Tiran stated that he didn't intend to paint or stain the pressure treated wood. The chairman stated that the painting or the use of opaque stain was necessary to protect the wood, would be an aesthetic improvement for the future residents, and would likely be a condition for the future site plan approval for this project. ACTION: A motion was made to table consideration of this project pending the receipt of a landscape plan and the submittal of a correct set of final plans. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 19, 2003 4 SPAARC 03-135 1601 Simpson Final Interior/Exterior remodel of commercial building into 6 office units PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Leineweber GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: John Leineweber stated that the project's color scheme had changed since it was last before the committee. Now, where blue had been shown, he was proposing a dark bronze. The awning material, instead of being metal, will now be traditional canvas material. The color of this element will be a sage green. DISCUSSION: Mr. Leineweber informed the committee that the glass would be slightly tinted. Metals used on the front of the building will have a slightly corrugated finish in dark bronze. Staff discussed the stairway and planting scheme shown for the rear elevation. The stairway will extend past the building by two feet. This will accommodate a planter on the northern elevation of the building. The stairway will be constructed of steel. An electrical room will be located beneath the staircase. Plans show a roof top area that may be accessed by the staircase, as well as by the second story office space. Trash removal will be in the rear parking area, accessible from the rear doors of the building. Mr. Leineweber stated that there would be two planting beds to the rear and side of the building. One is shown immediately adjacent to the building, near the base of the rear stairway. A second will be located along the sidewalk, adjacent to the parking lot entrance. Chairman Brzezinski noted that a raised planter in this location presented possible difficulties, either from damage by vehicles or by providing minimal planting area. Mr. Leineweber agreed to berm and plant this area. He also stated that he would continue to utilize other existing planters within the sidewalk and parkway area, as well as seek additional parkway trees from the City. Staff inquired about the location of signage for the storefronts. Mr. Leineweber stated that there would be only window signage. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-1) Arlova Jackson voted nay. SPAARC 03-185 1110 Church Street Recommendation to the ZBA 4-flat condominium conversion PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Michael Sieja, Al Belmonte GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 19, 2003 The applicants stated that they are rehabbing a vintage building into a 4-unit condominium. They are requesting a variation in lot area coverage in order to construct a four -space garage for unit owners. DISCUSSION: Mssrs. Sieja and Belmonte stated that the building is constructed of grey stone and brick. No changes in the building itself, including new openings, are planned. They do intend to replace the existing windows and to do some repairs to the masonry. They will also be removing existing porches and replacing with new ones which will include deck spaces. The interior of the building will be completely gutted and rehabbed. Chairman Brzezinski noted that, as a condominium conversion, they would have to appear before this committee again for site plan and appearance review. The applicants stated that there is currently is no garage, just a concrete slab large enough for two cars. Two other spaces have been created in the adjacent yard. The entry to the garage will be from an alley that is either unpaved or has very badly deteriorated pavement. The alley is very narrow, only 12 feet wide. Therefore, the garage will be set in from the alley five fleet. The applicants now plan to deck the roof of the garage. In addition to providing more outdoor living space, this will also screen the building from the Post Office's loading dock. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-182 1137 Dewev Recommendation to the ZBA Construct addition in order to go to 2 'X stories in height PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Arlova Jackson GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Applicants are seeking to add a second story to the building at this address, increasing its elevation from 1 '/2 to 2 Yz stories. DISCUSSION: The building has a large setback from the street. There have been no comments received from neighbors ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval. Arthur Alterson abstained from voting. Respectfully submitted, Susan Gudeday SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 19, 2003 The motion was seconded and passed. (7-0). Attendees: Committee Members: Design Professional: Other Staff: Protects Reviewed: SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES DECEMBER 10, 2003 James Wolinski, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Judy Aiello, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski Hans Friedman Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Moms Robinson, Carlos Ruiz, Susan Guderley SPAARC 03469 1427 Greenleaf Street Recommendation to ZOA Demolish existing and construct new two-family residence with attached parking PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Thomas Draus GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Draus stated that since the last time this had appeared before the committee there had been changes in the proposal. Previously, he requested variations for the side yard (easterly) and front yard (Ashland frontage) setbacks, as well as one to permit two rather than one curb cuts. His current plans no longer require either the side or front yard variations, and the proposed location of the garages will share the current, singe driveway. However, because the garage is attached to the principal structure, he must seek a rear yard variation on the north side of the site. The required rear yard setback is 30 feet; he is proposing 5 feet. DISCUSSION: In response to questions from staff, Mr. Draus stated that the revision has resulted in interior as well as exterior changes in the prior design. Entrances now face both Ashland and Greenleaf, while previously they had both faced Ashland. He stated that he felt that the orientation of the lot and the lack of access from an alley precluded any other layout for this project. Chairman Brzezinski asked the applicant to clarify whether he would have to seek these variations if he were constructing a single-family project. She noted that she had received five emails and two voicemails regarding the project, all of which expressed objections to the proposal. The reasons cited included its proposed curb cuts, the size of the development and the removal of parkway trees. Mr. Draus stated that his current plan would not necessitate the removal of any parkway trees and only one driveway. Rajeev Dahal asked the width of the proposed driveway. Mr. Draus stated that tt was 35 feet. Mr. Dahal stated that code permits a maximum driveway width of 25 feet at the property line, which may fan out to 35 feet at the apron. Chairman Brzezinski stated that she could not support this request to the ZBA. She noted that while this site's zoning does permit two-family structures, due to its lot dimensions and size it is not suited to this use without variations inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood. She further noted that a single-family residence could be built without a request for any variations. Jim Wolinski concurred. Mr. Draus asked whether open, surface parking is permitted in the city. He was informed that open parking was permitted in the rear yard, provided it is within the last 30 feet of the property and not in the required street side yard. Neal Good, neighbor, asked whether a parking pad is counted towards impervious surface or lot coverage. He also asked whether there was a set back requirement for a parking pad. He was informed that it is counted towards lot coverage and that there is a 3-foot setback required from the property line. Mr. Draus asked whether a detached parking structure could be located in the rear yard. He was told this would be permitted, provided that the required spaces were provided and his curb cut met code with regards to width at the property line. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of the requested variation. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-186 1226 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Rebuild existing rear porch "in kind" PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jon Schmarse GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Schmarse stated that he proposes to remove the old deck and to rebuild one the same size, using treated wood. DISCUSSION: Staff asked whether he proposes to stain or paint the wood used for the deck. Mr. Schmame stated that he had no plans to do so. Chairman Brzezinski noted that the committee liked to see that wood decks/porches be treated to enhance their appearance and weather more attractively. Mr. Schmarse stated that he would stain the wood. Chairman Brzezinski asked the number of units using the porch and the length of time it would be under construction and unavailable to tenants. Mr. Schmarse stated that the porch serves four units. He expected the work to take a couple of weeks, depending upon the weather. The Chairman asked that he make sure to notice the affected residents of the work and of the fact that the rear egress would be unavailable during construction. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- December 10, 2003 T ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval, subject to the applicant staining of the wood. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-187 1613-1615 Monroe Street Preliminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling to existing multi -family residence for future condo conversion PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tim Rasmastin GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Rasmastin stated that he intends to convert this building to 12 condominium units. Prior to doing so, he proposes the complete rehabilitation of the interior and exterior of the building. DISCUSSION: The applicant reviewed the proposed landscape plan with staff. He noted that this property is a U-shaped courtyard building. Currently, there are two sidewalks; one each leads to an entrance on ether side of the center courtyard. The landscape plan shows a new layout that begins as a single walkway at the public sidewalk and then branches off to serve both entryways. The plans also show the landscape design and plant materials proposed as the focal point of the courtyard. The applicant stated that he intends to install all new electric and plumbing in the building. In response to a question from staff, he stated that he does not plan to install a fire sprinkler system. Instead, he will be putting in an alarm system. Staff expressed concern that a gut rehab of this kind was not also installing a sprinkler. Other rehab work to be undertaken includes installing vinyl, double hung insulated glass windows, with half screens, and stripping and refinishing the original wood entryway doors and stairways. Units will also be equipped individually with new HVAC systems, which will be rooftop units. Carlos Ruiz urged him to consider replacement windows made of the original building materials to remain in character with the rest of the building. Mr. Rasmastin has applied with the housing planner for the condominium conversion process. He stated that he would also be changing the interior windows. He stated that the one - bedroom units are expected to be priced at $175,000. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-170 1228 Emerson Street Concept Construct 7-story, 60-unit condominium building, with 74 off-street parking spaces PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bernard Citron, Andrew Ferris, David Szafarz, Tim Doron SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 10, 2003 3 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This project is back again as a concept review. Mr. Citron stated that they have made this submittal after reviewing the committee's prior comments and with the input from the City's traffic and engineering staff. Vehicular access to the alley has been added. They have also changed some of the geometry along Ridge, adding a wider lane to allow traffic to pull into the site's Green Bay Road entryway. He stated that changing the orientation of the building wasn't practicable because it pushed access points to unsuitable locations. Entrances to the site are located on Emerson and Ridge, at the greatest distance possible from their intersection. The current concept plan also shows initial consideration to adding a front entrance, landscape design and pedestrian access to the site. There will be a front door onto Green Bay Road. The landscape treatment and pedestrian way will also reinforce this element. The projects pedestrian circulation system will link into the existing sidewalk along Green Bay Road and will be pulled back from the curb away from traffic. DISCUSSION: Andrew Ferris stated that the new building design responds to comments at the last meeting that the building was "to heavy", didn't have a main entrance, and needed to use more glass. The previous building was brick; this plan uses more glass and precast concrete. He stated that this plan still breaks up the elevation to emphasize a unit. The front facade of the building will angle at the balcony locations. Mr. Citron stated that because of their strong preference to include balconies for each unit, they decided that a curved facade was not feasible. The first and basement are parking, with six stories of residential above these. The colors depicted on the drawings were not finalized and they would entertain suggestions from the committee. In response to staff s questions regarding the proposed materials Mr. Ferris identified the elements shown as: colored pre -cast panels, aluminum storefront with glazing, pre -cast or metal accent pieces. Hans Friedman asked why they didn't design a curved building. The applicants stated that the decision was based upon economics, the difficulties of getting a perfect radius with the precast and then mounting glass on it, and the problem created by their desire to include balconies. Hans Friedman suggested the use of spandrel glass, so that the glass surface would not be broken from floor to floor. Chairman Brzezinski and Judy Aiello both noted the opportunity for making a great architectural statement on this visible site. The Chair suggested that they study altematives in size and shape for the building — to respond to the unique shape of the site. One idea might be to consider raising the front elevation, dropping the back elevation and providing balconies on the rear of the building. Masonry was also suggested to allow more of a curve to the facade. Use of a model was also suggested in creatively looking at the site. They were also urged to carefully consider the pedestrian experience on the site. ACTION: A motion was made to table concept approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes - December 10, 2003 4 SPAARC 03-174 1567 Maple Avenue Concept Construct a mixed -used 21-story building with 153 dwelling units and 4,509 sq. ft. of commercial space PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: James Murray, Robert Homer, Ibrahim Shahadeh, Jay Hubbel, Patrick Fitzgerald GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicants referred to a large model of downtown Evanston to discuss the project's context and appearance. The proposal is 21 stories, or 220 feet, in height. DISCUSSION: There had been concerns expressed about the layout of the first floor, its entrances and exits, and the context in which the commercial space would share the supportive areas for the residential. Jay Hubble had previously shown commercial parking access off of Maple, leading to 12 interior spaces, for the first floor commercial. Staff had asked them to eliminate this curb cut. What seemed to work is to have a continuous commercial frontage along Maple, totaling about 5300 sq. ft, to moved the loading area a bit forward and then move the commercial parking spaces up the ramp. A designated, one -floor elevator will be provided for the users of commercial spaces. These commercial spaces will be dedicated to the commercial spaces and used for employees or guests of business. Chairman Brzezinski asked if there was some sort of drop off area to serve the 143 residential units. Since doing so was expected to come at the expense of some landscaping or other improvement to provide a curb cut or lane. A total of 218 spaces will be provided for 143 dwelling units. When asked about providing visitor parking the applicants stated that the building's doorman building could direct guests to non -deeded spaces. Their experience elsewhere is that, at this price point, not all the spaces will be sold, thus they do not plan to reserve any spaces for guest use. Staff noted that this has not been the City's experience and suggested as an option for a community contribution that the building should reserve a number of spaces for this purpose. Aside for the elimination of the doors from the Maple Avenue side, there were no changes to the exterior elevations. All of the significant changes came as a result of the redesign of the interior of the building. Most notable amongst these changes was in the size and configuration of the commercial space. Instead of being long, narrow and deep, it now composes virtually all of the frontage along Maple Avenue and is larger in size. Staff expressed the importance of considering some softening of the building by insetting the storefronts slightly to allow for some groundcover or other transition between the front wall of the building and the sidewalk. Adjacent properties are also under redevelopment; all together, these projects provide the opportunity for thoughtful introduction of similar design elements in the area's streetscape. Walter Hallen stated that the treatment of the wall along the property line would be challenging. The pedestrian experience will be of approaching a five -story wall. The architects stated that they plan to drop the standing seam roof a bit and to step the bricks in and out so as to mimic window openings. SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 10, 2003 5 In response to staffs question, the architect stated that the mansard roof serves as both a parapet wall and screens a rooftop parking deck. Carlos Rues suggested softening this element with a curved line. Hans Friedman stated that this project would be better suited for a comer lot and is too big for this site. Chairman Brzezinski stated that she had no objections to the height but felt the bulk of the base was too great. Dennis Marino asked the project team to state why they thought the proposed height was appropriate for the site. Mr. Shihadeh stated that one consideration was definitely the provision of views. Also, he didn't see that this building was any higher or bulkier than other tall buildings in the City, be they on a comer or midblock. Adjacent lots provide similar opportunities for tall buildings. Walter Hallen asked how far this building's design, with regard to height and number of dwelling units, was from what would be permitted by right. James Murray stated that the design complies with the allowances granted pursuant to the PUD as applied to this site. Judy Aiello stated that a whole block of buildings of this size and density is not appropriate for this location. This area is a transitional one, from the downtown's high density into the surrounding residential neighborhoods. This design introduces precedence -setting height and density that is not be desirable or appropriate here. She noted that the nearby Roszak development is a much more appropriate height for a transitional location. The architects replied that they tried to deliver a luxury building and that demands a certain size to deliver certain amenities, such as a 24-hour doorman. They also believe that the site size, shape and location next to the railroad dictates height. The Chairman noted the importance of thoughtful public benefits to be conferred by this development in exchange for the added flexibility granted by the planned development. Mr. Murray reviewed those now under consideration, including: quality of design; demonstrable improvement of the railroad embankment, both its landscaping and concrete retaining wall between Davis and Grove; and some guest parking. There was discussion about the possibility that other adjacent properties, specifically the current Bank One site, being available for redevelopment. Staff requested an internal update on this project on the next agenda. ACTION: A motion was made to table concept approval pending contact with representatives of the adjacent bank property. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-188 1801 Dempster Recommendation to Sian Board Install awning signs PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 10, 2003 6 Staff found that the proposed design was an excessive amount of signage and numerous variations. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARr 03-189 1930 Ridge ;Avenuq Recommendation to Sign Board Instal! Wall signs PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The requested variation would allow the top of the two proposed signs to be 23 feet, rather than 15V as required. DISCUSSION: The Chair noted that no signage is allowed in a residential district. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-1). James Wolinski voted nay. SPAARC 03-190 1590 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Window signage PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This request is for the deviation from a unified business signage plan. DISCUSSION: This request applies to a condominium retail space in the Optima building. The unit/business owner wishes to retain a fluorescent window sign. There was some discussion as to whether or not the Quiznos sandwich shop was also required to eliminate its window signage in order to abide by the signage plan ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial, if it is consistent with the action taken for the Quizno's storefront. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Respectfully submitted, Susan Gudertey SPAARC Mee&V Notes - December 10, 2003 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES DECEMBER 17, 2003 Attendees: Committee Members: Alan Berkowsky, Keith Fujihara, Paul D'Agostino, James Wolinski, Judy Aiello, Ariova Jackson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Arthur Alterson Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza, Susan Guderley Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1834 Darrow Recommendation to Z13A Construct four (4) single family attached townhomes on existing vacant lot. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Neil Davidson GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The projects seeks three zoning variations. First, the number of dwelling units permitted by R4 zoning is two, while four are proposed. Second, the maximum lot coverage permitted or this site is 40%; the project proposes 52.33%. Finally, zoning requires each unit to have frontage on the street; the proposed design provides frontage for only one. The site plan of the project shows a series of four townhomes. A single unit fronts onto Darrow. The remaining three are stacked behind the first, along a side alley. DISCUSSION: Mr. Davidson stated that the units created by this development will be affordable. He stated that there are similarly sited townhome developments in the city. Each unit will have a garage, to address resident parking. Unassigned, parking pad spaces are also shown at the rear of the site. These may be used by either residents or visitors. The Entrances to each unit will be from the rear and from the alley. Jim Wolinski asked Mr. Davidson how many units would be affordable if he were to construct only three units on this site. Mr. Davidson replied that, in that instance, all three would be affordable; priced at $185,000 each. Each unit would be sized 1,256 sq. ft., with three bedrooms, and 2 1/2 baths. A small area in the rear of the property and small patios at the alley -side entrances were identified as the project's outdoor space, usable by the development's residents. The Chairman expressed concerns about the lack of outdoor space for residents, the distance that the far unit is situated back from the front of the property, and excessive lot coverage. She further noted that she would feel more comfortable if the request was for three units, which would likely also reduce the variations required for lot coverage and units without frontage. The developer replied that in his discussions with neighbors they had not expressed concerns about the development. Jim Wolinski noted that the cost of property has a significant impact upon affordable housing projects. This results in the fact that these types of developers often have to work with non - prime sites which either lack appropriate zoning or have other challenges. However, he also felt that this proposal was too dense. Three units would be a more appropriate and would yield more open space. Design modifications, such as staggering the units, were also suggested. Exterior materials would include some type of shingles, siding and the first twelve feet in brick. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval of three units, of similar size. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-2). Arthur Alterson and Arlova Jackson voted nay. SPAARC 03-195 845 Dodae Avenue Type 2 restaurant — Subway PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Recommendation to ZBA Catherine Cassano, Moaiz Verani GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This request seeks to establish a Subway sandwich store in one of the storefronts in an existing shopping center at Dodge Avenue and Main Street. No exterior changes are proposed for the exterior facade of the building; only signage changes are proposed. Staff believes that, due to its age, there is no unified business signage plan for this shopping center. DISCUSSION: Staff asked the applicants to explain their plans for garbage collection and litter control. Mr. Verani stated that, in addition to the shopping strip's dumpsters, the store will have its own dumpster. Pickups will be similar to his other store on Main Street (between Chicago and Hinman Avenues), where he has pick up three times a week. Judy Aiello asked what Subway uses to determine how many of its restaurants should go into a community. Ms. Cassano stated a site review analysis, largely based upon population, is conducted by the corporate headquarters. Ms. Aiello asked how many would be too many Subways for a city of 70,000 people? She asked Ms. Cassano to provide her with the company's site analysis criteria so that these could be considered. Mr. Verani stated that these restaurants served their surrounding neighborhoods and likened them to small convenience stores. Ms. Aiello took exception to that analogy and said that there was already a predominance of convenience food establishments in this vicinity. She noted the cumulative effect of all of these Type 2 businesses related to litter, traffic and potential for loitering. Their SPAARC Meeting !Votes — December 17, 2003 concentration is also in contrast to the lack of diversity In other retail businesses or services. Besides the Type 2 restaurants in this shopping center, there is only a doctor's office and a dry cleaners. Arthur Alterson noted that Crown Park would be in the litter pick up area for this restaurant. He also noted that parking is tight in this strip centers lot. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend the denial of this request to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded and passed. (6-3). Arlova Jackson, Hans Friedman and Carolyn Brzezinski voted nay. SPAARC 03-194 1000 Main Street Recommendation to Z13A Inferior remodeling to add 2 additional dwelling units in multi -family building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Chris Turley, Ed Cresto GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicants seeks a variation to add two, ground floor residential units in space that was occupied, until one year ago, by a commercial tenant. Mr. Turley, architect for the project, stated that the proposed conversion would entail a gut remodeling of this section, including new plumbing and electrical, and making it ADA accessible. DISCUSSION: Judy Aiello asked if there were any exterior changes planned; in particular a change in the storefront windows to match the other side of the courtyard. Mr. Turfey stated that they did not intend to try to match the other side's windows because they were the result of another renovation that was not in keeping with the rest of the building. He also want to make sure that there is enough light and circulation to meet code. His plans do show the replacement of the windows on either side of the door with casement windows. Carolyn Brzezinski commented that the existing windows appeared too commercial and that it would be difficult for residents to find window coverings. While she couldn't recommend matching the other side's windows without first seeing them, she asked Mr. Turley to propose an architectural solution to the front fagade and its windows that would be in the best interest of the appearance of the building and street. The Chairman asked whether they planned to sprinkle the building. She noted that they plan to add residential density under existing residential and that they cannot add more units to a non-sprinklered building without adding sprinklers. She said the City would have to review their fire ratings and the code; at a minimum, they would be required to sprinkler the new units. Should this space remain in a business office, sprinklers would not be required. Alan Berkowsky stated that regardless whether this project moves forward, the range of the building's addresses must be shown in the front courtyard of this building. SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 17, 2003 3 ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval, with the conditions that the front fagade be changed so that both sides are compatible with each other and reflect a true residential nature reflected by examples in the surrounding neighborhood, that the new units be sprinklered, and that the entire building be sprinklered at an agreed upon schedule. The motion was seconded and passed. (7-1). Ariova Jackson voted nay. SPAARC 03-193 1224 Noves Street Recommendation to ZBA Establish an open parking space in the front yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kris Hartzell GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Hartzell, the property owner, explained that she had purchased the home to rehab and sell. This parcel does not adjoin an alley. There is no parking on Noyes Street during the day. She stated that she believes that no parking is the reason that the property has not sold. There would be room for a driveway and a garage on the east side of the lot, but there's an elm tree within six feet of the driveway. Therefore, she is trying to establish a driveway and parking pad on the other side of the lot. DISCUSSION: Staff asked whether she had looked at bringing the driveway along the other side of the house to a rear garage, but she explained that she had been told that the side yard in this location wasn't wide enough; it is 7.69 feet, and 8 feet are required by Engineering. A next door neighbor stated that she had concem about the appearance of the parking pad or driveway in the front yard, and the narrowness of a 7.69 feet wide drive. Staff noted that not every house in the City is served by an alley. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial by the ZBA of a front yard parking space. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-174 1567 Maale Avenue Discussion Construct 21 story, mixed use building with 143 dwelling units, 4,509 sq.R. of commercial space, and 218 off-street parking spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Staff DISCUSSION: Jim Wolinski and Judy Aiello have been in discussions with representatives of the bank. They will be getting in contact with Mr. Homer about the proposed project on this site. Frank SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 17, 2003 4 Aguado has spoken with Jim Murray and he and the project team is scheduled to return to the SPAARC meeting on January 7, 2004. SPAARC 03-120 1710 Orrinoton Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct 9`" floor conference center and miscellaneous exterior changes to building PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Chris Thomas, Steve Kriegel, India Patel, Katherine Talty. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This project is in for permit for construction of the 9'h Floor and exterior demolition. They already have a permit for interior demolition DISCUSSION: Mr. Thomas, project architect, stated that the project received Planned Development approval in the fall. Staff asked whether they were leaving the hotel's pool. He answered that they were. Mr. Thomas reiterated the scope of the project: a complete interior renovation of the entire hotel and the redevelopment of its 9t' floor as a conference facility. In the process, the hotel is trying to recapture the original flavor of the old architecture of the 9"' floor, Mediterranean Revival, and then extend this across its facade. The south end of the 9th floor will house a lecture hall, featuring tiered seating. The outer wall of this structure will be curved. Mounted upon the exterior of this wall will be custom light fixtures, highlighting this elevation and its view from Church Street. A new, ground floor entrance to the conference facility will be served by its own elevator. There is an open balcony at the northern end of the Wh floor, which will provide a view over Northwestern and towards Lake Michigan. Mr. Thomas stated that the materials used for the exterior surfaces of the project will replicate the materials of the original construction, which is essentially Portland Cement plaster. Standing seam metal roofing will replace the terra cotta tiles. The metal will be colored to match the gutters and downspouts. Between the existing parapet and the first floor, the exterior will remain unchanged. At the ground level. Mr. Thomas noted that new storefronts will be introduced for the existing openings. In their design, he will try to regularize the spandrel heights. The plans also propose to re -dad the existing hotel canopy with metal panels. These will be a little more contemporary than the rest of the design elements. Chairman Brzezinski questioned whether a contemporary design and material use for this feature would blend with the rest of the building. There is also a new canopy proposed for the ground floor entrance to the conference center. The site plan shows a small extension of the current drop-off lane, to serve both the hotel and conference entrances. This will necessitate the replacement of one street light, and the removal, or modification of three raised planters. The sidewalk area will be re -paved using the current patterns of bricks. The landscape plan shows renovation and expansion of the raised SPAARC Meeting Notes -- December 17, 2003 planters. Where there is no change in the planter size or shape, they will replace plant materials for a 'facelift'. Each of the large planters will be anchored with shade trees and then filled in with lower growing shrubs and perennial plantings. Staff welcomed the additional plantings and noted that these planters should be maintained by the hotel. Chairman Brzesinski noted that this would be an opportunity to build new planters that would be more complementary to the building. Keith Fujihara stated that the new pull-up lane would require the elimination of two parking spaces. The City will require the hotel to reimburse the City annually for the lost parking revenues, in perpetuity. Walter Hallen noted that the site plan depicts barriers to pedestrian through -traffic in the area of a proposed sidewalk caf6. He asked whether or not it was the intent for the foot traffic to walk around instead of through this area. The landscape architect stated that that was their intent. Judy Aiello stated that the City probably would not approve such a layout. There would have to be a pedestrian path by the building, through which the wait staff would have to pass in order to serve the restaurant patrons. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval subject to a subsequent review of exterior materials, the canopy design, the landscaping of the southern Church Street plaza and working with the City on the planters. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03.097 1571 Maple Avenue Final Construct a new funeral service facility, "Donnellan Funeral Services" PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Doug Reynolds, David Burnham GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Reynolds discussed the permit drawings that had been revised as a result of staff comments at the project's prior appearance before the committee. He also advised the committee that the setback variations requested had been granted by the ZBA. DISCUSSION: Mr. Reynolds discussed the materials selection. The masonry used will be a Williamsburg Virginia colored brick (modular size) and limestone. The roof will be standing seam metal, in aged copper. The window will be aluminum clad residential windows and French doors in Cameo White. Railings on the upper floor will be wrought iron in a bronze color to match the roofing materials. This same material will be used for the lighting fixtures. Staff reported that they had reviewed the lighting plan, as requested at the last meeting. Hans Friedman asked if they were aware of the possibility that the neighboring property could be developed with a 200-foot tall building. Mr. Reynolds stated that he was aware of the proposal, but that it was his understanding that it had been denied and that there had been no SPAARC Meeting Notes - December 17, 2003 6 contact between that developer and his client. Mr. Friedman noted that the landscape plan for this project will be greatly affected by that project, if constructed. In discussing the landscape plan for the project staff noted the possibility that the neighboring developer may be interested in contributing to the planting materials in front of the angled parking shown on this project's site. Mr. Reynolds expressed uncertainty that plantings in this area could survive, because of snow plowing activities. Mr. Reynolds explained that the landscape plan for the Maple Street elevation will use ground cover and River Birches to screen the project's parking lot area from that view. The plan also calls for saving two existing honey locust trees and a buffer of serviceber y shrubs up against the building to soften its appearance. Paul D'Agostino had not yet reviewed the plan. Whiteway will design and present the signage for the project. Mr. Reynolds stated that his client is ready to start emptying the building for demolition. Ideally, this could be completed in the winter with construction starting in Marrh. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval, subject to the approval of the landscape plan. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 422 Davis Street Pre-Asmilcation Conference New construction at site of Mather Place at The Georgian PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Reefman, Mary Leary, Jim Curtain GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Reefman stated that, in addition to a Pre -Application Conference, they were also seeking Concept approval. He introduced the full project team, noting that Ms. Leary and Mr. Curtain would be the major presenters. DISCUSSION: Jim Wolinski explained to members of the public in attendance that the proceedings of the committee were not a public hearing; that will take place as part of the Planned Development process conducted by the Plan Commission. This meeting is intended to allow staff to discuss the project with the applicant and make suggestions to the architects. There will not be either an approval or denial of this project at this time, that will be part of the Planned Development hearing process conducted by the Plan Commission. Chairman Brzezinski stated that a few members of the public might be allowed to make brief comments, given adequate time. Carlos Ruiz stated that Judy Fiske and Mary McWilliams, Evanston residents, had that day submitted a nomination to name this property as an Evanston Landmark. He stated he intended to try to schedule a public hearing for the January 201' Preservation Commission Meeting. Mary Leary stated that, despite Mather Lifeway's large expenditures to upgrade these two buildings, there remain problems with the two buildings. These problems are reasons for SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 17, 2003 7 pursuing this project and include: the functional obsolescence of major mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems within the two buildings; problems associated with making the buildings' interiors either senior friendly or ADA accessible; lack of competitiveness with other senior living facilities opening in the region (apartment size and amenities); and redundancies in services and facilities. Mather did consider more extensive renovation but found this was almost as expensive as new construction, and still would not add parking or resolve the spatial limitations to allow for altemative apartment layouts. The proposed plans include: 250 apartment homes, 24 assisted living suites and 36 long term care suites, underground parking for 240 cars, underground corridor for access between buildings, and common areas for recreation, relaxation, entertaining and life-long leaming. They would plan to move residents of Mather Gardens to one of the other buildings in the Evanston area. Then pre -market that new community and begin construction in 2006. Project completion is estimated to be 2008. They would then move residents across the street, and build Phase 2, which would open in 2010. Plans will preserve the majority of the both gardens that are located on the east of the two buildings in the interest of providing open space to residents and neighbors. A majority of the residents at the Georgian signed a petition in favor of the project. They have also made efforts to reach out to neighbors on developing the proposed plan. Jim Curtain, architect for the project, described the exterior design of the building. He stated that the design of the project is based on traditional, neighborhood values. He showed renderings of reference buildings used to ascertain the character, depth and texture of the fagade for what is a traditional residential facility. The view of the fagade along Hinman showed two stories of a stone base, with brick above, which is consistent with the neighborhood. The design also shows a combination of both stone and wrought iron 'Juliet' balconies, also consistent with other balconies in the neighborhood. These will allow for French doors that will open up into the residents' living rooms. They will articulate the fagade without causing too much shade and shadow on the building or to areas below. The northem elevation shows a 15-foot setback for the ground level facade of the building. There is an additional 15-foot setback above the ground floor. Details shown on this fagade are also consistent on all other facades of the building. This is a way they intend to incorporate some of the identified traditional features into the development. Looking at a view of the entire complex, Mr. Curtain noted two key elements of the proprosal. First, the majority of the existing gardens are shown as preserved. The view also shows the two buildings to have similar and compatible characters, though not identical. To achieve this, the plans have incorporated identical materials, used in different ways. Phase I uses a roll-top mansard roof, with flat, limestone bays that articulate the living rooms with balconies. A two- story stone base is consistent around the perimeter of the building. For the Georgian, 3 foot, projected bow windows are used to define the living rooms. These units will still with feature French doors opening onto balconies. SPAARC Meeting Notes - December 17, 2003 The main amenity spaces in Phase 1 will be located on the ground floors, including: dining, living rooms, and activity rooms; barber; and beauty salon. All of these will have direct access to the garden and terrace. The dining room will be shared by residents of both buildings. This necessitates a tunnel to connect the two buildings together. Above the dining room is a terrace. There are also terraces at the sixth and eighth floors, to transition the building back from the adjacent residential neighborhood. The garden area for Phase 1 will feature open lawn areas, primarily to allow different amenity functions and group activity spaces. Around the perimeter of the garden will be raised planters for use by the residents' garden club. The garden in Phase 2 will be treated in a more "romantic" style, featuring winding paths and smaller gathering area. In the center is shown a rose garden. The amenity spaces in Phase 2 will also be located on the ground floor. They Include an indoor pool and exercise and fitness rooms. The main entrances to the building will be off of Davis Street. The site plan shows the perimeter of the building developed with streetscapes, utilizing the existing large trees. A series of ornamental trees will define the interior of the site, together with an iron fence and brick piers. Referring to the site plan, Mr. Curtain noted that the proposed Phase I building is an L-shaped building. He stated that the existing Georgian covers the property's full width. The width of the proposed building is visibly narrower than the current structure. The plan also shows the relocation of the existing alley, leading to Davis, which also affords opportunities for better views. Both buildings will also have rooftop terraces. All of the landscape concepts will be developed with input from the neighborhood. The underground parking for Phase I is shown taking access from Hinman Avenue. The majority of the parking is below Phase I; the remainder is under Phase 2. The service entrance will remain as it is currently for the northem building. Chairman Brzezinski asked about canopies protecting entrances to the building. Mr. Curtain stated that there are suspended canopies planned for both buildings, with a couple of columns for additional support. The continuing care units are located on the second floor of Phase 1. The independent living units will have a variety of floor plans, including: one bedroom, one bedroom, with den; two bedrooms; two bedrooms, with den. All units will have views. There will be a tower element on the comer of Davis and Hinman. This element is intended to signify the project and is consistent with other historic buildings in the city. Chairman Brzezinski asked whether both gardens would be open to neighbors. Mr. Curtain said that they are currently fenced to the neighbors and would likely remain so. Hans Friedman stated that this project represents a precedent setting intrusion of development into the R1 zoned neighborhood. He also had a concern about the developer's proposal to relocate the alley in this block. He observed that, because there's been no prior new development on these two blocks, there are no driveways along them and they remain pedestrian friendly. He SPAARC Meeting !Votes -- December 17, 2003 9 noted that this plan would place an alley, three garage doors and driveways on these two blocks of Hinman Avenue, which is a significant change and contrary to the traditional neighborhood .,alues of this particular neighborhood. Finally, he stated that the Georgian is a historic building for Evanston. It has outstanding terra cotta work and decorative values. While he would not object to the demolition of the Mather, this project should try to work within the footprint of the Georgian. Arthur Alterson observed that the addition of parking to this area is an advantage of this project. Chairman Brzezinski recognized several members of the audience for brief comments or questions. Judy Fiske, stated that she felt that there was a ZBA decision regarding the addition of a fire escape to the building that there was a strong feeling that the property to the east should remain R1. Bonnie Wilson of the Southeast Evanston Association stated that it is that groups opinion that the improvements in these properties should be consistent with the R6 zoning regulations. Lisa Williams read a letter from her condominium association which stated its concems about the proposed redevelopment of this site, including consistency with its given zoning, and the relocation/redirection of alleys and curb cuts onto Hinman Aveue. Several members of the Lakefront Neighbors committee, composed of residents of the adjacent R1 area and on Hinman Avenue, were present. Their spokesperson stated that they had numerous concems with the project and requested that they remain involved in this process. David Reynolds, 204 Davis Street, a neighboring property owner, stated that while he appreciated the neighborliness Mather Lifeways had extended in the past, their plans were for buildings very different from the others currently in the R6 area. The Chairman also recognized two other letters from Robert and Alice Eagley and Mary Singh. Martha Harriet stated that her husband and she had lived in the Georgian from 1975. Although its been completely renovated, its still not well suited to their needs. ACTION: A motion was made to continue the pre -application conference. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-197 413-421 Howard Street Concept & Pre -Application Conference PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John J. Lawlor, Bill Patrun GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Judy Aiello introduced the project by noting that it is the first proposal in the proposed Howard Street TIF District. It culminates five years of planning efforts and neighborhood input to create the TIF. Support for the proposal has been expressed at both the Joint Review Board Meeting and City Council public hearing. City staff have also begun discussions regarding the project in the hopes that this will be a new direction for Howard Street. SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 17, 2003 10 Jack Lawlor, attorney for the developer, introduced Bill Pathan, Bristol Chicago Development and Jim Curtain, project architect. Staff discussed whether or not to proceed with a Pre -Application Conference without the presence of the Alderman of the Ward. It was noted that this appearance was necessary if the project is to proceed to its scheduled appearance before the Plan Commission Meeting in January. DISCUSSION: The site's dimensions are approximately 300 feet, along Howard Street, and only 85 feet deep. to the CTA wall. A critical part of the project will be to vacate the rear alley, to give a total depth of 101 feet. The developer proposes to create a new leg to the remaining portion of this alley. which serves two adjacent buildings. This would be located on the east side of the new building and dedicated to the City. The net result of these actions would be the creatioin of 28,412 square feet of developable area. Surrounding the project is the City of Chicago's TIF District on the south, the CTA's rail yard to the north, 2 and 3-story mixed use uses to the east, and an auto tune up shop and another minted use building to the west. The site is zoned B3. The goals of the project are to make a southern gateway to Evanston, put more people and positive activity on the street and to supplement the redevelopment that has already occurred on the south side of Howard Street. The site and building plans presented assume that the 16-foot alley area is added to the site. The new alley has been designed with the proper turning geometrics for garbage and panel trucks. The ground floor of the building will be served by the main entrance, and contain a fitness room, rental office, and either a hospitality room or cyber-cafe. Glass will allow visual connection with the sidewalk area. There will be two loading docks, off of the newly created alley, at the rear of the site. Below the loading dock area, will be located building storage and storm water detention. The parking garage serving the development is entered from a curb cut on Howard Street, located at the western end of the development. There will be a double loaded ramp, with parking along the ramp. In total, parking will be housed on 3 Y2 floors. The total height of the building is 17 stories. There will be 221 units (75% studios and 1 Bedroom units, 25% 2 Bedroom units) rental/condominium units. Total parking count is 245 spaces. Floor plan shows the building set back from the property line 2 %2 feet. However, the entry of the building does extend all the way to the property line. Chairman Brzezinski observed that much of the built environment, especially the new development to the south, is very much 'hardscape' right up to the lot line. She asked that they consider some ways in which to pull their building back to allow the introduction of some greening in their design and the streetscape. Jim Curtain stated that their plans show a use of planters, located approximately bumper height, on the exterior of the ground floor. SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 17, 2003 If The primary building material is shown as cast in place architectural concrete, in two colors. The balconies are incorporated into the facade of the building and the articulation of the columns and painting of the building will read as a 2-story repeat. The lower part of the building is shown as predominantly brick, using limestone for lintels. The architectural concrete will continue all the way to the ground in the area of the entrance in order to denote its location. There will also be a canopy over the entrance. The garage elevation will be composed of 'frit' glass to screen the first floor of parking. Brick used in the spandrel areas will be a combination of 50% lighter brick, infilled with a pattern of darker brick. The design also shows a mullion cap running over the top of the spandrel and the garage opening. Upper garage openings will appear similar to the hopper windows on the residential floors: the lower portion will be spandrel glass, and the upper portion perforated metal. This will yield a 50% obscured closing. Greening at the street level will be accomplished by installing stone planters in the infill base of the garage's lower windows and by adding trees to those already in place for the streetscape. An alternative building design would use perforated metal rather than louvers at the base of the building, which was intended to lighten the appearance of that end of the building. The developer's time frame, assuming all necessary approvals, has an October 2004 start date. The developer is also requesting an upgrade of city water service. Bill Patrun noted that the ground floor rental office will be open 7 days a week, 12 hours a day. Wan Berkowsky observed that the stretch of Howard Street in this location is very narrow, which concerns him for fire equipment access. He requested that the possibility of stripping parking in this location be evaluated. Chairman Brzezinski asked whether, in that event, the sidewalk could be widened and/or a drop-off added. ACTION: A motion was made to grant concept approval. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously. (8-0) Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 17, 2003 12 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JANUARY 7, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Dennis Marino, James Wolinski, Rajeev Dahal, Keith Fujihara, Arlova Jackson, Ron Walczak, Paul D'Agostino Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza , Susan Guderley Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. PWects Reviewed: SPAARC 03-120 1710 Orrinaton Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct 9' floor conference center and miscellaneous exterior changes. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Stephen Kriegel, Divya Patel, Greg Destephano, Kathryn Tafty, Chris Thomas GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: At its last appearance before the committee, this project had received approval pending the review of building materials and other site plan issues. DISCUSSION: Mr. Thomas reviewed the materials list for the 9'h floor, which include: slightly textured, Portland Cement stucco: standing seam metal roof, in a grey -green color, aluminum clad wood windows in white, with simulated muntins and clear glazing; and new downspouts and gutters in grey -green metal, to match the roof. Third floor windows will be replaced, however all others will remain as is. An opaque coating will be applied to the windows behind which the conference center elevator will be located. Storefronts will all be new. The spandrels will be regularized across the facade. Each storefront window will be done in a medium bronze metal finish, with clear glass. The base of the storefronts will be limestone, to match the existing material. In the storefront to be occupied by the caf6, the plans show fully operable, full-length doors. Staff informed Mr. Thomas that the health department would require an air curtain at this opening. Discussing the site plan, Mr. Thomas stated that the hotel no longer is proposing to extend the drive, leaving the curb line as it currently exists. The hotel does wish to pursue with the City the replacement of a non -historic light pole, adjacent the drive, with a Talmadge pole. Mr. Destaphano informed staff that, with regard to the staff statements about the layout of the sidewalk cafe, he intends to pursue the layout as originally shown. He stated that the fully operable doors would put life on the street and contribute aesthetically to the streetscape. They are also a large expense and he wanted to have some assurance that, if they were installed, he could control the access between the outdoor seating area and inner dining room. Chairman Brzezinski noted that the committee did not grant sidewalk caf6 licenses; that was done by the Council. She and Arthur Alterson agreed that security did warrant some control over access through the doors. Keith Fujihara cautioned staff about setting a precedent in the way they allow a business to impede passing pedestrian traffic. Staff suggested that the matter might be addressed by an alternative layout. Due to the hotel's decision to not extend the driveway, the streetscape/planter drawings had been modified. In the center of the block, there will now be one large, rather than two smaller, planters. Plantings will include shade trees, a mix of understory shrubs, and perennials designed to give year round color and interest. The southern most planter will mirror these plantings. There are currently two planters in the northern end of the site's streetscape. The new plan shows these joined into one. Ms. Talty stated that the hotel was committed to the maintenance of the planters. Mr. Destephano stated they also intend to light the planters. Renderings of the proposed canopy were also presented. Mr. Destephano noted that its arched wing shape, in aluminum with bronze accent, was partially driven by the need to accommodate the graphic for the hotel. Chairman Brzezinski questioned whether the shape and style of the canopy read like that of the rest of the building. The former is very contemporary and the latter is more traditional. Alan Berkowsky stated that the street address of the building would need to be visibly displayed. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval, subject to the later review of the southeast comer plaza and the south elevation of the building at a later date. The approval includes the recommendation to allow the full-length doors to open to the sidewalk cafd. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 03-174 1567 Maole Avenue ConceoI Construct mixed use, 21-story building with 143 d.u.s and 4,509 sq. ff. of commercial space PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: James Murray GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Murray stated that the developers of this project have issued a letter of intent to acquire the adjacent BankOne property. Therefore, he requested a continuance for the consideration of this project. SPAARC Meeting Notes - January 7, 2004 2 ACTION: A motion was made to table staffs consideration of site plan and appearance review pending the outcome of this action. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 1228 Emerson Street Conceot Constrict 7-story condominium, with 60 d.u.s and 74 off-street parking spaces PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Szafarz, Steve I_enet, Bernie Citron GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Bernie Citron, attorney, introduced the other presenters and stated that they have brought the new renderings and a model to show the changes in the project. DISCUSSION: David Szafarz explained how the team had changed the design of the building to incorporate the comments made by staff. The new design emphasizes a curved front elevation. Its top and bottom materials are precast concrete. The remainder of this fagade is glass, with a metal band to accentuate the curve. Inset balconies are also shown, their railings being a continuation of glass. Staff asked whether all four sides of the building would have this same treatment. The applicants stated that they would have to see what the code required for the side walls, given the proximity of adjacent buildings. Several changes in the landscape were noted. First, the parking area in the rear has been reconfigured and screened from view with more plantings. It still contained the same number of parking spaces. Outdoor seating has also been added in the rear of the building. The landscaping of the front of the building has moved its trees from the parkway to inside of the sidewalk. Foundation plantings include shrubs, ornamental grasses and seasonal colorful plantings. Staff asked that the proposed 5-foot wide sidewalk be widened to 6 feet, with the extra foot being added towards the building. A. Berkowsky asked where they had planned for the parking for emergency and fire vehicles. He questioned the adequacy or availability of the rear parking lot. The building's rear driveway or midge Avenue, both of which are two lanes wide, were suggested. Mr. Citron stated that they would meet with the Evanston Fire Department to resolve this matter. Dumpsters for the building will be housed at its ground level. The air conditioning units will be roof mounted. Chairman Brzezinski suggested that some type of enclosure, following the curved of the front elevation, be erected to screen the view of the condenser units. Mr. Citron stated that the City owns a portion of the right-of-way in front of the proposed building. The developer is requesting that a portion of this be vacated in order to build this development. In exchange, the remaining portion of the R.O.W. will be planted and maintained by the building's owner(s). Staff requested that the developer also try to move and replant the large evergreens now in the front of the property. SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 7, 2004 3 Noting that this planned development will seek substantial zoning relief, staff discussed possible public benefits that could be provided in exchange. Items mentioned included painting the Metra viaduct, inclusion of affordable housing units, and additional landscaping. ACTION: A motion was made to grant concept approval. Included in this motion was the condition that a photograph of the architect's model is provided to the City and be made part of the official record of the committee's deliberations. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. SPAARC 2701 Ashland Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct 2 % story building, NU Anderson Hall and Burton Academic Advising Center PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bonnie Humphrey, Michelle Sakayan, Benjamin Zachwieja GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The project has not yet received final zoning analysis. NU proposes to replace an existing 1- story building, adjacent to McGaw Hall, with a new 2-story. L-shaped building. The new building will house offices for coaches, marketing operations, and academic advising for athletes. There will also be a wrestling practice area and locker facilities in the basement. DISCUSSION: Ms. Humphrey noted that there is no direct vehicular access to the building. There have been preliminary discussions between the University and EFD regarding access for fire and emergency vehicles to this site. Pathways to and from the building, via Ashland, have been identified for ambulances and fire engines. While able to reach the site, aerial trucks would not be able to exit the site. Trash removal will be accomplished via handcarts from the rear of the building to an asphalt area accessible by trucks. The principal building material will be modular brick. The first floor will have cast stone sills along the grade and aluminum storefront system windows. At the second floor, there is a continuous band of limestone around the building. Along the top of the building there is a recessed band of brick. The atrium is a 2 % story glass structure, using curtain wall construction. The air conditioning chiller for the building will be sited apart from the building, to its rear. It will be surrounded by a U-shaped masonry wall with a 4-foot iron gate. The mechanical room for the building is in the basement. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval, subject to EFD approval of emergency vehicle access to site. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 7, 2004 4 SPAARC 2801 Sheridan Place Recommendation to ZBA Construct 2-story attached garage and home addition PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Adel G. Schrodt GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Applicant proposes to construct a home addition. It would include a second, two -car garage as well as additional living space, located both above the two garages and in an extension on the north side of the existing house. The existing home is located 50 feet from both the south lot line and Sheridan Place and 33 feet from the north lot line. There is a rear yard requirement of 30 feet; the proposed addition would provide a rear yard of 11.3 feet. DISCUSSION: The property owner has spoken to the adjoining neighbor, to the north, who is in favor of the project. He has not yet spoken to the neighbors to the east as they are out of town. He has Invited all of the surrounding property owners to an open house to discuss the project. No changes are proposed to the existing driveway curb Gut. Arthur Alterson asked that the property owner check for any deed restrictions recorded with the original plat of subdivision for this property. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 1910 Dgmnster Recommendation to Sign Board 2 pole wrapped posting notice displays for on premises information and public service messages PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Applicant seeks an additional 2 pole wrapped posting notice displays for on -site public service messages. The request would result in a total of 5, free-standing signs when only 2 are permitted. DISCUSSION: The applicant is offering to provide two bike lids in exchange for the requested signs. The site is allowed two signs, because there are two qualifying street frontages. There are already three signs. If granted, the current request would result in a total of five signs. These signs are for tenant advertising and occasional public service announcements. SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 7, 2004 S ACTION: A motion was made recommend approval of four sign faces, mounted on existing poles for use by shopping center tenants or by the City, for 8 weeks of city -sponsored signage. Sign copy must comply with the 7 items of information or less requirement and shall be subject to a review fee from City. In exchange for the additional signs, 10 additional bike spaces shall be provided in covered locations. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 3434 Central Street Recommendation to Sian Board Illuminated freestanding and wall sign for Unit Church, non-exempt sign in residential district PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Halien GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: A request by the Unity Church to replace an existing sign with an illuminated freestanding sign (11 feet long by 80 inches high) and install a wall sign. All church signage in residential areas, other than an institutional sign measuring two feet by 3 feet, is subject to the sign variation process. DISCUSSION: Frank Aquado noted that Aid. Ed Moran has expressed his opposition to the proposed signs ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial of the freestanding sign with the recommendation that the applicant consider the church sign at Lincoln and Ashland as a better example of a freestanding identity sign (not internally illuminated and with no changeable copy). The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). A motion was made to recommend approval of the wall -mounted sign. The motion was seconded and approved (7-1). Rajeev Dahal voted nay. SPAARC 1901 Green Bav Road Recommendation to Sion Board Freestanding illuminated sign for auto repair business PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hailen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Applicant requests a freestanding sign for its auto repair business. Action would result in 2 signs, when only one is allowed. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend denial. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Respectfully submitted, SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 7, 2004 6 Susan Guderley SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 7. 2004 7 SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JANUARY 28, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur AIterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal. Paul D'Agostino, Dennis Marino, Ron Walczak, lathes Wolinski Design Professional: Hare Friedman (Absent) other Staff- Frank Aguado, Walter Hallert, Morris Robinson, Carlos Ruiz Chairman Brzezlnski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting at 2:31 P.M. The minutes of the December 17, 2003 SPAARC Meeting were approved subject to the correction of the motion for the 422 Davis Street pre -application conference to be properly acknowledged as a continuation, rather than for "preliminary final site plan and appearance review as stated in the record. Also a name correction for Mary Singh was required. Arthur Alterson stressed the fact that when corrections are determined to be required for previous minutes, it is extremely important that the corrections are made on the original dated document. Chair Brzezinski concurred, adding that the phrase "Draft Not Approved" should also be deleted at that time. Frank Aguado indicated that he would immediately make the corrections and disseminate the information. Chair Brzezinski next welcomed Mr. Robert Homer, the major principal on the development team representing the proposed 1667 condominium redevelopment project. Proposed Project Reviewed: 1567 Maple Concept Approval Construct a mixed -use twenty-one story residential building with 143 condominium units and 4,509 square feet of street level commercial space. Project Represented By: Robert Homer, IbrWwm Shihadeh, Developers and James T. Murray, Attorney Summary of Presentation: Mr. Homer advised the SPAARC that the other members of his team were in route, but began the presentation by reminding the Committee that at his last appearance before SPAARC, it was requested that he confer with BankOne. Mr. Homer later determined that the proper contact was actually Golub And Company, and through Golub he was Introduced to the responsible BankOne property management personnel in Chicago. Mr. Homer advised the BankOne personnel that he was in the early process of negotiating for the acquisition of the BankOne branch property on Maple Avenue when the J.P. Morgan/BankOne Merger occurred. As a result of the merger. the financial institution is on an indefinite hold relative to all capital projects. Mr. Homer stated that his firm offered BankOne the same price for square footage as was paid for the existing property. BankOne considered the offer to be acceptable, with the provision that a new branch facility within the new development be included, gratis, for perpetuity. Mr. Homer said he is now at the point where he needs to lake the approval process to its next step and was seeking direction from the Committee. Chair Brzezinski advised Mr. Homer that the next stage as indicated on the SPAARC agenda was for concept approval. Mr. Homer now has the option to proceed to the Plan Commission with a pre application conference with no action or official motion by SPAARC. Mr. Homer stated that the option to proceed to the Plan commission is desirable to determine what the Commission's sentiment Is for the proposed project. Chairman Brzezinski asked about the negotiations with Union Pacific regarding the landscape Issues the rail road embankment wall. Mr. Horner's response was that negotiations had started and that contact is ongoing. It appears that the negotiations will be a lengthy process. The developer has "engaged" the landscape architectural firm that the Union Pacific is most comfortable working with to provide design concepts, but Union Pack needs to provide parameters for the work. However, Mr. Horner said it was reasonable to proceed on parallel tracks to keep the project moving. Chairman Brzezinski asked for a clarification on any action the Committee has taken thus for on the proposed project. Arthur Alterson stated that the proposal was tabled on November 5, and December 10, 2003. The only significant changes made between the first and second meeting was to eliminate some curb cuts and the repositioning of a single driveway to the east side of the building. Chairman Brzezinski added that publictvisitor parking spaces were also Introduced to the plan. Action: Arthur Alterson moved to grant concept approval for the proposed project and Dennis Marino provided a second. Chairman Brzezinski expressed concern for the developer's intent to construct the building slab on grade rather than going below grade to accommodate at least one level of parking and reduce the mass of the base. The Chair's opinion is that the proposed project would be enhanced significantly if the base was not so massive. Mr. Homer stated the cost to go underground would be prohibitive and provided mitigating examples such as the City regulations for the excessively high number of parking spaces required per unit as a principal reason for the building size. Mr. Homer than stated that it may be possible to reduce the height of the parking garage by ten feet which will have the same effect of reducing the mass as going underground would create. The merits of this suggested solution was briefly discussed and proved to be, if feasible, an acceptable alternative to reducing the mass of the base. Arthur Alterson amended his motion to make it contingent on the developer to investigate all reasonable measures to reduce the height of the parking garage or taking the base of the building below grade to effect a reduction of ten feet in height, which will also reduce the massiveness of the base. After some discussion, Dennis Marino added the foregoing should occur while meeting all codes, ordinances and accessibility requirements and then provided a second for the amended motion. James Wolinski asked for and received the breakdown for the number of one, two and three bedroom units in the proposed project. James Wolinski also asked for the price points. The developer stated it was premature to set prices, but they will be competitive with similar units In other recently completed developments in the city which currently is approximately $300 to $325 per square foot. James Wolinski inquired about the construction time schedule. Aside from obtaining all approvals from the City, the developer expects to begin pre -construction sales in the fall of 2004. it is estimated that it will take six months of pre -sale activities to reach the point to finalize the financial Issues. As such, it is anticipated that construction will begin in the spring of 2005. Chairman Brzezinski asked for and received assurances that proper landscaping to include the Union Pacific embankment wall, sidewalk streetscape to match the downtown and parkway trees are in the plan. Chairman Brzezinski then called for a vote on the amended motion for concept approval and the measure was passed unanimously by the Committee. There being no further business, Chairman Brzezinski adjourned the meeting at approximately 3:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, fir[,_ .T .. I,- I "4. . I . ,,Y, .. .1 ". r y,,, "1. ii I . . Morris E. Robinson Economic Development Planner SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JANUARY 21, 2004 Aftendees: Committee Members: Judith Aiello, Arthur Altenson, Paul D'Agostlno, Keith Fujihara, Dennis Marino, Arlova Jackson, Carolyn Brzezinski, John Walczak, Alan Berkowsky, James Wolinski, Rajeev Dahal, Sat Nagar. Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Carlos Ruiz, Walter Hallen, C. Brzezinski (chair) determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting_ Proiects Reviewed: 422 Davis Street Pre-Appl[cation Conference and Concept New construction at site of Mather Place and The Georgian. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jim Curtin, Michael Werthman, Joe Zasdel, David Reifman, GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Jim Curtin showed an aerial view of the Georgian and Mather buildings. Design drawings were presented to show how the new buildings would look. He said that the project would be built in Phase I and Phase Il. The materials used would be compatible with other nearby buildings. It was explained that there would be a tunnel going under the street to connect the two buildings. Currently the Georgian is 107'; the new building will be 1 10'when constructed. The Mather building is currently 95' and will be 107' when it is rebuilt. Currently the two buildings serve approximately 200 residents, but have served more in the past. The two new buildings are projected to serve 350 residents. There will be 250 parking spaces. The square footage of the new buildings will be approximately 500,000 square feet, and the existing buildings have approximately 325,000 square feet. DISCUSSION: There was discussion among the Committee members with most members in support of providing concept approval for the new development. Hans Friedman said that because the Georgian was a beautiful building architecturally, it should not be demolished, but renovated Inside to suit the developer's needs. Members of the audience spoke and said that the Georgian has been nominated for landmark status. ACTIONS: Carolyn Brzezinski moved approval of the project concept. Motion seconded by Keith Fujihara. Motion passed with Mr. Friedman voting nay. 510 Sheridan Road Concog_i Construct a 5 story brick building with 32 dwelling units and 44 off street parking spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nathan Kipnis, Steven Gohr, Chuck Mudd GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Nathan Kipnis presented his project concept. The project consists of a five story brick building with 32 dwelling units and 44 off street parking spaces. Mr. Gohr and Mr. Mudd said they were seeking the Committee's direction on how to proceed with the project. DISCUSSION: Members of the Committee said that a planned development could be done if Mr. Gohr and Mr. Mudd were prepared to provide some public benefits for the City to approve their project. It would also be possible to go through the variation process although they would have to demonstrate that they needed to do this because of a hardship ACTIONS: Carolyn Brzezinski moved to table the project. Motion passed unanimously. 585 Inaleside Place Pmliminary and Final Remove existing frame addition; construct 2-story brick addition and 1-story brick garage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jennifer Knapp and Gary Beyed, Architects GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Knapp and Mr. Beyerl presented the architectural rendering of the proposed addition to a single-family home. DISCUSSION: Committee members expressed their approval of the proposed addition. ACTIONS: Carolyn Brzezinski moved preliminary and final approval of the proposed project. Dennis Marino seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Site Plan adjourned at 4:17 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Mary Baaske/Planning Division SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JANUARY 14, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Arlova Jackson, Paul D`Agostino, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski, Arthur Alterson, Judith Aiello Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff. Frank Aguado, Waiter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Susan Guderley Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the December 10, 2003 meeting were approved (6-0-1 ). Sat Nagar, who had been absent, abstained from voting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1210 Michioan Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct a 2-% story near addition to a single-family residence PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Dwyer, Nathan Kipnis GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant's architect, Mr. Kipnis, stated that the property owner, Mr. Dwyer, is proposing an addition to the rear of his home that it will intrude into the rear setback requirements. The required rear setback is 30 feet; a 17' 4 3/4" setback is proposed. The home is already an existing non -conforming structure, having only a 24' 7 % rear yard. The building is a local landmark and is also located within a historic district. It was originally two separate buildings that were linked together. The proposed addition is sited to the rear of the property so as to maintain the visibility of the two component structures, to avoid a large tree, to least affect the view of the neighbors, and to situate the proposed garage less obtrusively. Both the Illinois Landmark Association and the Evanston Preservation Commission have approved the plan. DISCUSSION: Mr. Dwyer and Mr. Kipnis noted the depressed courtyard shown on the site, providing light and access to the basement of the home. Neighbors have been approached about the project, except for those to the west. Staff encouraged contacting them before the ZBA meeting since their garage sits immediately adjacent on their lot. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARG 1235 Hartrev Avenue Concept Construct 100' freestanding monopole to contain 6 antennas for Sprint PCS GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: At the applicant's request, this project was withdrawn from the agenda. SPAARC 2127 Dewev Avenue Final Convert warehouse to commercial 1 light industrial uses, Phase 2 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andy Spatz, Signe Adas GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicants request final approval for Phase 2 of the project. DISCUSSION: Mr. Spatz discussed the materials and their colors for this phase of the project. He stated that they would be a continuation of those used in Phase 1: black standing seam aluminum and corrugated aluminum. Staff asked about the installation of the parkway trees that were to be planted as a part of Phase 1. Ms. Adas stated that this matter would be addressed in the spring. Staff stated that occupancy for Phase 2 may have to be tied to the planting of these trees for Phase 1 trees. Mr. Spatz stated that he had modified the rear elevation of the building to show five, rather than nine different planes. On the south side of the building, the proposed materials will be a combination of black and clear anodized corrugated aluminum. However, they may decide to go will all black. The lower part of the elevations will be either masonry or tile, just as in Phase 1. The window frames are a combination of Gear anodized and black metal. In Phase 1, the doors were storefront entries — 3 Y2 and 4 feet in width — with perforated metal mounted on the interior of the door to prevent break-ins. The ground floor windows in Phase 2 will be handled in this same way. They will also install a camera system in Phase 2, as they have done in Phase 1. The Chair asked Mr. Spatz to identify where, in Phase 2, there are remaining portions of the existing masonry. Mr. Spatz stated that there is a small area between the garage doors. He has subsequenfly decided to eliminate this "orphan' section by covering it with tile. Masonry SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 14, 2004 2 will also be used for the lower four feet of the southern elevation. Chairman Brzezinski suggested the continuation of the existing masonry around the southeastern comer of the building in order to give relief to the darkness of the corrugated black metal and to represent the original building material. Mr. Spatz stated that there will be masonry in Phase 3 and that he didn't want the brick to read like a "belt". He did agree to look at this suggestion. Ron Walczak asked if there was lighting included in the plans. Mr. Spatz noted that there were two spotlights mounted the southeast comer of the building, to illuminate its side, and four mercury vapor floodlights mounted inn the rear, to illuminate the alley. Parking for the project is provided by tandem parking spaces, within two garages opening onto the alley and two opening onto Dewey Street. The garages off of Dewey will necessitate the creation of two new curb cuts. Staff inquired about a third, existing curb cut along Dewey. Mr. Spatz noted this will remain to serve Phase 3 and that he planned to add another curb, as well. The Chairman acknowledged the benefit of having interior, off-street parking to serve the development She further noted that this design, with multiple vehicular curb cuts, comes at the expense of the pedestrian -way. She observed that the development was becoming more "Internalized' and that this underscores the need to increase the presence of pedestrians and other forms of "eyes on the street", in order to increase the safety in the neighborhood. She suggested adding balconies in Phase 3, to provide safe outdoor space and to achieve less of a fortress impression. The Phase 2 landscaping will consist of more trees in the parkway. Staff asked if one of these could be placed between the two proposed driveways. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval, subject to the placement of one of the street trees in the island between the two curb cuts, to the approval and permit for the proposed curb cuts from Public Works, and a suggestion to look at the brick on the first floor of the western elevation. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC Main & Chicaao & Custer Pmllminary and Final Replacement of Main Street Viaduct PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kimberly Beattie GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The CTA has developed final plans for this project based upon the direction given by staff' on the conceptual plans. Chairman Brzezinski explained that final site plan approval of a projed is not granted until staff has been able to review drawings submitted for building permit. DISCUSSION: Ms. Beattie stated that the CTA has coordinated with Meba/UP in order to assure the maintenance of pedestrian access under the bridge and to commuter parking for all but one SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 14, 2004 3 weekend during the construction period. It was noted that the design for the Main Street viaduct was considered within the context of the future improvement of nearby viaducts and the Main Street CTA station. Main Street was supposed to be the prototype for other viaducts improvements. However, it had to be treated as a unique case because of its proximity to and relationship with several other active projects: 900 Chicago Avenue condominium building, renovation of the Metra Station, and the planned improvement of the Chicago Avenue streetscape. The CTA had previously presented three different schemes, each showing a different treatment of the bridge abutment. The CTA's consultant stated that the greatest visual impact upon the viaduct designs was achieved via the shape of the abutment and how it opened up the space under the viaduct to make it feel more welcoming. These designs are further constrained by the adjacent projects' work limits. Design A showed the two abutments sloping directly back from the sidewalk elevation to the supports. To discourage skateboarders, a masonry face would be applied to the face of the two abutments. Design B looked at trying to mark the viaduct with a comer. On the south side, the abutment sloped back from a knee wall; on the north side the abutment went straight up and back. Design C tried taking the original abutment shapes and shading them to make them appear less massive. The design selected was that one recommended by the committee. It keeps a sloping abutment on the south side; on the north side, the abutment slopes back from a knee wall. There is a small area of vegetation on the southeast comer. The actual bridge structure will be a traditional girder, painted the same buff color as the new Washington Street bridge. To "pigeon -proof" the bridge, the CTA is proposing a metal netting of the underside. David Jennings added that they also consider some sort of treatment of the side ledges of the bridge. The CTA is hoping to bid this project in spring 2004, start construction in June of 2004, and complete work in June 2005. The first six months will be off - site fabrication of the girder. On -site work, necessitating street closure to vehicular traffic, will be approximately 10 weeks. Chairman Brzezinski asked about the type of plant materials suggested by the drawings. The Consultant stated that a variety of Sedums is proposed. Staff stated that they would like more time and thought reflected to this in the final plans. They asked that selected materials be something that would be of year-round interest, as well as serving to stabilize the soil. Chairman Brzezinski asked whether they had considered lighting for this project. Ms. Beattie stated that maintenance concerns had been raised by the CTA's maintenance and operations personnel over the use of light tubing the full length of the bridge. A traditional approach, putting light fixtures over the sidewalks, is now proposed. These fixtures will be placed up into the bridge structure (and also under the pigeon netting) so that the lamps will not be visible except from below. The bridge will be painted the same buff paint color as the Washington Street Bridge, with an epoxy coating. The pavement under the viaduct will be replaced and will match the brick and paving currently specified by the Chicago Avenue Streetscape. The exact match lines for new paving will be reviewed at the time of final site plan approval. SPAARC Meeting !Votes - January 14, 2004 4 ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 917 Greenleaf Street Concepl Construct a 5-story, 5 d.u., multiple family dwelling with 8 off-street parking spaces PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Brian Wilk, David Rawlings, Frank McCannon GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Frank McCannon, current property owner, proposes to raze the existing farmhouse -style residential structure on the property to construct the proposed 5, 2 bedroom condominium units. The applicant has not yet submitted for zoning analysis. DISCUSSION: Brian Wilk stated that the property is zoned R5 and displayed pictures of the property. The current structure is 1 Y2 story building, divided into two dwelling units. Behind the residence Is a garage with ten stalls. This property is situated immediately adjacent to landmark rowhouses on Maple Avenue. On its other side, is a three-story apartment building. They are currently working within the zoning guidelines, and do not wish to seek any zoning relief. The proposed construction type for the project is exterior wall masonry, with load -bearing fire rated, wood trusses. Staff noted that they would be required to install a sprinkler system, since the building exceeded two stories in height. The design eliminates a curb cut on Greenleaf, which would restore some street parking. Eight off-street parking spaces are also provided. The site plan shows a 27-foot, front setback and 5 foot side setbacks, to allow for side windows. All units will have 2 bedrooms, a foyer, great room, two baths, their own HVAC, a rear porch area, and a trash shoot to the dumpster, below. There is a 45-foot long, heated ramp leading to a below grade parking level, containing 5 spaces. There will also be elevator and fire rated stair access to the garage. A three stall, garage will be located in the rear of the property. The building's height will be 50 feet, to its flat roof. Decorative elements and the elevator mechanical room are permitted to extend above that maximum. Condenser units and chimneys will also be placed on the roof. Rajeev Dahal asked Mr. Rawlings to review the dimension of the first basement parking stall, to Insure that it is useable. The applicant's assumption regarding backing into and out of this space would not conform to city code. He will likely need to review this, and if not resolved, it will require variations. Staff informed the applicants that this development would be subject to both stormwater detention and soil retention regulations. Chairman Brzezinski asked whether they had considered the type of materials they would be using. The architect stated that although these had not been finalized, they would probably SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 14, 2004 5 consist of some sort of brick, limestone or rock face CMU. The sidewalls would probably be the decorative CMU. Carlos Ruiz asked that they consider using the brick for the coins on the front comers of the building. J. Aiello asked how far back the face brick would be wrapped. Mr. Rawlings stated that on one side it would go back as far as the chimney, approximately 8 feet. On the other side, this hadn't been determined. Arthur Alterson stated that he would have difficulty voting for the project if CMU were used for the side walls. Mr. Rawlings stated that the windows would be metal clad wood, with applied simulated divided lights. The price range for the units is between $500,00 and $600,000. R. Dahal asked for the slope of the proposed ramp. The architect stated that it is 20%. The City's maximum recommended slope for a heated, interior ramp is 15% (for an exterior ramp it is 12%). Staff suggested that they should look at averaging the front setbacks on the block, to see if that would allow some siting flexibility. ACTION: A motion was made to table site plan and appearance review approval to allow for a review of the proposed use of CMU, to obtain a zoning analysis, to study siting adjustments, and to resolve the parking difficulties noted by staff. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 413 Howard Street Pre-Aviplication Conference Construct a 17--story, 221 d.u. multiple family dwelling, with 245 off-street parking spaces PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jack Lawlor, Bill Patrun GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This development had appeared before the committee and was granted Concept approval. It Is appearing again to satisfy the pre -application requirement before proceeding, that evening, to the Plan Commission for planned development review. If deemed appropriate, the applicants are also requesting preliminary site plan approval. DISCUSSION: Because of the narrow depth of the site, the applicant will seek to vacate the existing rear alley behind the site. To provide service access to both this site, as well as the buildings to the east, a new alley will be constructed and dedicated on the eastern edge of this site. The net result of this would be new site dimensions of 221 feet in width and 101 feet in depth, and a total area of 28,400 square feet. The project will be located in the B3 zoning district. Adjacent uses are the CTA railyards, mixed use buildings, the Gateway Shopping Center and transit station and auto repair establishment. The project will contain 221 residential units, of which 75 % are primarily 1-bedroom units and a small number of studios, and 25% are 2 bedrooms. The basement would house tenant storage and some of the mechanicals. The ground floor will have additional tenant storage, a lobby, fitness area, hospitality room, and rental office. There will a total of 245 parking spaces SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 14, 2004 6 provided in the development's parking garage. Entry into the garage Is from Howard Street, at the building's extreme western end. ADA accessible spaces are located on the ground floor of the garage. All of the parking is on four floors, with a ramp on the rear wall of the structure. Parking stall widths are 8' 2", at the narrow spot adjacent to the column, and 8' 9" at the open spot without a column. These dimensions will necessitate a variation from the required parking stall size. Virtually all of the units have balconies. Most are inset balconies; the balconies for the studio units are Juliet balconies. The exterior building design of the front facade features brick at the base of the building and limestone lintels above three story 'openings'. The spandrels within this these openings will be a blend of light and dark patterned brick. The upper garage openings would have the appearance of a typical window. The lower hoppers would be non -operable spandrel glass, and the upper openings would be perforated metal. The majority of the ground floor, and its functional areas such as the fitness center and hospitality room, will be visible. Two -foot deep planters are shown in the openings in the facade of the garage. The upper portion of the building will be architectural, cast -in -place concrete. Mr. Curtain stated that reveals and articulations are used to give this character. Two colors of paint were shown on the concrete, which allowed the representation of a two-story opening in portions of the building. In the center portion, they have utilized the secondary color to make it more pronounced. The entrance bay has been projected an additional 10 feet to give it more architectural significance. The east and west views of the building also show the architectural concrete in multiple colors. The brick base turns the comer. Chairman Brzezinski commented that the west elevation doesn't seem to be as well detailed as the front elevation. Staff urged the applicants to study what might be done to these to make them seem less massive. Jim Curtain suggested this might be achieved using a different color representation. The elevation facing CTA is similar to the front, in terms of the articulation the base structure and the architectural concrete. The rear side of the garage is left open to allow for natural ventilation. A three foot projecting edge, over the sidewalk will continue the length of the building. David Jennings expressed a concern about the planters' placement, which extends approximately one foot into the sidewalk area. To rectify this, the configuration of the ground floor handicapped parking spaces and traffic aisle was discussed. Staff suggested that the ADA requirements be reviewed to see if these spaces should be scattered throughout the development. David Jennings also noted that some of the spaces shown in the plans are against walls. He observed that it would make more sense to use these for handicapped parking because their location permits better door swing, would leave more room for the ramp, and eliminate concem regarding adjacent spaces. Staff asked what is envisioned for the proposed planters. Mr. Curtain stated that these would be two feet high, but plantings haven't yet been discussed. The planters would be maintained by the rental office. Mr. Patrun stated that the units would initially be rental, under single ownership and management. However, the developer will plat and obtain final approval of the SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 14, 2004 building as a condominium in advance. The period for which the building would be a rental property is undetermined at Oils time. The applicants stated that they plan to have a recessed door to the garage, which will be card operable. Staff questioned the adequacy of the line of sight for both the garage door and the new alley. Rajeev Dahal asked for the slope of the parking ramps. Mr. Curtain stated that there are several slopes: the primary parking ramps are at 5%; the express ramps are no more than 10 %. Moms Robinson asked whether security measures would be necessary to prevent someone from accessing the parking ramp, via the CTA yard. Mr. Curtain stated that this would require someone to scale a 15-foot distance; staff suggested that, should this become a problem, chain link or wrought iron fencing could be erected. Temporary parking for construction workers will be an issue and various possible solutions are being pursued. Construction of the building would begin in October 2004 and is expected to take 19 months. J. Aiello asked whether or not the developer had met with the CTA. They responded that they had and that its primary concerns were the possibility of trespass from the development onto CTA property and the use of a boom crane for construction. ACTION Chairman Brzezinski closed the Pre -Application conference. A motion was made to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval, subject to investigation of enhancements to the east and west elevations and an agreement upon the extent to which the proposed planters will intrude upon the public way. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley SPAARC M wft Notes — January 14, 2004 8 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 4, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: James Wolinski, Paul D'Agostino, Carolyn Brzezinski, Ron Walczak, Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino, Adova Jackson, Keith Fu)ihara Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Moms Robinson, Tracy Norfleet Since there was not yet a quorum at 2:30pm, Chair Brzezinski suggested moving the approval of previous meeting minutes to the and of the agenda and proceeding with the presentation of the first project. A quorum was reached shortly as additional Commission members arrived. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1123 Howard Street Preliminery and Final Minor exterior alterations to accommodate `Washington Mutualr offices. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Leslie Wroblewski (Washington Mutual) and Tom Powers (Interior Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant's architect, Tom Powers, stated that his client, Leslie Wroblewski, is proposing minor exterior alterations to 1123 Howard Street to achieve the desired interior layout for a new Washington Mutual home loan center. Its use was clarified as a small, local center where prospective homebuyers can get loan information and file applications, but closings will not take place at this location. There are presently two entry points --a single door and a set of double doors. To achieve the desired interior layout, the applicant is proposing to lock all existing doors, remove two windows and replace them with a single door with sidelights, and appropriately landscape the entry. A site plan and photos were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski noted that locking the double doors raises safety concerns in case of an emergency. It also raises the need for adequate interior and exterior signage to direct customers to the correct entry. Ms. Wroblewski indicated that adequate signage will be provided. Mr. Hallen suggested removing the double doors, but Mr. Powers indicated that this might be cost -prohibitive because the original fagade would have to be replaced with closely matching materials. Mr. Powers asked if the double doors could be used as an emergency exit. Chair Brzezinski stated that a building of this size does not necessarily need an emergency exit In addition to the main exit, and she prefers that doors be usable at all times. Mr. Friedman suggested flipping the floor plan, utilizing the existing double door as a main entry, and removing the other door as a cost-effective compromise. Ms. Wroblewski noted that this may conflict with the uniform interior layout they prefer for home loan centers. Mr. Powers indicated that this might not be structurally possible due to the asymmetrical placement of interior columns. Both agreed to take this suggestion under further consideration. Discussion then turned to landscaping and fencing. Chair BrzeAnski stated that when the addition to the building was permitted, ownership agreed to the addition of a honey locust tree in the parkway and a wooden fence in the rear. Construction for this project is anticipated to start in mid -February with a six -week build out. The store will open in mid -April, but that will be too early to plant. A wood fence will be constructed in the rear instead of a chain link fence. This addressed Ald. Rainey's concern for screening the dumpster. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski moved preliminary and final approval to remove any doors not in use and replace existing materials; to consider reusing the double doors by flipping the floor plan and removing the unused exterior door, and to replace landscaping near the entrance with similar landscaping. The motion was seconded and approved (7-1). Mr. Alterson voted `nay because he would like to see a locust tree planted, per the earlier agreement with ownership. SPAARC 405 Church Street Preliminary and Final Addition of handicapped -accessible ramp and associated entry door. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew McGonigle (Northwestern University) and Anne McGuire (McGuire Igleski and Associates, Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. McGonigle is proposing the addition of a handicapped -accessible ramp and associated entry door for an older Northwestern University building. The building will contain the School for Continuing Studies, which is primarily attended by local seniors, and two ancillary offices for the University. The project will involve installing an ADA-compliant ramp, which will be accessible from a sidewalk leading to the alley. Ms. McGuire noted That the project respects existing materials and has been approved by the Historic Preservation Commission, which Mr. Ruiz verified. Mr. McGonigle also clarified how the ramp will be adequately lit. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about signage for the handicapped drop-off area in the alley, which will be a reflective, non -illuminated sign on either side of Church Street. Chair Brzezinski also asked about the entry door from the ramp, which will be a balanced door instead of a push - plate. Mr. Friedman asked if the third floor fire escape could be removed since it is in the front of building and detracts from its appearance, but Mr. McGonigle indicated that this is not possible since it is the only option for a second means of escape from that floor. Mary Singh, a resident across the alley, asked about parking area usage. Mr. McGonigle clarified that it is a faculty/staff lot, and visitors must acquire a hang tag permit from the University. The University tickets illegally parked cars (to the extent possible). The lot will be used by an estimated 15 employees for the building and visitors. Ms. Singh also asked if the alley was the best place for the drop-off area. Mr. McGonigle explained that an ADA-compliant ramp cannot be installed in the front of the house without changing its historic character, and since the drop-off area is located at the point where the sidewalk meets the alley, this is the best place for the ramp. ACTIONS: Chair Brzezinski motioned to grant preliminary and final approval for the ramp and entry, and the vote was unanimous. Following the vote, Chair Brzezinski motioned to approve the minutes for January 7, and the vote was unanimous. For the January 14 minutes, Mr. Aguado noted that he had received an email from Mr. Dahal suggesting that 'maximum permitted' be changed to 'maximum recommended.' The amended minutes were approved unanimously. For the January 21 minutes, Mr. Friedman indicated that he voted 'nay' on the 422 Davis Street project. The amended minutes were approved unanimously. The January 28 minutes were approved with Mr. Friedman abstaining since he was absent from that meeting. Ms. Singh asked a final question regarding drainage for the unpaved parking lot, and Chair Brzezinski suggested she contact the Engineering Department. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 11, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, Ron Walczak, Arlova Jackson, James Wolinski, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Brzezinski, Alan Berkowsky, Dennis Marino Judy Aiello, Arthur Alterson Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfteet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 25W Green Bav Road Preliminary Demolish dwelling and construct a four story, eight dwelling unit building with accessory parking. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Michael Obloy and Ben Dunlap (Peak Properties); Jim Chambers and David Doot (FWC Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The development group is proposing to demolish the existing dwelling and construct a four story, eight dwelling unit building with parking. The proposal incorporates a suggestion from the last SPAARC meeting to provide an entrance fronting Green Bay Road by redesigning the first floor. The first floor unit is now smaller to accommodate the walkway but as a trade-off, extra square footage freed up in the new design has been incorporated into the terrace for outdoor space. The team also noted their detailed compliance with the zoning and building code since the previous SPAARC meeting. Mr. Aguado confirmed that the site is zoned R5. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski thanked the development team for incorporating suggestions from the previous meeting and especially for addressing the street. She then asked for a clarification of rear auto access and parking. There will be three rear surface parking spaces and 12 underground parking spaces (fully below grade). The ramp slope is 8% at the top and bottom with blends, 16% in the middle, and heated. The recommended slope is 12% if heated and 6% it not, but the development team said Mr. Dahal has approved the ramp as proposed. Discussion turned to rear landscaping; there will be a landscaped publictcommon area. Chair Brzezinski asked the development team about exterior building materials, which will be mostly brick and split -face block, renaissance stone (preferred), or limestone. Mr. Marino asked where non -brick material will be used, which is the whole first floor and comice pediments. Mr. Marino preferred limestone. Mr. Hallen asked about the sides of the building, which will be brick. Chair Brzezinski asked about windows, which will be aluminum clad, double hung. Mr. Nagar asked about stormwater detention. At present, the underground storage tank interferes with sewer lines if it is oriented in one direction and runs into the alley if oriented in the other direction. The development team is working with a civil engineer, but the person was unable to attend today's meeting. Ms. Aiello asked about visitor parking, since on -street parking is not ideal. The three rear surface parking spaces are for visitors. She also asked if the front sidewalk will be replaced, which it will. Mr. Marino asked if this could be an opportunity to widen it, given the number of school children using it. Mr. Nagar said he could look into it. Chair Brzezinski emphasized the need to look carefully at this project since there has not been recent development on this side of the road. Mr. Alterson noted that the zoning analysis is not finished, as there may be problems with the underground parking module. It is 2 inches short of the required 42 feet, which led to a discussion about its building materials and configuration. Mr. Akerson asked about the materials in the rear of the building, which will be brick. He also asked whether cinder blocks will be used. There will be decorative block (i.e., the renaissance stone, per earlier discussion, and cinder block, CMU, or split -face are unlikely). Mr. Marino noted that renaissance stone could look worse than cinder block over time due to discoloration. He reiterated his preference for limestone, especially for the first floor. Chair Brzezinski asked about emergency exits, which are on the north side. Ms. Aiello asked about pricing. The model is not ready, but the estimated price range for the high -end product they are aiming for is between $2301sq ft and $280-290/sq ft. The first floor will be 1500 sq ft, and the others will be 1800-1900 sq ft. Discussion returned to exterior materials. Mr. Friedman asked how they will turn the comer, which will be brick. Chair Brzezinski noted the treatment on the front ends at the west fagade and suggested returning it more gracefully. Ms. Aiello asked whether they own the site; they do. Chair Brzezinski asked if they tried to acquire the site to the south. They initially expressed interest in it but realized that the best design would be a courtyard layout, which was not ideal. Chair Brzezinski asked whether the light fixture on the front will shed too much light since there is a nearby streetlight. The fixture is mostly decorative, and there will be other sources for illumination and safety. Chair Brzezinski suggested a light at the entry stairs. Since the development team is new to Evanston, Ms. Aiello asked them to describe their other Projects, which are single family homes, condo conversions, and some commercial in Chicago. She requested a list of projects showing their experience and compatibility with this site. ACTION: Mr. Marino moved to table preliminary approval pending a clarification of the materials for the front fagade and the completion of the zoning analysis. Ms. Aiello seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous. Mr. Aguado asked for details on overall building height, dimensions, and parking. Mr. Nagar reiterated the sidewalk widening issue. It was suggested that the development team bring building material samples to the next meeting. SPAARC 2312 Hartrev Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Demolish existing and construct a detached single family dwelling with an attached two car private garage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Leineweber (Owner and Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing one story single family cottage and replace it with a detached single family dwelling with an attached two car private garage. This is a non -conforming lot (it is 55x80), and he has corrected one side setback, kept the front setback, and improved the rear setback. The overall size will be 2300 sq ft, plus the garage. He is also proposing to eliminate the one -car driveway and access the garage from the alley. The building materials will be cedar siding on the base and cement stucco above, with an asphalt shingle roof and clad windows. DISCUSSION: Ms. Aiello thought the design was too suburban for Evanston, but Mr. Leineweber stated that he felt it was the best way to address the setback issues and the unusual configuration of the lot, while also eliminating the garage from the front of the house. Mr. Hallen thought that it was quite compatible with the surrounding houses, which are brick colonial, stucco, and cedar sided. Chair Brzezinski liked its simplicity and blend of old and new styles, although the windows did look very new. Ms. Aiello asked whether existing trees will be preserved, and Mr. Leineweber stated that only those worth preserving will be saved. The lot is very small, and shadowing is a problem, especially in the small back yarn. Ms. Brzezinski asked if there was a landscape plan. There will be a patio in the rear with a hedgerow, and there will be perennial bushes in the front. ACTIONS: Ms. Brzezinski motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA, including the landscape plan. The motion was approved unanimously. SPAARC 1640 Maple Avenue Final Mount a four-sided wall clock on the Harris Bank storefront. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Don Courington (Representing Hams Bank) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is seeking final approval to mount a four-sided analog wall clock on the Hams Bank storefront at the comer of Maple. The clock will be back -illuminated (LEDs) and visible at night and from the train. DISCUSSION: Ms. Aiello asked about the height of the clock, which will be 20 feet, 10 inches from grade and visible from the train. Mr. Friedman felt that the proportions shown on the drawing were off. Ms. Aiello asked if the clock could be lowered, but a variation has already been granted for the clock and Harris Bank sign to be at a height visible from the train. Chair Brzezinski noted that the clock's proportions and mounting are unusual, but she likes the idea of the clock. ACTIONS: Mr. Marino moved to approve the clock on the condition that it is accurate, since this has been a problem in the past which city government has no recourse to address. The vote was split with Mr. D'Agostino, Walczak, and Wolinski and Ms. Jackson and Chair Brzezinski voting 'nay,' but the motion passed. SPAARC 1834 Darrow Avenue Preliminary Constnict three attached single family dwellings. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Neil Davidson (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant has revised his original proposal to construct three instead of four attached single family dwellings. Each unit will have 3 bedrooms, 2Y2 bathrooms, and a garage accessible by the alley. One unit will face Darrow, and the others will face south on the alley. The structure will be stick building with shingle roof. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if the siding will be cedar or vinyl, which is yet to be determined. She expressed concern that vinyl siding could affect values in the neighborhood. She is happy to see a unit facing Darrow and asked about landscaping, which will be grass and trees. Ms. Aiello asked about the tot lot, which will be for residents' children. Mr. Wolinski noted that families must have children to qualify for this affordable housing, which justifies the tot lot. She also asked about fencing between the parking area and tot lot, which should be a 6-foot wood fence. Mr. Walczak asked whether that would be sturdy enough. Chair Brzezinski suggested a black coated chain link fence. Ms. Aiello suggested planters to act as a barrier to cars. Mr. Marino preferred a wood fence and car stops. Chair Brzezinski preferred landscaping. Mr. Marino noted that discussions were underway for paving the alley. Mr. Aguado asked about air-conditioning, which will be central air with condensers located 10 feet from the property fine. Mr. Friedman pointed out several inconsistencies on the drawings regarding the placement and heights of several gables. Chair Brzezinski felt that the number of gables was distracting and that some were unnecessary. She would like to see more development of the elevation drawings, as well as building material samples. Mr. Marino clarified the issue with vinyl siding, which has seams and a wavy look over time, although he acknowledged there are maintenance issues with cedar siding. Ms. Guderley, a member of planning staff sitting the audience, asked for a clarification of the setback line. For the patio, Chair Brzezinski suggested wrought iron fencing with deciduous planting. Ms. Aiello noted there was fencing only on the alley side and suggested some along the west elevation as well. Mr. Aguado asked if the porch was roofed, which it is, but the patio is not. Chair Brzezinski noted that there is not a zoning analysis, although ZBA saw the site plan for the three units. ACTIONS: Chair Brzezinski moved to table preliminary approval pending the completion of the zoning analysis, more developed building elevation drawings, and clarifications for fencing, siding, and landscaping. Ms. Aiello seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1427 Greenleaf Street Recommendation to Staff Demolish existing and construct new two-family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom Draus (Architect and Owner) GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing and construct a new two-family residence. Zoning has been approved. A key issue is a large tree blocking the ideal driveway location. DISCUSSION: Ms. Aiello asked if the tree was healthy, and it is. Mr. D'Agostino said it is a box elder, which is undesirable since it is soft wood and prone to storm damage. Also, it leans, which poses a hazard for parking under it. Mr. Draus noted that the lot is landlocked, so alley access Is not an option. Furthermore, placing the driveway closer to Greenleaf could impact traffic at that intersection. Thus, the best location for the driveway seems to be where the big tree is. Chair Brzezinski asked about in -lieu -of terms for replacing the tree since its 30 inches wide. Mr. D'Agostino said that the inch -for -inch rule would not apply, and he would look into the number of trees that can fit on the site. Ms. Aiello asked if the driveway could be rotated 90 degrees, but this is problematic for the turning radius into the desired 3-car, 36-foot wide garage. Mr. Mullen, a neighbor, expressed traffic impact concerns with different designs. Chair Brzezinski felt the best option is to remove the big tree. Since there are two trees along Ashland, it Is possible that just the big one would have to be replaced elsewhere on the site. Mr. D'Agostino agreed to look into the ideal species and spacing for replacement trees. ACTIONS: Chair Brzezinski moved to approve the driveway in the location shown, remove the big tree, replace with yet -to -be -determined trees. Mr. Nagar seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 3434 Central Street Recommendation to Sian Board Revised, illuminated freestanding sign for Unity Church. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: In this revised request by Unity Church to replace its sign, the height has not changed (12 feet), but the sign is cleaner, has flinch lettering, and is down -lit from inside instead of back -lit as previously proposed. Information on landscaping was not provided. DISCUSSION: While the site is big, there were concerns that the sign is still too big and will set a bad precedent. Ms. Jackson noted that Unity Church has already made significant changes to the original proposal (12 changes total). Landscaping around the sign was raised as a concern. ACTIONS: Chair Brzezinski moved to recommend denial, which passed with Ms. Jackson voting 'nay.' SPAARC 1100 Clark Street Recommendation to Sian Board Erect three freestanding signs. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This is a request for three signs at a large site for phased development: a double -face sign at Chicago and Ridge and a sign at Oak. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski felt there was too much information on these signs, including detailed project descriptions and references to other projects by the developer. Ms. Aiello asked how long the signs will be in place, which is three years through phased development. Chair Brzezinski felt that these signs might be allowable for Phase I. Mr. Marino initiated a discussion about what has been allowed at other large developments, such as Optima and Sherman Plaza. Ms. Aiello stated that the only information that needed to be on the signs was the developers name and number. ACTIONS: Chair Brzezinski moved to recommend approval of freestanding signs in the locations shown subject to being limited to project name and contact information. Mr. Marino suggested allowing a brief characterization statement. Ms. Aiello suggested there be no references to other projects. Chair Brzezinski suggested limiting these signs to Phase I only. Mr. Marino seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1700 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Awning and flagpole 'Banner'signage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: While there is a unified business owner signage plan, the flagpoles shown are empty, which leaves businesses unsure of what is allowed. CitiBank received special approval for its awning and flag. Panera Bread would like to do the same. Pictures of were shown of a long flag saying 'Panera' and a small flag with just the logo. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski noted that the Historic Preservation Commission approved the smaller flag. ACTIONS: Mr. Marino suggested a motion consistent with the Historic Preservation Commission's approval of the small flag. The vote was unanimous. Following the vote, the minutes from the February 4, 2004 meeting were approved unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 25, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Keith Fujihara t Ingrid Eckersberg, Ron Walczak, Bob Domeker, Arlova Jackson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, Dennis Marino Design Professional: Haas Friedman Other staff. Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Moms Robinson, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 1213 Monroe Street Construct a second -floor addition. Recommendation to ZBA PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Thomas A. Heinz, AIA (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to add a partial second floor to a bungalow on a 30-foot wide lot. There is an existing 2'8" setback, and the applicant is requesting a 3-foot rather than 5400t setback due to the small lot size. The applicant presented photos of the house and drawings of the proposed addition. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors have been consulted. They have, and there have been no objections. She verified that there is an existing garage. She also asked about building materials, which will be consistent with other houses in the neighborhood (i.e., wood, stucco). ACTIONS: Chair Brzezinski motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1916-1918 Manle Avenue Preliminary and Final Demolish existing and construct new rear porches. Construct rooftop access. This agenda item was withdrawn at the request of the applicant. SPAARC 2935 Central Street Final Develop former Brown's Chicken site with a ground floor non -medical office space and 10 dwelling units. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chris Fremick (Construction Manager) and William Schwarz (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Per the suggestion in last week's SPAARC meeting, the applicant considered 4112, 5112 (preferred), and 6112 roof pitches. The applicant also presented a sample of the white -trim vinyl windows they are proposing to use. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski noted the steps the applicant has taken to improve the building's design (e.g., arch and roofline) and suggested that a final step would be to select different windows. She asked if they had considered simulated divided light windows, but vinyl windows were less expensive. Mr. Friedman suggested casement windows and asked about the materials for the front door, which will be white and all -metal. Chair Brzezinski suggested wood doors and cited Koi Restaurant's mahogany doors as a good example (i.e., attractive, able to withstand traffic). She then asked about the railings, which will be mostly black. Mr. Marino reiterated his concern from last week's meeting regarding a medical use on the ground floor. He noted that when the project was initially proposed to SPAARC, approval was based on an agreement that there would be only non -medical uses on the first floor. However, a broker for a medical use had contacted Mr. Marino this week. The applicant responded that a contract has not been issued, but he will remind the owner of the original agreement. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned final approval with a strong recommendation for the 5i12 roof pitch and for upgrading the front door and windows. Mr. Marino seconded with a strong recommendation for non -medical uses on the ground floor. Chair Brzezinski noted the renaissance stone sample the applicants brought, and the applicants clarified where it will be used and in what amount. Chair Brzezinski felt that upgrading the windows was more important than changing from renaissance stone to limestone (although a warmer color of renaissance stone would be preferred). Mr. Ruiz suggested aluminum -clad windows as an option. The client requested a recess to confer these suggestions with his client since they could affect costs. Chair Brzezinski clarified that SPAARC is moving to approve the project with strong recommendations, not requirements. The applicant decided not to recess, the vote was taken, and it was unanimous. SPAARC 1834 Darrow Avenue Construct three attached single family dwellings. Preliminary PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Neil Davidson (Developer) and Bruce Johnston (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: .W"., Per the suggestion in last week's SPAARC meeting, Mr. Davidson and Mr. Johnston presented revised elevations showing improved roof lines and definition of the units. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if there will be brick at the base or up to the roof line, and the architect responded that brick will only be at the base. Mr. Alterson asked if there will be siding from the brick base to the roof, which there will be. The architect then noted how each unit has been more clearly defined while also simplifying the building, pulling out parts of the second floor, and keeping symmetry and crisp details. Mr. Wolinski asked about the cost difference between brick and siding, in light of maintenance issues and the fact that this project is receiving a heavy public subsidy. The architect responded that brick costs double, takes away from floor area, and is not in character with adjacent properties. Mr. Marino asked to see the siding sample, and Mr. Davidson passed around a sample of gray vinyl siding. The architect noted that this brand of siding can be ordered up to 60-feet long, avoiding the issue of vertical seams raised in the last meeting. Mr. Ruiz then asked about windows, which will have white vinyl trim. Mr. Marino asked if they are the same ones as used in previous projects, which they are. Mr. Ruiz suggested stained wood around the windows to reduce maintenance issues. Mr. Wolinski suggested more brick to complement the siding, and Mr. Davidson agreed to this. Chair Brzezinski asked about the size of the brick, and Mr. Davidson responded that he will not use utility sized brick. She then asked about the fence, which will also be vinyl. Mr. Walczak asked about the wheel stops for parking near the tot lot, which will be four inches high with landscaping. Chair Brzezinski noted that a three-foot hedgerow would be preferred to protect children and to screen headlights from adjacent properties. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to approve preliminary approval with conditions. Chair Brzezinski clarified the conditions as using brick at the first floor and all the way around the building; narrow siding and no vertical joints; protect the tot lot with a continuous hedge along the parking lot and wheel stops; and open -style fencing for visibility (vinyl ok). Ms. Jackson seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Multiole Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe • Review application for sidewalk cafd with liquor for type 2 restaurant (Flat Top Grill, 707 Church Street). • Review application for sidewalk cafd with liquor for type 2 restaurant (Baja Fresh Mexican Grill, 901 Church Street). • Review application for sidewalk cafd with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of Liquor Control Regulations Core Area (Oceanique, 505 Main Street). • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd for type 2 restaurant (Starbucks, 1724 Sherman Ave). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: • Steve Waak, Manager, Flat Top Grill • John Lanni, General Manager, Baja Fresh Mexican Grill • Renee Andre, Manager, Oceanique • Karen Buntinas, Store Manager, Starbucks GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski suggested handling the four sidewalk caf6 applications at once, and SPAARC members agreed. She reviewed the regulation checklist that was included in the application packets sent to each applicant, including rules for serving alcohol (only applies to Oceanique). Since all but Oceanique will be using disposable serving items, Mr. Alterson noted the importance of garbage monitoring and frequent collection. ACTION: All applications were approved unanimously. SPAARC 2401 Brummel Street Recommendation to ZBA Religious Institution requiring special use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Scott Krone (Architect, Coda LLC) and William Hanawalt (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Using maps and photos, Mr. Krone briefly described the existing site layout and proposed development. The cun•ent occupant, Shure Brothers, plans to vacate the premises when their lease expires. The applicant is requesting a special use permit for a church and administrative office space for the Vineyard Christian Fellowship. Build -out will be in phases. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about the access road, which is owned by Jewel and used for deliveries. Mr. Hallen asked about daily vs. Sunday uses. Only the offices will operate weekdays, 9-5. Mr. Marino asked if the applicant plans to use the west exit instead of the exit from East Hartrey, which they will. They are considering changing the address to 2401 Howard since it may help people to know to enter at the west side (with appropriate signage). Mr. Friedman asked if the traffic circulation aisles already exist. Mr. Krone stated that some existing walls will remain, some will be modified, and some new ones will be constructed. Mr. Friedman noted that the aisles must accommodate fire trucks and ambulances. Discussion returned to signage on Howard. Chair Brzezinski noted that signage might not be allowed by -right because the site does not front onto Howard, and she advised the applicant to contact the Sign Board. Mr. Wolinsks asked if they will have changeable copy on the sign, and Mr. Hanawalt stated they would prefer a more commercial sign. Chair Brzezinski suggested they limit the information and not include service times so traffic will not be distracted on Howard. Mr. Marino noted that the parking lot is owned by the Water Reclamation District and that part of it is in Skokie. He asked Mr. Alterson if there were any issues with Skokie and whether the lot needs re -paving and drainage improvements. Mr. Alterson responded that he was not aware of any issues with Skokie and agreed that the lot needs some work. Mr. Hanawalt responded that members of the congregation have volunteered to weed and patch the lot. Chair Brzezinski motioned to hear from the audience, which was approved. Ms. Judy Frieden, who lives behind the property, asked about rear landscaping. Mr. Hanawalt responded that members of his congregation have volunteered to do landscaping. Ms. Frieden also expressed concerns for traffic and accidents at the west entrance. Mr. Hanawalt responded that he will be hiring a traffic consultant. Mr. Marino asked if the east/west private road running parallel to the property is part of the purchase, and it is. He requested that it become a perpetual easement to the east property to prevent traffic from going through the adjacent neighborhoods to access the site. Discussion returned to Ms. Frieden's traffic concerns. Mr. Wolinski noted that a police officer may be needed to direct traffic on Sundays, especially for east -bound traffic. Mr. Friedman suggested preventing parking lot traffic from using the west exit, but Alderman Raney noted that it is the only place to make a left turn from that lot. Mr. Alterson noted that the Fire Department is not in favor of a Howard address, so the road and traffic issues will have to be addressed. Chair Brzezinski noted that the City Engineer handles address changes and advised the applicant to contact them. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA. Mr. Wolinski seconded. Mr. Marino suggested the condition of using the existing easement on the west property line as the main entry and having a perpetual easement on Shure Drive. The vote was unanimous. Chair Brzezinski motioned to approve the minutes of February 18, 2004. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division APPROVED SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 3, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Arthur Atterson, James Wolinski, Stefani Levine, Dennis Marino Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz. Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 1916-1918 MaipIA Avenue Prellminary and Final Demolish existing and construct new rearporches. Construct rooftop access. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Andrew Venamore (Airoom Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to rebuild exterior porches while significantly remodeling the Interior. SPAARC and ZBA have recommended approval for a zoning variance for the proposed porches but not for parking. Since this is a landmark building, the project has been presented to the Preservation Commission. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski clarified that SPAARC focuses on exterior changes only. She also asked about the building materials, which will be hardy board siding since it is easier to maintain than cedar and less expensive. Mr. Ruiz noted that this material has changed from the originally proposed vinyl siding, per the Preservation Commission's recommendations. Mr. Hallen noted that the Building Department's main concern had been a stairway leading to a door to the roof. Mr. Venamore stated that it provides access to mechanical units (i.e.. condensers) located on the roof. Chair Brzezinski noted that even if the door is locked, people might go up there anyway, and the roof was not designed to support that. She suggested replacing the door with a hatch. Mr. Hallen suggested either having a guard rail or removing the stairs. Mr. Friedman noted that the roof could be accessed by a ladder. Chair Brzezinski asked about the front porch. Proposed changes were not approved by the Preservation Commission. so the front facade will not be changed. Mr. Venamore also said that there will not be changes to the south and east elevations of the building. Mr. Aguado asked if there would be a new door to the basement, which there will be. Chair Brzezinski asked about the balcony railings and whether this had been discussed with the Preservation Commission. Mr. Ruiz thought wrought iron might be appropriate but asked for more time to determine the best material. Chair Brzezinski then asked about the downspouts and suggested that Mr. Venamore contact the Engineering Department for recommendations to prevent splashing. Chair Brzezinski reiterated the issue of the door and that other options would be preferred (e.g., hatch, no permanent stairway to a locked door). ACTION: Mr. Marino moved preliminary and final approval with conditions for the roof door and pending Mr. Ruiz' review of the balcony railing materials. Mr. Alterson seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Wolinski and Mr. Friedman voting 'nay.' S_ PAARC „ 1319-1321 Emerson Street Preliminary and Final Construct rear porch and stairs. Interior remodeling on first floor for change of use (office) and second floor (increase dwelling unit number from 2 to 3). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: David Roberts (Architect, Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant described the building as two-story brick with two existing apartments on the second floor and two proposed commercial units on the first floor (his office and a presently undetermined tenant). Exterior changes will only take place at the rear elevation. He is proposing to replace a window with a door and add a wood stairway. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski noted that the code requires a roof structure to shield the stairway from ice/snow and that the proposed stairway is within ten feet of an exterior window. Mr. Roberts stated that he will redesign the stairway to meet these requirements. Mr. Alterson noted that the zoning analysis has been completed and parking is adequate. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to table discussion, which was seconded by Mr. Alterson. She then withdrew the motion since further review would not be needed if the structure conforms with the building code. Following a brief discussion about the unpaved rear parking area, Mr. Marino moved to approve preliminary and final approval. Chair Brzezinski seconded with the condition of meeting code requirements. The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1515 South Boulevard Recommendation to ZBA Demolish existing and construct new front porch and one-story addition. Since the meeting was ahead of schedule and the applicant was not yet present, Mr. Wolinski motioned to approve the minutes from February 25 meeting. Chair Brzezinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Ms. Jackson then gave a brief overview of the 1515 South Boulevard project and presented drawings from the application. The applicant is proposing to rebuild a front porch on a single- family home with a new entrylvestibule. The side setback is 1.27 feet and the front setback Is 16.9 feet. DISCUSSION: Committee members liked the design of the proposed porch and felt the size was appropriate. ACTION: Mr. Alterson moved to recommend approval. Chair Brzezinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. The meeting adjourned at 4:14pm. Ms. Jackson agreed to stay in case the applicants arrived. When they did, she viewed a model they provided and informed them of the Committee's decision to approve the project. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 10, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, Rajeev Dahal, David Cook (for Max Rubin) Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Moms Robinson, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfieet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2100 Ridae Avenue Content Install cellular antennas on the roof of Evanston Civic Center. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Al Lehto (Real Estate Consultant for T-Mobile) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to install cellular antennas on the observation tower and in the dormers of the Evanston Civic Center. He presented photos and drawings. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wolinski asked if this is the same company that installed antennas at 515 Main, which it is, but there will be a different contractor for this project. Chair Brzezinski noted that the City will be compensated for mounting this equipment and suggested that the balustrades be painted as mitigation. Mr. Cook noted that they are rusty and in poor condition. Mr. Lehto has already agreed to tuckpointing but tentatively agreed to painting the balustrades as well. Mr. Ruiz asked about the dormer glass. Mr. Lehto stated it must be replaced since it is not RF- friendly, which keeps the antennas from functioning. Metal cross pieces will also be removed because they interfere with signals, but the metal around the windows will remain. Mr. Alterson noted that the proposed antenna on the observation tower may be a bigger issue and asked if it could be installed inside turret. Mr. Lehto stated that the turret already has a tenant. Mr. Alterson asked Mr. Lehto if he brought before/after maps, which he will bring next time. Mr. Friedman asked about the coaxial cable, which will run through the attic to a room where additional equipment will be kept. This room will be next to one occupied by Verizon. Mr. Alterson stated that he preferred for these antennas to be sited at the Civic Center instead of another location in town. Mr. Robinson asked about the amount of revenue the City will receive from this project, which will be roughly $30,0001year. Chair Brzezinski reiterated the need for tuckpointing and painting the balustrades and asked about their obligations for repairs when the antennas are removed. Mr. Lehto stated that they are required to restore buildings to the original condition. Mr. Cook asked if the Engineering Department has reviewed the project, which they have. Mr. Ruiz expressed concern for this project's impact on the building. Chair Brzezinski agreed but did not want to lose the revenue, especially since the project seems to be relatively unobtrusive. Mr. Ruiz asked about matching the brick color, and the applicant will see if specs are available and encourage the General Contractor to work with Mr. Ruiz and Mr. Cook. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval with conditions for painting the balustrades and others to be determined. Mr. Dahal seconded the motion. Mr. Friedman stated that he would prefer to table discussion pending additional information and drawings for how the cable enters the building. Mr. Cook clarified that they are proposing to follow existing cable. Chair Brzezinski stated that the motion stays and called for a vote. The motion passed 4-3, with Mr. Atterson, Mr. Wolinski, and Mr. Friedman voting 'nay.' SPAARC 836-838 Elmwood Avenue Recommendatlon to ZBA Remodel basement to instal/ dwelling unit for a total of five (5). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Nevin Belser (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing an affordable condo conversion in a 4-flat brick building, with the basement as the proposed Vh unit. A variance is needed since the lot Is 550 square feet less than what is required for a Vh unit. Currently, there are two nonconforming office uses (family therapists) in the north half of the basement. Photos and drawings were provided. DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson asked if the applicant owns the property, which they do. Mr. Wolinski expressed support for the developer but noted building code issues raised by the proposed basement unit (e.g., height, light, and sprinklers). The applicant said they were aware of Chapter 24 requirements, but Chair Brzezinski stated that these only apply to existing units, whereas the use will be changing from office to residential. She suggested that the applicant work with a fire suppression engineer or sprinklering contractor and possibly tap into the existing line. The applicant clarified that this is a building code issue and not a zoning issue, which it is. Chair Brzezinski asked about parking, which will be a three -car garage with two additional spaces. She also clarified exterior changes, which will be a new rear door and egress windows. The project will be presented to the Preservation Commission next week. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned a recommendation to the ZBA subject to meeting building code requirements. Chair Brzezinski seconded, and Mr. Ruiz suggested it be subject to the findings of the Preservation Commission. Mr. Wolinski agreed, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 831 Clinton Place Recommendation to ZBA Install a roofed canopy approx. 2.1' from the east property line. Install an air condensing unit approx. 5.3' from the west property line. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stephen Cole (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is requesting separate permissions to 1) replace a deteriorated roofed canopy over the front entry and 2) relocate an air condensing unit from the originally -proposed location to the back of the lot near the garage. DISCUSSION: Mr. Ruiz stated that the proposal must be reviewed by the Preservation Commission since the property is in the federal Historic District. Chair Brzezinski asked if the neighbors have been consulted about the air condensing unit, and they have with no objections. She asked if the proposed unit is quiet/efficient, which it is, and she suggested that the applicant bring proof to the ZBA and include this information in the permit application. Chair Brzezinski asked if the neighbor to the east had been consulted about the roofed canopy, which they have not. She asked if the balustrade is decorative, which it is. She asked about illumination, which will be a coach light. She noted that this could shine in the windows of adjacent houses and suggested a recessed light. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned a recommendation to the ZBA for the roofed canopy and the air condensing units. Ms. Jackson seconded. The vote was 7-1, with Mr. Wolinski voting'nay.' SPAARC 1240 Hinman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Install AC condenser approximately 2' from the north property line. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stephen Cole (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: The applicant is proposing to install an air condensing unit on the property. Photos were shown, and a letter from a neighbor with a similar unit was also provided. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned a recommendation to the ZBA. Mr. Alterson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1225-1227 Chicaac Avenue Prellminary and Final Interior and exterior remodeling for a type 1 restaurant and a retail space (former True Value Hardware store). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chai Roongseang (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to renovate the former hardware store into a new restaurant called Zensation. He rents another location in town where he operates the Noodle Garden restaurant and hopes to close that location in favor of this one, which he owns. He presented drawings. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski clarified the exterior changes, which will be a sign and aluminum windows that can open in summer. She asked about parking, which will be 10-12 spaces in the rear, and there is a city lot across the street. Mr. Wolinski asked if the parking is improved, and it Is asphalt. She then asked about the sign, which will be letter and not a panel. She asked if the swinging door will be reset to not interfere with the public way, which it will. The folding windows will also not interfere with the public way. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval. Mr. Akerson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC MUltiole Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (Cafe Mozart, 600 Davis Street). • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (Cafe Express, 500 Main Street). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: • Ted Angelopoulos, Owner, Cafe Mozart • Nack Paik, Owner, Cafd Express GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the regulation checklist that was included in the application packets sent to each applicant. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, which was seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Since the meeting was ahead of schedule. SPAARC members discussed the minutes of the March 3'd meeting. Ms. Jackson stated that they should be amended to reflect that the meeting adjourned early and she stayed to greet the applicant, who presented a model. Chair Brzezinski motioned to approve the minutes with the correction, which was approved with Mr. Rajeev abstaining since he was absent from that meeting. Following the vote, there was a recess until the time of the next item scheduled on the agenda. Mr. Akerson then took the place of Chair Brzezinski for the duration of the meeting. SPAARC 1110 Church Street Preliminary and Final Construct 3rd story addition. Construct detached garage with rooftop deck. Proposal is for condo conversion. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Michael Sieja (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing a V story addition and a detached garage with a roof -top deck for a condo conversion in an existing limestonelmasonry building. He presented drawings and photos, as well as a letter from the architect describing the design and building materials. DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson, as Acting Chair, stated that the applicant had presented to SPAARC in November and clarified that the zoning issue at hand is the garage, not the addition to the rear. He then noted that the setback is 9' and the material is metal roofing (synthetic copper), and Mr. Hallen gave examples of good materials (e.g., Osco at Asbury). Mr. Hallen asked about landscaping. The applicant stated it will be minimal since the rear is hard -surfaced. Mr. Hallen noted there are opportunities in the front yard. ACTION: Mr. Hallen motioned approval with the condition that a landscape plan be submitted to Parks and Forestry before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Mr. D'Agostino seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 929 Washington Street Preliminary and Final Replacement of existing windows for mult►-family dwelling (20 du's). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chris Turley (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to replace existing sliding windows, which are wood with storm windows, with aluminum -clad sliding windows. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen asked if the windows will be the same size, which they will be (custom-made). ACTION: Mr. Hallen motioned approval, Mr. Alterson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. The meeting then adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 17, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Frank Aguado, Carolyn Brzezinski, Adova Jackson, Sat Nagar, James Wolinski, Stefani Levine, Arthur Alterson Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Dennis Marino, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 3330 Central Street Preliminary Constntct a new retail building, including all site work and new perimeter fence. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Doug Bean (Owner) and Eric Westman (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The owner, Mr. Bean, displayed drawings and photos and summarized changes since the last meeting. Upon reviewing the signage ordinance, he decided to lower the elevation eight inches, including the tower, to better accommodate the desired sign. Chair Brzezinski commended the applicant for proactively addressing signage. Mr. Bean also has come to an agreement with the neighbors to the east regarding fencing. There will be a two -material fence (masonry/wood) high enough to screen the drive -through area. Mr. Bean also noted that they have received permission for a curb cut on Crawford. DISCUSSION: Mr. Atterson asked about tenants. Starbucks is committed, but Mr. Bean is not ready to disdose the other two tenants since they are in negotiation. Mr. AJterson asked Ms. Jackson it there were any special conditions for tenants, which is that there should not be a dry cleaner. The applicant stated that neither prospective tenant is a dry cleaner. Chair Brzezinski asked if the large trees shown in the photos are part of the landscape plan. They are not since they are located on the south side of the retaining wall in the alley. Chair Brzezinski asked if they will be protected during construction and how the fence will impact them. Mr. Hallen stated that they will be protected by the wall during construction. He noted that they might be city trees and could become an issue if the alley is paved. The applicant stated that there is time to work out the details with the trees and asked for advice. Ms. Levine referred him to Mr. D'Agostino, who was unable to attend today's meeting. Chair Brzezinski clarified setback and height requirements for the proposed monument sign at the comer and asked about its materials. The monument will be three strips of aluminum to match the building, with the sign added to that. It will not be illuminated. Chair Brzezinski asked about the pedestrian way, which has been shifted to reduce pedestrian/car conflicts at the drive -through. There is also a bike rack in front of the store. Parking has been increased by one stall. Mr. Aguado noted these follow suggestions from the previous meeting on August 13t'. Chair Brzezinski asked about lighting. There will be three pole lights onsite with zero bleed across the property line. Mr. Nagar asked if there will be lights on the east side. There will be a low light on the drive -through, which the fence will screen from the adjacent neighbors. Mr. Hallen asked about lights on the south side above the doors, which will be down -lit. Ms. Levine asked if there are existing street trees, and there are none. She suggested planting a tree near the parking/entrance if it will not affect visibility. She also suggested using shade trees instead of pines, which tend to get low with age. There followed discussion about the number and location of trees that potentially could be replaced. Chair Brzezinski asked about elevations, which were presented by the architect, Mr. Westman. He reiterated that the elevation has been lowered eight inches, including the tower, which is also narrower. Chair Brzezinski asked about the materials for the tower, which will be pre - finished aluminum with a standing seam roof. Chair Brzezinski asked about Starbucks' signage, which will be on the street and not in the tower. She also asked about the materials for the canopy, which will be all -aluminum and dear glass. Mr. Ruiz asked how the painted metal canopy on the north elevation differs from the one on the east side, and it is for the drive - through. Chair Brzezinski asked if the wood portion of the fence will be painted. It will be natural wood (cedar). ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned for preliminary and final approval subject to landscape revisions. Following discussion, the condition was clarified as using one shade tree instead of pine and adding one tree on Crawford Avenue, pending a consultation with Mr. D'Agostino. Mr. Marino seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2520 Hurd Avenue Preliminary and Final Subdivide one lot of record into two lots of record PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Todd Kihm (Contracted Buyer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 117' x 145' lot into two 58% feet wide lots. The existing house has been on the market for over a year and needs renovation. It would be saved if it were not located in the middle of the krt. Photos were provided. DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson asked if the zoning analysis had been completed, and Mr. Aguado stated that it has. Mr. Marino asked about the nearest intersection. The house is located just south of Central and Central Park. Mr. Alterson clarified that the house will be tom down, which it will. Mr. Marino asked if two houses will be built, which they will. Chair Brzezinski noted that there Is an alley and asked if there will be two garages. There will, and one curb cut will be removed. Mr. Alterson asked if he has closed on the property, and it is under contract. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned preliminary and final approval, and Chair Brzezinski seconded. Mr. Ruiz asked if neighbors have been asked for comments, but Chair Brzezinski noted that this project meets applicable codes and laws. Mr. Marino asked If this project requires approval by the City Council, which it does. He also asked the applicant if he has built other properties. As part of a previous company, he has worked in Winnetka, Glencoe, and other North Shore communities, and he has worked on multi -family housing in Evanston. Chair Brzezinski suggested he sell the irreplaceable parts of the house. Mr. Alterson noted that the 40' building line must be respected regardless of the zoning setback because it is a deed restriction. The vote was taken, and the motion passed with Mr. Alterson voting 'nay.' SPAARC 917 Greenleaf Street Preliminary_ Construct a five story, five dwelling unit multiple family dwelling. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Frank McCannin (Owner) and Brian Wilk (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to construct a five story, five dwelling unit multiple family dwelling in place of an existing two -flat. Suggestions from the meeting roughly six weeks ago included: consider using windows with mullions; reconfigure the parking ramp; make the building architecturally consistent with others in the neighborhood; and widen the first parking stall. DISCUSSION: Mr. Marino asked about the nearest intersection, which is Maple and Greenleaf. Chair Brzezinski asked if there will be storage lockers in the basement, which is to be determined depending on final floor plans. Mr. Hallen stated that the basement must have enough space for a water meter and sprinkler piping and public access for the Water and Sewer Department. Mr. Ruiz asked if the windows will be simulated divided light, but the type of windows is still to be determined. Mr. Ruiz also suggested fine-tuning the parapet to enhance the character of the building. Mr. Hallen noted that the elevator must be sized for an ambulance cot because it rises higher than 25 feet. Mr. Wolinski asked if the units will be condos, which they will be, and preliminary market research suggests a price point in the $600,0004650,000 range. Mr. Nagar asked about stormwater management, which is to be determined. Mr. Ruiz asked if there will be a canopy over the front door, which could protect residents from the weather while also being an opportunity to add a nice design feature. Chair Brzezinski agreed. Chair Brzezinski asked about the building materials. The front will be eight inch CMU with brick veneer, and the sides will have nice grade decorative CMU. Chair Brzezinski asked about the materials at the base, which will be rock face pre -cast stone. The applicant will bring samples of this and other building materials next time. Mr. Marino asked for examples of Evanston buildings with the proposed CMU, which the applicant agreed to provide next time. Mr. Wolinski asked if masonry on all sides might be feasible, given the price point. Chair Brzezinski agreed in light of long-term maintenance issues with CMU. ACTION: Mr. Marino moved to table discussion pending building material samples. Mr. Alterson seconded. Mr. Alterson also asked if all units will have two bedrooms, which they will. Chair Brzezinski asked about parking, and there will be three covered spaces in the rear in the form of a garage. The area with the tree will remain as open yard. The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2400-2440 Main Street Interior and exterior renovation for "Food 4 Less. " Final PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Natalie Mouw (Project Manager) and Rob Bond (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicants provided drawings for the proposed interior and exterior renovations of Food 4 Less. The sign has not yet been proposed to the Signage Board. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about building materials, which are cast stone (i.e., renaissance stone, and a sample was provided at the last meeting). Chair Brzezinski noted that there did not seem to be a transition between this structure and the other stores on Main. There followed much discussion about how to use clear glass in as many windows as possible to allow for additional light, eyes on the parking lot, and to animate the store. To get around the issue of clear glass windows being inappropriate for some uses in the store (e.g., accounting office), Chair Brzezinski suggested using clear glass at the top part of each window or raising the windows. The applicants agreed to take these suggestions under consideration. Chair Brzezinski asked how the front entry was lit, which will be recessed lights. She suggested it be down -lit to illuminate the arch feature. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to table discussion pending information on the windows, arch lighting, and exterior building materials. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Discussion of the March 10, 2004 meeting notes was tabled until next week. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 24, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, James Wolinski, Arlova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Frank Aguado, Carolyn Brzezinski, Arthur Alterson Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Dennis Marino, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Chair Smazinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2400-2440 Main Street Final, Interior and exterior renovation for "Food 4 Less." PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Natalie Mouw (Project Manager) and Rob Bond (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicants summarized the issues that tabled discussion last week and how they have been addressed (i.e., windows, building materials, arch illumination). In addition to the entry, two nearby bays will also have clear glass. Other bays cannot have clear glass due to functions behind the glass (e.g., accounting office) or walls that would have to be re - engineered. The applicants also presented base brick and renaissance stone samples. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if the arch will be illuminated all around, which is still to be determined. Mr. Alterson suggested that doing so could attract traffic from McCormick. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned final approval as revised and suggested the applicants investigate illuminating the arch all around at their discretion (not mandatory). Mr. Atterson seconded. Mr. Wolinski asked about signage. They are proposing to improve the existing sign and install a monument sign at the east entrance. Chair Brzezinski stated that she could not approve this project because there is no landscaping at the base, which has been raised in previous meetings, and because the glazing issue was not addressed in the design phase. The motion passed with Chair Brzezinski voting 'nay' and Mr. Friedman abstaining. SPAARC 917 Greenleaf Street Preliminary Construct a five story, five dwelling unit, multiple family dwelling containing eight off street parking spaces. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Frank McCannin (Owner) and Brian Wilk (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Wilk summarized the issues that tabled discussion last week (i.e., building materials, masonry all around the building) and passed around CMU and jumbo brick samples. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wolinski asked about the costs for masonry all around, which are between $150,000- 250,000. The developers stated that they would prefer to invest this money in the interior (e.g., appliances, counter tops). Chair Brzezinski thanked them for bringing in the building material samples but did not think they were the most appropriate. She acknowledged current market conditions that present difficult choices for developers in balancing interior and exterior Investments but noted that the neighborhood pays the price when developer; do not consider the exterior. Mr. Wolinski noted that a building's biggest amenity is how it looks from the outside and as a result, CMU is not the best material. Mr. Marino suggested the applicants are underestimating market response to building exteriors. Mr. Alterson expressed concern forthe visibility of the west wall and cited examples of buildings along the CTA line in which masonry was not continued around the building. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned to deny preliminary approval, and Mr. Marino seconded. Mr. Alterson asked if the applicants had reconsidered the windows and pediment, per last week's discussion, which they had not. Chair Brzezinski cited examples of buildings with brick all around. Mr. Wilk clarified that the primary issue is having brick all around. Mr. Alterson reiterated the point about modifying the pediment and windows but indicated that he would not vote against the project on those grounds if there was brick all around. Chair Brzezinski stated that the pediment is a design issue but improving the building materials is key. The vote to deny approval was unanimous. SPAARC 2812 Central Street Preliminary Construct a building of 1,928 square feet of Retail space and 9 dwelling units (condominiums) above. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Brian Vitale (Architect), Rob Graettinger (Attorney) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicants are proposing two mirror image buildings with ground floor retail and 9 condos each (31-BR and 6 2-BR). The zoning analysis has been completed and approved. Mr. Vitale noted that the buildings are similar to the design previously presented except that parking has been placed below grade to eliminate the need for a parking variance. Also, combining the two sideyar+ds will act as a courtyard. The base will be limestone with orange -toned brick above and zinc at the top, with materials wrapping around the building. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about the parapet, which will be three feet. The condensers will be on the roof. There will be trash chutes for residents and a trash room for retail instead of dumpsters. There is no parking for retail (less than 2,000 square feet). Mr. Alterson asked if both buildings could be linked with one underground parking lot, but it is not reasonably feasible due to legal/zoning issues for the two separate properties. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned preliminary approval, Chair Brzezinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2814 Central Street Preliminary Construct a building of 1,928 square feet of Retail space and 9 dwelling units (condominiums) above. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Brian Vitale (Architect), Rob Graettinger (Attorney) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicants reiterated that the buildings are mirror images. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski suggested they flip the stairs and offset the windows for privacy since the buildings are not far apart. Mr. Alterson asked if the separate condo associations for each building could potentially pave the courtyard or have incompatible landscaping. These will be addressed in agreements, and there will be a management company for both buildings. Also, a landscaping plan for both buildings will be submitted with the application. Since both buildings have a lot of glass, Mr. Friedman suggested installing blinds throughout, and Chair Brzezinski suggested making blinds a requirement in the condo agreements. Mr. Marino asked about the detail on the west elevation, and the applicants are refining the design. Mr. Wolinski asked about the price point, which will be $350,000-$450,000. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned preliminary approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Kelly Paris Off•Acenda Item PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Paul D'Agostino GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. D'Agostino presented plans for a small tot lot adjacent to Baker Park. Mr. Ruiz noted that it is located in the Historic District and should be presented at the April 27 meeting of the Preservation Commission. Mr. Marino asked if it could be reviewed administratively, which will be considered. Mr. D'Agostino stated that it is geared for 2-6 year old children, but the neighbors want equipment to have muted colors. However, the paving will have bright colors. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval subject to review by the preservation function. Mr. Marino seconded. The motion passed, with Mr. D'Agostino abstaining. SPAARC 1235 Hartrev Avenue Conceot Construct a 150' tall Freestanding Monopole to contain 6 antennas for Sprint PCS. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kelly Drew (Sprint PCS Representative) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Drew stated that Sprint PCS has identified a gap in coverage in the HartreylDempster area. To address this, 1235 Hartrey is a possible site for a 150-foot freestanding monopole with six antennas. Photos and supplemental information were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked why the monopole will be 150 feet, which is the height needed to reach Sprint's coverage objective without installing additional towers. Chair Brzezinski also asked if the area would be cleaned up, which it will, and it will be fenced. Mr. Dahal thought there had been a similar proposal at that location that had been denied. Ms. Drew stated that she had approached Evanston Township High School, but the proposal was rejected. Mr. Ruiz asked about the tower's appearance. which will be gray and have six tenants with space for 12. Mr. Ruiz asked if the number of tenants could be reduced to three and power increased, and Ms. Drew will find out if this is possible. Mr. Marino asked about lease terms, which will be five years with up to four renewals. He expressed concern for the tower's impact on the future redevelopment of adjacent sites. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion and volunteered to contact Evanston Township High School to reconsider Sprint's original proposal. Mr. Alterson requested a map showing the gap in coverage, and Ms. Drew will provide one at the next meeting. Mr. Alterson suggested the water tank as another option since it is taller than the other two potential sites, but it may be too far south. Chair Brzezinski asked about the possibility of using a large transmission tower in the photos Ms. Drew provided, but following discussions with ComEd, it is not feasible. The vote was unanimous for tabling discussion, with Mr. Marino agreeing to contact the high school and Ms. Drew agreeing to talk to the Water Department about the water tank. SPAARC 1745 Sherman Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for sidewalk caf6, a type 2 restaurant (Einstein Brothers Bagels). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Joseph Draniczarek (Manager) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the regulation checklist included in the application packet. The applicant offered to take responsibility for two nearby city trash cans that tend to fill quickly and have been a problem in the past. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval subject to adopting the two trash cans. Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1220 Michigan Off -Agenda Item Mr. Alterson passed around a sample of a new green roof material with a 50-year warranty being used at 1220 Michigan. He also noted that the wind turbine on the roof was inaudible. Chair Brzezinski noted the importance of green materials and Keeping current with them. SPAARC 1228 Emerson Street Pre -Application Conference Construct a 7-story, 60-dwelling unit condominium building, with 74 off street parking spaces. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Andrew Ferris (Architect), Bernard Citron (Attorney) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Citron summarized progress since concept approval was received on January 7. The basics remain the same (i.e., building design, access points), but landscaping and elevation details are still being revised. The applicant has met with the Alderman and has scheduled a community meeting for April 7, after which the application is expected to be filed. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about fire access and suggested they meet on site with Chief Berkowski. She also asked about the windows, which are energy efficient and not tinted. There was discussion about whether they could be operable, which will be determined. There was also discussion about whether to have a Greenbay or Emerson address, which will be determined. The landscape plan is also in progress, after which it will be known whether the large trees on the site can be saved or if they will be an issue for construction. Chair Brzezinski asked what this project will give back to the community. Mr. Citron responded that they are cleaning up a polluted site, building the city's tax base, and the landscaping and building themselves are amenities. Mr. Alterson suggested they estimate the number of school children that may live in this building. Chair Brzezinski suggested that the applicants consider having some affordable units or contributing to the City's affordable housing fund, providing space for public art, and contributing to alley and street maintenance. ACTION: There being no further comments or questions from the Committee, the pre -application conference closed. Discussion of the March 10 and 17 meeting notes was tabled until next week to give Committee members additional time to review them. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Attendees: Committee Members: Design Professional: Other Staff: SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 31, 2004 Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Frank Aguado (for Buildings), Arthur Afterson (Acting Chair), Sat Nagar Hans Friedman Dennis Marino, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Since Chair Brzezinski was unable to attend today's meeting, members selected Mr. Alterson to be the Acting Chair. He determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC Multiple Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Calve • Review Application for a Sidewalk Cafe with liquor for a type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of a residential zone (Tommy Nevin's Pub, 1450 Shennan Avenue). • Review Application for a Sidewalk Cafe for a type 2 restaurant (Taco Bell Express, 1743 Sherman Avenue). • Review Application for a Sidewalk Cafd for a type 2 restaurant (Chipotle Mexican Grol, 711 Church Street). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: • Steven Cin, Owner, Tommy Nevin's Pub • Barry Edelman, District Manager, Taco Bell Express • M. Kostov, General Manager, Chipotle Mexican Grill GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Acting Chair Alterson reviewed the regulation checklist that was included in the application packets sent to each applicant, emphasizing litter control and bringing f imiture inside at night. Mr. Cin, Owner of Tommy Nevin's Pub, stated that they will have a vinyl fence like Bar Louie's. Mr. Dahal asked which side of the property will have the fence, and it will be on Lake St. Mr. Alterson stated that they must bring it in at night, in addition to the tables and chairs. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval, Mr. Friedman seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1235 Hartrev Avenue Concept Construct a 150' tall Freestanding Monopole to contain 6 antennas for Sprint PCS. Item withdrawn at the applicant's request. SPAARC 917 Greenleaf Street Revision to Preliminary Construct a five story, five dwelling unit, multiple family dwelling containing eight off street parking spaces. Item withdrawn at the applicant's request. SPAARG Lincoln Street S Ridae Avenue Preliminary and Final Reconstruct playground at Leahy Park. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stefani Levine, Landscape Architect, City of Evanston GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Levine presented drawings of the existing park and proposed renovations, which mostly pertain to the playground and tennis courts. There will also be an accessible way to get to the field house, and the number of light poles will be reduced to four. DISCUSSION: Mr. Marino asked what the new light poles will look like. They will be a few feet taller than the existing ones, steel, and athletic (not ornamental). Mr. Aguado noted that a large water main tuns through the park. Ms. Levine stated that they plan to determine its location and modify plans accordingly. Mr. Alterson asked if the neighbors were consulted, particularly in regard to the taller light poles. They have, with no objections. Mr. D'Agostino noted that the illumination from these lights has less spillover than the existing lights. Mr. Friedman asked if parents helped select the equipment and colors, which they did through three meetings. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1525 Emerson Street Preliminary and Final Reconstruction of City Park (Gilbert Park). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stefani Levine, Landscape Architect, City of Evanston GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Levine presented drawings of the existing park and proposed renovations, which mostly pertain to new equipment, resurfacing, landscaping, and fencing. There will also be a bike rack and picnic tables. In response to the community's request for an African theme, there will be a new plaza in the shape of the African continent with relief of the more prominent geographic features of the continent, rather than political boundaries. .. ... .. � .., F.. „ . DISCUSSION: Acting Chair Alterson asked about fencing, which will be ornamental metal. Several damaged and missing gates at other locations in the park will also be replaced. Acting Chair Alterson asked about neighborhood involvement, and Ms. Levine stated that it is the same for all park projects. Mr. Friedman noted the berms on the side of the park, which will be constructed from available soil onsite and stand roughly three feet high. Mr. Friedman asked about the materials for the proposed relief of the African continent, which will be durable and expected to last a reasonable amount of time. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval, Mr. Friedman seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2103 McCormick Blvd Preliminary and Final Renovation of Eggleston Park. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stefani Levine, Landscape Architect, City of Evanston GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Levine presented drawings of the existing park and proposed renovations, which mostly pertain to the playground and basketball courts. Since the park is adjacent to the Ecology Center, the play equipment will have an ecological theme (e.g., climbing wall), and there will be a weathervane and a sundial painted on the pavement. A significant tree will be kept, and there will be two curved limestone paths around the berms and plantings. Plant material will be prairie seed (grasses and wildflowers), and there will be a butterfly garden. For lighting, there will be three standard fixture lights along the canal, which will be down -lit. DISCUSSION: Mr. Marino asked about fencing. Community members did not necessarily want to fence the park but expressed concern that children sledding on the berms could slide into McCormick. To address this, a fence will be constructed at the area in question, but it will not wrap around the comer since there will be plantings. It will be a metal panel fence with wood posts instead of wrought iron so that children cannot slide through it. Mr. Marino thought that the fence should wrap around the comer. Mr. Marino asked if the area currently used for soccer will be preserved, and it will. He also asked about the height of the light poles, which will be 18 feet, and whether the traditional Evanston fixtures had been considered. The standard ones were chosen since they are used for all parks and down -lit, which will provide enough light for safety while not bothering neighbors. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Marino voting 'nay.' Ms. Levine agreed to see if funding will allow for the fence to be extended to the comer, per Mr. Marino's suggestion. SPAARC 713 Mulford Street Preliminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling for a proposed condo conversion of existing multi -family residence (23 du's). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Baruch Schuk (Developer), Irwin Axelrod (Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Axelrod, the general contractor, summarized the exterior changes as window replacements, tuckpointing, and repair and painting as needed for this condo conversion. He brought a vinyl window sample and photos of existing conditions. DISCUSSION: Mr. Marino asked if they have a landscaping plan, and it is being developed. Mr. Schuk, the developer, provided an example from a similar project in Hyde Park, showing brick columns In front, pavers, and seating in a courtyard with a fountain as a focal point. Mr. Marino stated that he would like to see the landscape plan before recommending final approval. Mr. Friedman suggested they use aluminum, wood, or vinyl dad windows instead of the sample shown. ACTION: Acting Chair Alterson motioned to table discussion pending a landscape plan and reconsideration of window materials. He then asked about parking. Mr. Schuk stated that there is a 13 space parking lot next door that is part of the plan, and he will bring drawings next time. Mr. Marino seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 812 Gaffield Place Recommendation to ZBA Construct a one-story addition to a living room and kitchen. Construct an addition to the front yard deck PROJECT PRESENTED BY: David Reid (Owner/Occupant) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Reid, the owner, is proposing to square off the kitchen to expand it and extend the existing porch as a wrap -around. Above the new porch, he would like to extend the front yard deck as a balcony accessible from the master bedroom. He provided drawings, photos, and elevations (excluding the front elevation). DISCUSSION: Mr. Friedman asked if the property was in the historic district, which it is not. Mr. Marino asked about building materials. The addition will have stucco that matches the existing structure, and the posts for the porch extension will be consistent with the existing porch. Mr. Friedman noted that the railing on the second floor balcony is not in keeping with the architecture, but Acting Chair Alterson noted that using the balcony will put more eyes on the street and adjacent park (Filbrick Park). ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Friedman voting 'nay.' SPAARC 1423 Elmwood Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Eliminate garage space on the first floor of an existing coach house. Establish two (2) open parking spaces in rear yard. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Belinda Yeomans (Owner/Occupant) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Yeomans and her husband, the owners, are proposing to renovate their coach house for use as a home office. They plan to dry wall the inside of the structure but keep the garage door. Since single family homes are required to have two parking spaces, they are proposing to establish two spaces in the rear yard. Drawings and photos were provided. DISCUSSION: Mr. Ruiz stated that he had approved administratively some changes to the garage and at that time, thane were no plans for the two parking spaces. Acting Chair Alterson asked if the owners will use the coach house as a rental, which they will not. Ms. Yeomans explained that she and her husband had previously owned a different house and rented office space for her husband, but they felt the current property was ideal since it would allow them to own both a residence and office space. Acting Chair Alterson noted that a coach house can only be used as an accessory space to a dwelling unit and cannot be used as a business building. Mr. Ruiz summarized the exterior changes. The exterior will be painted, a skylight will be installed, and the door on the second floor will be replaced with a set of two windows that are consistent with a set on the house. Ms. Yeomans noted that she found what may be pieces of the coach house's original gingerbread under the porch, and she hopes to restore them. Acting Chair Alterson asked if the parking area will be paved, which it is because it is currently used for parking (the garage has not been used for parking for many years). Mr. Ruiz asked if the neighbors have been consulted. They have, with no objections. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval, Acting Chair Alterson seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Aguado voting 'nay.' The meeting notes for March 10, 17, and 24 were then discussed. Ms. Norfleet summarized two minor changes for the March 10 notes that she had received in an email from Ms. Jackson. Mr. Aguado stated a minor change for the March 17 notes. Amended notes for March 10 and 17 and the notes for March 24 were approved unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES APRIL 7, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Adova Jackson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Walter Hallen, Stefanie Levine, Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, Keith Fujihara Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Tracy Nor feet Chair Orzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2834 Central Street Prellminary New mixed use building, eight dwelling units and one retall space. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Brian Viteli (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. V-deli summarized his project as a mixed -use building in the B2 district, comprised of three residential floors above a ground floor retail unit and a basement with storage and a mechanical room. He presented site plans, photos, and floor plans. The retail unit is less than 2,000 square feet, so parking is not required. For residential parking, there will be 13 spaces in the rear that will be enclosed and exhausted. There will be a trash chute and dumpster in the building. The entry to the residential lobby is at the side of the building with a walk-through garden leading to it. The second and third floors will have two -bedroom units. The fourth level has been stepped back to create a terrace, and it will have three bedroom units. Each unit will have a fireplace and a balcony, and the price point is in the $350,000 range. The building will have modular brick (not utility) all around, large double -hung windows, a limestone base, and painted iron balconies that are in keeping with nearby buildings. Landscaping will include trees, shrubs, and the garden leading to the residential lobby. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski noted that the front balconies extend over the sidewalk, so they will be rotated to the side of the building. Mr. Hallen stated that the trash chute should not open into a corridor but into a transition room. Chair Brzezinski added that it should be wheelchair accessible. Mr. Fujihara asked about stormwater detention, and a civil engineer is involved in the project. Mr. Wolinski noted potential for an over -saturation of condos on Central. Mr. Viteli stated that the developer, who lives a block away from the site, is aware of this. Based on careful market analysis, he determined that larger two -bedroom and three -bedroom units were desirable. Mr. Wolinski asked if the property to the west is available, which it is not. Chair Brzezinski clarified that there will be brick on all four sides, which there will be. Mr. Viteli added that the developer would also like to do brick detailing at the top of the building. Chair Brzezinski noted that one of the elevations will be quite visible, and Mr. Viteli stated that attention is being paid to window alignment and brick detailing. Chair Brzezinski asked about rooftop equipment, which will be mostly condensers (covered by a parapet). She asked about the windows, which will be standard insulated clear glass with wood interior and aluminum dad exterior. She asked if there is a retail tenant, which is to be determined. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski complemented the architect and developer for using modular masonry on all four sides of the building, and she motioned preliminary approval. Ms. Jackson seconded. The motion passed, with Mr. Alterson abstaining since he was absent from the discussion. SPAARC 1000 Main Street Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior remodeling of existing office space. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chris Turley (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Turley stated that he is here for the second time because the use for two units at the base level has changed. Originally businesses, it was difficult to sell them. The applicant then decided to convert them to two handicapped -accessible units, but sprinklering was cost - prohibitive. Thus, they are being converted back to businesses. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked Mr. Turley to clarify exterior changes for the two units. Basically, they are building a 'vanilla box' that tenants can alter. Mr. Hallen noted that the drawings still show windows meant for the accessible units, and Mr. Turley will correct this. There will be no other exterior changes. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to table discussion since the applicant stated that there will be no exterior changes and therefore does not need to come back before the Committee. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Since the meeting was ahead of schedule, discussion turned to the meeting notes for March 31. Mr. Friedman motioned to approve them. When it was not seconded, the motion was withdrawn, and discussion was tabled until next week. SPAARC 911-913 Maole Avenue Final Interior/exterior remodeling for condo conversion of existing mufti -family residence (6 du`s). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mircea Tran (Project Manager) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Tran stated that exterior alterations will pertain to landscaping, balconies, and windows. This is the second time he has appeared before the Committee. DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson located the minutes from the first meeting in November, and Chair Brzezinski read that discussion was tabled pending a correct set of final plans, including landscaping. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to table discussion for the same reason it was tabled the first time. Ms. Levine seconded and stated that the landscape plan provided does not have a scale. Chair Brzezinski asked about perennials alongside the building, and Ms. Levine suggested planting shrubs instead. Chair Brzezinski recommended using a licensed landscape architect. Ms. Spicuzza, Housing Planner, stated that she has not received the required condo conversion documents. Chair Brzezinski stated that the applicant must do this before returning to the Committee. She called the vote to table discussion, and it was unanimous. SPAARC 2530 Ridae Avenue Preliminary and Final Window replacement along East, North and South elevations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mark Diener (Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Diener is proposing a one -for -one replacement of windows on the east, north, and south elevations of a small office building. The windows will be double pane glass for energy efficiency. Mullions on the north and south sides will be horizontal instead of vertical, and the front window will be tinted gray to eliminate the need for blinds with cords in the pediatrician's waiting room. A window sample was provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about the doors and door hardware. Following discussion, she suggested that Mr. Diener meet with the Fire Department onsite. She also noted that the tinted window may not be enough block out sunlight and stated her preference for the same color of glass on all sides. She asked if the windows will be operable, which they will. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval. Mr. Alterson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 806 Hinman Avenue Recommendation to Sian Board Erect a wall sign. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to update an existing sign at the top of the west side of the building. It is a nonconforming sign since it is higher than 15 feet and does not necessarily face the public way, although it is high enough to be seen from various locations. DISCUSSION / ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to deny the updated sign and leave the existing sign since it is not the only nonconforming sign in the area. Mr. Wolinski seconded and asked about signage fens. Following discussion, he modified the motion as follows: deny the updated sign and allow the existing sign to remain as a nonconforming sign subject to past and ongoing signage fees. The motion passed, with Mr. Alterson voting 'nay.' SPAARC 1314 Ridge Avenue Preliminary and Final Review plat of resubdivision. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: James Murray (Attomey) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Murray stated that the proposal to subdivide the former District 65 property into eight lots, Including the coach house and mansion, has undergone extensive review by the Preservation Commission and Plan Commission. He presented a drawing of the resubdivision. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen asked if new houses require review by the Preservation Commission, which they will. Mr. Alterson asked about utility easements, which Mr. Murray clarified on the drawing. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval. Chair Brzezinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1818 Maole Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Revise existing signs to new corporate name. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that Hilton is changing its name to the Hilton Garden Inn, prompting a one - for -one signage replacement. Their new sign is before the Committee because this hotel Is in a special signage district. Drawings of existing and proposed signs were provided. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval. Mr. Fujihars seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2400 2440 Main Street Recommendation to Sign Board Variations to Unified Business Center sign plan. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen presented drawings of the Unified Business Center sign plan. For the large freestanding sign, Chair Brzezinski thought that only business names should be allowed and not superfluous language. Mr. Hallen showed a drawing of the shopping center logo because the plan proposes placing it on three faces of three towers (total of nine logos). He also noted that there will be a 7' x 8' monument at the east end. Mr. Wolinski thought the existing sign should be saved since this was the first shopping center in Evanston. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski opted to split motions for the freestanding signs. First, she motioned to allow the wall signage as submitted but with business names only and no accessory signage. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Mr. Wolinski motioned approval for both freestanding signs, and Mr. Fujihara seconded. The motion did not pass. Chair Brzezinski motioned denial of the larger freestanding sign. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Wolinski voting `nay.' Mr. Wolinski motioned to deny the nine logos, and Chair Brzezinski seconded. Following discussion of size (smallish) and lighting (intemal), the vote was taken. The motion passed with Mr. Fujihara voting 'nay.' SPAARC 1549 Sherman Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for a type 2 restaurant, 'The Hatian Coffee Bar". PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Christopher Casas GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the regulation checklist that was included in the application packet sent to the applicant, emphasizing litter control and bringing furniture inside at night. The applicant clarified how the sidewalk caf6 will wrap around the comer, noting that he had worked with Mr. Nagar to revise the layout. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Following the vote, Mr. Murray, the attorney for the 1314 Ridge Avenue property, returned to the table to present an updated drawing of the resubdivision showing slightly different boundaries for lot 3 and other minor modifications. The meeting then adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division APPROVED SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES APRIL 14, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Frank Aguado, Ron Walczak, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson. James Wolinski, Walter Hallen, Paul D'Agostino, Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marano Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff. Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC Multiple Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of liquor Control Regulations Core Area (Jacky's Bistro, 2545 Prairie Avenue). • Review sidewalk cafe application for a type 11 restaurant (Liquid Cafd, 1100 Davis Street). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: • Steve McSweeney, Owner, Jacky's Bistro • Adrian Stanciu, Owner, Liquid Cafe GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the regulation checklist that was Included in the application packets sent to each applicant, emphasizing rules for serving alcohol, controlling litter, and bringing furniture inside at night. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to recommend approval for both sidewalk cafes. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 112 Asbury Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct a one-story garage approximately 31' from the front property line. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Oded Cohen (Architect) and Jeff Gross (Owner) R-- GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson asked for a clarification of the proposal, which is to extend a rental car business for additional storage space. Mr. Alterson stated that approval was granted three years ago for an office. Cars were to be kept elsewhere since the lot is zoned for office space, which does not include renting cars. The owner was not yet present, so the architect decided to wait. Discussion turned to the March 31 and April 7 meeting notes. Mr. Friedman motioned approval for the March 31 minutes, and Mr. D'Agostino seconded. The motion passed with Chair Brzezinski, Mr. Wolinski, Mr. Hallen abstaining since they were absent from that meeting. Chair Brzezinski motioned approval for the April 7 minutes, Ms. Jackson seconded, and they were approved with Mr. Dahal abstaining since he was absent from that meeting. When the owner of 112 Asbury Avenue arrived, Mr. Alterson asked him about the use. Mr. Gross stated that he rents cars and at the request of the YMCA, he has been selling cars they receive as donations. He offered to stop doing so if it is not allowed. Discussion followed about the proposal to extend the building to store boxes of rental car records and the like. After reviewing drawings and photos, Chair Brzezinski noted that the zoning concern is how the property is being used and that if the rental car use is not allowed, then extending its function is an issue. The owner stated that space is limited since he is also storing his antique cars in the building. Chair Brzezinski suggested relocating the antique cars to another facility to free up storage space onsite. Mr. Wolinski commended the owner for improvements to the site and for maintaining it but stated that he could not support the project because he has seen cars parked onsite, which goes against the approved use for the site. Mr. Gross stated that the cars Mr. Wolinski saw are employee cars. They cannot parts on the street because the Alderman wants the cars onsite and not on the street. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to recommend denial, Chair Brzezinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1115 Lake Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a one -car detached garage. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kenneth Coe (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The owner is proposing to construct a one -car detached garage in the front yard because the small lot size and a bay window on the house preclude the garage from being next to the house or behind it. It requires a zoning variation for side setbacks and Preservation Commission review since it is in the historic district. Drawings and photos were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski noted the unique lot and stated that a one -space garage seems realistic since there is no other off-street parking. She asked tf neighbors had objections, which they did not. She asked if there will be new curb cuts, which there will not since there is an existing driveway. Since the garage will be close to the house, she suggested a fire wall in the garage. Mr. Alterson asked about the space behind the garage, which will be a concrete slab. He asked if the garage will be drive -through, which it will not. Mr. D'Agostino asked why concrete will be used. It will replace badly -deteriorated asphalt. Chair Brzezinski suggested having green space instead of pavement. The owner stated that the area was shady, and discussion followed on shade -tolerant plants and pervious surface materials. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval subject to approval by the Preservation Commission and non -paving of the area behind the garage (no concrete or asphalt). Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote passed with Mr. Friedman voting 'nay.' He asked about the setback for the garage, which is the same distance as adjacent properties (e.g., it will not stick out). He suggested making the garage narrower. SPAARC 1567 Maple Avenue Revision to Concept Construct a mixed -use 21-story residential building with 143 dwelling unites and 4,509 square feet of commercial space. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Robert Homer (Developer) and James Murray (Attorney) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Murray and Mr. Homer stated that since they last appeared before the Committee, 25 feet have been acquired from the adjacent property (Bank One), per the Committee's suggestion. The building configuration and design also have been altered per Committee suggestions. The height remains the same, but there is a new parking area along the driveway. New drawings and elevations were presented. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that the new parking area does not meet maneuvering standards for cars backing into the driveway. Mr. Homer suggested it could be Bank One employee parking to reduce traffic, but Mr. Alterson did not want added liability for the condo association. Chair Brzezinski suggested angling the spaces. Mr. Homer thanked the Committee for this input. Chair Brzezinski asked about building materials. Brick has been extended to the base, and brick color has darkened. Mr. Friedman complemented the improved design. Mr. Hallen noted that parking access and fire -rating have not been worked out. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to recommend approval, and Mr. Wolinski seconded. Mr. Alterson asked if they had a pre -application conference, which they have. They are willing to repeat it and to work with the Plan Commission as needed. Mr. Wolinski commended Mr. Homer for incorporating Committee comments and acquiring land from Bank One, especially in light of their recent merger. The vote was taken, and it was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES APRIL 21, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, James Wolinski, Rajeev Dahal, Arthur Alterson, Ariova Jackson, Walter Hallen, Carolyn Brzezinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norlleet Chair Brzexlnski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 1700 Central Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Caft Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe with liquor for type i restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of liquor Control Regulations Core Area (Trattoria Trullie). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Taso Papakostas, Manager GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the regulation checklist included in the application packet, emphasizing rules for serving alcohol, controlling litter, and delineating the cafe area. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Mr. Wolinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2401 Bnummel Place Recommendation to Citv Council Review of landscape plan for a religious institution requiring special use. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: William Hanawalt, Owner and Steve Lenet, Landscape Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hanawalt summarized what has happened since he was last before the Committee and presented drawings for landscaping the parking lot, part of which is in Skokie. Mr. Lenet described existing parking lot and landscape conditions and summarized proposed changes and plant material (mostly on the eastern edge of the parking lot). DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if Skokie requires a landscaping permit, and Mr. Hanawalt will find out. Mr. Hallen noted that Skokie has parking lot screening requirements that Evanston does not. Mr. Wolinski stated that this project has appeared before the Planning and Development Committee, and Alderman Rainey requested that a landscape plan be approved by this Committee as a condition for granting the special use. Chair Brzezinski asked about remediating the parking lot, and Mr. Hanawalt said that plans are in progress. Mr. Hallen suggested that four beds with trees could improve the lot's appearance. Chair Brzezinski noted that the lot is not as visible as others, but planters could mitigate the heat island effect. Mr. Lenet agreed. Mr. D'Agostino asked about landscaping the eastern edge, which is a narrow strip that has several trees. Mr. Lenet thought it was too narrow to accommodate additional trees, so he opted to keep the existing trees and replace the shrubs. Mr. Wolinski noted that discussion has focused on the north half of the lot. Mr. Hanawalt agreed to provide the plans for the southern half of the lot and stated that they are removing an existing chain link fence. Mr. Dahal asked how the parking lot will be lit. Discussion followed about putting lights vs. trees on islands. ACTION: Mr. D'Agostino motioned to recommend approval with a minimum of six islands with trees spaced throughout, with the east frontage proposal as shown, and subject to Skokie's approval. Chair Brzezinski seconded, and the motion passed with Ms. Jackson abstaining. SPAARC 2500 Green Bav Road Preliminary Demolish dwelling and construct a four-story, eight dwelling unit building with accessory parking. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ben Dunlap and Mike Obloy (Developers) Jim Chambers and David Dodt (Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Chambers presented updated drawings and summarized how they have incorporated the Committee's suggestions from the last meeting. There will be brick all around, and part of the front yard will be raised. Mr. Dunlap stated that a civil engineer has been consulted for stormwater detention, but the tank location is still tentative. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about the ramp slope, which has been approved by Mr. Dahal. Mr. Dahal asked about trash removal. There will not be a trash chute, but there will be a masonry trash enclosure at the southwest comer of the rear parking area. Mr. Obloy stated that there will be a weekly maintenance person to clean the site. The trash enclosure will not need to be ADA-accessible, but there may be a problem with its location next to the handicapped parking space. To address this, Mr. Dunlap suggested to his team that they flip the parking lot configuration. Chair Brzezinski asked about rear lighting and suggested they balance security with impacts on the neighbors as they prepare for final review. Chair Brzezinski asked about building materials, and samples were provided. Windows will be Gad wood with simulated divided light in front but not on the sides. Brick will be standard size, and Chair Brzezinski commended them for using brick all around the building. Stone samples were also provided. Balconies will be wrought iron. Mr. Hallen and Mr. Friedman commended them on the design, but Mr. Friedman thought that a contemporary building might be better at this location. Chair Brzezinski thought that they have done well since the adjacent sites do not provide much context. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned preliminary approval, Mr. Wolinski seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Friedman abstaining. SPAARC 503 Main Street Prellminary and Final Change in use to a Type 1 restaurant, exhaust duct to roof, and new conditioner condensing unit. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Dit Sakmunwong, Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Ruiz stated that this restaurant is a landmark property, and he has administratively approved the application for a rear air conditioning unit since it is not visible from the public way. The owner provided photos showing a similar air conditioning unit at an adjacent address that is closer to but not visible from the public way. In addition to installing the rear air conditioning unit, the owner stated that he is considering relocating the front door to the side since it swings over the public way or altering it to swing into the restaurant instead. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval since the proposed exterior changes are in the alley and not visible from the public way. Ms. Jackson seconded. Mr. Ruiz suggested the condition that the owner come back before the Committee for approval if there will be changes to the exterior door. He also noted that signage will undergo Preservation review and that a UBC sign has not been filed. The vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. SPAARC 2102 Grant Street Recommendation to ZBA Tear down existing facade, construct a two-story addition, and construct second story dormer additions. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Vincent Weber (Designer) and Joyce Armington (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Mr. Weber presented photos of the existing house and drawings of the proposed addition. Mr. Friedman asked if the addition will be taller than surrounding houses. Ms. Armington stated that all of the other houses are taller than hers (the adjacent ones are 1.5 stories). Chair Brzezinski noted that Ms. Armington's house is on the comer, making it is easier to go taller. She asked if the neighbors had been consulted, and they have with no objections. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Following the vote, discussion turned to the April 14 meeting notes. No changes were suggested. Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division �f;' i ^': - APPROVED SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES APRIL 28, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Sat Nagar, James Wolinski, Stefanie Levine, Arlova Jackson, Waiter Hallen, Carolyn Brzezinski, Judy Aiello, Rajeev Dahal Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norlleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2408 Orrinaton Avenue Concept Change of use for Kendall College site to detached single family dwellings (19) and attached single family dwellings (44). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Rob Buono (Developer), Larry Booth (Architect), Bernard Citron (Attorney), Ked LaJeune (Architect), Keith Jacobs (Builder), John Malarky (Attorney), Ron Adams (Civil Engineer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Wolinski noted that several neighborhood residents were present, and Chair Brzezinski summarized the role of the Committee for them. Mr. Buono then introduced the development team and gave a brief history of Chicago -based Smithfield Properties. Previous projects include for -sale housing in Chicago (e.g. Lincoln Park), the Borders at State and Randolph, and industrial buildings on Goose Island. The Kendall College property is their first project in Evanston. To foster dialog between the community and the development team, a task force of ten neighbors was created in January. Discussion is ongoing regarding issues such as density, open space, the size of proposed homes, and setbacks. Mr. Buono presented drawings showing the arrangement of 63 total units on the site. They are proposing 19 detached single family at the periphery of the site, with 44 attached singly family units at the center surrounding an area of private open space. Different elevations were presented, and the same design will not occur more than two times on a street. Samples of building materials also were provided. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wolinski informed the Committee that Mr. Buono had appeared before the Planning and Development Committee, which recommended rezoning the property to single family residences. Mr. Wolinski asked about the price point, which Mr. Buono estimated will be between $850,000-$1.1 million. Chair Brzezinski commented on the opportunity presented by having a full city block to develop. She noted their response to existing single family homes but thought the lot size is disturbing since it is significantly smaller than the surrounding lots. Mr. Buono responded that the proposal seeks to balance community input and the development team's goal of providing diverse house types and price points, while also keeping the project feasible from a financial standpoint. Mr. Booth stated that they attempted to create a balance between the development's appearance, the context of the neighborhood, and affordability. He also clarified the proposed side yards and setbacks. Chair Brzezinski noted the minimal rear yard for the proposed single family homes. Mr. Booth responded that the target market for these homes are persons seeking convenience living, such as empty -nesters that do not want a big yard requiring maintenance. Mr. Citron suggested that market exists in Evanston just like it does in other suburbs (e.g., Lincolnshire, Cotswolds in Highland Park). Mr. Friedman was surprised at their proposal and did not think it was appropriate for Evanston or this particular part of Evanston, which is not like Linconshire or Highland Park. Mr. Ruiz stated that the site is located in the national and local historic districts and asked how the development team plans to address the preservation issue if all existing buildings are to be demolished, as proposed. Mr. Buono acknowledged the need to undergo Preservation Commission review. He stated that they are trying to create architecturally and aesthetically integrated community and reiterated that they are trying to balance many different interests. Mr. Ruiz read aloud from the Preservation Ordinance the sections that authorize preservation review for projects like this. Mr. Wolinski thought that the development team was missing an opportunity to create an exclusive community of larger single family homes (e.g., given the trend for tearing down existing homes on small lots and replacing them with large homes, this market might prefer new, large homes on large lots instead). Mr. Ruiz noted that the Preservation Commission looks at the impact to the entire historic district as a whole when considering individual applications. He suggested that the two existing structures on Orrington be integrated into the new plan rather than be erased from the historic district. He also noted that the balance seems to be within the site rather than within the whole district (e.g., looking in rather than looking out). Chair Brzezinski opened discussion to the public. Mr. Bruce Edinback stated that he was one of the task force members. He thought that the development should be residential and keep the integrity of the surrounding single family homes. He also thought that the Preservation process should be respected. He added that the zoning change to R1 was appropriate. He also stated that he had met with the developer through a good faith effort and that the developer came to Evanston with no experience here and deserves a fair process. He concluded that Evanston is not Lincoln Park, Lincolnshire, or Highland Park, so a de minimus back yard is not appropriate. Ms. Judy Fisk represented the Northeast Evanston Historic District Association. She noted that the area has been under intense scrutiny over the past five years. It shares siting, setbacks, side yards, building character, the existence of back yards and garages, public access, and identity with other properties in this historic district and the other two districts. As such, the proposed project does not fit. Furthermore, she thought it would have devastating effects on the historic district by removing five contributing buildings and by being the boundary of the district. If the development proceeds as proposed, she would recommend that this property be removed from the historic district. Ms. Diane Libkin noted that her son attends nearby Roycemore school, posing concerns for safety since traffic from the site is oriented to Orrington. Ms. Jane Smith noted that there will be lots of cars passing through the u-shaped alley on the site, raising the issue of pedestrian safety in accessing the open space. Mr. Nick Agnew reiterated Mr. Edinback's points. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski suggested that the Committee needed more time to digest the proposal and motioned to table discussion. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 713 Mulford Street Preliminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling for proposed condo conversion of existing multi -family residences (23 du's). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Baruch Schur (Developer), Kostas Kotsomitis (Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Schur summarized issues from the last meeting (e.g., landscaping and parking). He presented two courtyard designs. The first design had a long narrow pond leading to a fountain with seating behind it. The second design did not have the long pond, and seating was around the fountain. Chair Brzezinski liked the second design better because she thought the long pond in the first design could act as a barrier to neighbor interaction across the courtyard. Ms. Levine complemented Mr. Schur on the fountain and landscaping and stated that she preferred the second design as well. Mr. Schur stated that at the last meeting, he was asked to consider using windows made of wood with aluminum clad. He presented window samples, including a vinyl model manufactured in Chicago. Chair Brzezinski asked if he was replacing all windows, which he is (total of 243 windows). He stated that there is a cost difference of $100,000 for using the sample shown as opposed to wood/aluminum clad. Discussion followed about the window materials and whether to use SDL windows. Chair Brzezinski stated that she would prefer that he forego the fountain in favor of good windows. Mr. Ruiz suggested that Mr. Schur consider restoring the windows and offered a contact for an estimate. If he still wishes to replace the windows, then Mr. Ruiz recommended using SDL wood with aluminum clad. Chair Brzezinski clarified for Mr. Schur that Committee comments on the windows are recommendations and not requirements. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval of the proposal with a recommendation to restore the windows or consider SDL window replacements. Chair Brzezinski seconded. Ms. Jackson asked about parking, and Mr. Schur presented a drawing showing the revised layout. Following discussion about stormwater, landscaping, and the access point, Mr. Nagar amended his motion for approval to be subject to parking plan review. The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 720 % Clark Street Recommendation to City Council Review application for a Sidewalk Cafd for a Type 2 restaurant (JK Sweets). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Yi-Young Cha (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the regulation checklist included in the application packet, emphasizing rules for disposable items and litter control. ACTION: With all members agreeing there would be no negative effects of the sidewalk, the vote was unanimous to recommend approval to City Council. SPAARC 2416 Demoster Street Preliminary and Final Install panel brick on exterior walls of car wash and change material of mansard roof. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Wayne Rapp (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: To update the look of his car wash business, Mr. Rapp is proposing to replace existing steel paneling at the front and sides with panel brick and to build a standing seam metal roof. Photos of the existing building and building material samples were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked how the panel brick will be applied and how far it will extend on the sides of the building. Different distances were discussed. Ms. Jackson noted that he had received concept approval on May 9, 2001, but Mr. Rapp said that was for an earlier proposal that has now been scaled back (as proposed today). ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval. Chair Brzezinski added the recommendation that the panel brick on the sides of the building stop at the end of the mansard. Mr. Friedman seconded. The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1901-1911 Howard Street Recommendation to City Council Review of plot of consolidation. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Sam Callas (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION i DISCUSSION: Mr. Callas presented his plat of consolidation for a lot with a restaurant and an adjacent lot. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to recommend approval of the consolidation, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Following the vote, the meeting notes for April 21, 2004 were discussed. Ms. Jackson motioned approval, and Chair Brzezinski seconded. The notes were approved with Mr. Nagar and Ms. Levine abstaining since they were absent from that meeting. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MAY 12, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Frank Aguado, James Wolinski, Ariova Jackson, Waiter Hallen, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, John Brewer Design Professional: Other Staff: Hans Friedman Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 600 Main Street Remodel Main Street Metra Station. Reconsider Previous Action PROJECT PRESENTED BY: John Szostek (Metra Representative) GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Szostek stated that Metra is proposing to install bars on windows as part of the Main Street Station renovation. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski read the action from the July 9, 2004 minutes, which was to allow bars at the street level but not at the platform level. Mr. Hallen asked if Metra wants bars at both levels, which they do. Mr. Szostek presented drawings of the proposed windows with bars. He cited security concerns as the reason for the bars since there will be offices and a 24-hour weather shelter in the station. Following discussion about the distance between the bars, Mr. Szostek acknowledged that they are too close together and that they could be decorative. Mr. Hallen asked if other stations have bars, and the Central Station does. Chair Brzezinski thought that bars at the platform level would give station users and passing commuters the perception that the area is not safe. She suggested that Metra purchase the bars and store them in case the need arises to install them. Mr. Szostek mentioned that Metra is spending a tot of money to restore the windows and does not want them to be broken. Mr. Marino asked if they considered electronic security, which they have, but there may be problems with vibrations from passing trains. Mr. Szostek reiterated that they want to protect the restored windows. Mr. Hallen pointed out that bars alone cannot prevent broken windows. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to table reconsideration of the previous action pending a problem with windows being broken. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1425 Dobson Street Preliminary and Final Rebuild existing porches for multi -family (12 du's) residence. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Raymond Reinhardt (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Mr. Reinhardt is proposing to replace existing wood porches. Chair Brzezinski asked if the replacement will be in -kind, which it will. She asked if they will be painted or stained. Mr. Reinhardt stated that he has repainted the existing ones several times and does not want to continue doing so with the replacements. Chair Brzezinski suggested they be stained. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, and Mr. Dahal seconded. Chair Brzezinski suggested phasing the project so as not to remove all three exits and to barricade the exits doors to porches under construction. The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1414 Elmwood Avenue Final Inferior and exterior remodeling of multiple family dwelling for condo conversion, new roof, and front entry doors. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Melinda Heindel (Architect), George Lyrus and James Laukkanew (Owners) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Heindel stated that this is a 22-unit condo conversion that includes interior and exterior changes to a 1960s building. Photos were provided. The applicants last appeared before the Committee in October regarding the roof, front entry, and landscaping. They also are proposing a fence. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about the windows, which will be vinyl, double -hung, and white (similar to existing). She asked about rear lighting, and the two existing flood lights will remain. She asked about the fence, which will be 5' cedar slats that match the neighbor's fence. Mr. Marino asked if the project complied with the City's condo conversion ordinance. Ms. Spicuzza, Housing Planner, stated that she received the notice of intent but not the disclosure statement. Chair Brzezinski asked about overhead wires in the rear, which will be upgraded. She thought the appearance would be improved if they were placed underground. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval with the condition that the applicants consider placing overhead wires underground as part of the upgrade. Mr. Marino seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Friedman opposed due to the use of vinyl windows. SPAARC 1235 Hartrev Avenue Concept Construct a 150' tall free-standing mono -pole to contain 6 antennas for Sprint PCS. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kelly Drew and David Raymond (Sprint PCS Representative) GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Drew stated that since the last meeting, she looked into the two suggested alternatives for the proposed 150' tower. The water tank already is occupied by Sprint PCS but does not provide enough coverage. Evanston Township High School decided against the proposal since they have three existing agreements. Ms. Drew stated that she is appearing before the Committee as a last resort. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski was concerned about the height of the tower, and Ms. Drew stated that flush mounting can be done instead of a standard array to minimize the tower's visual impact. Mr. Marino asked about the height of other existing towers. Mr. Raymond presented a map showing the location and heights of towers in Evanston and another map showing the gap in coverage. Mr. Wolinski noted that part of the gap is in Skokie, which has three towers compared to Evanston's six towers. Ms. Drew stated that a possible negotiation in Skokie recently fell through and reiterated that she was before the Committee as a last resort. Chair Brzezinski asked if they pay taxes for the towers, which they do. She reiterated her concern for the height of the tower, even with the flush mount. She asked how coverage would be affected if the tower height is dropped to 125.' Mr. Marino noted that 85' was the standard a few years ago. Mr. Hallen noted that there is not much difference between 125' and 150' compared to dropping down to 85.' ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to deny the 150' freestanding mono -pole but was willing to hear future proposals, including an 85' height. Chair Brzezinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1012 and 1014 Church Street Recommendation to Sian Board New wall 'Blade' sign. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen presented drawings for three large blade signs proposed by Carmen's restaurant and a neighboring restaurant. Mr. Marino asked if they will blink, which they will not, but they will be illuminated. He was concerned about the cumulative effects of too many blade signs. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to deny the signs since they are too large. Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 616 Lake Street Recommendation to Sign Board Replacement of freestanding sign. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen presented drawings of the existing and proposed sign for Immanuel Lutheran Church. It will be illuminated. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Wolinski opposed. SPAARC 1739 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board New wall 'Blade' sign. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen presented a drawing of the small blade sign proposed by Gary Poppins restaurant ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Marino and Mr. Friedman opposed. Since the meeting was ahead of schedule, discussion tamed to the meeting notes for April 28. There being no changes, Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, and Mr. Wolinski seconded. The motion passed with Mr. D'Agostino abstaining since he was absent from that meeting. SPAARC 2408 Orrington Avenue Concert Change of use for Kendall College site to detached single family dwellings (19) and attached single family dwellings (44). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Rob Buono (Developer) and John Malarkey (Attomey) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if the applicants had new information since the last meeting. Mr. Buono stated that there have not been any changes to the site plan or elevations. Rather, he wished to respond to comments made last time regarding density, the relationship to the existing neighborhood, and marketability. To address density, the development team has reviewed 2000 Census data at the block level for the area contiguous to the site and within a Y2 — % mile radius (e.g., Ridge, Sheridan, Emerson, Central, excluding Northwestern University and Roycemoore school). Numbers were presented for the average number of persons per household and units per block for each area. Mr. Buono noted the presence of multi -family units south of the site. To address marketability, Mr. Buono stated that if the development is solely single family homes, not many will sell for 52-2.5 million nor 51-1.5 million. Using the multiple listing service, they have reviewed closings in the past 30 months for the selling price, amount of time on the market, and lot size. Two houses sold for over 52.5 million, four sold for $2-2.5 million, and six sold for $1.5-2 million. A map was presented showing the locations of these homes. Mr. Buono stated that next week a traffic engineer will be doing a movement count for the property and surrounding sites. To aid in estimating morning and evening peak volumes, Northwestern has provided data on the number of students with cars, restaurant hours, etc. Chair Brzezinski opened discussion to the audience. Ms. Fisk spoke on behalf of the Northeast Evanston Historic District Association and stated that in researching the district, she found that density historically was higher near CTA stations, but higher density does not make sense at this site. Mr. Wolinski asked Ms. Fisk how the neighborhood would feel about keeping the existing administration building as a condominium. Ms. Fisk indicated the need for Preservation review of the site and thought that the boundary of the historic district would not be the same if the existing buildings were removed. Mr. Wolinski asked Mr. Buono how converting the administration building to condos affects their numbers. Mr. Buono stated that they had presented concepts for retaining some of the buildings to the task force. Keeping the administration building specifically as a condo had not been discussed. Chair Brzezinski thought it would be unfortunate to lose the texture the existing buildings provide to the area, especially the administration building. She also noted that they are proposing something more dense and on smaller lots (e.g., stand-alone townhouses) than what an R1 single family zone allows (e.g., the adjacent area). She suggested having a mix of types, such as condos in the administration building, some single family homes for those who want them, and perhaps townhouses near the Roycemoore side of the property. She thought the proposal looked like a new town or subdivision replacing a site that had been wiped clean. ACTION: Mr, Nagar motioned to table discussion to give the developer time to draw up alternatives. Mr. Wolinski seconded and noted the need to see the traffic study when it is completed. Mr. Ruiz expressed concern for the proposed demolition of all structures and noted the need for Preservation review. Mr. Friedman thought that any single family homes should conform to the R1 requirements and not be half the size required, as proposed. The vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norffeet Planning Division SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MAY 19, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Frank Aguado, James Wolinski, Stefanie Levine, Dennis Marino, Arlova Jackson, Arthur Atterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, John Brewer, Rajeev Dahal, David Jennings Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Carlos Ruiz, Susan Guderley, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 110 Kedzie Street Recommendation to ZBA Locate an A/C unit 3.9' from the east property line. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Pam Daniels (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Daniels stated that she currently does not have air conditioning and is requesting a variance to install an air conditioning unit on the east side of the property, where it would be the least obtrusive. Photos, a plat of survey, and letters of support from neighbors were provided. DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson asked if they will be using a quiet, efficient unit, which they will. He asked if she brought any product information for the unit, including noise levels, which she did not. Discussion followed on the unit's proximity to the neighbor's house and the variance needed. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, and Mr. Marino seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Wolinski opposed. �1RC 1712 Church Street Revision to Final Construct an enclosed waste transfer station. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Chris Peters (Project Manager), Gerald Callaghan (Attorney), Bob Wemeiwski (Consultant) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Wemeiwski stated that the transfer station and sound wall have been previously approved. However, they are now proposing to demolish the existing open-air transfer station and build a new, enclosed facility where it would better facilitate truck traffic on the site. A new site plan and elevations were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if the new facility will be exhausted. There will be vents on the roof and a state-of-the-art misting system. Chair Brzezinski stated that the proposed facility will be closer to the residential area than the existing one and asked if it will be visible from the residences. Mr. Wemeiwski stated that there will be a 14' sound wall, but the top of the transfer station would be visible over the wall. Mr. Wolinski asked how operations have changed recently. Mr. Wemeiwski stated that some operations have been consolidated and relocated to Northbrook, and this facility is primarily a transfer station. Mr. Wolinski thought that support for this facility could wane if employees are not from Evanston. Mr. Marino asked about hours of operation. The station will close at 4:30pm, and trucks will leave soon after and wilt not remain in the bays overnight. Mr. Friedman stated that the last time the proposal was before the Committee, an issue had been trucks parked on the old railway. The applicants stated that trucks no longer park there, and containers that were stored there are presently being relocated from the berm. Chair Brzezinski asked if they owned it, which they do. Mr. Wolinski asked if EPA will review the new proposal, which they will. Mr. Callaghan stated that they came before this Committee in preparation for the EPA meeting. Since EPA has 90 days to make a decision, the approved sound wall is currently being constructed so that construction of the facility can start on schedule in the fall after EPA has made its decision. Mr. Jennings asked if the property to the south is owned by the applicant and if it is part of facility operations. Mr. Wemeiwski stated that trucks used to park there, containers are now stored there, and the future use is unknown. Mr. Jennings asked if neighbors have been made aware of the new orientation, which they have not. He suggested that the applicants work with the Aldermen to set up a neighborhood meeting. Chair Brzezinski suggested they minimize or eliminate container storage, especially on the embankment. Mr. Marino thought the new proposal was better but that neighbors should be notified. Unfit then, he thought that discussion should be tabled pending the applicants' meeting with the Aldermen. He also noted other issues of containers and disposition of the property to the south since there could be another use for it. Mr. Callaghan stated that the neighborhood meeting should take place before they go to EPA for review. 7C ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion, and Mr. Jennings seconded. Mr. Jennings asked if neighbors had been notified about the sound wall, which they have (17 residences). Chair Brzezinski stated that a notice about the demolition has been mailed and suggested a new letter go out with the construction schedule and what to expect during construction, as well as a contact for questions. Mr. Marino asked about rodent control in the proposed facility. Any rodents that escape during tipping are expected to be caught using bait traps. Since doors will be closed during tipping and at night, rodents are not expected to escape the building. Ms. Gudertey asked where the vents on the proposed enclosed facility will be oriented, which will be upwards. Mr. Friedman asked about building dimensions, which will be roughly 1000 square feet smaller than the existing facility. Mr. Marino asked about the peak volume on the busiest day (1200-1300 tons/day) vs. an average day (600-800 tons/day). Chair Brzezinski asked about operations during construction. A portion of the tipping floor will remain open, and construction will be delayed to fall, which is a slower time. Chair Brzezinski called the vote on the motion to table discussion, which was unanimous. SPAARC 1235 Hartrev Avenue Concept Construct a 110' tall free-standing mono -pole to contain 6 antennas for Sprint PCS. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kelly Drew and David Raymond (Sprint RCS Representatives) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Drew stated that the proposed 110' tower is a compromise that will alleviate most of the current coverage gap (not at the outskirts). Maps showing this were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if it will be flush -mounted, which it will not because doing so will decrease the coverage. Mr. Marino asked if they will lease or purchase the land, and they will have a 25-year lease. He asked if the base will be visible from the public right-of-way, which it will not since it is currently surrounded by industrial buildings. Mr. Aguado asked if there will be other tenants. Ms. Drew stated that would be ideal, but other carriers have not yet expressed interest. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski stated that given all the issues and the applicant's willingness to decrease the height to the level of other poles, she would motion concept approval, which Ms. Jackson seconded. She amended her motion to include preliminary approval as well, which Ms. Jackson also seconded. Mr. Marino asked if the applicant considered an 80' tower, but they only considered 125' and 110'. Mr. Raymond stated that it going lower than 100' would impact their coverage objectives, and they felt 110' was a good compromise. Mr. Marino amended the motion to have the city revisit screening the base if existing buildings are demolished. Chair Brzezinski amended the motion, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Dahal and Mr. Wolinski opposed. SPAARC 1932 Central Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for sidewalk cafd with liquor for type t restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of liquor Control Regulations Core Area (The Blue Stone). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: John Enright (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Enright stated that this will be his third year as a sidewalk caf6, and Mr. Marino commended him for running it well. Chair Brzezinski stated that it is within 200' of residential and reminded him to be aware of alcohol regulations. She then read the regulation checklist that was included in the application packet. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Fallowing the vote, discussion turned to the meeting notes for May 12. Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Mr. Wolinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MAY 26, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Frank Aguado, Carolyn Brzezinski, Walter Hallen, "eev Dahal, Sat Nagar, Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, Ron Walczak, Paul D'Agostino. Adova Jackson, John Brewer Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Carlos Ruiz, Susan Gudertey, Tracy Norfieet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the May 19, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 913 Lee Street Recommendation to ZBA Locate an A/C unit approx. 1.8' from the rear property line. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Myma Orensteln (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Ms. Orenstein is proposing to install an air conditioning unit in an attic bedroom window. Chair Brzezinski asked about noise levels for the unit, and it is quieter than other modem units because it is a split system. Also, her house fronts Lee Street, but the neighbors house that would be affected fronts Elmwood and is not close to the property line. Photos and letters of support from neighbors were provided. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Mr. Alterson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 720 Colfax Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a one-story mudroom addition. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom Gemmell (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Gemmell stated that his house was built in 1917 and has a small setback from the alley than what is required under the current zoning ordinance. He previously received all necessary approval to renovate the kitchen and enclose the entry off the alley, but construction was halted when, due to unforeseen circumstances, the original proposal had to be modified to accommodate a disabled family member. He is now proposing to align the mudroom with the alley to allow for wheelchair access and maneuvering room, and this requires a zoning variance. A packet of information was provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if the property is located in a historic district, and it is in the Northeast Evanston district. She also asked if the neighbors had been contacted. They have, and two letters of support have been included in the packet of information. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1803 Ridae Avenue Preliminary Change use to a parking area for Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Rev. John Norwood (Pastor) and Doug Madel (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Rev. Norwood stated that they have acquired property that they once owned and leased to Standard Oil. They are proposing to change the use to a parking lot for the church. The rear 25' eventually may be used for future church expansion. Chair Brzezinski asked if they have received zoning approval. Mr. Aguado stated that there have been three submittals, and the current one is zoning compliant. Mr. Madel stated that this is a modified version of a previous submission and now meets the 5' setback requirement for parking. Discussion followed about traffic congestion and ingress/egress to the lot, including existing and proposed curb cuts on Clark and Ridge. Rev. Norwood stated that they are considering an exit -only on Ridge for funerals since processions tend to be quite long. It would be gated when not in use. Site plans were provided. Mr. Hallen asked if their proposal has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer, and Mr. Dahal stated that it has. Mr. Wolinski asked if they have permission to park in the Roszak development across the street. They have not sought permission since they now have this lot. Discussion followed about stormwater detention on the parking lot in light of recent regulations. Illumination and landscaping the parking lot perimeter and islands also were discussed. Mr. Friedman thought that a nice fence and landscaping would improve the site and offset density from nearby residential development. Chair Brzezinski stated that a landscape plan will be needed for final approval and encouraged the applicant to work with the Parks and Forestry Department. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to table discussion, citing a need for more discussion on the proposed curb cuts, grading the parking lot, sidewalk location, water drainage. and types of fencing and gates. Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC ISM Darrow Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Conversion of rental building into fee simple townhouses. Elimination of rive off-street parking spaces. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mike Wittenbrink (Co-owner and Building Manager) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Wittenbrink stated that his building was built in the 1960s and did not have off-street parking. When parking requirements were put in place, spaces were provided for this building in a shared lot behind the adjacent building to the north. Since then, his building was sold several times but the parking spaces were not transferred in any of the sales. Thus, since Mr. Wittenbrink does not own the five spaces in the shared lot and has not been able to acquire the adjacent building with the parking lot, he is requesting that the parking requirement be eliminated for his building. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski clarified that he is not trying to eliminate five spaces but rather, the requirement for providing off-street parking. Mr. Aguado asked about the number of units, and there are five. He asked about price points, which are estimated to be in the $130,000s without parking. Mr. Hallen asked about the number of bedrooms, and all are one-story with one bedroom and all separate utilities. Chair Brzezinski asked if Mr. Wittenbrink is aware of the Condo Conversion Ordinance, which he is. He stated that he is considering selling them as fee -simple townhouses since they are completely separate units. Mr. Aiterson thought there should be an association for either condos or townhouses in light of common elements (e.g., roof) and the issue of tenants should a unit be rented. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval since this is a revision to the parking requirement rather than an elimination of spaces. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Multiale Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk CaN • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe with liquor for type 2 restaurant (Noodles & Company, 930 Church Street). • Review Application for a Sidewalk Cafe - Type 2 Restaurant (Ben & Jenys Ice Cream, 1634 Orrington Avenue). • Review Application for a Sidewalk Cafe for a Retail Food Store (Foodstuffs Retail Gourmet Food, 2106 Central street). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: • Scott Black, Manager • Rodney Lane, Manager • Steven Wessel, Manager GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the regulation checklist that was included in the application packets, emphasizing litter control. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, which was seconded. The motion was approved with Mr. Alterson abstaining. SPAARC 801 Chicago Avenue Preliminary Construct a 28 dwelling unit multiple family dwelling with retail space on the ground floor. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: James T. Murray (Attomey) GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Murray stated that he is seeking preliminary approval for a revision to a prior design for this site, originally proposed in 2003. The initial proposal was for a 7-story building, consisting of five floors of residential dwellings over three levels of parking (one underground). That proposal would have resulted in 45 dwellings, in a mix of one and two bedroom units. The Plan Commission and community requested that the developer redesign the project to reduce its density, increase the size of the units and result in less traffic. The current proposal is for a 6-story building containing a total of 28 residential units (all of which would have two bedrooms) and ground floor commercial space. The building would provide parking on the first and second floors, with four floors of residential above. DISCUSSION: The project remains a planned development. The developers shall seek two variations. The first is from the setback requirement along Kedzie, in order to provide landscaping. The second pertains to the requirement for screening a commercial loading area. Mr. Friedman questioned the placement of the parking ramp enclosure on the southern side of the building. He stated that it resulted in an unattractive street elevation, which might be eliminated if the ramp was switched to the northern side of the building. Chair Brzezinski stated that she disagreed, provided the proposed brick work was part of the final design. Chair Brzezinski noted that the lighting provided in the parking floors needs to be directed downward or shaded to prevent it from shining into neighboring buildings. Staff asked Mr. Murray to identify the location of the emergency generator. He stated that this had not yet been identified on the plans. Staff advised him that this location should be hidden from view. Staff also noted that the rear pedestrian exit into the alley must be protected by bollards to assure that emergency egress from the building could never be blocked by a delivery vehicle. Reviewing the residential floor plans, staff discussed the project's relationship to the building to the north. Mr. Murray stated that the previous design had proposed a courtyard on its northern elevation, to provide a break and greater distance between the buildings. This proposal had been rejected by the neighbors. Chair Brzezinski recommended that this project's northern elevation be redesigned. First, the storage spaces along the central hall should be eliminated and this portion of the wall recessed. Second, glass block windows should be provided along the elevator hall to allow natural light and make it seem less tunnel -like. Mr. Murray stated that a landscape plan has been developed for the project. On the northern elevation, it specifies climbing ivy, both on the ground and the roof. Along the Kedzie side, plantings will include a variety of shrubs. Staff asked if there were any rooftop utilities. Mr. Murray stated that, to his knowledge, they are to be housed in the elevator over -ride which is to be constructed of the same material as the building. Staff noted that, should that not be the case, the parapet wall might be of sufficient size to accomplish some screening. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski moved to approve preliminary site plan approval with the conditions that: the light fixtures in the parking garage are directed downward; a path of egress is defined and protected by bollards from the rear exit door; the rooftop utilities are hidden from view; and the emergency generator is hidden in the east half of the building and specifically not on the front or southem elevations. In addition, staff recommends that the storage areas be eliminated on the residential floors, the northern wall recessed in this location and that glass block windows be provided along the central hall of each floor. The motion was seconded by James Wolinski and passed (8-2-1). Ms. Jackson and Mr. Alterson voted nay, and Mr. Friedman abstained. Revisions to Preliminary and SPAARC Sherman Plaza Pre-AoDlication Conference Adjustment to Planned Development for mixed -used development within block bounded by Church Street, Sherman Avenue, Davis Street, and Benson Avenue. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: John Terrell (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Terrell stated that the proposal planned development for Sherman Plaza has been modified. The number of dwelling units has increased to a total of 253, and the retail square footage has decreased. Revised elevations were presented. Originally, there were four stories of retail, and now there are two stories. In addition, loft -style units comprising the lower stories of the tall residential building have been wrapped around to face onto a green roof. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if there will be two-story retail at the comers, which there will. Parking requirements and shared City parking also were discussed. Mr. Wolinski asked if there will be a health dub, which there will, in addition to Osco Drug and a number of smaller tenants. Chair Brzezinski asked about the plaza at the comer of Davis and Sherman, which will be set back to allow for window shopping and will include landscaping, planters, and possibly an outdoor cafe. Chair Brzezinski asked about the space at the comer of Davis, which is to be determined. She suggested tying it to Fountain Square or making a financial contribution to its rehabilitation, which could be a give -back to the community in light of decreased retail space and City parking in this revised proposal. Mr. Wolinski asked if the cost of the revised project Is the same as the last proposal. Mr. Terrell stated that it will be roughly $170 million. Mr. Friedman asked about the start date. Mr. Terrell stated that they are hoping to demolish the garage next month and start foundation work by August/September if financing is in line. Chair Brzezinski asked about building materials, which will be brick with some cast stone. She stated that previous planned developments had specific building material samples to present to City Council. She also asked if the south and west elevations had changed, which they have not. Discussion followed on the need to see all elevations, building material samples, and possibly a model. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned preliminary approval, and Mr. Atterson seoonded. The motion passed with Chair Brzezinski, Mr. Nagar. Mr. Hallen, and Mr. Friedman opposed. Respectfully submitted, Susan Gudedey and Tracy Norfleet Planning Division SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JUNE 2, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Dennis Marino, Paul D'Agostino, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski, Wafter Hallen, Frank Aguado, Arthur Alterson (Acting Chair), Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, James Edwards Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Tracy Norfleet Since Chair Brzezinski was absent, the Committee noted a quorum was present, and nominated Mr. Alterson as Acting Chair. The minutes for May 26, 2004 were approved. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 800 Elain Road Revision to Final Construct a mixed -use building containing 248 dwelling units with retail on the first floor. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Matt Cison (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Cison stated that he is proposing minor changes to the parking garage. He showed on the elevations where metal will be replaced with channel glass. Mr. Marino asked if this will still mask the parking structure, which it will. Mr. Wolinski stated that he has received calls and emails from concerned neighbors, and he asked how they will be affected. Mr. Cison stated that the change should not affect light, and the timing is good since move -in is scheduled for July. Mr. Marino asked if the proposed glass is being used elsewhere on the building, which it is. Mr. Cison indicated where on the elevations. Mr. Wolinski asked if the screening will remain throughout the life of the building, and Mr. Cison stated that the declaration states that the condo association cannot change the exterior, balconies, or building's design. Mr. Wolinski asked if the storage locker will be covered, which it will. Mr. Friedman asked for a sample of the glass, which was not available. Mr. Hallen asked about the wall shown in the parking area drawing, which will be painted black and aid in screening lights, cement columns, etc. Mr. Friedman stated that the fluorescent lights and other parts of the parking area can be seen now. Discussion followed on whether the proposed screening will be adequate. Mr. Alterson asked if there will be an opaque barrier at every point, but it will just be at the northeast comer in response to concerns from nearby neighbors. Discussion was then opened to the audience. Mr. Donald Gecewicz, 1860 Sherman, stated that light shining through was not just an Issue for the glass but also for the perforated metal on the parking garage. Mr. Alterson asked if the black wall will be placed behind the glass only, which it will. Elizabeth Dorsett, a resident at Sherman Gardens, asked if the color scheme is complete (e.g., orange and purple), which it is. Mr. Hallen asked about the balcony colors, which will be anodized aluminum with a red strip. Mr. Dahal stated that there is a narrow grass parkway on Elgin with a few parking meters and trees. To prevent the grass from being torn up, he suggested brick pavers with grates around the trees. Mr. Alterson asked if the developer would pay for this and the City would install it, and this would be the case. Mr. Hallen stated that the drop-off area is still an issue since a meter would be removed, causing the City to lose revenue. Mr. Cison asked how the residents will pay in perpetuity for lost revenue and whether the meter could be relocated down the street. Mr. Marino thought the idea of a developer compensating the City for one meter in perpetuity seemed extreme. Discussion returned to the issue of brick pavers vs. courtesy walks for the parkway. Mr. Cison then presented a revised subdivision plat and summarized changes from the previous one. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion to have time to see the lighted garage at night. Mr. Wolinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2812 and 2814 Central Street Final Construct two buildings with Retail space and 9 dwelling units (condominiums) above. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Brian Vitale (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Vitale stated that he received preliminary approval at the March 24 meeting for these two separate but identical buildings. He stated that since the last meeting, the balconies have been brought inward. Revised elevations and a brick sample were provided. He also presented a landscape plan, which showed two trees on the parkway in front of each building. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen asked about windows, which will be clear anodized, aluminum frame. A sample was not available. Mr. Aguado asked if the issue with the proposed canopy over the public way had been resolved, which it has not. Mr. Aguado clarified the process to get it approved by City Council, Mr. D'Agostino asked about the species of trees, but the information was not available. ACTION: Mr. Hallen motioned approval, and Mr. Marino seconded subject to approval of species by Mr. D'Agostino. The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2834 Central Street Final New mixed use building, Retail and 8 dwelling units. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Brian Vitale (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Vitale presented drawings, a brick material sample, and a landscape plan for this property. Mr. D'Agostino stated that the species listed were not on the approved list, but they could work out something. Mr. Vitale stated that the previous issue with parking has been resolved. Balconies have been relocated to the side of the building. He will resolve the canopy issue at this building at the same as the other two buildings (2812 and 2814 Central). Mr. Wolinski asked about the construction schedule, which will be same as 2812 and 2814 Central. Mr. Wolinski stated that accumulated litter at this site must be cleaned up. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to Mr. D'Agostino's approval of the species. Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2450 Main Street Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior renovations to Sam's Club. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ron Rees (Sam's Club Representative) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Rees presented elevations and drawings for the proposed renovation of Sam's Club. The major exterior change is the addition of a loading canopy with a 14' clearance on the west side of the building. Mr. Hallen asked about the RV space indicated on the drawings, which is where concrete will replace asphalt for servicing RVs. Mr. Wolinski asked if the cart area on the south side will be reconfigured for more convenience, but this is not in the current proposal. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, and Mr. Wolinski seconded. Mr. Edwards amended the motion to be subject to checking with the Fire Department (e.g., location of the fire connection, canopy height obscuring the strobe light). The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1945 Darrow Avenue Preliminary and Final Create open, off-street parking area for religious institution (Faith Temple Church of God in Christ). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Anthony C. Moody, Sr. (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Moody stated that the major change has been the relocation of disabled parking closer to the church. Mr. Hallen asked if drainage has been addressed, which it has. Mr. Aguado stated that the proposal is zoning compliant. Mr. Marino asked if the wrought iron fence is all around the parking lot, which it is. He asked if it will be gated, which it will in the evenings for security. Ms. Jackson stated that it was granted as a condition of the ordinance. Mr. Marino thought that this broke with the tradition of not gating private property and noted that similar requests had previously been denied. He was concemed it could set a precedent. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval, and Ms. Jackson seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Marino opposed. SPAARC 1813 Demoster Recommendation to ZBA Type 2 restaurant - Pick a Cup PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Carol Kent (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Kent stated that she is proposing to open a coffee house that also serves food. She Is hoping to offer poetry and open-mic nights and to involve local high school theater groups. DISCUSSION: Mr. Marino asked about expected hours of operation, which tentatively will be 7am-10pm. Mr. Wolinski asked if she has run a coffee house in the past. She has not, but she has over 10 years of coffee shop experience. Mr. Alterson asked about operations, and Ms. Kent presented drawings showing the layout (e.g., areas for tables and chairs, an informal seating area, a stage, a servicing area that will also handle to -go orders). Because there will be wait staff and non -disposable service items, discussion followed on whether this was a Type I or II restaurant. Mr. Alterson asked how many to -go items she estimated in her business plan, which is 20-25% (mostly morning coffee). This places the business in the Type 11 category. Mr. Alterson asked if she had talked to the Alderman and neighbors. She has contacted Alderman Jean -Baptiste and will follow-up. Mr. Wolinski pointed out the current problem with litter, which she is aware of since she lives down the street from the site. Mr. Alterson asked if she has the site under lease, which she does. Mr. Walczak asked about the seating capacity, which will be around 50 people. Mr. Marino asked about parking, which is to be determined. Mr. Aguado asked about a sidewalk cafes, which may be possible next year. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Attendees: Committee Members: Design Professional: Other Staff: SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JUNE 09, 2004 APPROVED C. Brzezinski, A. Jackson, A. Alterson, D. Marino, J. Brewer, R. Walczak, J. Wolinski, S. Levine, S. Nagar. W. Hallen, F. Aguado, D. Spicuzza, C. Ruiz, S. Guderley Chair Brzezlnski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the June 2, 2004 meeting were approved, with Chairman Brzezinski abstaining. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 800 Elain Road Revision to Final Construct a mixed -use building containing 248 dwelling units with retell on first floor. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Matt Cisan, Optima, Inc. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chairman Brzezinski stated that the committee's action on the proposed revision to the final site plan had been tabled at its last appearance, pending some committee members' observation of the conditions at night. DISCUSSION: Chairman Brzezinski and other committee members confirmed that they had observed the project site during the evening. The chairman noted that, in changing from the use of all solid materials at its base, this building had improved its image and did not appear to come down as a tower on a big, heavy base. Mr. Cisan stated that had been the intent of the revision. The Chairman asked Mr. Cisan about the status on the parking meter issue. He stated that he had left a message with David Jennings to explore the possibly of modifying the surface along the curb, in order to provide a courtesy walk near the meters. ACTION: A motion was made to grant final site plan and appearance review approval to the proposed revision. The motion was seconded and approved. (6-0-2). S. Levine and R. Walczak abstained from voting. SPAARC 808 Main Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a detached one -car garage in the rear yard PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Therese Waldowski GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Waldowski stated that she proposes to construct a one car, 12' x 20' garage in the rear yard of her property. This will necessitate a major variation from the setback required between a garage and a principal structure. DISCUSSION: Ms. Waldowski stated that she did not feel that this project would have an effect on neighboring properties, because the yard and new garage would be enclosed within an existing, 6-foot high rear fence. Chairman Brzezinski asked whether access to the garage was gained via Main Street or a rear alley. The applicant stated that access to the proposed garage would be via an easement over a parking lot in the rear of the property. She showed pictures of the parking lot, adjacent city alley and their relationship to the subject property. A. Alterson asked whether the applicant has a copy of the easement agreement, other than that shown on the property's plat of survey. Ms. Waldowski stated that the only document depicting the easement is the plat. The plat shows an L-shaped easement running east to Sherman Street and south to the city alley between Elmwood and Sherman Avenues. Ms. Waldowski stated that she has been using this as a means of access to the property's rear parking pad for 27 years. Chairman Brzezinski noted that the pictures of the rear parking lot show an area that is clearly used customarily as access in this location. However, she advised the applicant that she will need to demonstrate legal access in order to obtain an access permit and advised her to bring whatever documentation she had, including to the fact that she's used this for the prior 27 years. A. Alterson asked the applicant to check the property owner's records for a copy of the title insurance policy or an easement agreement. Ms. Brzezinski asked if she had heard from any of her neighbors as a result of the City's public notice or if she had separately approached her neighbors about the proposed project. Ms. Waldowski indicated that she had not. ACTION: Based on testimony that access to the rear of this site has been gained via the parking lot to the south for the past 27 years, photographs showing a clear access way to this site, and the demonstrated need for a garage, there was a motion to recommend approval of the request to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and approved (8-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 9, 2004 SPAARC 823 Clinton Place Recommendation to ZBA Construct an addition to front entrance and construct 2-story addition with rear deck. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ronnie and John Walker GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicants stated that they wish to add a small addition to the front of their house and a 2- story addition to its rear. In order to do so, they need two variations. The first is from the maximum lot coverage permitted for their property, which is 30%. Their proposed addition will result In a lot coverage of 37.8%. Second, they wish to retain a roofed stairway in the rear of their home. This extends into a required side yard and requires a major variation in order to remain. DISCUSSION: The applicants stated that they have met with their neighbors to explain their proposed project and have received no objections. The project is scheduled to go before the Preservation Commission on June 15t'. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (8-0). SPAARC 824 Emerson Prellminary and Final Construct 1-story building for use as a drive -through banking facility for First Bank & Trust PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Joseph J. Behles, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Behles stated that this facility will be located on the former site of Russ's Automotive at the intersection of Benson, Emerson and Elgin. This is a drive -through facility, with vehicles entering from Emerson and leaving via a right -only exit onto Elgin. DISCUSSION: Mr. Behles stated that the bank has a cooperative cross -access agreement with the restaurant to the south. This agreement will allow vehicles making deliveries to the restaurant to cross the bank property in order to share the right -only exit onto Emerson. The site plan calls for the closing of existing open curb cuts along Benson in order for landscaping to be added along this frontage. Staff noted that there was a curb cut still indicated on one of the elevations and that it should be eliminated. There will be an ATM machine at the far outbound lane. There will also be a single lane immediately adjacent to the SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 9, 2004 3 building for regular drive up customers and two pneumatic lanes with overhead delivery. The building is less than 1,000 square feet in area, constructed of brick and curtain wall. Sections of the glass will be bullet-proof. A small vestibule on the south side of the building will accommodate a walk-up window and an ATM machine. The building is a little taller than average. Its parapet is 42 inches high, so as to function as both a safety rail and a screen for a rooftop unit. Building materials are brick, anodized aluminum and steel for the drive -up canopy. All lights in the canopy will be recessed. Site lighting will be fixtures mounted on ten -foot tall poles in five locations on the periphery of the site. The fixtures are designed to throw light downward. W. Hallen observed that there would be a need for shields on the lights along the eastern property line to prevent any light from intruding onto neighboring properties. In discussion landscaping of the site, R. Walczak voiced a concern for good visibility from Benson. Mr. Behles noted that the site is now unattractively under -landscaped and he wants to get as many plantings in as possible. The plan calls for shrubs, canopy trees and some perennials at the southeast, southwest and northwest comers of the property. Chairman Brzezinski asked if Parks & Forestry staff had had a chance to review the proposed plant materials. S. Levine quickly reviewed the list and said that the plant materials listed were reasonable. Shrubs listed along Benson were designed to stay relatively small- dwarf lilacs and daylilies — which should accommodate the visibility issue. The Chairman asked about the addition of flowering plants in the northeast comer of the site. Mr. Behles stated that the bank was receptive to the addition of plant materials and that all of the landscaping would be irrigated. White -Way will handle the signage and is scheduled for the Sign Review Board meeting in July. W. Hallen asked the applicant whether they had addressed a concern raised previously by R. Dahal about the Elgin Road access point. Mr. Behles stated that they are working with Mr. Dahal on this matter. S. Nagar stated that he would discuss the driveway location R. Dahal. Frank Aguado noted that the prior plan had shown the walk-up vestibule on the north side of the building, in a location immediately accessible from the handicapped parking space. As it is now shown, someone using the handicapped space would need to traverse a drive -up lane to enter the building. Chairman Brzezinski stated that this design would not meet the meet the intent of the Illinois Accessibility Code. Mr. Behles response was that the bank would likely require the restaurant to reserve one handicapped spot in its parking lot for the bank's use, as part of its access sharing arrangement. J. Wolinski noted that the project had received a special use permit to operate. Therefore, the facility must be established within one year of receiving that permit. Mr. Behles stated that he will be replacing sidewalk on all frontages. The chairman asked him to indicate detectable warning in front of the driveways on the plans. SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 9, 2004 4 ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan approval subject to review and approval of the landscape plan, approval of the location of the exit onto Elgin, and the provision of the handicapped parking space along an accessible route. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously (8-0). SPAARC 1575 Oak Avenue Preliminary and Final Window replacement for multi -family dwelling PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Richard Hikezic, general contractor GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Applicant proposes the removal of the existing steel casement windows and their replacement with aluminum double -hung windows. DISCUSSION: Staff discussed the great difference between the appearance of the existing steel windows and the proposed aluminum double hung windows. They compared the 'before' appearance shown by photos with the 'after' depicted by a rendering. Although double hung, the proposed window units are not divided 50%-50%. Staff asked whether they had looked at replacement with casement windows. Mr. Hikezic stated that they had already ordered the windows shown. Chairman Brzezinski asked whether the screens for the double hung windows are mounted on the exterior. Mr. Hikezic stated that they were. The Chair noted that screens would be another significant change in appearance caused by this window choice. W. Hallen asked whether the existing windows were out- or in -swinging windows. He was informed that they are out -swinging, with the screens mounted on the inside. Mr. Hallen added that another alternative they could have considered was the introduction of fixed sections of windows. He noted that the building currently has a combination of both fixed and operable windows. W. Hallen stated that the thing that makes the building interesting is the variable pattern of windows that creates a rhythm within each bay. Chairman Brzezinski felt that the change in window style would detract from the building's appearance, as would appearance of exterior mounted screens. She was told that only the bottom of the window is operable and would have a screen. Staff asked whether the glass would be clear or tinted. Mr. Hikezic stated that it would be tinted lightly. J. Wolinski asked whether this was a rental or condominium or apartment. He was told that it is rental. Staff acknowledged that they did not object to changing to more energy efficient or easily cleaned windows, but that they felt part of the problem should also be selecting the best design solution. Chairman Brzezinski suggested retaining big lights of fixed glass where they currently exist and using casement, or even double -hung, windows in the existing sash openings. Mr. Hikezic stated that they had made their selection from stock windows and had not considered custom windows. He reiterated that the windows had already been ordered. SPAARC Meeting mores — June s, 2004 5 Chairman Brzezinski noted that the building's design included a change in the color of the brick at the spandrel, to achieve a desired design effect. The replacement of the windows, as proposed, negates this design. She encouraged them to go back to the owners and ask them to consider other options for windows. ACTION: A motion was made to table consideration of this project until the contractor can ask the owner to consider the possibility of installing a similar pattern of windows. This would include a combination of a large, fixed glass panes and operable units, sized to fit the existing casement openings. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (8-4). SPAARC 1745 Orrington Avenue Preliminary and Final Window replacement for multi -family dwelling PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Martin Merel GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Applicant proposes to replace existing white painted, wood double -hung windows with multi- channel, white vinyl windows with aluminum storm windows. DISCUSSION: There are 6 units in the building. The units are rental, but the building Is titled as if they were condominiums. Only those windows located within the building's masonry area and wood bays will be replaced; the porch windows will not be replaced. The existing windows are not divided into smaller panes. ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (7-0). SPAARC 1710 Orrinaton Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Erect canopy signs and a tall building identification sign. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing two signs. One is a tall building identification sign at the top of the eastern elevation of the building. The second is signage on the drive -through canopy. DISCUSSION: The high building sign is proposed to be 263-sq. ft. and requires a variation from the area requirement of I GO sq. ft. The area counted is a box made by the length and tallest letter; however, the sign does not cover all of that area. The scale drawing of the sign was discussed and seemed consistent with the Hilton and the Best Western. SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 9. 2004 6 . �. The canopy sign requires several variations from the sign ordinance: the top of the sign exceeds 15' 6'; the lettering is not flush with the canopy surface; signage covers 65% of the vertical surface of the canopy (15% is permitted); and usage of lettering higher than 4" is not permitted on a canopy surface which is not parallel to a street. Staff noted that while signage on this canopy is appropriate, the proposed size of the lettering looks out of place. Chairman Brzezinski noted that in this situation the 15% requirement would probably be too small, but that the proposal needs to be reduced. J. Wolinski noted that the canopy regulations are written for window awnings and therefore not really appropriate in this case. Because the structure in question has columns. it cannot be viewed as a marquee. Chairman Brzezinski believed that the committee should recommend a 25% reduction. J. Wolinski felt that the size of the NO" caused the greatest design problem. Chairman Brzezinski agreed that the O was too large, but felt that the rest of the sign could still be reduced by I S%. ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval subject to the canopy sign being reduced in area by 25-40%. The motion was seconded and approved (7-1). J. Wolinski voted nay. Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderiey SPURC Meeting Ndes — June 9, 2M SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JUNE 16, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, Walter Hallen, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski, Frank Aguado, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Sat Nagar Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Carlos Ruiz Chair Brzezinski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the June 9, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 645 Custer Avenue Conceot Change of use to 16 dwelling unit multiple family dwelling (condos) and 4 attached single family dwellings (townhouses). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Steven Lome (Owner) and James Nagle (Architect) GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Lome is proposing 16 apartment units (condos) and four townhouses (total of 20 dwelling units). The development will include penthouse units and a rooftop garden. Chair Brzezinski asked about the zoning analysis, and Mr. Aguado stated that it has been submitted. The property is currently zoned MU, and the project will be a planned development. A model and photos of existing conditions were provided. Mr. Nagle presented a site plan and described the layout and design of the new structures, building materials (masonry/veneer), and parking configuration (30-space ventilated garage). Discussion followed regarding the alley. Mr. Hallen asked about the payback to the City, per the planned development ordinance, and discussion followed. When asked about price points, Mr. Nagle stated that they are estimated to range from under $400.000 to $550,000. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned concept approval, and Mr. Friedman seconded. The motion passed with one abstention. Mr. Alterson suggested working with Alderman Feldman throughout the process. Mr. Aguado clarified what was needed to complete the zoning analysis. SPAARC 2021 Lee Street Preliminary and Final Link two buildings, expand parking area and consolidate parcels for CE Nishofl & Co. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Richard Abrham (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Abrham stated that he is proposing to link two buildings at grade, expand parking, and consolidate the parcels. He previously appeared before the Committee with a proposal for a loading dock but then opted to route trucks to a different loading dock and put in a cul-de-sac to limit truck traffic in the nearby residential area. A site plan and elevations were provided. Chair Brzezinski suggested that the proposed link have more windows. Since there are no sidewalks in front of the complex on Lee Street, she also suggested extending the sidewalk to the comer. The parking area also was discussed. The parkway will have trees, and the south wall will be resurfaced with landscaping in front of it. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned preliminary and final approval subject to increasing the number of windows in the link to a minimum of eight, extending the sidewalk to Grey Avenue, and planting parkway trees with a minimum spacing of 35'. Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Multiple Locations Preliminary and Final Construct accessible ramps and exterior improvements at several Northwestern University buildings (1810 /1812 / 1818 Hinman Avenue and 1914 / 1940 Sheridan Road). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Andrew McGonagle (Northwestem University) and Anne McGuire (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. McGonagle stated that they are proposing to install ADA-accessible ramps on several Northwestern University buildings located in the historic district: • 1810 Hinman: The proposed ramp will be located off the rear parking lot. • 1812 and 1818 Hinman: One ramp accessing both buildings from the rear is being proposed as the least intrusive option. It has been reviewed by the Fire Chief. A bike rack behind the buildings will be relocated so it is not visible from the public way. • 1914 Sheridan: The front porch will be repaired at the same time as the new ramp is constructed to replace a temporary metal ramp. Chair Brzezinski thought additional landscaping was needed. • 1940 Sheridan: The proposed ramp will be located at the rear of the building. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned preliminary and final approval subject to a Northwestern University architect review the proposals for the possibility of mitigating the ramps with landscaping. Mr. Friedman seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. SPAARC 1049 Hinman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Install an air condenser unit 5' from the street side property line. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Susan Sneider (Contract Purchaser) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Sneider is proposing to install a quiet air condenser unit that will be landscaped. A variation is needed since the site has been built up, and placing it on the roof would make it too dangerous to service. Photos and drawings were provided, and the proposal has been approved by the Preservation Commission. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2313 Thaver Street Recommendation to ZBA Demolish single family residence. Construct two story single family residence and existing two car detached garage to remain. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Douglas Lasch (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing house and build a smaller house because the foundation is deteriorating, and the layout does not meet the owners needs. A variation is needed for the roof overhang. Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors have been consulted, and the owners are in the process of doing so. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval, and Chair Brzezinski seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Alterson voting 'nay.' SPAARC 1575 Oak Avenue Preliminary and Final Window replacement for multiple family dwelling. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Richard Ziko (Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Ziko stated that since he last appeared before the Committee, he has met with the owner to discuss replacing existing windows with picture windows, and the owner agreed. They will be double hung, light tint, with screens on the lower part. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval, and Mr. Alterson seconded. The vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JUNE 23, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Stefanie Levine, Sat Nagar, Waiter Hallen, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arlova Jackson, Frank Aguado Other Staff: Tracy Norfieet Chair Brzezinski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes ftom the June 16, 2004 meeting were approved. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 3200 Grant Street Final Construct garage additions to townhouse units (Presbyterian Home, Trinity Court), phase 111. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Nancy Tolaw (Director, Presbyterian Homes) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Tolaw stated that there are currently 57 townhouses and 28 garages, and 29 additional garages are being proposed. The townhouses are in sets of three, so to avoid having three garage doors in a row and to maintain the residential scale, buildings needing garages will have a double garage at one end and a single garage at the other end. The original driveway layout for several of the double garages has been altered due to maneuverability issues. This has increased the amount of asphalt but has not substantially changed the amount of landscaping. Site plans and elevations were provided. Mr. Nagar asked if all units are occupied, which they are. He asked about the average number of units under construction per year, which has varied depending on turnover. Front additions also were discussed, and photos were provided. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned final approval with a recommendation that changes to the garage be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator. Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 734 Weslev Off -Agenda Item I Recommendation to ZBA Construction of a new porch. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Christiana A. Djuric (Owner) Page 1 of 2 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Ms. Djuric distributed photos of the existing house and a historic photo showing that it used to have a porch. A variance is needed to construct the porch. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA, Chair Brzezinslci seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Page 2 of 2 SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JULY T, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Sat Nagar, Frank Aguado, Paul D'Agostino, Walter Hallen, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Ron Walczak, John Brewer, Rajeev Dahal, Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, Carl Caneva (Health Dept), David Jennings Design Professional: Other Staff: Hans Friedman Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the June 23, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 540-48 Weslev Avenue Recommendation to City Council Resubdivision into three lots of record. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: William Jannes (Contract Purchaser) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Jannes stated that he is the contract purchaser of two vacant lots to the north of a currently occupied lot with a frame house. He is proposing a resubdivision into three buildable lots under the zoning ordinance. A plat of survey and photos were provided. A zoning analysis was completed before the contract purchase. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about access if both properties were developed, which would be through the alley (no new curb cuts). Mr. Nagar asked if Mr. Jannes would own all three lots. He would own the two presently vacant lots, and the current owner of the third lot would remain as its owner. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Chair Brzezinski asked about existing trees on the two vacant lots, and Mr. Jannes stated he hopes to keep as many of them as possible. Pepe 1 of 3 SPAARC 824 Emerson Recommendation to Sian Board Erect wall and freestanding signs for "First Bank 8 Trust". PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that the site currently occupied by Russ' Auto will become First Bank & Trust, which is proposing a canopy with two signs and three freestanding triangular signs. The canopy signage will be less than 10% of the area. A plat of survey was provided, and Mr. Hallen pointed out the location of the freestanding signs. Discussion followed on the location of the three freestanding signs and whether all/any were needed. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to approve all signs but the freestanding ones since they are not necessary. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 636 Ridae Recommendation to City Council Resubdivision into two lots of record. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ana Wolfe (Architect) and Gail O'Hara (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that the applicant is his neighbor and briefly described the project. He noted that the second lot cannot be accessed by the alley, so there will be a curb cut on Ridge to get to the garage. Chair BrzeAnski asked about the easement shown on the plat of survey. Ms. O'Hara stated that the plat is incorrect, but she did not have the correct one with her. Mr. Aguado stated that the zoning analysis shows compliance. Mr. Dahal asked about the garage door orientation, and Ms. Wolfe stated that they will face each other. Mr. Alterson asked about paving, which will be pavers with grass. He noted that 45% is the maximum, and there Is a bonus for using pavers. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to recommend approval of the subdivision with the easement shown subject to Ms. O'Hara demonstrating ownership to the alley. This was seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1000 Davis Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for a Bakery, "Benison's Bakery". Since the applicant was not present, Chair Brzezinski motioned to table discussion, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1803 Ridae Preliminary and Final Change use to a parking area for Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Josh Wheeler (Engineer) and John Norwood (Owner) Page 2 of 3 A' GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chair Brzezinski asked if the applicant had submitted for permit. Since they have not, only preliminary approval can be granted. She then summarized the issues from the last time they appeared before SPAARC (e.g., lighting, landscaping, driveways). Mr. Wheeler stated that the big issue is the deed restrictions that preclude digging due to environmental problems. As such, the previous plan with curbs, light poles, and trees had to be modified. The new plan uses striping instead of curbs to direct traffic flow, planters instead of trees, and existing light poles instead of installing new ones. Drawings were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked how the existing tight poles are powered, and Mr. Norwood stated that he has contracted with ComEd to power an existing light in the alley, which should be bright enough to light the parking lot. If not, Mr. Norwood thought that a light could be attached to the side of the church, but he would prefer not to do this. Mr. Jennings noted the existing street lighting and raised the issue of spillover, and discussion followed. Chair Brzezinski asked about disabled parking, and Mr. Wheeler thought the spaces could be moved to the curb with the City's permission. Chair Brzezinski agreed since this could get around the issue of the lot's slope. Mr. Alterson thought that the ramp was in the back of the church and suggested moving the disabled parking there. Mr. Norwood agreed. The landscape plans were then discussed. Mr. Jennings suggested curbed islands tilled with soil, which could provide more landscaped area than planters. Mr. Wheeler noted that such an island could not accommodate different plants than the planters. Mr. D'Agostino noted that islands could pose a drainage issue, and discussion followed. Mr. Dahal noted that the height of the planters could pose a traffic issue. Mr. Jennings and Mr. Nagar noted that the City is willing to waive internal detention requirements for cost, location, slope, etc. Chair Brzezinski did not favor this. Even though the change of use is good for the church. the previous owner (BP) should clean up the site first, and the City should not allow a contaminated site to remain in downtown. Discussion followed on the future developability of the site. Mr. Norwood stated that had the site been cleaned up, this would have increased the price of the site, and the church could not have afforded to acquire it. Mr. Alterson raised the issue of ice forming across the sidewalk. Chair Brzezinski added that the sheet -icing problem results from the lot's extreme slope and for this reason, the internal detention requirement should not be waived. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski stated that for final approval, the drawings provided need more detail, and materials also should be addressed. Mr. Nagar motioned preliminary approval subject to landscape plan review by Mr. D'Agostino, and the resolution of lighting issues. Chair Brzezinski added that they should review the location of disabled parking. Mr. Alterson seconded, and the motion passed with Chair Brzezinski voting 'nay.' Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Page 3 of 3 APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES J U LY 14, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Frank Aguado, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Walter Hallen, Sat Nagar, Stefanie Levine, Adova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the July 7, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1603 Orrinaton Avenue Concept New and renovated retail storefronts for north and south plazas. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: David Reitman (Attorney), Lee Golub (Developer), Michael Newman (Developer), Steven Yas (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Yas stated that the proposal is for 1603 and 1629 Onington (former Borders). They are proposing to utilize the existing rotunda with additions to it that will be lower than the rotunda (e.g., comer retail at street level). This will create two smaller plazas around the rotunda. They also are proposing exterior changes to the former Borders store, including renovating the storefront and adding ground level retail space and a glass link from the former Borders to the lobby of the building on the adjacent site. The link will have stairs and elevators to both levels of underground parking and possibly have an escalator to second floor retail. The existing ramp to underground parking in front of the site will be relocated, and there will be a surface parking lot behind the glass link. The valet location also will be moved. Site plans, elevations, a birds -eye -view drawing, and a model were provided. DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson asked about the change in the amount of parking. There will be a loss of two spaces in the underground lot and a gain of 22 surface spaces. Mr. Hallen asked about the change in retail square footage. An estimated 16,000 sq ft of retail space will be added to the current 33,000 sq ft of space (total of 50,420 sq ft). Mr. Friedman asked about the linWs Page l of 6 materials, which will be glass and aluminum similar to the existing lobby. Chair Brzezinski asked if the glass will be tinted, which is to be determined. Mr. Hallen asked about zoning variations, and it will be a planned development. Mr. Alterson asked if they have submitted for a zoning analysis, which is in progress. Mr. Friedman asked why they were removing the skin of the former Borders. Mr. Yas stated that it is rusting, the brick needs repair, and the proposed design provides more light. Mr. Marino asked about the change in plaza square footage. Mr. Yas estimated that 10,000 sq ft will be lost from the south plaza, and roughly 7,500 sq ft will be lost from the north plaza (e.g., a 2/3 total reduction). The total footprint of the proposal is increasing from 40% to 60% (includes the former Borders). Stefanie Levine noted that the surface parking lot behind the glass link is accessible only from the alley and that the lot is a dead-end. She asked who will be using the lot. It will be for short-term retail parking. She thought there could be a problem if the lot was full and motorists had to reverse into the alley to get out of the lot. Chair Brzezinski asked if the proposed comer retail addition to the rotunda could be swapped with the lot, but doing so could make it diffc uft to lease. Mr. Nagar stated that the issue of turning around in the lot can be worked out. Mr. Alterson asked about security in the lot, and Chair Brzezinski suggested that the developers keep this in mind. Mr. Hallen noted that it will be visible through the link and from the retail shops. He was concerned about truck traffic in the alley and suggested doing a traffic count. Mr. Marino added that the amount of time that trucks are there also is an issue. Mr. Marino stated that while the plaza may not be usable space, it serves as visual relief and open space. Mr. Yaz summarized how the proposal relates to the plaza across the street at the Chandler Building and stated that the proposal creates two plazas that are more hospitable than the existing ones. Mr. Hallen stated that the two existing plazas do not relate now. Chair Brzezinski agreed with the need for open space but thought there could be an issue of requiring this developer to respect existing plazas when Sherman Plaza will be built to lot line without a plaza. She asked if surface parking was the highest/best use for the space behind the glass link. Mr. Alterson thought that the parking lot was a better use than the existing plaza, plus it would still maintain the openness of the area. Mr. Marino asked for more Information about retail and restaurants. There will only be retail on the north side, and there will be retail and possibly a restaurant on the south side. Mr. Marino thought there was more of a need for high quality retail given 65+ downtown restaurants and loss of open space. Mr. Ruiz did not think that the surface parking lot behind the link should be thought of as open space since it does not add to the fabric or pedestrian enjoyment of downtown. Mr. Yas explained how other aspects of the proposal contribute to the fabric/pedestrian enjoyment of downtown (e.g., aligns with Chandler plaza across the street, utilizes the vacant rotunda and former Borders, provides comer retail to animate the street, creates two usable plazas, constructs glass link that accounts for the change in elevation between the former Borders and the rotunda while respecting existing design and materials). Chair Brzezinski added that relocating the ramp to underground parking in front of the site is a huge improvement to the street and pedestrian access to the site. She also noted that consideration should be given to making the sidewalk on Davis wider. Mr. Yaz stated that he will consider it, but it may pose a problem structurally. Page 2 of 6 ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned concept approval subject to review and revision of the parking lot turn- around issue, which was seconded. Mr. Marino suggested holding the vote until the pre - application conference to allow for a site visit and comparison to the previous proposal. Chair Brzezinski agreed since this is a significant proposal for a downtown block. Mr. Nagar withdrew his motion. Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion, and Mr. Friedman seconded. The vote was taken, and it was unanimous. The pre -application conference was tentatively scheduled for two weeks from today. SPAARC 602.608 Hinman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct two (2) four -car detached garages for the existing 4-story 16 dwelling unit buildings. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Jeff Lerner (Attorney) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Lerner stated that the current proposal to construct two four -car detached garages off the alley requires a variance to increase lot coverage and to decrease alley setback from 3' to 1'. When the original project was built, there was outside parking directly west, but it has recently been developed into residential that includes parking. The property to the south is a park. As a result, the only pass -through in the alley will be the residents at his location accessing the proposed garages. A site plan and photos of the site were provided. DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson asked why the garages were not built as part of the original project. Mr. Lerner stated that the original project was envisioned with open space and while there was anticipation of what might be developed to the west, nothing was definite. He added that they already received a variance for the original project for lot coverage. Chair Brzezinski noted that this type of situation resulted in a change to the zoning ordinance to address parking in these types of developmen`s, but this project pre -dates that change. However, she was concerned about the one -foot setback from the alley. Mr. Hallen noted that the parking spaces as designed would be very difficult for users to maneuver into. Chair Brzezinski stated for the record that she must abstain from voting since the same developer built her building, but she wanted to note her concern about encroachment on the alley. Ms. Jackson stated that she had received an email from a neighbor asking about the location of the trash bins if the garage is built. Mr. Lerner did not think it would be a problem to put them back where they are now after construction. However, their location during construction is to be determined. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to resolution of the traffic and trash bin location issues, but it was not seconded. Mr. Nagar stated that he needs to do a site visit to determine the safety of backing out of the proposed garages. Mr. Alterson asked if the garage could be moved back to allow for a three-foot setback, and Ms. Levine pointed out a wall in the photos Page 3 of 6 that would preclude this. Mr. Alterson stated that there is more of an issue with the alley setback variation than the lot coverage variation. Discussion followed. Mr. Marino made a recommendation to continue discussion to the next ZSA meeting to allow for the Traffic Dept. to do an appropriate study of the alley setback issue. Mr. Alterson seconded, and the motion passed with Ms. Jackson voting 'nay' and Chair Brzezinski abstaining. SPAARC 1508 Sherman Avenue Prellminary and Final Interior and exterior alterations to building occupied by Coldwell Banker Real Estate Office. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mehran Farahmandpour (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Farahmandpour stated that the proposed exterior changes consist of removing graffiti, tuckpointing, and replacing/relocating openings on the alley side only (not the front of the building). An existing opening will be closed with masonry, an existing window will be converted to an exit door, and the boarded -up garage door will become a block glass window. Chair Brzezinski asked if the door will swing out, which it will. She stated that it cannot swing over the alley. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to recommend approval subject to the door not swinging over the alley. Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2320 Pioneer Road Major Renovation and three story addition to Crown Park. Pre -Application Conference The Swedish Retirement Association / Three PROJECT PRESENTED BY: John Malarkey (Attorney), Susan Morse (Administrator and Executive Director), Marvin Lofquist (Chair), John Gray (Project Manager), Tracey Schnick (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski summarized the process for a pre -application conference and noted that the Chair of the Plan Commission, Lary Widmayer, was present. Mr. Malarkey introduced the development team and stated that this is a planned development, and they are requesting a zoning change from R4 to R5. Mr. Lofquist stated that the Swedish Retirement Association/ Three Crowns Park has been in operation for over 100 years. After looking at their governance structure, they decided that Three Crowns Park would be the operating entity and that the Swedish Retirement Foundation would be created as its parent (a non-profit organization). He stated that over the years, they have been Evanston -based. While they have broadened their client base, they have been operating at a loss. Thus, the proposed renovation and expansion is in hopes of being able to stay in Evanston and to continue providing middle-market/afford able care. Page 4 of 6 Ms. Morse stated that they are a continuous care retirement community with independent, assisted, and skilled health care. The missing piece is a memory support unit, which is part of this proposal. She stated that they currently have roughly 100 residents, many of whom are from Evanston or have family here. She added that when they changed their name, they also changed their address to 2323 McDaniel since visitors had difficulty finding them at the 2320 Pioneer address. Ms. Schnick stated that she is the new architect and has made revisions based on information she received from the previous architect regarding SPAARC's concerns from the last meeting. She presented a site plan and summarized what has changed since then. They are proposing to renovate and expand the Landstrom Building and construct a unit along McDaniel. A portion of it will be four -stories around a courtyard. It will have a traditional roof that keeps with the character of traditional Evanston buildings. Views of the Pioneer Building, a landmark, will be maintained. Also, the amount of surface parking has been decreased, and below grade parking will be provided. Chair Brzezinski asked if the buildings on McDaniel will act as the entry point and have security, which they will not. Instead, there will be a drive -up entrance with security at the north end of McDaniel with some surface parking. Ms. Morse stated that this will be the first time the facility will have a formal entry. Mr. Alterson asked if the Preservation Commission has seen this proposal, which they have not. However, they have seen the previous one. Mr. Alterson asked if the zoning analysis has been done. Mr. Aguado stated that it has been submitted but some information is missing. Mr. Marino asked if there has been a neighborhood meeting. There have been several meetings that involved 40-50 people, and the Aldermen from the two affected wards have seen this proposal. Chair Brzezinski commended them for increasing living space by reducing surface parking and providing underground parking. Mr. Widmayer, Chair of the Plan Commission, asked if the building on McDaniel covers parking, which it does (below grade parking). Chair Brzezinski appreciated the traditional 3-4 flat style of the building on McDaniel but suggested giving some articulation to the u-shaped center portion. Mr. Hallen thought that the proposed one-story link between the Landstrom building and the Pioneer building was appropriate since it affected the historic building very little. Mr. Friedman suggested a corridor connection since it would be even less obtrusive. Mr. Marino asked if they are anticipating any future growth, which they are not at this time. Mr. Alterson asked about the number of parking spaces added. There will be 138 total underground (currently, there are 60-70 surface spaces). Mr. Nagar asked about their timeframe. Ms. Morse estimated it will take a year to market before they go for financing. Mr. Friedman suggested designing the foundations to accommodate a few more stories for future growth, but Ms. Schnick noted that soils were bad. Mr. Marino noted that the site is in a single- family neighborhood and that he would not want to see them go taller. Mr. Ruiz requested a model for future meetings. Mr. Nagar noted that the increase by 92 units may require upgrades to the water and sewer line. Chair Brzezinski noted that the planned development requirement of a give -back to the City may not apply since they are a non-profit organization. Mr. Marino added that they are respecting the existing landmark Pioneer building. Page 5 of 8 Chair Brzezinskf asked about the servicing area. Ms. Schnick stated that the location will not change and explained truck traffic access. Ms. Morse added that they had considered relocating it to McDaniel, but it would generate too much traffic. Chair Brzezinski asked if food and laundry are handled onsite, which they are. Mr. Atterson noted that getting a map amendment may be difficult due to uncertainty of future use should the site come up for redevelopment. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to approve the revised concept (not zoning). Mr. Alterson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Page 6 of 6 -4- SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JULY 21, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Paul D'Agostino, Ron Walczak, Sat Nagar, Adova Jackson, Arthur Afterson, Dennis Marino, James Wolinski, John Brewer. Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Moms Robinson, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezlnski noted a quorum was preosant and began the meeting. The minutes from the July 14, 2004 meeting were approved. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 1823 Church Street Preliminar►► and Final Proposed wall painted mural. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Geri Palmer (President/CEO, Zion Institute for Creative Programming) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Ms. Palmer stated that she is the President/CEO of a new arts organization in Evanston. The organization received a grant in May 2004 from the City of Evanston's Cultural Art Fund for several murals to be painted this summer by at -risk youth. When she appeared before SPAARC for approval, a list of signatures from the community and a sketch of the mural were requested. Chair Brzezinski noted that she appeared in February 2004, and discussion was tabled to give time for residential outreach and to see a sketch and a video about the program that Ms. Palmer offered to show. Mr. Alterson asked about an existing mural on a fence on Church Street, which her organization was involved with. Mr. Wolinski asked if that mural needed approval from the Public Art Committee, which it did not, but she did seek their approval for the proposed mural since the grant was from City funds. Chair Brzezinski asked if the grant for this project came from CDBG funds, which it did not. Chair Brzezinski clarified that the project is for at -risk youth and asked how they are identified. Ms. Palmer stated that they were identified through referrals from colleagues and from the Evanston Police (e.g., youth that need to do community service). Chair Brzezinski asked about the timeframe for completion. If approved, this mural will be painted in the next couple of weeks, and another is anticipated to be completed by the end of August. Mr. Wolinski Page 1 of 4 asked Ms. Palmer if she represents ECDC, which she does not, but she attends their regular meetings and has scheduled a special meeting to show them the sketch on July 24. She added that the building owner is on the ECDC board. Mr. Alterson asked if her organization's relationship to ECDC is like a contractor, which it is not. Rather, both groups are involved in revitalizing the area where the mural will be located, and this project is viewed as a prelude to revitalization. Mr. Wolinski asked about long -tern involvement. Ms. Palmer stated that the youth targeted for this project have done graffiti, so the goal is to motivate them to express their art skills in a different way. Chair Brzezinski suggested a maximum timeframe for the mural so that it does not look unattended and has closure. She asked about the surface and whether it could be painted white, which it can. Ms. Palmer was amenable to a sunset date for the mural because the focus of the project was the youth involved. Mr. Alterson clarified that this is a comer location, which it is. Ms. Palmer then passed around a sketch of the proposed mural, a list of signatures of those who approve it, and photos of the existing mural on the fence on Church Street and the initial sketch to show that they painted what they proposed. Mr. Marino asked if the City has a policy on murals or if they are handled case -by -case. He noted that there have been bad experiences in the past. He supported this kind of expression but was not sure if it is part of revitalization. Ms. Palmer noted the amount of support for the project, including the owner, ECDC, and those on the list of signatories. Mr. Hallen agreed with Mr. Marino but thought this was a special case and that requiring it to be painted white after a certain amount of time was fine. Ms. Palmer stated that the Public Arts Committee approved it. Chair Brzezinski thought that SPAARC should defer to the Public Arts Committee and thanked Ms. Palmer for seeking their approval. Mr. Robinson thought the City should have the right to remove the mural if so deemed. Mr. Wolinski clarified that the existing and proposed murals define the area as being in a state of transition. He supported the project for six months or so since it provides an opportunity for at -risk youth and reduces anti -social behavior, but he thought that the mural should be removed once revitalization happens. Chair Brzezinski stated that she is normally not in favor of murals like this but since youth will be Involved, she suggested approving it for six months with the requirement that it comes back to SPAARC for approval to remain longer. Mr. Alterson asked about conditions on the grant for the mural (e.g., is it for a piece of public art that should not be temporary or for a program for at -risk youth). Ms. Palmer was amenable to reappearing before SPAARC to get an extension for the mural since it would be a good evaluative tool for reporting on how the grant was used. Mr. Nagar asked about the process. Ms. Palmer stated that youth have had sessions with a teaching artist to determine a positive message they wanted to express (e.g., diversity), and the sketch resulted from this process. It provides an opportunity for them to express themselves in a way they cannot now and before they choose to do so illegally. Chair Brzezinski asked if they will be responsible for cleanup and maintenance, which they will. Mr. Aguado noted that a six month sunset date would be in January, which could prevent it from being painted over. Mr. Hallen stated that it must be 40 degrees and rising for the mural to be painted over. Mr. Brewer suggested a year timeframe. Chair Brzezinski thought six months was a general marker and could be flexible. Mr. Walczak agreed and stated that he is not PV9 2 of 4 usually in favor of murals but thought this was different, especially in light of youth Involvement and signatures supporting the project. Ms. Jackson stated that she had a problem with the entire conversation because requiring the applicant to reappear before SPAARC to evaluate if it is working is difficult to determine, especially since the mural is located in an area where no SPAARC members live. She did not think SPAARC had that authority. Rather, neighbors will decide if it is appropriate, and this will be reflected in the number of calls the City receives about it. Mr. Robinson asked if Aldermen have approved the project. Ms. Palmer stated that Alderman Jean -Baptiste is on ECDC, which approved the project, and Alderman Kent was at that ECDC meeting. Mr. Alterson noted that SPAARC does not review other public art projects. Mr. Hallen thought that a sunset date was important. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned approval, and Mr. Brewer seconded. The motion failed (4 -5). Mr. Alterson motioned approval with a sunset of one year with the possibility of an extension, and Chair Brzezinski seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Marino voting `nay.' SPAARC 2500 Green Sav Road Final Demolish dwelling and construct a four story, eight dwelling unit building with accessory parking. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mike Obloy (Developer), Arthur Cottrell and David Dodt (Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski summarized issues from previous SPAARC meetings (e.g., ramp slope, trash enclosure, walk width). Mr. Wolinski asked about current site maintenance, and Mr. Obloy stated that they have been there once a week. Mr. Hallen asked if there have been any changes since the last meeting, which there have not. Mr. Cottrell showed samples for the base material and a brick sample (king size to reduce costs). Chair Brzezinski asked about mortar, which will be natural or brick color (to be determined). A window sample was not available, but it will be bronze or black, aluminum case with wood interior. Mr. Ruiz asked about window light. There will be simulated divided light in the front and the cloister, and the side and rear windows may have snap -in grills (to be determined). Mr. Ruiz thought it would be better without them, and Chair Brzezinski added that they could break or be lost. Mr. Marino asked Mr. D'Agostino if he has seen the landscape plan, which he has. He suggested a substitute for the citrus trees. Mr. Hallen asked about lighting the parking area and sidewalk to the rear. Mr. Obloy stated that photometrics were not available for all proposed fixtures, and Mr. Cottrell provided information on alternatives. Discussion followed. Chair Brzezinski noted the need to balance security with the effects on adjacent neighbors. Chair Brzezinski asked where the air conditioning unit will be located, and it will be on the roof. Mr. Aguado asked about the placement of electric utilities, and there are overhead wires. ACTION: Page 3 of 4 Mr. Marino motioned approval with the condition that wires be placed underground, and Chair Brzezinski seconded. The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2612 Noves Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct Iwo -story addition at rear of house. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tim Pareti (Owner) and Tom Reidy (Builder) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Pareti stated that he is proposing a two-story addition to a two -bedroom home that is a legal non -conforming structure. Chair Brzezinski asked about the issue for zoning, which is the sideyard setback. Site plans and photos of the existing structure were provided. Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors supported the project, which they do. Mr. Aguado asked if central air conditioning will be installed, and it will not. Mr. Alterson noted that if they do so in the future, a 1 p' setback is required. Chair Brzezinski asked if any windows will be less than 3' from the property line, which they will not. Materials will mimic those of the existing structure. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Pegs 4 of 4 APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JULY 28, 2004 Attendees: Committee Membem: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Dennis Marino, Rajeev Dahal, James Wolinski, Judy Aiello, David Jennings, Stefanie Levine, Sat Nagar, Arlova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, John Brewer, David Stoneback Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Morris Robinson, Donna Spicuzza, Susan Guderley, Tracy Nortieet Chair Brzezinski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the July 21, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 11603 Orrinaton Ave. Concept and Pre -Application Conference Now retail storefronts for north and south plazas. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Stephen Yas (Architect), and Gregg Graines (Attorney), Bruce Armstrong (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Yas briefly described the proposal (e.g., new storefront for former Borders plus a retail addition and a glass link to the adjacent building, rotunda additions providing comer retail, modifications to existing north/south plazas, relocation of the ramp to underground parking, provision of additional on -street parking and a surface lot behind the glass link that will be accessible from the alley). Drawings and a model were provided. At the July 14, 2004 SPAARC meeting, the main issues raised were setbacks and sidewalk widths. There is a 24' setback from Davis/Orrington to align with the Chandler building across the street. The sidewalk on the north side of Davis is 10,' and the sidewalk on the south side measures 9'6`. Mr. Alterson asked if the sidewalk on Orrington changes elevation, which it does not. It will be widened. Mr. Hallen asked if there have been any modifications to the surface parking area behind the glass link. There is now a hammerhead turnaround, and the retail storefronts will have more glass for security reasons. Mr. Dahal asked if there will be a gate on the garage entry, and there will be one on both the entry and exit. Page i of 8 Mr. Friedman asked if there will be stairs to the rotunda from the street, and the existing ones will be re -done and widened. Ms. Aiello asked if there will be an ADA ramp entry from Davis, which there will not. Rather, there will be an ADA accessible route from Orrington. Mr. Marino did not think the sidewalks were wide enough. Mr. Yas thought that maintaining the building lines was important for a downtown location like this. Chair Brzezinski suggested reducing some of the on -street parking on Davis to make room for more trees, and Ms. Aiello suggested a bigger knuckle at the comer of Davis to allow for another tree. Mr. Marino thought that the on -street parking was needed. Mr. Yas stated that KLOA is doing a traffic/parking study. Ms. Aiello asked if it will include the alley, which it will. Chair Brzezinski asked about signage, and Mr. Yas showed on the drawings that there will be signage band on Orrington. He thought there will probably be awnings on Davis. Chair Brzezinski thought that retailers may want bigger signs, and Mr. Yas stated that they might draft sign guidelines to address this. Mr. Wolinski thought this might be a good site for blade signs like the ones on Maple because they are pedestrian -friendly. Mr. Halien thought that these signs could be 2'x3' non -illuminated. He added that 909 Davis and 1640 Maple have sign schemes and require tenants to organize uniform signage. Ms. Aiello asked if there would a unified signage plan for this proposal, which there will. Chair Brzezinski thought that the curve of the glass link was not in keeping with the rectilinear form of the adjacent structures. Mr. Yas stated that the curve accounts for the transition in elevation, but Mr. Friedman suggested that stepping it down instead. Mr. Ruiz asked why brick was being proposed, and Mr. Yas stated that it is in keeping with structures to the north. Mr. Philip Padawer, Design Evanston, asked about rooftop equipment. Mr. Yas stated that they will be reusing the existing equipment because it is fairly new, but they may provide additional screening. Mr. Padawer asked about the roof of the curvilinear part of the link. Mr. Yas stated that they would like to use glass, but it will probably be solid. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski summarized the main issues discussed (e.g., trees at the comer area of Davis, better screening of rooftop equipment). Ms. Aiello if the Alderman and Plan Commission have been notified, which they have. Chair Brzezinski noted that Mr. Widmayer, Plan Commission Chair, was present at the July 14, 2004 meeting. Chair Brzezinski then closed the pre -application conference. Mr. Nagar motioned concept approval, noting previous comments. Mr. Marino seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Friedman voting 'nay.' SPAARC 1100 Clark St. Preliminary and Final Now construction of an 8 story, 237 dwelling unit residential condominium building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom Roszak (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked which address is being used for this project. Mr. Alterson stated that the City is using 1100 Clark, and Mr. Nagar stated that the new one has not yet been issued. Page 2 of 8 Chair Brzezinski asked if there have been any revisions to the proposal. Mr. Roszak stated that there have been no major changes, but he has met with Kevin Kelly regarding fire alarm systems, access, and putting a fire hydrant in the center vs. fighting fires from the perimeter (more likely). Mr. Roszak also had discussions about water service. Discussion followed among Mr. Stoneback, Mr. Brewer, and Mr. Roszak regarding water needs. Chair Brzezinski noted that the project is in for permit for Building A, and Mr. Roszak stated that Building B will be next. Mr. Alterson asked about the scope of the permit, which is for the foundations for phase I. Mr. Roszak distributed drawings, photos, and other information for all proposed buildings. Chair Brzezinski thought that bigger drawings were needed since the site is so significant. She asked for a clarification on the drawings in terms of how traffic and pedestrians are separated out in the development. Mr. Roszak pointed to bollards on the drawings. Discussion followed on how the bollards in the center part of the development affect fire and ambulance access. Ms. Aiello asked about fire lanes, and discussion followed. Mr. Roszak stated that there is a mountable curb off Ridge, and the fountain in the center will automatically shut off if a vehicle comes near it. Mr. Jennings noted that there is a requirement to resurface Oak/Clark, and discussion followed on cost estimates. Mr. Roszak presented building material samples, including regular size tan -colored brick, limestone, and copper -colored panels. Balconies will have galvanized grey frames with dear glass panels. Ms. Aiello asked about the amount of copper -colored panels that will be visible from Ridge, and Mr. Roszak pointed it out on the drawings. She asked about graffiti and scratching, and Mr. Roszak stated that the panels are fixable. Chair Brzezinski thought they should be copper -clad instead of copper -colored. Mr. Friedman asked about the grids shown above the trees in the drawings, which are rooftop terraces. He thought this was misleading and noted that the actual footprint of the proposal is bigger than what is shown on the drawings. He reiterated Chair Brzezinski's request for bigger drawings and ones that more accurately show the footprint and massing. Ms. Aiello added requestod that they also bring setback and sidewalk widths to the next meeting. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned preliminary and final approval for Building A for foundation work only. Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1021-1027 Dodae Ave. Preliminary and Final reconversion from 16 dwelling units 8 and exterior afterations. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Dan Shapiro (Attorney), Barry Newdelman (Architect), Uri Raanan (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Shapiro stated that the project had received concept approval a year ago, and a zoning analysis has been done except for location of the air conditioner unit. Mr. Newdelman stated that they are proposing exterior work, including removing second -floor balconies and stairs at the front/rear since they are duplexing the units. For landscaping, he stated that they will be Page 3 of 8 keeping two existing trees, with some new ones between the buildings. There also will be landscaping where the stairs were removed. Chair Brzezinski thought the landscape plan needed more detail. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wolinski asked about the price point, which is estimated at $275,000. Mr. Stoneback asked about water service. Mr. Newdelman stated that he has talked to the Water Dept., and there will be new service off the main. Chair Brzezinski asked about lighting. There will be uplighting at the front bushes, and the address on the front will be lit. Chair Brzezinski asked about parking. There will be 1.5 spaces per unit located in a rear parking area, which will be lit off the building. Mr. Stoneback asked about drainage in the parking area, and they will continue using the existing drainage system. Mr. Alterson asked if there will be a townhouse association. Ms. Spicuzza noted that this project does not fall under the condo ordinance. Mr. Shapiro stated that a townhouse association can be created. Mr. Aiterson asked about trash removal. Mr. Newdelman stated that there are two containers in the back now and noted that the number of units is decreasing by half. Ms. Aiello thought that the City is responsible for removing trash from townhomes, and Mr. Jennings agreed. Ms. Aiello noted that there needs to be space for eight rollout carts in the alley. Discussion followed on how to get rollout carts to the alley if the parking area is full since there is not a path. Mr. Shapiro thought that an easement or other solution was possible. Mr. Jennings suggested requiring each unit to be responsible for getting their rollout cart to the alley, possibly by going through their own parking space. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to table for further discussion pending a better landscape plan, and Ms. Aiello seconded. Mr. Newdelman stated that he has been waiting for a year to resolve a zoning issue and was issued a permit in February. He requested approval to start construction with the condition that he return to SPAARC at a date certain to present a revised landscape plan and a resolution of the trash issue. Chair Brzezinski agreed and withdrew her motion. Ms. Aiello motioned approval subject to the resolution of landscaping and trash removal issues within one month. Mr. Marino seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Wolinski voting'nay.' SPAARC 1729 Lvons St. Concept Demolish all structures and construct (3 du's) multi -family dwelling. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Neil Davidson (Developer), Lester Blair (Owner), Bruce Johnston (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Davidson stated that the property is a nonconforming lot, and they are proposing to demolish the existing buildings and construct a more appropriate building. The current building has three units, which are not fully occupied. The proposal is for three condos facing Lyons requiring variations. Drawings and photos were provided. Page 4 of 8 DISCUSSION: Ms. Aiello asked about the site's zoning, which is R4. Mr. Hallen noted that they will need numerous variations, and Mr. Aguado stated that there will be 12 variations. Ms. Aiello asked if they could build something smaller, such as a two -flat. Mr. Blair stated that they are trying to maintain three living spaces. Mr. Marino stated that he had visited the site and thought the proposal was not out of scale since it is a comer lot. Mr. Hallen asked about the number of parking spaces, and there will be six. Mr. Aguado asked about the alley, and Mr. Davidson stated that they are seeking to vacate the 10' alley (City property) to incorporate the land into the project. Mr. Jennings noted that they cannot leave a dead-end stub. He clarified that he was not opposed to the alley vacation, but the problem with the dead-end must be resolved. Discussion followed on the alley issue. Mr. Blair stated that the purpose of the project is to improve the area and keep prices down. Ms. Aiello asked about the price point, which Mr. Davidson estimated at $275,000-$300,000 or lower with City assistance. Mr. Wolinski stated that he could not agree with the townhouses but thought that a two -flat could work. He added that taking down the existing structure could be a benefit since it has numerous problems. He thought that any new structure should use brick and stone. Since there are several multi -family units in the neighborhood, a two -flat would be better than townhomes. Ms. Aiello added that the properties to the east are two- and three -flats, and the ones to the north are single-family homes. She asked about the height difference, which will be an estimated 8'. She was concerned about introducing a new type of housing into the neighborhood and requested the heights of neighboring properties. Chair Brzezinski suggested noting this on the drawings. She thought the massing was too much for the lot and while the design was nice, it could be a shock to the neighborhood. Ms. Aiello asked if the addition could be removed and the remaining structure rehabbed, but Mr. Marino stated that it has too many problems. ACTION: Ms. Aiello motioned to table discussion, and Mr. Alterson seconded. Chair Brzezinski did not support tabling and wanted to deny concept approval. Mr. Marino asked if SPAARC members were tabling discussion based on the proposed three -flat or another issue. Ms. Aiello stated that massing and density were the main concerns. Mr. Marino suggested that SPAARC members visit the site because he thought it could handle three units. The vote was taken, and the motion was passed with Chair Brzezinski voting 'nay.' SPAARC 525 Sherman Ave. Recommendation to ZBA Convert garage to a storage shed and establish one open pariang space in front yard. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: John and Rhonda Darin (Owners) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Darin stated that several contractors have been unable to solve a consistent problem with seepage in their basement. Mrs. Darin noted that they have lived there for 5+ years. Mr. Darin stated that as a last resort, they applied for and received a permit to replace the driveway, but when it was removed, the seepage problem was eliminated. As a result, they are asking for permission to not rebuild the driveway because they are not sure that any driveway material Page 5 of 8 will solve the seepage problem like vegetation has. Mr. Darin noted that the amount of impervious surface has been reduced to 35% from 55%. He added that the driveway was very narrow, requiring them to drive on the neighboring property to access the garage. As a result, they tended to park in front of the house instead. Photos and other information were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski noted that they already have the curb cut, and the proposed change is probably a continuation of the current use because they park in front now. She asked Mr. Alterson if such a narrow driveway (67 wide) would be permitted if proposed today, and he did not think it would. Chair Brzezinski stated that she is normally not in favor of front yard parking, but they are parking there now, and there does not seem to be another solution to the seepage problem. Mr. Wolinski asked what they plan to do with the leftover space, and it will be greenspace planted with native vegetation and other species that absorb stormwater. Mr. Jennings suggested not allowing the parking in front to further decrease the amount of impervious surface, but Mrs. Darin noted that on -street parking is tight because of their proximity to the hospital and the South Boulevard CTA stop. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1803 Ridge Ave. Final Change use to a parking area for Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Josh Wheeler (Engineer), Rev. John Norwood (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Wheeler stated that the issues from the last SPAARC meeting were lighting, location of ADA parking, and landscaping. They spoke to ComEd about using the existing lights. One is a standard Evanston alley light which can be used to light the parking lot. A photo was provided. The other light on the comer cannot be Used, so it will be removed and capped. Mr. Wheeler then showed a letter from the Capital Improvement Board indicating approval to move ADA parking to the rear. A site plan was shown. For landscaping, they are proposing to reuse existing pots from the gas station. Mr. Jennings asked why they are not using curbed planters, and Mr. Wheeler stated that they cannot be anchored under the no -dig limitation on the lot. Chair Brzezinski asked if the pots will be empty in winter, and they will not. Some will have evergreens. Ms. Levine asked about pot size, which will be 3-5' in diameter and about 3' tall. Chair Brzezinski stated that they normally encourage more landscape screening, especially for prominent sites such as this one. She thought it was unfortunate that they cannot get what they would normally require there. Mr. Wheeler noted that it will be greener than what exists now. Mr. Hallen asked if the entrance to Ridge will be obstructed, which it will except for funeral processions. Ms. Levine agreed with Chair Brzezinski on the landscaping issue and suggested cast -in -place planters like those used for rooftop gardens. She thought they should be heavy enough to not need anchoring. Rev. Norwood noted that they are proposing a flat-foot fence as additional screening. Pape 6 of 8 ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to deny the landscape plan because it is not consistent with other parking areas, and it is a prominent site. Ms. Levine seconded, and the motion passed with Ms. Jackson abstaining. Mr. Friedman stated that he would have preferred referring the matter to Ms. Levine for approval rather than denying final approval. Chair Brzezinski thought the site should have been cleaned up by BP, and if the City cannot get what it usually requires from a site, that only highlights the site's problems. Mr. Jennings thought that if the only issue precluding islands is anchoring them, then the applicants should talk to EPA to see if they can open it up and re -seal it. Mr. Wheeler stated that under the agreement, the site cannot be opened up and excavated for 15 years. Furthermore, the landscaping professionals he consulted said that islands will not work. Mr. Hallen requested drawings showing all gates and fences for the next SPAARC meeting. He asked if the fence and gates are all one color, and they will all be black. Rev. Norwood stated that he hoped they could come to a quick solution to these issues in light of the costs of having to consult numerous experts. SPAARC 2408 Orrinaton Ave. Pre ADallcation Conference Change of use for Kendall College site to (19) Detached single family dwellings and (44) Attached single family dwellings. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Bernard Citron (Attorney), Keri LaJeune (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Citron stated that the proposal has been before SPAARC twice, and the proposal seems reasonable since it incorporates some of the community's concerns (although the developer acknowledges that the community still has concerns). He stated that there have been no changes to the elevations or site plan, and they are asking that SPAARC proceed forward with a vote today. Drawings and site plans were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski clarified that in addition to today's pre -application conference, they are asking that SPAARC members vote on concept approval. Mr. Wolinski noted that at the last meeting, Mr. Buono did not think he could sell million -dollar homes quickly. Mr. Wolinski checked the statistics for recent months and found 17 homes that sold for over a million dollars. Thus, he disagreed with Mr. Buono and thought this should be a single family neighborhood needing minimum 7,500 sq ft lots. Mr. Ruiz thought they should give consideration to being in a historic district and noted that an application to landmark the existing administration building was discussed by the Preservation Commission and continued to the August meeting. Mr. Citron acknowledged that the site is on the boundary of the historic district and that one of the buildings is a proposed landmark. He noted that they have not had a chance to comment. Discussion followed on parking, trash removal, fire and emergency access, water service, and stormwater detention. Mr. Hallen asked about visitors, and they are expected to park on the street and use the network of pedestrian walkways to access interior townhomes. Page 7 018 ACTION: Ms. Aiello stated that they have been here twice and have not made any changes. She motioned to deny the concept because it does not meet the context of the neighborhood and is too dense. Mr. Friedman seconded. Chair Brzezinski stated that she agreed with the density problem but was open to the possibility of not all lots being sized as single family because a market exists for smaller lots. She also thought consideration should be given to guest parking and traversing the site, reducing the number of townhomes, and possibly converting the proposed landmark to condos. Ms. Aiello agreed. Public comment was taken. Mr. Bruce Enninbach stated that the development was inappropriate since the surrounding area is single family, and there are other options for empty nesters. Ms. Barbara Janes presented photos of several housing developments built by this developer In denser neighborhoods in Chicago. One photo showed red trash cans along the private road, and another photo showed the lack of guest parking. She polled several residents who were happy with the construction but had opted to live in a denser area. She acknowledged that the City is anxious to get the land back on the tax rolls but encouraged consideration of single family homes for this site. Ms. Judy Fisk spoke to the historic significance of the Administration Building and the status of the landmarking procedure. She thought this was a crucial/pivotal block for Northeast Evanston since it is the boundary of the historic district, and this proposal is inappropriate. She added that SPAARC should consider the future of Sherman Avenue. Mr. Nick Aguwar stated that he was on the task force of citizens who worked with the developer, and they came to a dead-end a few months ago. They said they would consider suggestions, but there is little evidence of that in this proposal. Since the site is in the historic district, he suggested single family homes that bring it back to how it was before Kendall College. He asked what happens R the proposal is denied. Chair Brzezinski stated that preliminary and final approval are required under the ordinance, but a vote on concept approval gives an indication of where the City will go with the project. Mr. Alterson added that the applicant is always free to petition the city for a zoning change. Chair Brzezinski added that there will be additional opportunities for public comment through the Plan Commission and Planning & Development Committee hearings, etc. Mr. Aguwar concluded by saying that this site presents an opportunity to do something great that respects the historic district while also providing single family homes. Chair Brzezinski called the vote on the motion to deny concept approval, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Page a of s APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES AUGUST 4, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Stefanie Levine, Arlova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Frank Aguado Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Susan Guderley, Moms Robinson, Donna Spicuzza, Tracy Nortieet Chair Brzezlnski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minubes from the July 28, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 616 Hartrev Avenue Prellminary and Final Resurface gravel -parking area with asphalt paving. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Judy Prueher (Property Manager) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Prueher presented a plat, site plan, and photos of the existing lot. Discussion followed on the location of adjacent walls, buildings, property lines, striping, and existing tnms/landscaping. Mr. Hallen asked about drainage. Ms. Prueher stated that the parking lot is gravel now, and site is working with the City Engineer to provide detention when it is paved. Mr. Dahal asked about the driveway. A second driveway is proposed to give better access, but they can remove it and jockey cars if needed. Mr. Hallen asked if the lot will be curved, which would slow deterioration. Chair Brzezinski agreed. Discussion followed on c+irbing and landscaping. Ms. Prueher noted the need to balance curbs and screening with the site's location in an industrial area. Chair Brzezinski asked about zoning issues. Mr. Aguado stated that they will meet parking requirements, but there is an issue with setbacks and parking in the front. For the front, Ms. Prueher stated that IEPA encouraged paving this area since the adjacent site used to be a dump. Chair Brzezinski noted that in that case, they may not be able to dig for detention. Ms. Prueher was advised to reconsider curbing and to talk to IEPA about digging. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski noted that paving, draining, and striping the lot is an improvement She motioned approval subject to a physical barrier additional to the planting area to prohibit parking in the area where it is not allowed. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Page 1 of 3 SPAARC 1729 Lvons Street Conceat Demolish all structures and construct (3 du's) multi -family dweldng. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Neil Davidson (Developer) and Bruce Johnston (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Davidson stated that they have incorporated suggestions and zoning concerns from the last meeting and revised the drawings. Mr. Johnston stated that the height has been lowered by changing the way the roof pitches, the plan has been changed to get an offset in the front that orients to the comer, the garage has been narrowed to pull the building back, and the square footage and lot coverage has been reduced. A photo montage of the streetscape was provided to compare the heights, setbacks, and bulk of existing/proposed buildings. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about the variances needed for this revision. Mr. Aguado noted that a new zoning analysis has not been completed for this revision. Chair Brzezinski thanked the applicants for the photo montage. She liked the building materials but thought the proposed building was set too far forward and overpowered the site. Mr. Johnston stated that they can set it back further. Discussion followed on how far it can be set back and the distance to the garage needed for fire safety. Mr. Aguado asked if the alley issue has been resolved, but it has not. Ms. Spicuzza asked if there will be three separate driveways, but there will be one large driveway. Chair Brzezinski noted that there is parking for up to six cars, and the coming and going of so many cars raises safety concerns for pedestrians crossing the driveway. She thought this was an indication of too much development on the site and suggested two units with one driveway leading to underground parking. Mr. Ruiz agreed and asked Mr. Aguado if they are required to build three units at this site, which they are not. Mr. Friedman commented that he liked the floor plan. Chair Brzezinski agreed and thought that the architecture was nicely handled and tried to be compatible with the neighborhood, but she could not get past the garage/parking/pedestrian conflict. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to deny approval. Ms. Jackson seconded and noted that she was against the proposal because the lot coverage percentage is too high. The motion passed 3-2 with Chair Brzezinski, Mr. Aguado, and Ms. Jackson voting 'aye,' and Mr. Daha) and Ms. Levine voting 'nay.' SPAARC 3425 Central Off -Agenda Item / Recommendation to ZSA Sideyard variation for a second -story addition. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mark Seef (Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Seef provided photos and noted that the adjacent properties have the same addition. Ms. Jackson summarized the zoning issue (e.g., sideyard variation for a second -story addition). Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors approve, which they do. Page 2 of 3 ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to recommend approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Mr. Aguado noted the setback requirement if they want to install an air conditioner. SPAARC 715 Sheridan Road Recommendation to City Council Resubdivision of property into two (2) lots of records. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Steve Knutson (Architect) and James Murray (Attomey) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Murray stated that this is a landmark structure on a large lakefront lot (roughly 58,000 square feet) in the historic district. The owner is proposing a new residence on a smaller lot that meets all zoning requirements, including setback, and its architecture respects the existing landmark structure. The project was presented at the last Preservation Commission meeting, but Commissioners were undecided on the project (3 in favor, 2 opposed, 1 abstention, several absent). Mr. Ruiz stated that the matter will be taken up at the next meeting of the Preservation Commission. Chair Brzezinski noted that the Preservation Commission has purview over this area, but she thought it was unfortunate that the garage could be seen. Mr. Murray noted that it actually will not be seen from the street due to a change in grade and the distance to the street. He added that there will be one driveway subject to an easement that will serve both properties. Mr. Hallen clarified that there will be only one curb cut, which is true. Ms. Jackson asked about the easement agreement, which is to be determined. Chair Brzezinski asked if the property owner to the south is aware of the project, and a letter of support was provided. Mr. Hallen noted the irregularly shaped lots that will be created. Mr. Murray stated that in 1991, the owner considered subdividing it into three lots, but this did not go forward. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, and Mr. Dahal seconded. Ms. Jackson thought they should wait to have a recommendation from the Preservation Commission, but SPAARC members decided to proceed with the vote, which was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Page 3 of 3 APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES AUGUST 11, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), James Wolinski, Adova Jackson, Arthur Alterson. Ron Walczak, Stefanie Levine, Rajeev Dahal Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Donna Spicuzza, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the August 4, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1729 Lvons Street Concept Construct a 3 dwelling unit multi -family dwelling with 5 off street parking spaces. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Neil Davidson (Developer) and Bruce Johnston (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Johnston stated that the issues from the last meeting were the front setback and cars backing over the sidewalk. They measured the setback for the east property, which is 9', and decided to align both setbacks. Mr. Johnston presented an updated photo montage. The parking area also has been reconfigured for three covered spaces with an adjacent open parking space and another open parking space across the driveway along a balcony. The driveway is configured so that cars in the three covered spaces and adjacent open parking space back out in a way that orients them to face forward when they pull onto the street. Mr. Dahal thought that the parking area was tight and was concerned with the open parking space along the balcony. Discussion followed on what the zoning ordinance and traffic standards allow for parking space and aisle widths. Mr. Friedman suggested a carport with room for four cars. Chair Brzezinski agreed and thought this could allow for more landscaping. She thanked the applicants for their cooperation in making these changes. Mr. Hallen noted that they narrowed the driveway and made the balconies smaller. Mr. Wolinski stated that since this is affordable housing, residents may not own as many cars as market -rate residents. He noted that the Indusionary Housing Committee has discussed parking requirements for affordable housing projects. He suggested lowering the amount of parking by getting a variance to eliminate one of the open parking spaces. He acknowledged that it is rare to request eliminating an off-street parking space, but this situation is unique Pees 1 or 6 since it is for affordable housing. Chair Brzezinski agreed and thought it would make the parking area safer. Mr. Alterson asked about the amount of impervious surface, which is roughly 75%. Mr. Alterson noted that eliminating the open parking spot could provide additional green space. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski acknowledged that issues still remain, but in light of the photo montage showing alignment with the adjacent property, she motioned concept approval. Mr. Friedman seconded. Mr. Wolinski asked about the elimination of the open parking space, but Chair Brzezinski did not amend her motion. Ms. Jackson commended the applicants for the improvements and stated that she applauded affordable housing in Evanston, but she thought these residents should have the same amenities as market rate residents, including open space. She thought this proposal was too dense. The vote was taken, and the motion passed with Ms. Jackson and Mr. Alterson voting 'nay.' SPAARC 911-913 Maple Avenue Prellminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling for condo conversion of existing multi -family residence (6 dWs). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mike Tiran (Owner and Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Tiran is proposing exterior changes, including converting the front windows to Juliette balconies. Chair Brzezinski asked about the windows, which are double -hung. She asked about the balcony doors, which will be vinyl to match the existing windows and will open to the inside. Chair Brzezinski asked about landscaping, but a plan was not available. Chair Brzezinski noted that this project was before SPAARC on November 19, 2003 and April 7, 2004, and discussion was tabled pending a landscape plan. Discussion followed on what is required in a landscape plan. Chair Brzezinski asked about the balcony railings, which will be black metal. She asked about the front door, and the existing door will be kept. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned preliminary and final approval subject to a landscape plan defining the species and size and which must be approved by SPAARC before Certificates of Occupancy can be issued. Ms. Levine seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2020 Green Bay Road Recommendation to Sian Boar! Erect a freestanding sign, for "New Age Gallery". PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that on this part of Green Bay Road, there are four residences between two commercial areas, and one is proposing to put up a sign for a small business. Chair Brzezinski asked if it will be non -illuminated and free-standing, which it will. A drawing of the sign was provided. Page 2 of 6 ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned denial, and Mr. Alterson seconded. Mr. Friedman asked if the small business was in operation, and Mr. Hallen stated that the owner just purchased the house. Mr. Aguado stated that the new owners were aware that it was zoned residential. The vote was taken, and the motion passed with Chair Brzezinski, Ms. Levine, and Mr. Dahal opposed. SPAARC 800 Elain Road Recommendation to Sian Board Erect a freestanding sign, for 'Optima Horizons' PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that Optima Horizons is proposing to place a red pylon sign at the property line by the main entrance. A drawing and site plan indicating its location were provided. Mr. Hallen noted that it is at the lot line, but he did not think this presented a problem. Chair Brzezinski thought it was tall but that €t was a good to have a sign for visitors and orientation along Elgin. Discussion followed about materials and maintenance. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2535-2541 Prairie Avenue Prellminary Condo conversion and reduction of dwelling units from 49 to 39. Demolish existing detached garage, establish open parking spaces, new rear porch and balconies. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Drew Heindel (Architect) and George Cyrus (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Heindel stated that they are proposing to convert a three-story courtyard building with 49 units to 39 condos by rehabilitating and combining/duplexing some of the units and eliminating existing storefronts (the existing commercial space is a non -conforming use). Mr. Heindel presented a site plan, which includes an 11-space rear parking area. The existing garage will be demolished and replaced with surface parking. A variation is needed for the amount of impervious surface, but the same number of spaces will be kept. Chair Brzezinski asked why the garage is being demolished. Mr. Heindel stated that it is in need of repair, and it is narrow and difficult to maneuver into. Mr. Alterson asked if they will be paving over green space, which they are not. Discussion followed on what triggers the impervious surface rules. Chair Brzezinski asked about windows. Mr. Heindel stated that the gangway, rear, garden level windows have been replaced. The storefronts that are being converted will have different windows, as well as the rear portion where the porches will be. The porches will have a steel frame structure with steel railing or wood. Chair Brzezinski suggested painting the wood. She asked if there will be interior balconies, which is to be determined depending on costs. She asked about the price points, which are estimated to range from under $200,000 for a one - bedroom to around $250,000 for a two -bedroom. She noted that not all units will have parking Page 3 of 6 (39 units vs. 11 spaces). She asked about air conditioning. which will be central air with rooftop condensers. She asked about landscaping. The front is built to the sidewalk, so the courtyard is the only area available. She recommended reconsideration of balconies and requested a landscape plan for the courtyard. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Mr. Walczak seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 843-849 Ridge Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Renovate a 3-story multi -family residential building, add one dwelling unit in the basement, remodel porches and create a new open parking area. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Morton Kaplan (Developer) and Rachel Bomgaars (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Kaplan summarized his experience with similar renovation projects in Evanston and Chicago and stated that this building will have a mix of two- and three -bedroom condos and a janitor unit (not condo). He has worked with the Preservation Commission since this is a landmark building. Ms. Bomgaars stated that they have received a Certificate of Appropriateness for windows and for relocating two stairway porches and separating them into four different porches to gain a larger driveway and rear parking area with eight spaces (there are two spaces now). There also will be an electronic fence with a gate. She presented drawings and showed the location of the porches, parking area, and trash area. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski thought the trash area was too small for two dumpsters serving 21 units. Ms. Jackson asked for a clarification of the number of units, and there will be 21 condos, a janitor unit at the garden level (not condo), and one commercial space that will be converted to residential for a total of 23 units. Chair Brzezinski asked about windows, which will be wood. She asked if they will be insulated and simulated divided light, which they will. Ms. Bomgaars added that they will be custom made to match what is there. Ms. Jackson asked how parking spaces will be allocated, which is to be determined. Mr. Dahal noted that the parking area is tight. Mr. Alterson asked about the current commercial space, and Mr. Kaplan clarified its size and location and showed a photo. Chair Brzezinski asked if the building will be sprinklered, but Mr. Kaplan was not planning on it. She noted that this is a building code issue. She asked Mr. Dahal for his opinion on the parking area. He suggested moving the turnaround area or having angled parking, but it still will be tight. Chair Brzezinski agreed and noted that it is good to get spaces off the street, but the parking area must work. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval subject to Traffic Engineering approval of the number of spaces (not necessarily the number proposed). Mr. Alterson seconded. Ms. Jackson noted that it is worsened by adding another unit. Chair Brzezinski agreed but noted that it is part of the volume of the building, and adding onto the building would be even worse. The vote was unanimous. Page 4 of 6 �PAARC 1800 Ridas Avenue Pre-Aooiication Conference Change of use from Office I Religious Institution to thirty-four (34) condominium dwelling units. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: James Murray (Attorney) and Bob Mihelich (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Murray stated this property has recently been acquired, and the owner is seeking to revitalize the existing structure (refenestration, tuckpointing) and convert it to 34 condos with two additional stories as part of a planned development. There will be patios and balconies, and the parking area is in compliance (55 spaces proposed, 54 required). Mr. Hallen asked about the mix of units, and roughly one-third will be one -bedroom. Mr. Alterson asked how many units are allowed, which is 70. They are proposing fewer units to keep the open space. Mr. Mihelich stated that this will be an adaptive reuse of the existing building with loft -style condos and two recessed additional floors with condos. It is sensitive to the neighborhood and a good transition between the residential and downtown areas. They are reconfiguring the existing parking, and there also will be a notable amount of landscaping and outdoor terraces. Elevations, a site plan, and floor plans were provided. The building also will have green features, including a terrace with trees on the roof of the existing building and a green screen on the addition for vines. A photo montage with a view from Asbury was presented. Chair Brzezinski requested a winter view. There also will be planters along Ridge, but Mr. Dahal did not think the sidewalk was wide enough. Mr. Alterson asked about the building height, which will be 65.' He noted that there is a landmark building to the south. Mr. Friedman asked if the neighborhood had seen the project. Mr. Mihelich stated that they presented the proposal to the neighbors last week. Mr. Friedman noted that they are adjacent to an historic district on the west and south side. He thought that the addition on top of the existing building was a shock because it did not relate to the existing building or to the neighborhood. He thought that neighbors could object for that reason. Mr. Murray stated that 30-40 residents attended the meeting, and there was a positive response. He noted that the new addition is set back from the alley to give deference to the adjacent properties. Mr. Friedman stated that he worked on the existing building in the past, and he thought it deserved better. Chair Brzezinski was open to the proposal and noted that there is a contemporary precedent nearby, but she acknowledged that others may have reservations to the design and manila color of the addition. Mr. Wolinski asked if they had considered a more traditional color or design. Mr. Mihelich thought it was better to set apart the old and new as long as they were complimentary. Mr. Walczak noted that the addition is almost concealed by landscaping, so the design will not be observed much of the year. Chair Brzezinski requested a four -season view of the building and a material sample for the green screen. Mr. Hallen noted that the exits may not meet the code. Ms. Levine asked how they will install the terrace with trees on the existing building. Mr. Murray stated that they are working with engineers for irrigation and drainage. Ms. Levine thought it could be complicated and expensive. Chair Brzezinski asked how they are handling the privacy issue for the units on Ridge, and they will be raising the windows to 6' or so. Page 5 016 ACTION: Chair Brzezinski closed the pre -application conference. Mr. Afterson motioned concept approval, and Chair Brzezinski seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Friedman voting 'nay.' Respectfully submitted, Tracy Nodleet Manning Division Page 6 of 6 APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES AUGUST 18, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino. James Wolinski, Rajeev Dahal, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arthur Alterson, Sat Nagar, Dennis Marino. Judy Aiello, David Stoneback Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff. Frank Aguado, Gavin Morgan, Donna Spicuzza, Carlos Ruiz, Moms Robinson, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the August 11, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 222 Hartrev Avenue Concept Construct a multifamily development at the former Shure Brothers site. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Bill Rotolo (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Rotolo noted that Alderman Rainey was present and stated that at a recent neighborhood meeting on this project, reaction was generally favorable. The site is the former Shure Brothers manufacturing headquarters located behind Target at Hartrey and Howard. The factory building and parking lot will be replaced with 80 three-story for -sale townhomes with two -car garages and visitor parking. Building materials will be brick, stone, and siding. A site plan and aerial photo were provided, as well as information on a similar project in Jefferson Park done by the some builder (Concord Homes). The price point for this project is estimated to range from the low $400,000s-$500,000s, and the target market will be those seeking maintenance -free property, mostly young professionals. There is an environmental problem due to contamination from Shure manufacturing processes, but a mitigation plan has been developed, and they are awaiting a go-ahead from IEPA. The amount of traffic is expected to be less than the former use with 500 employees. Discussion followed on traffic signals, access, upgrading Shure Drive, and traffic generated by the shopping center and Vineyard property. Mr. Rotolo stated that KLOA is doing a traffic study. Chair Brzezinski thought that the product was too basio400king. Mr. Rotolo noted the landscaped parking courts and courtyards between the buildings. Discussion followed on Page 1 of 6 open space, and Chair Brzezinski suggested active space. Mr. Rotolo stated that there Is a pedestrian link to an active park to the north. Mr. Wolinski asked about the detention pond, which is 4' below grade. Alderman Rainey noted that this was a big issue for the neighbors, although they liked the setback it provided. Chair Brzezinski suggested leveling out the detention pond and putting tubes underneath, which would allow for better integration with the surrounding neighborhood. She also suggested a more variety in the design of the townhomes. Mr. Rotolo was amenable to these suggestions but noted the need to avoid orientation to Target's loading docks and to provide enough room for screening and noise reduction measures. Ms. Aiello thought there was enough distance from the tracks to shift the project north away from Target. Mr. Stoneback stated that the existing water main under Shure Drive is in poor condition and will have to be replaced/relocated, and Mr. Rotolo agreed to discuss this with City engineers. Mr. Alterson thought there should be porches instead of the canopy entrances, which would allow for more resident interaction. Chair Brzezinski asked Mr. Rotolo if he considered condos, but Alderman Rainey stated that the neighbors did not want this. Mr. Friedman noted a similar case at Chicago and Hinman. Discussion followed on building materials. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned concept approval subject to the green space off Hartrey being level. Ms. Aiello seconded and added the condition that they explore alternatives for variation. Mr. Nagar added the condition for underground detention. Mr. Alterson rioted that they project is not necessarily oriented to a street and could raise issues for policing. Ms. Aiello asked when construction will begin, which is anticipated to be next spring with first occupancy by the end of 2005. The vote was taken, and it was unanimous. SPAARC 2209 Howard Street Concept Extedor site and facade renovation for `Target." PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Scott DeBell (Engineer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. DeBell stated that Target is proposing site improvements since the store is nearly ten years old. The shape of the facade will not change, but the blue/green doors and stripes will be removed, leaving a beige and red exterior with planters in front. They also are proposing to extend the sidewalk out at the front center of the store, and discussion followed on the impact to the front access drive. Site plans, photos, and elevations were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked what will be behind the planters, which will be shopping cart storage. Ms. Aiello did not support outdoor shopping cart storage, and other SPAARC members agreed. Chair Brzezinski asked about installing benches, which will be considered. Mr. DeBell pointed out the round red bollards (2.5' diameter) in front, which are being proposed for appearance reasons. Page 2 of 6 Ms. Aiello suggested breaking up the large parking area with landscaped islands. Mr. DeBell stated that the parking count included some of the spaces in front of Office Depot, so they may not be able to install islands and still meet the parking requirement. He also noted the installation, drainage, maintenance costs for islands. Ms. Aiello did not think there was enough landscaping and noted that the City is in the process of upgrading its landscape requirements. She thought Target should set a good corporate example by upgrading their landscaping per the new requirements. Mr. Marino stated that SPAARC is sensitive to costs but noted that the City contributed $7 million to the creation of the shopping center, and he thought that improving the landscaping would be a good opportunity to give something back on the ten-year anniversary of the shopping center. Alderman Rainey stated that she has tried to talk to Target managers about landscaping, but the response has been that there is no money to provide/maintain landscaping or they are not authorized to do so. She also noted the problem with litter, to which managers have been unresponsive. Mr. Wolinski and Chair Brzezinski acknowledged the problem. Ms. Aiello requested that a regional manager appear the next time the proposal is before SPAARC. Mr. Marino noted the condition of landscaping along Howard and requested consideration of that for next time. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion to give time for consideration of SPAARC's suggestions and to allow for a regional manager to attend the next meeting. The vote was taken, and it was unanimous. SPAARC 515 Main Avenue Preliminary Install 9 roof mounted cellular antennas for "US Cellular." PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Michael McCrery (Attomey) GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. McCrery stated that US Cellular is proposing to install equipment on the roof of the existing building to fix a gap in coverage. Antennas will be painted to match the background and will be screened by filling in the cut-outs with panels matching the existing brick (using brick will add too much weight and could block the signal). Site plans and photos were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about the total height of the proposed screening, which will be about 8.' Ms. Aiello asked if there was another altemative, but the only other alternative is building a tower. She stated that it is already a tall building, but Mr. McCrary noted that the penthouses are higher than the antenna. Chair Brzezinski noted that they are set back from the roof line, whereas raising the parapet would be very visible from the street. Mr. Friedman noted that the cut-outs are part of the building's design, and this proposal will affect the comer of the building. Chair Brzezinski asked about the net change in height, which Mr. McCrary estimated as 3-4 feet, but SPAARC members noted discrepancies on the drawings. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to table pending a sample of the fiberglass panel. Mr. Wolinski seconded. Mr. Friedman asked if other locations on the roof were considered, but space is Page 3 of 6 limited since there the separate air conditioners for each unit are located on the roof. Mr. D'Agostino added that a clarification of the total height is also needed for the next meeting. The vote was taken, and it was unanimous. SPAARC 1029-1035 Davis Street Preliminary and Final Resurface parking area and stripe at an angle. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Michael Ghiselli (Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Ghiselli presented a plat and site plan and stated that the owner is proposing to resurface the existing parking area and stripe at an angle. Discussion followed on driveway width, who uses the lot, and code compliance. Mr. Ghiselli suggested putting a fence in the comer to narrow the driveway and reduce pedestrian/car conflict. Chair Brzezinski suggested a curbed planter with landscaping instead. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion to give time for Mr. Dahal to review the project and for the owner to attend the next meeting. Mr. D'Agostino seconded. The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1930 Ridge Avenue Revision to Final Construct four 4-story mufti -family residential buildings with underground parking. Discuss revision to conditions of previous approval on 11/20/02 with regard to the talmadge vs. davit light fixtures along Ridge Avenue. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Rajeev Dahal (Traffic Engineering Dept) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski stated that when SPAARC recommended approval for new apartments at this location, street lights were discussed, and there was a condition that talmadge light fixtures be installed on Ridge. Mr. Dahal had been concerned with that intersection, and after a site visit, it was decided that keeping the existing fixtures would be better. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned to approve the revision to the final proposal (e.g., keep the existing fixtures). Mr. D'Agostino seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Friedman opposed. SPAARC 1235 Hartrev Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct 110' free-standing monopole for 6 antennas for Sprint PCS. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Kelly Drew (Representative for Sprint PCS) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Drew stated that the project had received concept approval, they have filed a building permit application, and they are seeking preliminary and final approval. Mr. Marino asked if there have been any changes to the proposal, which there have not. Chair Brzezinski noted Page 4 of 6 that the antennas exceed the approved 110' height. Ms. Drew stated that half of the 4' antennas are above the 110' pole, for a total of 112'. Ms. Aiello asked if they had considered other locations, and Ms. Drew stated that they have, and this is the only option. Ms. Aiello asked if they had other towers in Evanston, and there are a handful of others. She was concerned about its visibility and proximity to residents, and discussion followed. Chair Brzezinski asked about installation costs, which Ms. Drew estimated to be around $50,000. ACTION: Ms. Aiello motioned to deny approval, Mr. Alterson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 8434349 Ridqe Off_-Aaenda Item Renovate a 3-story multi -family residential building, add one dwelling unit in the basement, remodel porches and create a new open parking area. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Rajeev Dahal (Traffic Engineering Dept) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Dahal stated that he reviewed the parking issue since the last SPAARC meeting and found that the aisle width is sufficient for small cars to maneuver but could be difficult for large cars. Given that there is a need for off-street parking in that area, he suggested that SPAARC approve it with the condition that buyers be made aware that aisle width is sub -standard before they purchase the space. The other alternative is to approve a smaller parking lot with 4-5 spaces that meets all requirements. For the former, Mr. Alterson noted that variations would be needed. Chair Brzezinski liked the idea of disclosing the sub -standard width before purchase. Ms. Aiello thought it should be in the condo declaration, and Chair Brzezinski suggested it be on the deed for the parking space. Mr. Friedman was concerned about setting a precedent by allowing the sub -standard aisle width. Discussion followed. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval subject to disclosing to owners the substandard aisle width. Ms. Aiello added that subsequent owners should be notified. Mr. D'Agostino seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Wolinski and Mr. Friedman opposed. SPAARC Discussion of Pre-ADD11cation Conferences Off Aaenda Item Mr. Wolinski stated that he and Ms. Aiello discussed the timing of pre -application conferences and whether they should be combined with concept approval. The issue is that several pre - application conferences have been scheduled when SPAARC members had not yet seen the project and then were asked to vote for concept approval at the close of the pre -application conference. Ms. Aiello stated in light of the increased number of planned developments, she thought that SPAARC should review its process to ensure that all applicants are treated equally (e.g., checklist, etc). She noted that the ordinance may need to be amended, and Mr. Alterson agreed. Chair Brzezinski agreed and added that the ordinance has not been reviewed since it was passed in 1993. Ms. Aiello also thought the Zoning Analysis should be completed before the pre -application conference. Discussion followed on the purpose of pre - application conferences vs. concept approval and whether voting should occur at either stage. Page 5 of 6 Mr. Friedman thought that voting on concept approval could mislead the applicant and that the purpose of concept review should be for feedback only. He suggested holding off on a vote until preliminary approval. Mr. Stoneback noted the impacts of large projects on infrastructure and the need to consider this. Mr. Wolinski agreed and thought this should be part of the give - back to the community from these projects. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfieet Planning Division Page 6 of 6 SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES AUGUST 25, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, James Wolinski, David Stoneback, John Brewer, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arlova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, Sat Nagar, Dennis Marino, Ron Walczak Other Staff. Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Moms Robinson, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the August 18, 2004 meeting were approved, Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 1100 Clark Street Preliminary and Final! Construction of an 8 story, 237 dwelling unit residential condominium building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom Roszak (Developer) and Don Wallin (Architect) GENERAL, PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Roszak presented a set of drawings, including a landscape plan and site plan showing vehiclelpedestrian flow and lighting. Traffic enters from Oak and either turns into the parking structure or continues to a drop-off area at a tum-around in the center of the development Mr. Roszak stated that he met with Alan Berkowski, Fire Chief, to discuss fire track access (e.g., mountable curbs, fire lane). Mr. Hallen asked if fire lane materials were approved, and they were. Mr. Marino asked about green space, which is roughly 45%. Mr. Brewer asked if fire trucks can turn around in the circle, but they will pass through the turn -around onto the fire lane leading to Ridge. Chair Brzezinski asked about signage to direct visitors, taxis, etc. Mr. Roszak stated that standard signs will be used to direct traffic at the tum-around, and there will be 15-minute parking signs. The fire lane will be marked with an emergency access only sign. Chair Brzezinski asked for an update on the commitment to provide public art at the plaza. Mr. Roszak stated that he has contacted Evanston High School and the Northwestern Arts Program for rotating temporary exhibits (e.g., 3-4 times/year). Members asked who will be responsible for maintenance and quality control. Mr. Roszak stated that the condo association will decide which pieces to display (it is their property), and the school will be responsible for installation and maintenance. Mr. Wolinski stated that he liked the idea of public art but did not want murals to be included. Mr. Roszak stated that there would be sculptures of limited size and weight and not murals. He added that there will be a bench and trellis on the plaza. Page 1 of 4 Mr. Hallen thought there should be further review of ADA accessibility from Ridge to the four buildings, and Chair Brzezinski recommended getting a letter of approval from Doug Gambel. Mr. Moms Robinson, Economic Development Planner, asked about repav ng Oak, and it is part of the planned development. Discussion followed on the timing and cost of repaving Oak and replacing the water main and whether another hydrant should be installed off Ridge by the fire lane entrance (the Oak hydrant could have low flow if water mains are not replaced). Chair Brzezinski asked about lighting. There will be lighted bollards in the vehicular travel areas (like the ones on Chicago Avenue but silver). A cut sheet was provided. Mr. Hallen asked about lights on buildings, which Mr. Roszak described. The alley will not have extra lights because there are no cars, but the refuse area will be lit. Mr. Walczak asked if bollards and alley lighting were sufficient for security. Mr. Roszak stated that the bollards are bright at night without distracting drivers, and they light the path rather than the whole area. Mr. Walczak asked if wall lights should be added in the alley, but Chair Brzezinski noted that the condo owners will have to pay for them, and Mr. Alterson thought that neighbors might not want them. Mr. Marino noted that there is an alley light program in cooperation with ComEd that can be explored with the new residents. Mr. Ruiz asked about mechanicals, and there will be small condensers on the roof and two electric transformers onsite. Mr. Hallen asked if there will be an emergency generator, and there will not. Chair Brzezinski asked about gas meters, which will be off the alley and along the perimeter behind landscaping. Mr. Marino asked about water meters, which will be inside. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, and Mr. Nagar seconded. Chair Brzezinski was concemed about the public art in the comer plaza and wanted further review of this aspect of the project. Mr. Marino amended his motion with the condition that Mr. Roszak return to SPAARC for review of public art in the plaza. Mr. Robinson asked if it will be three years until the street is repaced, and discussion followed. Chair Brzezinski added the condition that the street must be repaved at the end of the project or sooner if construction stops for more than 12 months. The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1326 Dodae Avenue Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior renovation for Hertz rental car. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Joe Kole (Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Kole presented photos of the existing building, which has four garage doors. Hertz is proposing to replace the first bay with a door and storefront. The finish will match the existing bays, and a building material sample was provided. Chair Brzezinski asked about sidewalks, and the existing ones will be kept. She asked about window/wall signage, and there will be wall signage and maybe a pylon sign. Mr. Wolinski asked if this will be an office or if there will be rental cars onsite. Mr. Kole stated that 4-7 rental cars will be on hand, and additional rental cars will be valeted from other locations as needed. He added that there is space to park 5-6 cars inside the building. Page 2 of 4 nt ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 825 Naves Street Preliminary and Final Exterior alteration to accommodate an ATM. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Vance Pena (Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Pena stated that D&D Dogs is proposing to install an exterior 24-hour Bank of America ATM and presented a photo mock-up of what it would look like. Mr. Hallen asked about security lighting. Mr. Pena stated that it will comply with state regulations. Mr. Marino clarified that it faces east, which it does. He was concerned about the potential for crime and its proximity to the CTA. Chair Brzezinski asked about lighting around the ATM, and there will be one light on the ATM, two lights (down -lit) on the building, and maybe one on the comer for the sidewalk. Mr. Nagar asked if the ATM will encroach on the public way. It will extend 200 but still meet ADA accessibility requirements. Mr. Walczak was concerned that it would be available 24-hours, and discussion followed. Mr. Aguado noted that there is an existing security camera pointed to the seating area. Mr. Pena stated that Bank of America requires cameras at all off -site ATMs. Ms. Jackson noted that the CTA stops running at midnight and thought the ATM should be 24-hours for anyone who needs it. Mr. Robinson noted that the bank could reduce the hours of operation if the ATM is not used enough. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to a 11 pm-6am restriction for safety in this residential area. Mr. Walczak seconded, but the motion did not pass. Mr. Nagar motioned approval for a 24-hour ATM, and Ms. Jackson seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Marino and Mr. Walczak voting 'nay.' SPAARC 1803 Ridge Avenue Final Change use to a parking area for Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Josh Wheeler (Engineer) and Rev. Norwood (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Wheeler summarized what has happened at previous SPAARC meetings and stated that the remaining issue is the landscape plan, which he presented. He stated that is has been verbally approved by Ms. Stefanie Levine, City Landscape Architect. The plan consists of constructing interlocking retaining walls around the lot to create planting areas for trees, grass, and perennials (species were listed on the plan). The plan will be implemented in phases over four years, starting with a planter along Ridge and a fence with gates where future phases will take place. Mr. Nagar noted that other lots do not have fencing and asked why it is needed. Rev. Norwood stated that it is to prevent pedestrians from crossing the lot (e.g., liability issues), and Mr. Wheeler added that it will prevent other traffic from parking there. Mr. Alterson stated that they would need a fence variation, and Mr. Marino noted that Ridge has a history of being open. Rev. Norwood stated that he is willing to not put in the fence since it Page 3 of 4 would save money. Mr. Wolinski asked if the cost savings would hurry the phasing of the project, and Mr. Wheeler estimated that it would cut the time to two years. Mr. Hallen asked about the retaining walls and planters, and Mr. Wheeler described the materials, heights, and how they stay in place. He also showed a photo of a sample retaining wall. Chair Brzezinski was concerned about sheet drainage, and Mr. Stoneback noted that it could contribute to flooding at the Clark/Oak intersection. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval because it is a great enhancement and a special case due to prior use. Mr. Nagar seconded subject to phases 1 and 2 being done at the same time and without a fence. The motion passed with Chair Brzezinski voting 'nay.' SPAARC 1611 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Change of use to a type 11 Restaurant, "Cold Stone Creamery" PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Purav Shah (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Shah stated that exterior changes for this new business consist of a new awning to match those nearby. A photo mock-up was provided. Mr. Marino asked about hours of operation, which will be 11 am to 10 or 11 pm. Chair Brzezinski asked if there will be outdoor benches, and there will not at this time. She briefly informed them of the sidewalk cafb rules and procedures, as well as those for trash and litter. Mr. Marino requested that employees park in the public garage and not on the street. Ms. Jackson requested a menu for the file. ACTION: Mr. Nagar recommended approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 8434349 Ridge Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Renovate a 3-story multi -family residential building and add one dwelling unit in the basement, remodel existing poaches, and create a new open parking area - revised open parking scheme. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ms. Rachel Bomgaars (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION l DISCUSSION: Ms. Bomgaars presented a drawing of the revised panting scheme, and Ms. Jackson summarized changes. Ms. Bomgaars noted that they have made additional space for the dumpsters. Mr. Alterson asked about sprinklering the building, which is still being considered. ACTION: Ms. Jackson motioned approval, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division PV94o(4 APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 1, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arlova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, Paul D'Agostino, James Wolinski, Dennis Marino, Rajeev Dahal Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Wafter Hallen, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the August 25, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 515 Main Street Preliminary Install 9 roof mounted cellular antennas for 'US Cellular". PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Roslynn Schaefer (Project Manager) and Keith Mandoske (Engineer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Schaefer stated that Mr. McCrery presented this project last time and could not be here today. She presented modified drawings and photos. Mr. Mandoske presented a photo of the building from street level and a mock-up of what it will look like with the fiberglass panels in place. He provided a material sample and stated that it will be custom-made to match the building (e.g., color and size of bricklmortar). Chair Brzezinski asked if SPAARC could see a custom-made sample when it is ready, and Mr. Mandoske was amenable to that. Discussion followed on the location of antenna arrays (2 concealed and 1 flush -mounted on penthouse) and equipment relative to the fiberglass panels and at what point it is visible from the street. Mr. Wolinski asked if the condo association approved this. Ms. Schaefer stated that they have approved it subject to the City's approval. Mr. Marino asked about the life expectancy of the fiberglass material. Mr. Mandoske stated that the material has been around for about 10 years, has a life expectancy of 20-25 years, and weathers like brick. Mr. Friedman asked why they are using the fiberglass material. Mr. Mandoske stated that it is RF-transparent, as opposed to brick. Mr. Marino asked about the life expectancy of the technology. The lease is for up to 25 years, but the life of the technology cannot be predicted. Pegs 1 of 2 Discussion returned to the location and height of roof equipment relative to the parapet. Chair Brzezinski applauded the idea of trying different techniques to mask the antennas but thought there was an issue with the equipment being so close to the parapet and that equipment height is not indicated on the drawings. She noted that there is a long view to the west on Main St and to for those headed south -bound on Chicago Ave. She requested a revised drawing showing in elevation how the equipment would show above the comer. She also thought the equipment should be organized neatly rather than scattered in box -like structures. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski motioned to table discussion subject to revised elevations and further discussion of the equipment. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 635 Chicago Avenue Preliminary and Final interior and exterior alteration to accommodate "Bank One" PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Brian Taylor (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Taylor stated that the existing Bank One is planning to become a full -service banking center by expanding into two adjacent storefronts (Kamala Perfumes, which Is closing, and Evanston Cleaners, which is relocating within the same shopping center). Modifications consist of making it into one storefront and relocating the entrance. Materials will match existing. Photos and drawings were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if the entrance door swung out. Mr. Taylor stated that it does, but not over the public way. Discussion followed on rooftop equipment. Mr. Marino asked about the number of employees and where they will park. Mr. Taylor estimated there will be 12 full-time employees, who will probably parts in the lot for the shopping center. Mr. Marino noted that a full service bank might generate more traffic and suggested that employees park elsewhere. Mr. Friedman noted that the lot is busy now. Discussion followed on parking alternatives (e.g., the alley is too narrow, the spaces behind the shopping center are probably for the anchor tenants, the surrounding area is residential). Mr. Dahal suggested a lot on South Boulevard. Mr. Friedman noted that not all 12 employees would be working at the same time. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to employees not parking in the lot, and Mr. Alterson seconded. Ms. Jackson asked how that will be regulated. Mr. Taylor offered to ask Bank One to investigate parking alternatives and commit in writing that they will do that. The vote was taken, and it was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division F*R 2 of 2 APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn BrzezinW (Chair), Arfova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, Stefanie Levine, James Wolinski, Dennis Marino, Rajeev Dahal (Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the September 1, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 815 South Boulevard Constnrct two-story addition, deck and patio. Recommendation to ZBA PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Gary and Karen Anderson (Owners) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Anderson presented photos and drawings of the proposal. The addition is a mudroom in the middle of the rear of the house that will be taller than the first floor. They also will be repairing the railing on an existing porch. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about variations needed, which are percent lot coverage and impervious surface. Mr. Anderson noted that the lot is smaller than Evanston's standards. Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors had been contacted, and Mr. Anderson stated that the adjacent neighbors have provided letters of support. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 515 Main Street Preliminary and Final Install 9 roof mounted cellular antennas for'US Cellular". PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Roslynn Schaefer (US Cellular Representative) and Keith Mandoske (Engineer) Page 1012 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Mandoske presented a series of photos showing how a mock-up of the equipment and screening would look on the roof and from street level and various other points (e.g., Jewel, Metra station). He also presented photos showing existing rooftop cabinets on a site in Dixmoor, IL that are similar to the ones proposed for this site in Evanston. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen asked about the maintenance/duration of the panel material. Mr. Mandoske estimated that without touch-ups, it should last 10-12 years. Ms. Schaefer reiterated US Cellular's commitment to the building owners and the City for maintenance and appearance. Mr. Hallen commended the presentation of the visual impacts, and Chair Brzezinski agreed. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, and Ms. Jackson seconded. Mr. Wolinski noted that antennas are Inevitable and commended the applicants for picking the tallest building in the area and doing all that was asked by SPAARC to screen the equipment. The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1620 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Proposed Unified Business Center signage plan, for "Sherman Plaza'. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen presented drawings of the signage plan. Chair Brzezinski noted that some of the signs are above canopies and awnings. Mr. Wolinski clarified that this is a signage plan and not a signage district request, which it is. Chair Brzezinski did not think she could comment on signage since SPAARC has not seen final elevations or materials. Mr. Wolinski noted that second floor tenancy is still to be determined. Discussion followed. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned to recommend denial, and Mr. Friedman seconded. Mr. Marino suggested tabling discussion pending an explanation of the signage plan and context of the fagade by the applicant at a future SPAARC meeting. Chair Brzezinski agreed. Mr. Friedman withdrew his second, and Ms. Jackson seconded the motion. The vote was taken, and the motion failed with Ms. Levine, Mr. Wolinski, Chair Brzezinski, and Mr. Marino opposed. Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion, Ms. Levine seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfieet Planning Division Page 2 of 2 SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 159 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Rajeev Dahal, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arlova Jackson, Arthur Afterson, Paul D'Agostino, Sat Nagar, Dennis Marino Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Waiter Hallen, Gavin Morgan, Moms Robinson, Jill Chambers, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the September 8, 2004 meeting were approved. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 2500 Green Bav Road Revision to Final Demolish dwelling and construct a four story, eight dwelling unit building with accessory parking. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Art Cottrell (Owner) and Mike Obloy (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Cottrell stated that at the last meeting, there was discussion of putting overhead electric service underground. However, this is difficult, and they already have had to reconfigure the parking and trash area because of a utility pole that ComEd says cannot be relocated because it powers a nearby school. Also, for underground wires, ComEd has to place at -grade equipment adjacent to the pole. Finally, going underground is expensive. He noted that buildings on both sides have overhead wires, and they would not be adding additional clutter. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen thought this is the first time SPAARC required underground service to a building. Chair Brzezinski acknowledged the applicant's situation but thought that underground service should be required from now on. She added that SPAARC's mission is to make ongoing improvements, and they have learned to pay attention to all utilities. She was concerned that overhead wires along the sideyard could pass too close to windows. She suggested having an on -site meeting between the development team, CornEd, and the City's Electrical Inspector to review the elevations. Mr. Obloy stated that ComEd has the drawings and elevations and has been working with them and the neighbors. He noted that this is an unusual situation. Mr. Page 1 of 4 Hallen suggested that SPAARC accept overhead service to the building. Mr. Dahal asked about changes to the parking area. Because the pole has to remain, the parking area has been flipped. Mr. Alterson clarified that the number of spaces is the same, which it is. Discussion followed on the parking area layout, trash enclosure height, and other poles that are tilted and overgrown. Mr. Cottrell stated that if ComEd puts wires underground for this project, they will want to put neighbor's wires underground at the same time, but one of the neighbors will not communicate. Chair Brzezinski applauded their efforts. Mr. Wolinski noted that they had gotten this far in the project before this came up, and he thought this underscores the need to look at electric utilities in addition to others for all projects. Chair Brzezinski stated that she would prefer that the wires go underground, but if they cannot, then the requirement for underground wires can be released. Mr. Wolinski noted that the City has an Energy Commission that may be able to assist in these situations. He asked when they plan to start construction. Mr. Obloy stated that they will begin as soon as they have permits. Mr. Hallen noted that soil retention still needs to be worked out. Mr. Wolinski stated that the site needs to be cleaned up and maintained until construction begins. ACTION: Ms. Jackson motioned to amend final approval to eliminate the requirement for underground wires. Mr. Wolinski seconded. Mr. Hallen stated that if the City is going to require placing overhead wires underground from now on, such a policy must be published. Discussion followed on the height of the trash enclosure and impacts to visibility coming out of the garage if it is a solid enclosure. Ms. Jackson amended her motion to include an enclosure for trash not greater than 3' in height if it is solid. Mr. Wolinski seconded. The vote was unanimous. Following the vote, Mr. Obloy asked if brick size can be changed for economic reasons. Chair Brzezinski preferred standard size brick but noted that appearance review is non -binding. Mr. Friedman stated that they designed a fairly traditional -looking building, and a larger brick would not fit with that. Mr. Wolinski suggested considering the effects of this last minute change on future projects in Evanston, as City Council may not like such a change. Mr. Alterson agreed. SPAARC members noted for the record that smaller brick size was preferred. SPAARC 1823 Church Street Preliminary Exterior alteration and change of use to a Cultural Facility. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Brenda Stewart (Director of Center), Morris Stewart (Affiliated with Center), Lonnie Wilson (E-Town, ECDC), Kiril Mirintchev (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Mirintchev stated that the proposal is to convert a former retail building at the comer of Church/Dodge to a cultural arts center. He presented drawings and elevations. There will be a canopy 1 awning and a sign. Parking will be relocated to the rear (4 spaces with 'I that is ADA-accessible), which will allow for a landscaped area with a fountain and seating. An elevation at night was shown to indicate lighting. The front elevation will have detailing to resemble curtainsld rapes. The existing brick and base will be repaired, and the canopy will be painted hollow metal. The wall with existing murals will be cleaned and have small windows. Page x or 4 DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen asked about the parking lot across the street, and they will be sharing it. Chair Brzezinski asked if a zoning analysis has been completed, and Mr. Aguado stated that it has, and it seems to be in compliance. Mr. Friedman complemented them on a very exciting design. Chair Brzezinski agreed and complemented them for doing something positive with the comer, especially since open space is becoming scarce. She noted its proximity to the high school could pose a problem for hanging out and suggested considering the functions behind the windows at the comer. If the comer is office space, this is fine during the day but might be problematic at night. She suggested having it open to the lobby space with seating. Mr. Robinson asked about the number of seats, and there will be 60. Some will be fixed, but others can be moved to allow for classroom and exhibit space. Mr. Wolinski noted that he has worked with E-Town in the past and believes this project will be a success. Mr. Dahal noted the different street lights in the renderings and stated that the City will require the davit arms to stay. Chair Brzezinski suggested sensitivity to the new design and landscaping. Mr. Marino asked about construction costs, which are to be determined due to heat and ventilation issues. Mr. Aguado noted that the awnings at Church go over the property line, and the curtains on the front elevation go over the right-of-way. Chair Brzezinski stated that these can be worked out in future meetings. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1168 Dodae Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Proposed Type 2 restaurant in Evanston Plaza - Domino's Pizza. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Dan Scurek (Real Estate Consultant for Dominos) GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Scurek presented a site plan and store layout, indicating the separate customer area and delivery exit. There is a rear exit and dumpsters behind the wall. Chair Brzezinski noted that there is other food service nearby and suggested checking the number of dumpsters and sharing agreements. Mr. Aguado asked about the hours of operation, which will be 11-11. There will be 20 employees, mostly part-time (4-5 full-time). Mr. Hallen asked how many employees will be working at one time. Mr. Scurek estimated that on busy nights (FddaylSaturday), there will be roughly 12 employees. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 108 Florence Avenue Concept Construct four story, single family attached townhomes (5 total) with attached garages. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Jeff Schliesmann (Architect) Page 3 of 4 GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Schliesmann stated that the applicants are proposing to tear down the existing single family house and construct a three-story multi -family. He noted that the electric service is coming in from the alley and is currently overhead. Chair Brzezinski stated that SPAARC would like it to go underground. Mr. Scliesmann then presented a photo montage of the streetscape and noted that it is mostly multi -family, with some single family. Because the yard is small, there will be roof decks. There also will be in a sidewalk on Florence since there is none at present. DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen asked about the variations. Mr. Aguado stated that the zoning analysis has been completed, and there are seven variations including the number of units (3 allowed, 5 requested), lot coverage (45% allowed, 65% requested), and setbacks. Mr. Alterson asked about impervious surface, which will be 24% (15% allowed). Discussion followed on the variations needed, particularly for setbacks, and whether fewer units could be constructed (e.g., townhouses). Mr. Schliesmann noted that they do not yet own the property (it is under contract). Chair Brzezinski thought that too much lot coverage was a bigger problem than the number of units, although she thought that townhouses could fit nicely. Mr. Friedman noted that keeping the required west setback would eliminate a unit and open up the comer. Ms. Jackson noted that they have not applied for zoning variances yet. Mr. Dahal noted the narrow drive aisle width and thought it would be difficult to have two cars in the garage because of turning. Mr. Alterson asked if he has met with the Alderman, and he has not. Chair Brzezinski was concerned with sidewalk being next to the curb. Mr. Wolinski noted that demolishing the house is positive for the neighborhood, but it should be replaced with something that works. Mr. Alterson agreed. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned to deny concept approval because of excessive lot coverage. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Nortieet Planning Division Page 4 of 4 APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 22, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, Ron Walczak, Rajeev Dahal, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Dennis Marino, Arlova Jackson, Sat Nagar, Arthur Akerson, James Wolinski Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Gavin Morgan, Morris Robinson, Jill Chambers, Carla Bush, Tracy Norfteet Chair Brzszinski noted that a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the September 15, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2209 Howard Street Exterior site and facade renovation for "Target' Conceot PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Scott DeBell (Architect), Kent Sheldon (Store Manager), and Michelle Myers (Building Services Area Manager) GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. DeBell presented a revised site plan showing landscaped islands in the parking area and a shifted entrance to the lot. The drawings still show cart storage behind the planters, but this will not happen. Chair Brzezinski asked what will be there, which will be a sidewalk. Chair Brzezinski was concerned about pedestrian safety and thought it should be fully landscaped instead. As an example, she showed photos that she had taken of a strip mall in Schaumburg with landscaping against the building. Discussion followed about current vs. new landscaping. Mr. Marino noted that poor maintenance of the plant beds by Howard was raised at the last meeting (e.g. sparse landscaping that has not been upgraded, litter accumulation). He asked for additional landscaping and a commitment to maintain it on a regular basis. He also asked about the number of landscaped islands in the parking area. Mr. DeBell stated that there will be 11 new ones, and several will be reconfigured due to the relocation of the vehicular access point. Mr. Friedman clarified that the current drive immediately off Howard is being dosed, and Mr. DeBell clamed its relocation. Page i of d Mr. Marino noted that the owner of the north property is proposing residential development and may want to negotiate with Target for access to Howard along the east edge. He suggested holding off on closing this point to allow for such discussions to take place. He added that an original option was a stoplight, which may be revisited. Ms. Bush stated that she represented the Health Dept. and was concerned about litter accumulation and chronic infestation at the rear. She clarified that it is an area -wide problem (whole block) and not necessarily specific to Target. Mr. Sheldon acknowledged this and stated that they have aggressively sought solutions. As part of the renovation, they are considering using an off -site warehouse, which will allow them to eliminate the outside storage containers. They also will put all cardboard and bales inside a fenced trash area. Essentially, they want to fix the problem by reducing the amount of materials left outside. He added that Office Max, Jewel, and Target now have locking containers to prevent trash from blowing out and rodents from getting in. He was concerned that additional landscaping in the front of the building could allow rodents to burrow there. Mr. Alterson asked how the landscaped islands will be watered, and they will be attached to the existing irrigation system. Chair Brzezinski asked if it is automatic, and it is. Mr. Wolinski stated that there has been a gradual decline in maintenance in the past three years, which must be addressed. Chair Brzezinski suggested that Target meet with the other businesses, perhaps monthly, to discuss problems with the shopping center. She thought that if they cleaned up the litter and rodent problem and provided nice landscaping, then they would reap the benefits. Ms. Myers stated that the problems started happening when they went from local to national contractors, but they are now back to local ones and anticipate positive changes due to more day -today control. Chair Brzezinski did not think the area by the entry should be striped because she did not want people backing into the entry. She suggested that it be landscaped to provide a nice entry to their portion of the shopping center. She then summarized SPAARC feedback and issues for follow-up: resolve maintenance issues on Howard, extend the north leg further (e.g., replace the striped area at the entry with landscaping), consider more landscaping near the building, provide an update on a meeting involving all businesses in the shopping center. Mr. Alterson asked if there will be bike racks. Mr. DeBell stated that there will be bike racks and benches, and Mr. Alterson suggested putting these on the plan. He also suggested that the businesses come together to improve the pedestrian area with landscaping. Chair Brzezinski thought this was important so the shopping center would not have a lopsided feel after Target has made their changes. Mr. Marino asked how much retail space will be added by eliminating storage. Mr. Sheldon estimated that it will be 20,000-30,000 sq ft. He added that the storage containers will be gone by January 15 or earlier. Mr. Robinson, Economic Development Planner, stated that Alderman Rainey was concerned about carts accumulating at nearby bus stops. Mr. Sheldon acknowledged this, and Mr. DeBell stated they are working with CTA to get bus stops within the center. Mr. Wolinski stated that he shops there often, and the trash cans are almost always full and need to be emptied more often. Mr. Sheldon acknowledged this and stated that they have a new vendor for that. Page 2 of 4 ACTION: No action was taken since the purpose was for feedback on the concept. SPAARC 2650 Ridqe Avenue Prellminarv_ Modification and addition to loading dock area at Evanston Hospital. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mark Nichols and Bob Wootton (Architects), David Behis and Tim Vandermulen (Project Managers) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Vandermulen stated that the project started with the incinerator issue, and they have decided to address several other issues at the same time (e.g., site for a radio surgery unit, reconfiguring loading docks). He presented detailed drawings showing several phases of work, the first being the closing of the incinerator and reconfiguration of the docks, followed by the installation of the radio surgery unit. Discussion followed about whether the radio surgery unit would be a special use, or if it is a relocation of an existing use. Mr. Vandermulen clarified that it is a new piece of equipment in an existing department. He also clarified the dock modifications. Chair Brzezinski was impressed with the extent of the work achieved thus far. She asked about exits during construction. Mr. Vandermulen acknowledged the issue and stated that it was the reason for selecting the phasing the project. Mr. Dahal asked about the impacts of construction on Girard. Mr. Vandermulen thought they may need to do some unloading there in light of the dock reconfiguration, and some construction trailers may be located where they once were. Chair Brzezinski stated that In light of the aggressive schedule they are faced with and the amount of maneuvering necessary, she would be amenable to the temporary relocation of certain items to be identified so that pedestrian/traffic issues can be discussed. Mr. Vandermulen stated that they are currently working on this. He added that they may need to extend dock hours, and companies are will to work with them to get deliveries before the construction contractors come to work. Chair Brzezinski stated that this can be worked out. Mr. Wolinski stated that due to the urgency of an October 15 deadline to close the incinerator, he would commit to the hospital that once their plans are submitted, they would be at the top of the list for review. He then asked about the sequence of permitting with other agencies (e.g., State Health Dept). Discussion followed. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Chair Brzezinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2705 Woodbine Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Two-story addition at rear of existing house. Proposal is to construct eaves that extend 3'6" into required (north) side yard. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: George Halik (Owner/Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Halik stated that the issue is an eave extension for an addition to his house. He presented a survey done before construction, a site plan, and photos of the existing house and the Page 3 of 4 adjacent house to the north. After construction began on the addition. it was discovered that wall heights in the main part of the house and old addition differed, affecting roof pitches and eave alignment. After considering his options, Mr. Halik decided to ask for a zoning variation for 2' to extend the eaves on the new addition. He has a letter from the neighbors to the north stated that they are aware and do not object to this. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval, and Mr. Marino seconded. Chair Brzeiznski thought it was unfortunate that this eave extension was considered to be a major variation. She recommended that this aspect of the zoning ordinance be looked into and modified, perhaps to allow for save extensions to be minor variations. SPAARC members generally agreed. The vote was taken, and it was unanimous. SPAARC 1620 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Review plat of resubdivision for "Sherman Plaza". PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Arthur Alterson (City Zoning Administrator) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson presented a plat of resubdivision and noted that a substantially similar plat was approved in July 2003. It divides ownership into four areas for the Sherman Plaza development, in conformance with the planned development that was approved. Chair Brzezinski stated that she would not vote in favor of this because she is opposed to any further action on this project until SPAARC has been shown more detail (e.g.. materials, colors, elevations). ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned preliminary and final approval. Mr. D'Agostino seconded. The motion passed with Chair Brzezlnski, Mr. Friedman, and Mr. Walczak voting 'nay.' Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Page 4 of 4 APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 29, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Ron Walczak, Paul D'Agostino, James Wolinski, Arthur Alterson, Arlova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Dennis Marino Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Morris Robinson, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted that a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the September 22, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 140 Ridoe Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct a four-story six unit multiple family dwelling with 90 off-street parking spaces. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Gregory Gerdov (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Gerdov summarized the project. Chair Brzezinski asked about zoning variations. The project is 95% compliant for setback (45' wide currently, 50' required) and 98% compliant for square footage (7,550 sq ft currently, 7,600 sq ft required for six units). Discussion followed on parking (10 provided. 9 required), impervious surface, and whether one space should be left uncovered to reduce lot coverage. Mr. Hallen thought these were small variations considering the magnitude of the project. Mr. Alterson noted that the impervious surface variation is large. Chair Brzezinski asked about driveway materials, which will be asp ha It/con crate. She suggested using brick pavers, and Mr. Hallen noted that there is a credit for using this material. Mr. Gerdov agreed to consider it but was concerned about maintenance and snow plowing. Discussion followed on the parking area/driveway configuration and the amount of impervious surface. Mr. Alterson thought the driveway was biggest problem for impervious surface and reiterated the suggestion to use pavers. Chair Brzezinski thought the variations seemed reasonable given the attractiveness of design, use of masonry, and enclosed parking spaces. She asked Mr. Dahal for his opinion of the parking and access, and his only concern was the sightline at the garage door by the alley. Discussion followed. Page 1 of 3 ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval with the condition that the driveway be brick. Mr. D'Agostino seconded. The motion passed with Ms. Jackson voting 'nay.' Mr. Wolinski commended Mr. Gerdov for building more or less within the existing zoning requirements and not trying to overbuild. SPAARC 108 Florence Avenue Concept Construct four story, single family attached townhomes (5 total) with attached garages. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Jeff Schliesman (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Schliesman stated that he has considered SPAARC's comments since the last meeting. For the setback on Howard, he measured all buildings on the block, and most setbacks were 27-30'. Impervious surface also was a concern, and driveway and access size have been reduced. The number of units is the same (five), but each unit is smaller. Other buildings on the block have between six and 13 units. He presented an aerial photo mock up showing setbacks, and discussion followed. Mr. Hallen asked if there is a zoning analysis for this revision, and there is not. Mr. Schliesman presented a new site plan including parking access from the alley. He noted that the percent impervious surface has dropped from 85% to 67% and added that he is willing to use alternate materials for walkways, etc. Mr. Marino asked about the setback from Florence, and it is almost to the property line (slightly less than 3'). Chair Brzezinski asked about the sidewalk, and there isn't one. Discussion followed on putting in a sidewalk. Chair Brzezinski stated that her biggest objections were the driveway and new curb cut on Florence. Mr. Alterson thought the lot was better suited to four units instead of five. Chair Brzezinski agreed and thought this would solve the driveway problem while allowing for bigger units. Ms. Jackson stated that three units are allowed, although the lot size is just under what is required for four units. Mr. Wolinski noted that the project has 40% more units than what is allowed (3 vs. 5). Chair Brzezinski was less concerned about the number of units than the problems being caused by that many units. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski stated that no action is needed since the purpose is for feedback on the concept. Mr. Wolinski thought there were too many units and suggested three units instead. Mr. Marino suggested keeping in mind the single family neighbors across the alley. SPAARC 2024 McCormick Avenue Concept New landscaping at Rotary Club of Evanston Gardens. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Dick Peach (Vice President, Rotary Club) and Linda Lutz (President, Rotary Club) Page 2 of 3 .7 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Peach stated that the Rotary garden was begun in 1962 as an international effort. The 1001' anniversary of the Rotary Club is in 2005, and they are anticipating roughly 60,000 members to attend a week-long celebration. As part of the celebration, they would like to rededicate the garden. Improvements to the garden include a new 16' wide circle with granite seats on the hillside near the flagpole. The floor will have paving blocks purchased by Rotary Club members. The area around the flagpole also will be made ADA-accessible. A drawing was provided. Mr. Peach stated that Mr. D'Agostino and Ms. Levine have seen the proposal. Originally, stairs were proposed at the sides, but Ms. Levine suggested stairs down the center. Chair Brzezinski stated that a railing would be needed. She asked about lighting. Mr. Peach stated that there are existing lights on the hill. Chair Brzezinski suggested inset lights along the stairs if the hill lights are not bright enough. Mr. Marino asked how often the circle will be used by the Rotary Club. Mr. Peach stated that it is to be determined, but it can be used by the public because it will be donated back to the City when it is complete (construction is expected to take roughly two weeks). Mr. Alterson stated that the property is owned by the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District and leased to the City, and he asked if other approvals are needed. Mr. D'Agostino stated that the City maintains it, and further approval would only be needed for a permanent structure. Mr. Peach noted that other committees have approved it (e.g., Fourth of July Association). Mr. Marino asked about annual maintenance for the landscaping and structure. Mr. D'Agostino did not expect a change from the current level. Ms. Lutz estimated that they have been spending $6,000-7,000 annually, and they are considering adding an irrigation system as part of this project. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned preliminary and final approval subject to Building Division review. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Pegs 3 of 3 APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 6, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Rajeev Dahal, Gavin Morgan, James Wolinski, Stefanie Levine, Arlova Jackson, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Sat Nagar, Arthur Alterson, James Edwards, Ron Walczak Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Donna Splcuzza, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted that a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the September 29, 2004 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1319-1323 Maxie Avenue Preliminary Consolidate two lots of record into one lot of record. Construct four (4) story, multiple family dwelling containing fourteen (14) units. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mike Greco (Architect) and Gary DeStefano (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Greco stated that this is the second project in Evanston (819 Foster was the first). They are proposing to demolish the existing single family home on each lot, consolidate the lots, and construct a building with 14 two -bedroom units and 29 parking spaces (14 basement, 8 at - grade with entry at the back alley, and 7 at -grade tandem). Current surveys show a small gap between the lots that they are working to correct. There are two large-scale existing multi- family buildings on the block (one condo, one rental). The front yard setback for this project will be the average of the two existing buildings. They also will be using brick pavers for walkways, exterior terrace, and the rear drive (except the ramp to underground parking). Basement parking includes ADA-accessible spaces and an elevator. Building materials include masonry all around and aluminum -clad windows. A zoning summary, plat, drawings, photos of the existing sites, and floor plans were provided. Mr. DeStefano noted that the existing single family homes were the last ones remaining on the block. They tried to match the existing multi -family buildings in architecture and massing while keeping sideyards for relief for adjacent properties. They also applied what they learned from the 819 Foster project. Page 1 of4 DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson noted the new planned development minimum threshold and thought they were very close at roughly 28,000 sq ft (does not include the basement or balconies). Mr. Hallen noted on the drawing that BOCA standards will not allow two sets of stairs to discharge to the same space. Mr. Greco stated that one set of stairs can be moved. Chair Brzezinski liked the setback and sideyards but thought the symmetrical plan leaned on the commercial side. She suggested making it more residential in terms of architecture and not just landscaping. She also suggested giving it a better sense of entry. since it is on the side (e.g., a canopy). She commended them for using brick all around. Mr. DeStefano stated that they will use standard brick in front with utility brick on three sides. Mr. Friedman noted that this site is across the street from a historic district. Discussion followed on detention and basement parking (per new guidelines). Mr. Wolinski asked about the condition of the existing single family homes, and they are in the process of being demolished. Chair Brzezinski noted that they will need an accessible route to the trash enclosure and asked about the location of utilities. Mr. DeStefano stated that this is to be determined, but meters will be placed within the structure instead of outside. Mr. Greco stated that there are two electric poles in the alley with overhead wires. Mr. DeStefano thought they could put wires underground. ACTION: Mr. Alterson thought that discussion of appearance indicated that it was too soon to vote. Chair Brzezinski thought the applicants had done an appropriate amount of work, and Mr. Hallen agreed. Chair Brzezinski noted the outstanding zoning issues. Mr. Friedman suggested that at the next meeting, the drawings show the massing of the brick at the rear. Ms. Jackson motioned approval, and Mr. Dahal seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Afterson voting 'nay.' SPAARC 3200 Grant Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct one -car garage at Unh 606. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Nancy Tolan and Luis Cruz (Representatives for Presbyterian Homes) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Tolan stated that when this project was approved a year ago, 29 attached garages were proposed to be added to the existing townhomes. They are in the final phases of construction now, and a resident has asked that they save her garden by not building a garage. As such, they are requesting that a garage not be constructed at this location but rather, in another location. Ms. Tolan presented a site plan showing the locations in question. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors have been notified. Ms. Tolan stated that a letter has been sent, and a discussion will be held tonight. Ms. Jackson stated that she visited the location in question and observed that a garage is underway now. Mr. Aguado also visited the site and confirmed Ms. Jackson's observation. Ms. Tolan took exception to this. Chair Brzezinski Page 2 of 4 stated that they can check permits to verify what is happening. Mr. Alterson thought that if two City staff saw the same thing, then a sign is needed to identify the exact locations in question. Chair Brzezinski agreed and suggested doing this before the ZBA hearing. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval, Ms. Levine seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 614 Dempster Street Preliminary and Final Exterior renovation and roof top A/C unit. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ted Mavrakis (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Mavrakis stated that he recently purchased this building but has not leased it because he wants to make repairs (e.g., old heating system, recessed entry is not ADA-compliant, etc.). For the exterior, he is proposing to eliminate the recessed entry and install a window like the existing two windows, and there will be a new entry at the comer. The east side will be tuckpointed, a new heating unit will be placed on the roof, and the stairs to the second floor will be redone. There also will be some roof work. Drawings and photos were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about the second floor space, and Mr. Mavrakis stated that it would be good for an artist. She asked if there is another way to exit the second floor, and there will be exterior stairs at the rear. Mr. Edwards asked about the basement, which is only in the front half of the building. Chair Brzezinski noted that it is shallow and asked if it is sprinklered, which it is not. She noted that if it is used for anything other than a furnace or water heater, it must be sprinklered. She was disappointed to see the loss of the recessed entry because it is reminiscent of old retail space. Mr. Hallen noted that it is not ADA-accessible. Mr. Friedman agreed, and Chair Brzezinski encouraged Mr. Mavrakis to appeal to the State of Illinois to keep it. Mr. Friedman asked where the second floor started, which is in the rear half. He asked if it has windows, and it does. Mr. Aguado noted that the 1978 plat shows an alley at the rear, which could be an issue with the exterior stairs. Mr. Alterson asked if there was parking inside the rear half. Mr. Mavrakis stated that there is currently, and he will come back with plans for that space. Mr. Alterson suggested keeping in mind that the site has credit for two inside spaces. Mr. Hallen noted fire - rating issues, and discussion followed. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2617 Lincolnwood Drive Recommendation to ZBA Demolish existing one -car garage and construct new 2-car detached garage. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Thomas Rochon (Owner) Page 3 of 4 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski read the description of the project and asked if the existing one -car garage is detached, and it is. Mr. Hallen asked about variances, and Ms. Jackson stated that it is for lot coverage. Mr. Rochon stated that this is a substandard lot. He and his wife want to replace the one -car garage with a two -car garage for both of their cars and for storage. They also want to pull back the garage from the alley for easier maneuvering. Mr. Wolinski asked how old the existing garage is, which is unknown. Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors have been contacted, which they have. Photos and a drawing were provided. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski stated that he is in favor of this for getting another car off the street and motioned approval. Mr. Walczak seconded. Mr. Aiterson asked about the percentage over allowed lot coverage, and Mr. Rochon thought it was just under 50%. Mr. Alterson asked if there is an impervious surface issue, and there is not. Chair Brzezinski understood a two -car garage on a lot of this size but was not sure about a two -car garage with extra room for storage. The vote was taken, and it was unanimous. SPAARC 825 Hamlin Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a second floor addition. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Karl Simmons (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Simmons stated that his house is small, but he and his wife do not want to leave the neighborhood, so they are proposing to expand the attic for a work space. Because of the proximity to adjacent neighbors, they are applying for a variance to have the walls go straight up instead of being set back. Photos and plat were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski noted that building codes require a fire -rated wall, which depends on distance to the site's property line. Mr. Alterson dared that this is at the rear, which it is. Mr. Simmons stated that it is not visible from the front, and Mr. Hallen commended this. Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors have been contacted. Mr. Simmons stated that it is in progress. ACTION: Mr. Walczak motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Page 4 of 4 APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 13, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Gavin Morgan, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Judy Aiello, David Jennings Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Max Rubin, Susan Guderley, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted that a quorum was present and began the meeting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 1723 Simuson Recommendation to Z8A Revision of type 2 restaurant special use permit to allow JJ Fish with menu offish dinners and chicken wings rather than sandwiches. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Carlos Khalil (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Khalil stated that he took over the special use license when he purchased the restaurant He tried to operate with the same menu (mostly sandwiches) but decided to franchise with JJ Fish (mostly fish and chicken). There have been complaints about the smell, which can be solved by installing an air filter. Because it costs $20,000, he wants to be sure that the use can be permitted first. Another problem has been loitering, and he learned in a meeting with Mr. Wolinski that policing is a condition of the special use permit. He has been doing so to the extent possible, in cooperation with police, but loitering remains a problem. Chair Brzezinski encouraged him to install the air filter. Mr. Alterson asked for information on the filter, including noise, but it was not available. Mr. Alterson encouraged him to get this information for the ZBA. With respect to noise, he noted the proximity to neighbor to the north. Mr. Wolinski stated that this is an unusual special use permit and the business sought to franchise before coming to the City for approval. The real issue, however, is that a lot of work has been done to clean up that intersection, but staying open until 11pm brings back loiterers. He suggested limiting hours of operation to 7pm, in addition to Installing the air filter. He also suggested investigating how other JJ Fish locations have addressed the odor issue. Pape 1 of 8 Mr. Khalil stated that he came to the City's Health Department, and an inspector indicated that everything was in order. Chair Brzezinski thought this indicated that the City needs to do a better job in transferring the requirements for special use licenses when ownership changes. She noted that the area is void of any landscaping and suggested that the applicant go beyond what is required. Since it is a comer location, and if it is made attractive, then it could attract a different clientele (e.g., families rather than a hang-out area). Mr. Alterson stated for the record that he did not think Mr. Khalil did anything wrong, rather, it was poor procedure on the part of the City for handling Type II restaurants. Regarding signage, he received a phone call that the JJ Fish sign is still visible through the glass block. He added that Ramey's permit required a landscape plan and a landscape maintenance plan. Mr. Khalil was not aware of this but was amenable to landscaping. Mr. Wolinski asked about the franchise fee, which is a one-time $25,000 fee that has already been paid. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA with the condition of a sunset provision of one year to ensure that conditions do not deteriorate at that comer (e.g., after one year, it will be reviewed by staff and sent to City Council). Chair Brzezinski thought this was a good way for SPAARC to check on the status of landscaping and installation of the air filter. Mr. Wolinski noted that the City is trying to encourage economic development in this area, and since they have already paid the franchise fee, this gives them an opportunity to prove themselves within one year. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 525 Hinman Avenue Preliminary and Final Demolish structures, construct rive story, multiple family dwelling with 8 dwelling units. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mike Greco (Architect/Developer) and Gary DeStefano (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Greco stated that they are proposing to consolidate two lots and construct an as -of -right building with no zoning exceptions or variations (R5 zoning). There will be eight two -bedroom condos and12 parking spaces (underground and detached garage to the rear, no new curb cuts). The building will be all masonry, and the design is in keeping with existing nearby multi- family buildings. A site plan, rendering, and drawings were provided. To address lot coverage and impervious surface, they are proposing an open lattice concrete paver system in the parking area with grass in the voids. Chair Brzezinski asked about winter maintenance. She thought this material was great for drainage but was better for occasional - use access rather than as a main driveway for cars all year round. Discussion followed about street salt, dust, and whether the condo association would have to replace it due to poor performance or poor conditions. Trash, detention, and utilities also were briefly discussed, as well as landscaping (two new parkway trees will replace the existing tree). Materials will consist of modular brick on the front with a mixture of stone detailing and utility brick on the sides and rear. The top comers, base, and other details will be stone Page 2 of 8 (renaissance). Windows will be aluminum -clad wood, double -hung. Mr. Friedman noted that there was a discrepancy between the rendering and the drawing for the entry (the drawing shows an off -center door, and the rendering shows a centered door). Chair Brzezinski suggested a centered oversized door reminiscent of traditional buildings. Chair Brzezinski clanfaed that the balconies are juliette, which they are. She asked if first floor residents have outdoor space, which they do not. She asked about the materials for the rear garages, which will be vinyl siding. She suggested adding a window, wood trim at the comers, and bollards. She asked about lighting at the front entry, and discussion followed. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval, Mr. Friedman seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1415 Leonard Place Recommendation to ZBA Construct a roofed front porch approximately 9.5' from front property line. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom Fischl (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski read the description of the project, and Mr. Fischl presented photos of the existing house, the neighbor to the east (where the new porch would line up with their existing porch), and other houses on the block showing set backs. The setback for this project will be approximately 4' less than what is required. A site plan was provided. Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors have been noted, which they have. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Sherman Plana Final Planned Development for mixed -used development within block bounded by Church Street, Sherman Avenue, Davis Street, and Benson Avenue. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Nick Patera and Jodi Mariano (Landscape Architects), Fred Romano (Architect —Garage), Tim Schmitt and Mike Fitzgerald (Architects--- Retail/Residential), Roxanne Henry and Tim Anderson (Owners —Garage) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Parkina Garage Mr. Romano distributed packets of information on the project, including elevations and a matrix of building materials. He then presented elevations for the garage and material samples. The garage frame will be reinforced concrete, and the exterior skin will be a combination of brick, pre -cast concrete panels with brick insets, painted pre -cast concrete, glass in the wall, and metal grids in the openings of the garage. Ground floor storefronts will be Page 3 of 8 aluminum/glass. The aluminum will be a burgundy color at the window area with the doors being a gold color. The concrete finish is different at the first four levels than at higher levels. The base will be polished black granite, except for the columns on the north elevation (alley side). Framing of the storefronts and the entries to the garage and condos will be painted burgundy (metal finish). Doors and sign bands will be gold like the Sears on State Street (photo provided; material sample not available). The dock door will be a rolling grate (also gold). Above the storefronts will be a burgundy fabric awning that will extend roughly 4' (for shelter, not just decorative). Signage for the garage is to be determined. Garage and loading dock access was described. Stairway locations were clarified. On the higher set of openings, the sign previously proposed has been replaced with placeholders for art. Mr. Alterson asked if they will be panels. Mr. Romano stated that they will be made of a perforated metal screen material that will be painted (colors to be determined). Mr. Jennings asked about the panel size, which was estimated to be 6'x40'. Chair Brzezinski asked what would happen if the public art did not come to fruition. Ms. Aiello stated that the first meeting with the City's Public Art Committee will be held next week and assured SPAARC members that something will go on these panels. Ms. Chambers asked what will be behind the panels, and it will be open (no grid). Mr. Romano then presented the elevation and materials for the garage's comer lobby tower. It will have clear glass, butt glazing, and white metal trim. At the ground level, there will be fluorescent polished stainless steel sconces. Chair Brzezinski asked about the openings at the south elevation, set back from the street. They are windows with white frames. The north (alley) elevation was presented. At the ground level, the black granite turns the comer for three columns, with the remaining columns having a different base material. The wall is concrete block, which they are proposing to texture. Discussion followed about the openings and 10% area allowed to be open on the alley wall, per the building code. The west elevation was presented. Mr. Hallen suggested that the awnings be extended from 4' to 6' and that they continue around the comer. He asked why brick was introduced at the ground floor of the glass tower instead of continuing the glass down to the base. Chair Brzezinski agreed and thought that the innovation in the garage's design is the comer glass lobby, whereas the rest of the garage is routine. Ms. Aiello noted that negotiations took place on the design, and more masonry is being used than previously proposed. Chair Brzezinski noted the number of colors and materials and thought that some did not match. She agreed with Mr. Hallen that the glass in the tower should be brought down through the base to strengthen the comer. Mr. Friedman, speaking as a taxpayer rather than a SPAARC member, strongly disagreed with this design for the public parking garage. He did not think Evanston needed a monument / museum but rather, a well -designed functional garage. Ms. Aiello stated that SPAARC members had seen this before, and it has not changed. Chair Brzezinski stated that SPAARC had seen it for preliminary review, but it did not have this level of detail. Page 4 of 8 Chair Brzezinski summarized her other comments. She thought the doors that punch the louvered opening on the Davis side were an unfortunate detail and rather, they should be more consistent with the storefront. She agreed with Mr. Hallen that the awnings should be extended, citing 800 Elgin's generous continuous canopy along Benson as an example. She thought that the wall -mounted exterior lights were inappropriate since they are fluorescent (poor light), steel (does not match the gold front), and the fixture, which is a standard fixture, does not suit downtown Evanston. She asked about interior lighting, which is to be determined. Mr. Alterson suggested that the money for the public art be directed to the wall sconces instead. Chair Brzezinski added that she did not think that the proposed colors matched (e.g., burgundy awning vs. red brick) and suggested buff brick for a wider palette. For the aluminum perforated panels, Chair Brzezinski acknowledged Ms. Aiello's assurance that public art will go on the panels but in case it does not, she asked if the panels would remain. Mr. Hallen noted that the east panels on the Century Theater remain blank. He suggested that the panels for the parking garage be painted the same color whether they have public art or not. Mr. Rubin stated that the panels are not essential to the structure and can be removed. Chair Brzezinski thought that the columns in the alley that do not have granite (e.g. painted) will get dirty. Mr. Rubin stated that repainting them is cheaper than granite, and they can be painted black. Mr. Hallen agreed with the texture for the north wall CMU areas but thought it was too coarse and could attract dirt. Mr. Alterson asked about graffiti, and Chair Brzezinski suggested a putting a coating on the base of the garage where it could be subject to graffiti. Mr. Morgan asked about lighting in the alley. There will not be lights on the columns as a high level of traffic is not anticipated. Chair Brzezinski asked if there is an alley light, which is unknown. Ms. Chambers asked if the poured in place concrete will have the same pattern as the pre -cast panels, which they will. She disagreed with trying to make that part of the building appear to be brick when the scale is off, and there is some brick from the base down, and the colors do not match. Chair Brzezinski suggested a darker color. Ms. Chambers agreed with previous comments regarding the painted aluminum and fabric awning and suggested that either they match or be contrasted. Chair Brzezinski asked about lighting in the lobby tower. Although there was some confusion, Mr. Romano thought they will be concealed down -lights. Ms. Guderley agreed with previous comments about the awning, especially because the sidewalk Is narrow. Mr. Hallen noted a recent change in the signage rules to make awnings a minimum of 3'. Mr. Aguado asked if the pre -cast concrete could be stained instead of painted to avoid an expensive on -going maintenance issue, but this increases costs. Retail / Residential Mr. Fitzgerald summarized his experience and stated that they are proposing a series of four buildings for this site. Elevations and material samples were presented. For the Davis/Sherman elevation, the scale has been broken down to be pedestrian -friendly. The retaillresidential tower will be a poured in place concrete structure, and the lower five floors will be dad in reddish brick (different from parking structure). The remaining concrete floors will be painted beige. Each brick pier has a polished black granite stone base. Page 5 of Storefronts will have a champagne anodized finish and a stone base (and other details) cast to look like Indiana limestone. There will be two levels of fabric awnings. Ground floor awnings will extend 4'. While they are shown in blue on the renderings, tenants will be able to choose the color, per review by the development team. Mr. Alterson asked if retailers will be tenants of the condo association. They will not, rather, there will be a vertical subdivision between the retail and condo association. Second floor awnings will be red for each window, per that tenant's specifications. At the entrance to the residential tower on Davis, there will be a metal canopy (champagne color) with a glass top. Chair Brzezinski asked how far it will project, which is 6'. She suggested that it be 8' and curved/tilted. Mr. Fitzgerald stated that it will drain to the front, and it was suggested that it drain to the rear (north). There also will be a dark green canopy at the rounded northeast comer retail. Discussion followed on the green, champagne, and red colors. The residential tower is set back from the face of the brick base, and as it curves back on Davis, the setback allows for a roof terrace for those residential units. The tower will be painted beige, the window color will be clear anodized, and the underside of the concrete crown at the top of the tower will be uplit. Chair Brzezinski asked about the brick at the base, which will be utility size due to the scale of the building. Chair Brzezinski did not think this was appropriate since the storefronts for this project are more traditional than other projects (e.g.. 1640 Maple). She asked about condo window treatments, and the declaration will require that anything facing the outside be off-white (e.g., blinds/curtain linings). The elevation and material samples for the middle portion on Sherman were presented. There will be loft condos setback from the top of the two-story retail, which will have a green roof. For the two-story portion, materials will be utility size buff brick. There will be an eyebrow extending roughly 3% which may be uplit at night (to be determined), and has common space behind it for residential use. Storefronts have alternating fabric and metal awnings. There is an entry to the glass lobby of the parking garage from Sherman, and it is set back relative to adjacent storefronts. Mr. Wolinski asked if the top of the glass tower will have a blinking light, which is to be determined by FAA regulations. Elevations and material samples were presented for the two-story retail portion at Sherman and Church. The two-story retail will be mostly single -user. There will be several different brick colors, and the tenant requires dark green awnings and other details. Signage for the athletic club and parking garage were briefly discussed, and Chair Brzezinski noted that it might not be as visible due to the setback. Mr. Friedman asked if the orange brick and red brick walls were flush, and they are not. Mr. Marino asked about brick size, which will be utility size for cost reasons. Mr. Marino was uncomfortable introducing utility brick at grade in the downtown. Mr. Hallen noted that it is a commercial building that is not in a residential setting. Chair Brzezinski preferred standard size brick and suggested that as a compromise, the buff brick building (or another portion) have standard brick to break down the scale. page 6 of 8 Elevations and material samples were presented for the loft -style building on Church. It will be dark red brick, limestone -color detail, grey storefront system, and polished black granite base. There is a metal mechanical screen on the roof, but it is set back 90'-100' and is not expected to be visible from the street. Chair Brzezinski complemented the architects for incorporating previous SPAARC comments, especially pertaining to the pedestrian scale. Mr. Friedman stated that the Church Street portion Is across from a landmark (old Marshall Fields building), and he did not think the proposed elevation was appropriate. Landscapinq / Streetscavinq Mr. Patera stated that the landscape/streetscape plan incorporates some of the elements already in use in the downtown (e.g., brick patterns, pavers). The idea is to break up the sidewalks with tree groupings and planter; in a pattern that engages pedestrians (e.g., conversation, window shopping). Tree grates and lighting were described, as well as the raised planters of varying heights along Sherman (taller at the north/south ends and shorter in the middle). At Davis/Sherman, three diagonal spaces were removed to accommodate landscaping (ADA parking is still available). Mr. Nagar asked if there will be changes to curb elevations, and there are none. He suggested using metal frames under tree grates to prevent them from collapsing. Mr. Dahal asked about the distance of trees and light fixtures from the curb, and discussion followed. Most existing davit/tallmadge lights will remain; a few that will be relocated (e.g., garage entry). Mr. Dahal asked about the location of parking meters. They are shown on the drawing, but Mr. Jennings noted that they do not align with panting spaces and could pose a problem for people getting out of their cars. Chair Brzezinski asked Mr. Jennings if this location could be considered to try out a more European model of employing a central pay box with tickets in cars to demonstrate payment, thus eliminating costly meters cluttering the sidewalk. Mr. Jennings said no. Chair Brzezinski asked about bike racks, which will be bollard style in several locations. Mr. Alterson did not think there were enough bike racks. Mr. Marino asked if there were any bike racks in the garage, and there are none. Discussion followed on newspaper boxes and the location and number of trash receptacles. Mr. Jennings noted the need to accommodate a bus stop and fire hydrant, as well as the new standard for accessible ramps. Mr. Marino asked if utility infrastructure will be visible from the public way, and it will not. Chair Brzezinski noted the seat walls and asked if benches with backs were considered. Ms. Aiello stated that the downtown streetscape policy does not allow benches. Chair Brzezinski thought the lack of benches with backs was unfortunate. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval for the residential, retail, and landscape/streetseape portion, and Mr. Marino seconded. Mr. Jennings and Mr. Dahal added that it be subject to review by Engineering. Chair Brzezinski noted the recommendation for standard brick size on the retail portion. The motion passed with Chair Brzezinski and Mr. Friedman (in absentia) voting 'nay'. Page 7 of 8 Ms. Aiello motioned approval for the garage subject to the minutes and/or a list of issues given to the client within 72 hours so they can review them and come back with changes if needed. Mr. Wolinski seconded. The motion passed with Chair Brzezinski and Mr. Friedman (in absentla)voting 'nay'. SPAARC 821 Dorris Street Recommendation to Sign Board Install two blade signs for the new parking structure. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen presented drawings for two blade signs (one projecting on Davis, one projecting on Benson) to mark the entries to the parking garage. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norlieet Planning Division Page 8 of 8 SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES OCTOBER 20, 2004 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: David Jennings, James Wolinski, Rejeev Dahal, Stefanie Levine, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arlova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar (Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski noted that a quorum was present and began the meeting. The minutes from the October 6, 2004 meeting were approved. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 1228 Emerson Street Revision to Concept Construct a 7-story, 60-dwelling unit condominium building. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Dan Shapiro (Attorney), Drew Ferris (Developer), David Szafarz (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Shapiro stated that they appeared before the Plan Commission on September 81h, and concerns were mostly traffic -related. Over the past month, they have studied these issues and met with City staff. The revisions pertain only to parking and access issues; there have been no changes to building design. Mr. Ferris stated that the first concern was truck movements in/out of the parking area, and the Plan Commission suggested combining the driveway with the alley. The revised site plan reflects this change and includes the movements of a 50' truck and the right in/right out access at Emerson. In the loading area, there will be pavers or other materials that go with the landscaping. The revised site plan also showed the sightline for cars turning right from Emerson onto Green Bay. The IDOT standard is 240' for the sightline, and landscaping has been adjusted to allow for a 220' sightline. The building has not been moved back. Mr. Dahal has reviewed this. Page I of 6 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about the location of city property with trees. Mr. Ferris pointed to it on the site plan. Mr. Shapiro stated that this has not changed since the original proposal (e.g., request that it be vacated). Chair Brzezinski clarified that the request is to vacate the property and remove the trees (two pines). She asked about the area between the wall on the alley and the driveway, which will be landscaped. It has been moved over to allow for a better sightline. Mr. Alterson noted that a new zoning analysis must be done and stated for the record that there must be an official opinion from the City stating that everything is in order and why. It needs to be communicated to the Plan Commission in response to some hesitancy on the part of some Commissioners to authorize the drive -out onto Green Bay. Mr. Ferris summarized the findings of the traffic study done by their consultant (e.g., the light is on a 90 second cycle, 37 parking spaces on lower level to generate 10 trips at peak hours). Mr. Jennings spoke for the Department and stated that they did not think there is a problem with the drive onto Green Bay nor see any significant hazards associated with it. He noted that if that drive did not exist, it would force all traffic to Emerson, which would be worse. There is some right-of-way needed from the City (e.g., part of the Green Bay right-of-way must be vacated), and they must dedicate part of the alley to widen it. Mr. Dahal clarified the need to maintain/plow the alley and asked about the utility poles. Mr. Ferris stated that wires will be buried. Mr. Wolinski noted that there was a meeting yesterday between the development team and City staff to discuss issues brought up at the Plan Commission, especially the sightline. It was decided that moving the landscaping back was preferable to moving the building closer to the Asbury residents. Mr. Wolinski thought this was the best solution. He did not think that pushing all traffic to Emerson is something the City should support. He noted that City staff agreed to write a staff memo to the Plan Commission endorsing this proposal. Mr. Alterson thought that putting utilities underground is an opportunity to restore the alley, which is not in good condition. Chair Brzezinski suggested relocating the pines, and discussion followed. Mr. Jennings thought the pines could be replaced with species that do not block the sightline. Chair Brzezinski suggested requiring trees but only after the actual placement of the drive to see what could go there. Discussion followed on landscaping in the alley and installing pads for garbage cans. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval of the revised concept, Mr. Marino seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Alterson opposed. SPAARC 1813 Hinman Avenue 11902 Sheridan Road Prellminary and Final Construct ADA accessibility ramp and porch. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Anne McGuire and Andrew McGonagle (Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. McGuire stated that they have appeared before the Preservation Commission, which approved the ramps at both locations. Drawings, photos, and landscape plans were provided. Page 2 of 8 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski was concerned about the amount of ramp at 1813 Hinman. Ms. McGuire noted that the building has a high first floor. Mr. Wolinski asked why they did not opt for a lift. Mr. McGonigle stated that they decided against it because of the amount of maintenance that would be needed. He noted that the ramp has been brought into the deck to shorten it. Discussion followed on lighting and landscaping. The ramp at 1902 Sheridan will be on the south side of the building and will have landscaping. Discussion followed on the type of landscaping and the sensitivity of the ramps to their structures. Mr. McGonigle stated that they considered enclosing the trash receptacles, but this requires a zoning variation. Chair Brzezinski suggested screening it with landscaping. Chair Brzezinski noted the nearby crushed stone parking area and suggested screening it with landscaping. Mr. Ruiz stated that as part of its review of the project, the Preservation Commission asked about paving the parking area. Mr. McGonigle stated that this could be problematic due to zoning issues. Discussion followed on zoning (T2 zone) and screening the lot with landscaping. Mr. Friedman suggested the applicants review the working history of the lift at Best Western. Mr. McGonigle stated that it is a hydraulic lift and not a mechanical lift that will be exposed to weather as it would for these locations. Chair Brzezinski suggested putting the hydraulic 11hTs controlling equipment inside. Ms. McGuire stated that they studied another house with a high foundation, costed both a ramp and a lift, and decided to do neither and relocate to another building. Mr. Hallen noted that best Western's ramp has a big space for equipment compared to the location discussed here (a former residence). ACTION: Mr. Marino noted that the Preservation Commission approved both ramps and motioned SPAARC approval. Mr. Dahal seconded. The motion passed with Ms. Jackson abstaining. SPAARC 108 Florence Concept Construct four story, single family attached townhomes (4 total) with attached garages. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Jeff Schliesmann (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Schliesmann presented a revised site plan for four units (previously five) with access off the alley (no curb cuts on Florence). The building has been moved from the west property line to increase the turning radius needed for the garages. He is also considering moving unit 1 to decrease lot coverage, while still maintaining the Howard setback and sightlines off Florence. Mr. Alterson thought that moving unit 1 would have a big benefit for the amount of impervious surface, while also providing relief at the corner. Mr. Schliesmann agreed and noted that it would also create two comer units, but it would change the drive for that unit. Mr. Marino was concerned about the view from Howard, particularly the side of unit 1. Mr. Schliesmann noted that he placed the stairs along the inside walls so that there could be windows along the Page 3 of 8 outside walls. Mr. Marino thought that unit 1 should relate better to Howard, especially since has a green lot in front. Mr. Schliesmann did not want to give the impression of unit 1 having a big front yard compared to the other units. Mr. Friedman suggested putting an entrance at the comer so that there is a view of an entrance from Howard. Mr. Aguado asked how far cars will have to back out if unit 1 is shifted. Mr. Schliesmann stated that it will be more difficult. Mr. Dahal asked about trash receptacles, which will be stored in the garage and brought out to the alley. Mr. Alterson asked about contacting the Alderman and neighbors, which is in progress. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to deny the concept and encouraged the applicant to incorporate today's suggestions, especially for the view from Howard. Mr. Alterson seconded. Chair Brzezinski suggested using back pavers at the back of the driveway. Mr. Dahal did not like the idea of drivers having to back out all the way into the alley. Mr. Halien noted the number of variations requested, and Mr. Alterson agreed. The motion passed with Mr. Friedman opposed. He thought it was an interesting scheme, and the Howard elevation could be worked out. SPAARC 2209 Howard Street Preliminary Exterior site and facade renovation for 7a►jet' PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Scott DeBell (Engineer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. DeBell stated that they have incorporated comments from the last SPAARC meeting. The parking spaces near the access to the parking lot have been changed to a landscaped Island, and there is additional landscaping on Howard. Target wants to keep the front sidewalk planters away from the building but is willing to increase the size of all planters. Revised drawings were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski stated that since they were here last, Food 4 Less has opened, and there Is a bench in front. Mr. DeBell stated that there will be benches, trash receptacles, and bike racks, but they are not shown on the drawings. Mr. Ruiz asked what will be behind the planters in front of the store. There will not be carts (even though they are still shown on the drawing), rather, there will be green space. Chair Brzezinski was concerned about security there. Mr. Aguado suggested additional lighting. Ms. Levine asked about the central islands in the parking lot, which are new. She suggested having two trees at either side of each island instead of one in the middle. She also suggested adding trees to existing islands that do not have any trees. Chair Brzezinski agreed with both suggestions. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to both of Ms. Levine's landscaping suggestions, grade - level lighting for security in the space between the store and the landscaping, and that a litter Page 4 of 6 plan be submitted for the shopping center out to the street. Mr. Dahal seconded. Ms. Jackson asked how the litter plan would be enforced. Mr. Marino stated that it is required in special use applications. Mr. Alterson suggested the plan include a provision to pick up stray shopping carts. The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 713 Mulford Street Conceot Improved parking area for 14 off street parking spaces. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Irwin Axelrod (General Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski stated that they appeared before SPAARC in April for a condo conversion, which was subject to review of the parking area. Mr. Axelrod presented a plat and revised site plan for the project and clarified that it is for 12 parking spaces, not 14. Chair Brzezinski asked how it will be drained. Mr. Axelrod stated that once the project is approved, he will hire a civil engineer for the detention. Chair Brzezinski asked about landscaping between the parking area and adjacent lot to the south and noted that the City requires landscaping around parking. Mr. Axelrod stated that there will be a 6' woad fence. Chair Brzezinski thought there should be shrubs instead. Discussion followed on whether the area can be landscaped in light of drive aisle width, parking space length, and the location of wheel stops. It was decided that a fence was best, and Chair Brzezinski suggested a low fence (3'-4'). She asked about the type of fence. Mr. Axelrod stated that it will be a cedar board -on -board fence to screen lighting. He was willing to make it lower than 6'. Mr. Alterson asked if the fence is only for the parking area, and it is. Ms. Levine asked about landscaping along Mulford. Mr. Axelrod thought it was approved at the last meeting, and Chair Brzezinski stated that the City will check that they have the landscape plan on file. Mr. Alterson asked about impervious surface, and discussion followed. Ms. Jackson noted that they do not have a zoning analysis yet. ACTION: Mr. Friedman motioned approval, Mr. Alterson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1571 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Change use to a Type It Restaurant, "Pita Pete's". PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Peter Lutz (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Lutz stated that this will be his second restaurant (the first is in DeKalb). He passed around a menu and described the restaurant's operations. Photos of the exterior were provided, including the new awning. Chair Brzezinski asked if there will be any other exterior changes. and there will not. She asked if there will be a sidewalk cafd, and there will not because it is next to the alley. Chair Brzezinski asked about parking, and there are four spaces behind the building (2-5 employees). She then listed the rules for litter control. page 5of6 ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded. and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1620 Orrinaton Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Change of use to a type 11 restaurant, "Cafe Ambrosia". PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mike Renollet (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Renollet stated that this is the second location (the first is in Ann Arbor). It will be a full - service coffee shop with some pastry but no cooking onsite. Chair Brzezinski asked about litter. Mr. Renollet stated that at the Ann Arbor location, there is a sign showing when the sidewalk caf6 was cleaned. Dumpsters will be inside, with pick-ups 3-4 times per week. Mr. Ruiz noted that this is a landmark building, and the awning will need a Certificate of Appropriateness. Chair Brzezinski asked if there will be any window signage, and there will not to allow people to see in/out. Chair Brzezinski asked if there will be any other exterior changes, and there will not. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2932 Park Place Recommendation to ZBA Construct a two car attached garage. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Helen Madden (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Madden stated that they had a detached 1.5 car garage that was 3' from the property line, and the cement will be removed to allow for more yard. Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors had been noted, which they have. Mr. Alterson asked about the variation requested, which Is for rear yard setback. Chair Brzezinski asked if it is on the comer, and it is not (it is on the alley). The garage cannot be detached because there would not be1D' between the existing and new structures. Chair Brzezinski asked if a gable roof would be better than a hip roof. The house is a bungalow with a hip roof, and the proposed garage is consistent with other nearby garages. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Planning Division Peke 6 of B -*- SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES October 27, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Stefanie Levine, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski Design Professional: Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Waiter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Gavin Morgan, Jim Edwards, Susan Guderley Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 702-708 Greenleaf Street Recommendation to ZBA Demolish existing 2-unit building and construct 3-story, 3-unit residence for a total of fte dwelling units on the lot. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Haman Jha, prospective owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The existing building at this location is composed of two structures. One is the original building, constructed in the early 1900's; the other is a brick addition. The current owners have converted each of these two portions into two apartments, for a total of four units. Mr. Jha proposes to retain the brick addition and replace the original house with a new structure. Under his proposed design, the two units in the existing brick addition would be combined into one unit and the new structure would contain four units, for a total of five units. Mr. Jha does not currently own the structure but he has a pending offer to purchase the property. He would be the developer of the new design DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked the petitioner to state the requested variations. Mr. Jha stated that he is seeking to get a variation from the number of required parking spaces. Currently there are no off-street spaces. He is proposing to provide sic with his proposed. Arthur Aiterson stated that the zoning analysis shows that eight spaces would be required. Two are proposed accessible via a curb cut off of Green leaf and two off of the alley. The petitioner stated that there is an existing curb cut off of Greenleaf. J. Wolinski asked why they are saving the existing addition. Mr. Jha said that he likes its simple, straightforward design and that it is in surprisingly good shape. Chair Brzezinski asked if there will be any attempt to make it more sympathetic with the new addition. On the elevations he had provided to staff, Mr. Jha showed the anticipated changes to the existing building to be retained. These include removing the shutters and replacing the windows. The parking spaces would be internal to the building with their own individual garage doors. Another variation is from the number of permitted number of dwelling units. A. Alterson stated that the zoning analysis finds that there is not enough lot area for a total of five dwelling units. W. Hallen stated that this is a small lot, containing 3,200 sq. feet, which is zoned MUE. He noted that there is sufficient lot area for three units. The parking required for three would be fewer. J. Wolinski asked if the new units would be rental or for sale. Mr. Jha stated that they would be for sale. Other variations include a front yard problem on Greenleaf, a street side yard problem along Custer (which is actually an alley here, for purposes of zoning analysis requires a 20-foot setback), and a rear yard issue. The bulk standards of the MUE District re yards and gross floor area are such that one could not erect one of the existing buildings under the current zoning regulations. The A. Alterson stated that the most salient issues are too many units and too few parking spaces. Mr. Jha said that compared to the current conditions where there are four units with no off- street parking provided, his proposed development would be an improvement as to parking situation along Greenleaf. Also, the existing house doesn't meet any of the setback requirements, which would be met by the proposed new structure. The lot is 40 feet wide, which under the MUE setback requirements of a 20-foot front yard setback and 25 foot rear yard setback, would yield a negative five feet in which to build. Chair Brzezinski agreed that configuration of the lot appears to present a hardship, in terms of setbacks. However, she couldn't support either the number of units proposed or any curb cut off of Greenleaf. She did applaud the inclusion of internal, off-street parking in the proposed building design, but noted that the logical point of access for parking is via the Custer/alley right-of-way. She also noted that she did not object to the petitioners design holding to the front lot line along Greenleaf, because it would be visually and contextually consistent with that area's dense street frontage. W. Hallen said that the width of the alley required further study if it is to be used as an access point. City maps shows its width ranges from 18 to 30 feet. If the segment serving this development is only eighteen feet wide, it may not permit the required taming radius into the garage. The property owner noted that there is an existing curb cut and they are proposing to move it 20 feet. Chair Brzezinski stated that she had a problem with any curb cut along Greenleaf Street. It is a vestige from a past use that needs to be eliminated to improve the pedestrian circulation and safety in the neighborhood. The petitioner asked the Chair about the Committee's view on the number of units. Chair Brzezinski stated that she didn't object to the proposed number of units or the resultant size or bulk of the building. However, the number of proposed units did trigger her concern by how it increased the development's non -conformity with regard to providing adequate parking. SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 27, 2004 2 Additionally, the parking scheme proposed would allow vehicles to back out over the sidewalk, which conflicts with the goal of creating a safe pedestrian experience in the neighborhood. A. Alterson stated that, while there are already four non -conforming units in the existing building, this is an opportunity to building more in keeping with what is allowed. For him too, parking was the most critical issue. Ron Walczak stated that the proposal was better than what exists there now and thought that, if the number of units was reduced and the curb cut issue resolved, it could be a workable plan. Chair Brzezinski encouraged the petitioner to rethink the scope of the project in order to lessen the degree of non -conformity inherent its design. J. Wolinski asked if the existing units are legal. A. Atterson asked the petitioner when he was scheduled to appear at the ZBA. Mr. Jha stated he was to appear November 160. It was suggested that he request a continuance in order to give him time to reconsider the project design. ACTION: A. Alterson moved to recommend denial of the request to the ZBA. The motion was seconded by J. Wolinski and passed unanimously. (6-0). SPAARC 1732 Central Street Concept Construct a tour story, six dwelling unit multiple family dwelling over one office tenant on the first floor. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nathan Kipnis, Architect; John Yi, Architect; Parush Mabadi, owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: N. Kipnis presented the photographs of the site, which is just east of Green Bay. The proposed design included a single, ground floor commercial space topped by 6 dwelling units, arranged two per floor. The site currently contains a vacant commercial space, formerly housing an accountant's office. The site plan showed nine parking spaces. The amount off street parking provided reflected the requirements only of the site's two -bedroom, residential units. The amount of the commercial space is below that which would require any parking. Mr. Kipnis stated that the building height shown on the proposed elevation was below the maximum permitted by the zoning. DISCUSSION: N. Kipnis stated that he had several questions for the committee. He asked if a skylight placed on the roof of the first floor would be subject to any setback requirements. He noted that the code appeared to be silent on this. Chair Brzezinski said that she would need to research this question. Mr. Kipnis then noted that it appears that the site's northerly property line is 6.9 feet north of the existing building line of all the other buildings along the street. Were he to meet the zoning requirement of building to the lot line, that would eliminate the sidewalk in front of the property. Instead, his concept plan shows a three-foot setback from this property line. A. Alterson asked if he meant that he had located the property lines of buildings to the west. Mr. Kipnis clarified his comment as being that he had not researched where their property lines were located, but SPAARC Meeting Notes - October 27, 2004 3 that if he built to the lot line shown on his survey his building face would stick out from the other buildings. Chairman Brzezinski asked if the existing building currently aligns with the other buildings and whether it would be demolished as part of the new project. Mr. Kipnis stated that the existing would be demolished and does currently align with the other storefronts. Chairman Brzezinski noted that if the new building is made to comply with the building to lot line the trees would appear to be in the middle of the sidewalk. A. Alterson asked Mr. Mabadi if he was the owner of the property. Mr. Mabadi stated that he has the property under contract. He added that he used to own a property, the Clyboum, at 2930 Central where he ran his business. This building will house his operations once completed. A. Alterson asked him to check the title property, to see if there is a public access easement along this northerly property line. Additionally, he told the applicant that there is draft language before the Plan Commission to change the front setback regulations to three feet. This may shortly be passed. W. Hallen noted that, in the event of a fire, the concept plan would provide second way out of the vestibule for the residential unit stairway. However, if the door and wall between the stair and vestibule were removed, making vestibule part of the stairway, this problem would be solved. Mr. Kipnis observed that would be an open stair. Mr. Hallen agreed, added that fire - rated doors would be required. Mr. Kipnis asked whether and to what extent balconies can extend over the property line. Chair Brzezinski informed him that, if they are occupied space, they cannot. There are provisions for awnings. He said that he is anticipating having Juliet balconies not projection balconies. Mr. Kipnis asked the committee to review his parking lot concept for setback, handicapped parking requirements. W. Hallen asked where the water meter room was located. Mr. Kipnis said there is a mechanical room in the rear of the building. Chair Brzezinski informed him that the water meter, RPZ and sufficient area to gain access to both must be located within 3' of the entrance of the water service. If that is coming in the front, he will need to find adequate space at that location. Mr. Hallen also noted that the trash shoot needs an anteroom. Chair Brzezinski commented that the entrance to the residential doesn't have any prominence. She observed that it is a narrow space and possibly would detract to the desirability of the residential units. She also felt that there was residential needed in the part of the street, Finally, N. Kipnis discussed his plans to provide a roof deck which would serve as outdoor open space for all of the units and set back from the front of the building. Both an elevator and an exterior stairway would provide access. The stairway and elevator will both be located to the rear of the building so as not to be visible from the far side of the sidewalk. Chair Brzezinski discussed the placement of mechanical units on the top of the building and asked them to think about their visibility from either the platform or further down the sidewalk. Mr. Kipnis stated that they are considering using a new elevator design that does not require an over run. He also asked if a covered trellis could be placed on the roof. A. Alterson stated that it would not count towards building height. SPAARC Meeting (Votes - October 27, 2004 4 S►RC 618-628 Judson Avenue Preliminary Condo conversion and exterior alteration to multiple family dwelling PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jim Laukkanen, Keeney Development Group, LTD., Drew Hendel, Mealy-Hendel Architects GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The subject property falls within the Lakeshore Historic District. It is an existing 20-unit apartment building, with three floors plus a garden level. There are 6 units per floor, on the upper floors, and two units in the garden level. All units are 2 bedroom. It is before the committee for conceptual approval of exterior modifications proposed as part of condo conversion and because their zoning analysis indicates that a zoning variation will be required for one element. DISCUSSION: Drew Heindel described the planned exterior modifications. These include cleaning and tuckpointing the masonry. The roof membrane will also be replaced. They are also considering adding some decorative iron railings in front of the three window groups. Chair Brzezinski asked if these windows include doors. Mr. Heidel stated that they had previously, but had been replaced with fixed windows with operable windows at each side. Along the south side of the building and the alley frontage, the existing wooden porch and stairs will be replaced. For one of these, a variation will be needed for the porch that runs along the alley. The zoning analysis treats this as the rear property line, which would require a 30-foot setback. The developer is proposing to change the stairway configuration and expand the landing areas. A. Alterson asked if this is simply a replacement of an existing stairway. Chairman Brzezinski stated that she would support expanding the outdoor landing space. There is only one off-street parking space associated with the building. W. Hallen asked if the rebuilt stair would be BOCA code compliant. Mr. Heidel said that it would not be completely compliant. To be fully compliant, they would have to completely redo the parch and it would need to ex tend much further. Walter asked if there is some configuration that would comply. Walter stated that it is the general policy that if rebuilt stairs have space available, then it must be BOCA code compliant. A. Alterson told the applicants that, when requesting a variation, it is advisable to have a code compliant proposal. A. Atterson asked for the property's zoning classification. W. Hallen stated that the zoning is R1. A. Alterson identified its current and proposed use, multi -family residential, as a non- conforming use in the R1 district. He stated that while this zoning status would not preclude its conversion to condominiums, it would prevent the structure from being rebuilt should it be destroyed, for example by fire. Chair 3rzezinski asked if they were adding air-conditioning units and was told that they would be placed on the roof. She asked if they were aware that they would need to provide a fire sprinklers as a requirement for condo conversion. Mr. Heidel stated that he hadn't planned to do so, although he'd had an evaluation performed. Chair Brzezinski said that this topic would require additional conversation regarding this matter. Finally, the chair informed the applicants SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 27, 2004 that they would be required to provide a landscaping plan with their final construction documents. She also noted that emergency lighting will be required on exterior stairways and that cut sheets would need to be submitted for all exterior lighting. She also asked If they planned on painting or staining the wooden stairways. The developer had not yet considered this but stated that he would be going to the Preservation Commission and would do whatever they required of them. ACTION: S. Nagar moved to grant preliminary site plan and appearance review approval, subject to the staircase meeting BOCA code and meeting the requirements. The motion was seconded by S. Levine and passed unanimously. (6-0). Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley SPURC M"ft Notes — October 27, 2004 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES NOVEMBER 3, 2003 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Arlova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Paul D`Agostino, Arthur Alterson, Gavin Morgan, Sat Nagar, Jim Edwards, Carl Caneva Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hailen, Moms Robinson, Jill Chambers, Carlos Ruiz, Susan Guderley Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the October 13, 2004 and October 24,2004 meetings were approved. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 215 Lake Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a one-story addition PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Maria Tweedie, Rockwell & Associates GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Tweedie identified the subject property as an Evanston landmark and within the Lakeshore Preservation District. She stated that the proposed project has been approved by the Evanston Preservation Commission. The project now seeks variations from the 30-foot rear yard setback, the requirement for lot coverage and from a required 10-foot separation between the garage and house. DISCUSSION: Chairman Brzezinski asked if there had been any comments from the naighbors. Adova Jackson stated that she had not. Carlos Ruiz informed the committee that the Preservation Commission had recommended approval of the variation. ACTION: Arlova Jackson moved to recommend approval of the requested variation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded by Paul D'Agostino and approved unanimously ( 9-0) W SPAARC 2114 Central Preliminary and Final Replace roof top air handling unit PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Dan Rodriguez, Northeast Illinois Heating GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Rodriguez stated that his company does all of the replacement and maintenance on Starbuck's HVAC equipment. He said that he'd already applied for the permits and submitted all other applications except for the crane permit. He said that Frank Aguado asked that he appear because there is a chance that the replacement unit may be visible from the street. He passed around a picture, taken from the parking lot across the street from the subject property, of his co-worker standing on the existing unit. That individual was visible from the waist up. DISCUSSION: Chairman Brzezinski asked Mr. Rodriguez about the neighboring structures. Specifically, she asked if they were condominiums. Mr. Rodriquez stated that he did not know if that was the case, but that they were part of the same building. He added that there was some urgency to this project because this Starbucks does not currently have an operable heating system. Chairman Brzezinski asked if this was also an air conditioning unit. Mr. Rodriguez stated that this package unit included both heating and air conditioning functions. The Chair asked if the new unit would be quieter than the old unit. Mr. Rodriquez stated that it would not be quieter. The Chair noted that the Building Department is getting more frequent complaints from neighboring property owners who must view or hear roof top equipment. Mr. Rodriquez stated that the only other option available under the circumstance would be to repair the old unit. And that the new unit would be no noisier than the old one. Chair Brzezinski asked if the new unit could come with any sound attenuating package. Mr. Rodriquez said that it did not. He guessed that the new unit may be somewhat quieter because the new air conditioning unit will have an economizer which will cause it to run less. He further noted that the roof top equipment on neighboring buildings (Food Stuffs) is visible from the street. Existing fencing appears to serve a security function. Arthur Alterson asked if the dimensions of the new unit are bigger than the existing one and whether there was a change in its placement. Mr. Rodriguez stated that it may be taller because there is a transition that goes between the old and new units. However, he felt that the picture he had shown of the person standing on the existing unit indicated a three-foot allowance for some additional height. The new unit will be placed in the same location as the old one. The Chairman recommended that if there is anything that can be done to improve the sound attenuation of the unit that it be used. She noted that the City limits noise emitting from a property to 55 decibels, measured at the property line. ACTION: Arthur Alterson moved to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded by Arlova Jackson and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 3, 2004 SPAARC 636 Church Street Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior remodeling of dining area of Mr. Everest, a type 1 restaurant PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Dila R. Sharma, Manager GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Sharma stated that the restaurant's plans are still being finalized. At this time. they are planning to add an extra door to serve outdoor seating. He said that they are also considering adding tiles to the fagade, to cover the existing limestone. DISCUSSION: The Chairman informed him that the building is a landmark and that any exterior changes would require the review of either the Preservation Commission or the Preservation Planner. Carlos Ruiz stated that the proposal for adding file would need to go before the Commission. Before he could determine the level of review required for the proposed door, he would need more information on the type of door, its frame, amount of glass, etc. Staff also informed him that the door could not swing out over the public right-of-way. The plans also showed front opening windows. Mr. Sharma indicated that these windows are no longer under consideration. He said that they are still working on the remainder of the planned improvements with the contractors and are awaiting estimates. Chair Brzezinski stated that, under the circumstances, she would recommend that further discussion of the project be tabled until there were plans to review. She also suggested that, once plans have been finalized, Mr. Sharma take them before the Preservation Commission prior to SPAARC. Mr. Sharma asked whether he would need to return if there are no exterior changes made as a part of the improvements. The chair told him that if there are no exterior changes to the building the project would not need to come before either the Preservation Commission or SPAARC. ACTION: Arthur Alterson moved to table further consideration of the project at this time. The motion was seconded by Rajeev Dahal and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 2620 Lincoln Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct Mudroom and Attached two car garage PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Linda Kimball, property owner, Scott Javore, Architect, John Toniolo, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mssrs. Javore and Toniolo stated that the project involved the demolition of an existing garage and the addition of a new garage, connected to the house by a mudroom. The proposed SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 3, 2004 addition requires variations from the buildable area requirement and the required rear yard setback. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if the City had heard from any neighbors. Arlova Jackson stated that the neighbor to the south had concerns about her side yard views being blocked. She is particularly concerned that the new garage is proposed to be taller than the current one. The adjacent neighbor to the east, immediately abutting the garage, has not been heard from. Staff asked about the fencing shown on the site plan. The architects stated that this is proposed to be a 4-foot fence. Staff asked the architects whether they considered any other locations for the addition. Chair Brzezinski stated that attaching the garage in the proposed location visually merges the house and garage. She acknowledged that the front of the garage is treated to reduce its appearance as a garage. The architects stated that the principal reason for the placement of the addition was the existence of a very large oak tree. The property owner's desire to protect this tree presents a hardship related to this property by severely limiting potential locations and dictating that the mudroom attachment be longer than would otherwise be desirable. Staff questioned whether the tree would survive even this disturbance. The architects stated that remedial steps would be taken to protect the tree, including hand digging the foundation in this location and pruning the tree roots and foliage. A. Alterson noted that because the property owner could construct a new, detached garage by right, the notion of a hardship is not valid. He noted that they needed a variation because of the desire to construct the connecting link between the house and the garage. The property owner added that having a mud room was more important than having extra height for the garage. The architects said that they were now considering reducing the garage height to address the neighbors' concerns. Linda Kimball asked for the committee to clarify the regulatory restrictions on the construction of a two or two and one half car garage on her property. Did she need a variation to construct a two car garage? Ariova Jackson stated that she did not need a variation to construct a detached, two car garage, provided it was located five feet from the property line. Adova Jackson also noted that, since a detached garage may be built by right, the proposed project has great difficulty meeting the standard for variation that requires that the least regulatory adjustment be made. She also noted that a neighbor's concern weighed heavily. ACTION: Adova Jackson moved to recommend to the ZBA that the variation be denied. The motion was seconded by Arthur Alterson and passed. (6-1-1) (Gavin Morgan voted nay, Sat Nagar abstained) SPAARC 1703-1711 Darrow Avenue Preliminary and Final Creation of thirteen (13) parking spaces on the City Right -Of -Way PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John J. Leineweber GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 3, 2004 4 The applicant, John Leineweber, proposes a plan to create 13 new parking spaces to serve his redevelopment of the Strange Engineering building into live -work space on the r-o-w in front of 1703-1711 Darrow. DISCUSSION: The plan proposed by J. Leineweber utilizes approximately 6 feet of r.o.w. and 12 feet of parkway to create thirteen, 18-foot deep parking spaces. Of these, one will be reserved for handicapped parking. Mr. Leineweber stated that there is no parking permitted on the west side of Darrow. Due to the number of driveways and curb cuts on the 1700 block of Darrow, there is a total of about 10 legal parking spaces currently serving the immediate area, which has already created a parking problem for the neighbors. Gary Weiss, the engineering consultant recommended by the City, has hired by the applicant to design the layout and engineer for the additional parking spaces. J. Leineweber has bid out these plans and have selected a contractor to complete the work. He informed the committee that, should it approve the plans, he intended to immediately apply for a permit in order to construct the parking before winter set in. The plans call for the removal of the existing curb and gutter, replacing them with a depressed gutter in that same location, and establishing a new barrier curb at the sidewalk. There will also be wheel stops. Chair Brzezinski asked about the landscaping design. While he waited for his landscaping consultant to appear, Mr. Leineweber briefed the committee on his plans to landscape the comers on both sides of the parking lot and also the parkway along Church Street. The comer planting beds on either sides of the parking spaces will extend 18 feet into the street. He said that he had been working with P. D'Agostino to get street trees in each of the two beds, along with berming, decorative rock 'outcroppings' and other landscaping materials. Chair Brzezinski cautioned him that the berms not obscure visibility. She also asked if Mr. Leineweber would be installing the landscaping. He said that he was the general contractor for the project and would be responsible for both installation and maintenance of the plantings. Mr. Leineweber noted that the whole parking area will have a concrete surface. Sat Nagar noted that the plans still show a portion of the parking area as asphalt and asked him to revise the drawings or to snake a note of the change. Rajeev said that the plans had been reviewed by Traffic Engineering and that they would require a davit arm, rather than a Talmadge pole, at the comer. And they would like the parking spaces denoted by Thermoplastic. J. Leineweber asked if they could relocate the light. Rajeev asked where they would planned to relocate it. J. Leineweber said that it would have to be moved three feet. He was directed to work with Tom Twigg on this matter. Carlos Ruiz asked if parked cars would overhang the sidewalk. Rajeev recommended that the wheel stops be located a couple of feet from the sidewalk so they wouldn't intrude into the pedestrian area. SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 3, 2004 S Dennis Marino stated that it was his sense that this project involves the restoration of a period building and that a Talmadge light pole would match it better. He asked that Traffic Engineering explain its objection to its use. Rajeev said that davit arms are used in this stretch of Church Street to achieve the necessary illumination. John Leineweber said that there is a Talmadge light further down Church Street. D. Marino stated that he was concemed about where the transition was made from a residential lighting scheme, to the east of the project, and the commercial setting to the west. ACTION: Dennis Marino moved to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval, subject to replacing the comer davit arm light pole with a Talmadge fixture, in the location requested by the developer and final landscape review by the Forestry Department. The motion was seconded by Sat Nagar and passed. (6-2). (Rajeev Dahal and Adova Jackson voted nay) SPAARC 702-708 Greenleaf Street Recommendation to ZBA Demolish 2-unit building construct a 3-story, 2-unit building, for a total of four dwellings on the lot PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Lana Berkovich GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Berkovich stated that her project is on the ZBA schedule for November 961'. She corrected the agenda by informing the Chairman that the new design proposes a total of three dwelling units. DISCUSSION: She informed the committee that each of the existing structures on the site contains 2 units. The western structure has a rental garage unit on the ground floor, which is currently used to store an antique car. Above is a 2-bedroom rental apartment. The eastern building has two apartment units, one on the ground floor and one on the second floor. The proposed plan calls for gutting the western structure and converting it to one unit and demolishing the eastem structure and replacing it with a two -unit building. The arrangement of the units shown by the proposed structure's floor could be considered as either two duplexes or two townhouses. The entire ground floor would be parking. Two tandem spaces are provided for the brick building and one of the townhomes and two side -by -side spaces for the second townhome. Access to the garages would be from the alley formed by Custer Street extended south of Greenleaf. Ms. Berkovich stated that she and her husband would live in the western unit. She noted that the surrounding neighborhood exhibited a mix of unit types and uses, typical of the ones which the City's comprehensive plan seeks to promote. She stated her belief that her development was consistent with that mix. W. Hallen asked the zoning of the property. She stated that the underlying zoning is MUE, further noting that the subject property is located on the edge of that district. Ms. Berkovich observed that if this site developed as proposed, it would form a buffer between the single family houses to the north and Evanston lumber to the south. SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 3, 2004 6 Chair Brzezinski stated that she felt that this design fit in better with the scale of the existing neighborhood, and removed the curb cut that would have interfered with the pedestrian flow along Greenleaf. She complimented the contemporary design of the new structure and asked if materials had been considered. Ms. Berkovich stated that this is only a massing study and materials had not yet been chose. Some thought has been given to brick to ground floor and non-traditional cedar boards on top. The garage door will be replaced with glass panels. W. Hallen noted that walls dose to property lines will have severe fire restrictions for windows and openings. Those sides which face the public way consider the distance to the centerline of the right-of-way for the fire separation distance. These regulations will placet some restrictions on the south and west sides of the building. A. Alterson asked whether pulling the building in would assist in this matter. W. Hallen said that if this would achieve a distance of 5 feet, one inch or more, it would offer relief. R. Dahal asked about the replacement curb line and streetscape. She said that the streetscape depicted by the drawings includes both existing and proposed trees. A. Jackson stated that the variations necessary would be the same as those requested. ACTION: Rajeev Dahal moved to grant recommend approval of the variation to the ZBA. The motion was seconded by Hans Friedmanand passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 108 Florence Avenue Concecl Construct 4-story, single family attached townhomes (4 total) with attached garages. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jeff Schliesmann GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The site plan has been revised by sliding the unit now fronting Howard Street over, which makes a difference in site coverage. The units are roughly the same size, but the change in the setback results in slightly shorter and smaller area of paving on the site. The total lot coverage has been reduced from 66% to 61.7%. One DISCUSSION: Discussing the project, Mr. Schliesmann, noted that there remain some design issues. One is that the owner of Unit 1 will only be able to back out of his/her garage, a total of approximately 60 feet. Chair Brzezinski noted that, with only a small loss to the front yard, Unit 2 could be moved forward a bit to allow a small area for vehicular backing. Backing into the alley, while not ideal, isn't any worse than most garages and does not impact the pedestrian way. Chair Brzezinski observed that the revised plan responded to the committee concerns. She suggested that the developer's next step was to get a zoning analysis, and go before the ZBA for any required variations. The committee would again review the project and forward its recommendation to the ZBA. If the ZBA approved the necessary variations, he would again return to the committee for preliminary and final site plan review and approval. SPAARC Meeting Notes -November 3, 2004 7 Frank Aguado asked where trash storage would occur. The developer stated that this can occur in each unit. Frank Aguado asked if the committee would consider recommending approval to the ZBA, provided the plans do not change, so that the developer would not need to return to the committee for that step. ACTION: Arlova moved that the committee recommend approval of this design to the ZBA, provided there are no further changes to the project's design. The motion was seconded by Hans Friedman and passed unanimously. (7-1). (Rajeev Dahal voted nay) SPAARC Northwestern University Preliminary and Final Install campus site maps at various locations. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Rick Nemec, Ann Zieglemaier, Rod Gregor, Northwestern University GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Rick Nemec stated that they are seeking an application for a sign permit to install directories they want to place throughout the campus DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski stated that one of the reasons that she wanted this project to come before the committee was for its analysis regarding the potential for vehicular -pedestrian conficts. She stated that she supported the idea of installing way -finding signs. She asked whether the proposed signs were non -illuminated. Ann Zieglemaier confirmed that they were non - illuminated, adding that they would all be fully handicapped accessible. As a result, all are surrounded by paved areas. One side of the sign will display a map of the whole campus and the other side will be a blow up of the area indicating handicapped entrances and parking. The signs will 9 feet tall, and 3 feet, 8 inches wide. The signs are for pedestrians and not intended for drivers. They will not be located on the parkways; most are three foot, six inches back from sidewalk. The areas up to them, from the sidewalk, will be paved so that a wheelchair could go all around the sign. Chair Brzezinski asked whether there is any additional landscaping planned as a result of this. Ms. Zieglemaier stated that they would restore landscaping wherever they had to remove plant material. The Chairman noted that these signs are not really regulated by the sign ordinance. However, they fall within a grey area since they say Northwestern University. Any directional signage that includes the place name is technically viewed as a sign. Institutional signs get a waiver. The City has chosen not to issue a permit for these signs. The university's appearance at the meeting was not a condition for obtaining permit. Rather, it is a function of meeting the requirements of the Site Plan and Appearance Review Ordinance and receiving feedback, should to committee find any errors or omissions found in the plans. The Chairman observed that these are really informational signs or location maps SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 3, 2004 8 ACTION: A motion was made to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. (8-0). Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley SPAaRC Meeting Notes — Nowember A 2004 9 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES NOVEMBER 10, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, James Wolinski, Carolyn Brzezinski, Arthur Alterson, Arlova Jackson, Sat Nagar, Rajeev Dahal, Dennis Marino Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Frank Aguado, Jill Chambers, Susan Guderley Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the October 27, 2004 meeting were approved. (R. Dahal and H. Friedman abstained) Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2485 Howard Street Recommendation to ZBA Intenorremodeling at Jewel Food Store to accommodate a type 9 restaurant PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom Picarski, lawyer for applicant; David Thoma, architect for applicant. GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Picarski stated that the applicant, The Stratford Company, is planning on opening a take- out, Kosher, Chinese food section within an existing Jewel store. The restaurant will occupy a small percentage of the store's area. Mr. Picarski displayed renderings of the restaurant's sales kiosk. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski noted that this is on the agenda because of the project's status as a type I) restaurant. She started that one of the committee's concems regarding this type of restaurant is litter. She asked whether the restaurant will be distributing disposable type wrapping, bags or containers. Mr. Picarski stated that there will be no seating area and sales are exclusively cant' -out. James Wolinski stated that type II restaurants are required to submit a litter plan that establishes the means by which it will control litter within 250 feet of the property. He further noted that there have been litter issues associated with the Target store, within this same shopping center. He warned that, if they were granted a special use permit, they would be responsible for all litter within the 250 foot radius, regardless of its source. Mr. Pacarski asked whether the Jewel store had been assigned any responsibility for litter control within the shopping center. Chair Brzezinski and J. Wolinski stated that Jewel does have some clean up responsibility. However, the approval and issuance of this or any other request for a special use permit for a type II restaurant is dependent upon an acceptable and effective litter control plan. A. Alterson clarified that, as a retail food establishment, Jewel is currently required to pick up within 250 feet of its operation, just as restaurants must. This requirement falls under the City's health code and has nothing to do with a development agreement or any special zoning. The litter requirement imposed type 11 restaurants dictates that they must clean up all litter and garbage, as well as its own, within 250 feet of the premises. That will take in a large portion of this shopping center, the parking lot to the west, and into the water reclamation district area west of that. Chair Brzezinski asked if this operation will be similar to how Starbuck's coffee has established itself in Dominick's. Mr. Thoma added that, in addition to the hot food sales, there will be a display case for some prepared items which shoppers can simply place in their shopping cart. Mr. Picarski stated that this operation will be more analogous to Jewel's prepared food counters, where people can order a sandwich, pizza, or chicken 'to go'. W. Hallen found it peculiar that this operation is considered a type 11 restaurant. He felt that the character of the food and its containers was not readily disposable, less so than that used by Starbucks, and should be considered while deliberating on this request. A. Alterson asked about the method of payment. Mr. Picarski explained that both the freshly prepared items and pre -prepackaged items would be paid for separately by Jewel shoppers. Chair Brzezinski stated that she felt that this is similar and complimentary to the Jewel's current deli or pizza counter. A. Alterson asked if there will be additional waste containers planned for the operation. Mr. Picarski stated that none were planned. Should they be a condition to approval, he will add them after clearing them with Jewel. ACTION: Sat Nagar moved to grant recommend approval of the variation to the ZBA. The motion was seconded by Arthur Alterson and passed unanimously. (7-0). SPAARC 2212 Grant Street Construct a second -story addition PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Recommendation to ZBA Mark Golan, architect homeowner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Golan stated that a variation from the side yard requirement is necessary in order to construct a second story addition to an existing, one-story bungalow. A major variance Is required because the requested side yard width is more than a 30% reduction in the required side yard width. DISCUSSION: At the nearest point, the house currently comes within 2.7 feet of the property line. The required side yard width is 5 feet Arthur Alterson asked if the house was this dose to the property line along its full length. Mr. Golan stated that there would be one window, within the SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 10, 2004 2 stairwell, that is closer than three feet to the property line. It was his understanding that this would be required to be safety glass. Chair Brzezinski and W. Hallen corrected him, stating that it needed to be fire rated. Mr. Golan said that if that window is 3 feet or closer, he would either eliminate the window or make it fire rated glass. Chair Brzezinski asked if his clients intended to live in the house once the addition was constructed, noting that this neighborhood has been vulnerable to a number of 'tear downs'. Mr. Golan stated that they did. He told the committee said that the house currently has only two bedrooms. One of these will become a breakfast area and the other will contain the stairwell up to the new second floor. Mr. Golan stated that, with the addition, the home will contain three bedrooms and three baths, including an original one on the first floor. He noted that have been additions to several other houses in the neighborhood. He observed that two of these are located two doors down from this site. He conjectured that one of these probably required variance because the distance between them is less than ten feet. The Chair asked if any of the neighbors had been heard from. Arlova Jackson stated that notice for the variance had not yet been mailed. Mr. Golan said that the owners are scheduled for the December ZBA meeting, but wanted to proceed immediately with the SPAARC review. They have recently been given the list of property owners who will be notified of their requested variance and plan to speak with their adjacent neighbors about the project. Sat Nagar said that the city %011 need a grading plan for the back yard to make sure the existing grades are maintained. He also asked the architect to show the locations of the proposed downspouts. The architect said that the plans will show the downspout locations and will direct the outflow to the owner's property. However, he said that he didn't think he needed a grading plan since no groundwork is proposed. Chairman Brzezinski noted that they would be exceeding their permit if they did any earth moving past the exist foundation. F. Aguado asked if the air conditioning unit shown on the plans was new. Mr. Golan stated that it Is. Mr. Aguado observed that it appears to be too close to the property line and might require another variation. Mr. Golan said that he would move its location so that it meets the 10-foot yard requirement. Mr. Golan noted that the applicant is requesting more than one variance: one for the building and one for the balcony. He noted that if they had made the building larger, filling in that portion of the second floor proposed as a balcony, they would not have needed a second variance. ACTION: Arthur Alterson moved to recommend approval of the variation to the ZBA conditioned upon the plans showing the direction of down spouts and the air conditioning meeting all required yard setbacks. The motion was seconded by Sat Nagar and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 10, 2004 3 SPAARC 1031 Sherman Avenue Concept Construct twelve attached single family dwellings (12 town homes) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Anita Goyal, contract purchaser of subject property; Gloria Wagner, Listing Agent for the property GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The agent distributed proposed renderings and floor plans of the development and the survey of the property. She noted that the property had been on the market during the past spring. Ms. Goyal stated that she is proposing to construct twelve town homes on the site about 2200 square feet, with two parking spaces per unit and 8 guest parking spaces on the outside. Three stories, masonry first floor and brick on the second and third floors. DISCUSSION: There was discussion of the property's zoning. The agent and developer stated that they had been told that the site carried two zoning classifications because it is divided into two parcels, one fronting on Sherman and one taking frontage on a rear alley (Custer Street extended). A., Akerson corrected her by saying that the property is one zoning lot and that the boundary between two zoning districts falls on this property. Therefore, its zoning is either MUE or R3. The chair noted that with either zoning designation, the developer would need to apply for a planned development or zoning amendment to accomplish the proposed development. The developer confirmed that vehicular access to the site would be via the alley (Custer Street). The building itself would not address Sherman. The individual unit entrances faced the southern, side property line. Pedestrian access, into the units, would be gained via a sidewalk from either the alley or Sherman. Garage entrances and visitor parking spaces would be located on the north side of the building. Chair Brzezinski stated that she objected to both the number of units proposed on the site and its failure to add anything to the Sherman Avenue streetscape. She noted that there is an established pattern in the neighborhood of street facing entrances. This design does not fit into that pattern. Ms. Goyal said that her architect had suggested turning two end units to face Sherman, creating more of an L-shaped building. Chair Brzezinski observed that, to approach a rear unit, a pedestrian would have a long, largely unmonitored pathway. This design raises safety concerns. James Wolinski asked if the ownership of the property has been resolved. The agent stated that was resolved by the current owner. ACTION: Dennis Marino moved to deny concept approval. The motion was seconded by J. Wolinski. In the discussion that followed, D. Marino stated that he believed that the site was suitable for residential development. However, he shared the chair's criticism regarding both the number of units and the effect of the proposed site design on the neighborhood's streetscape. He advised the developer to return with a plan that included fewer units and which faced the street. Hans Friedman advised them to revisit a previously reviewed site plan, which utilized a courtyard concept. The developer stated that design did not fit into her marketing study, in SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 10, 2004 4 terms of square footage per unit. She stated that her proposed price point for these units is $450499,000. The motion passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 3330 Central Street Recommendation to Sian Board Installation of two signs for "Starbucks Coffee" PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This Starbucks franchise proposes substantial signage for this site, most of which oonfonns to the sign regulations. Two signs require a variation: one is the menu board and the other, located at the entry point to the drive up lane, announces a 10-foot high clearance for the roadway. The Menu Board serves the drive up window and is located in the rear of the building. The maximum permitted area is 25 square feet; the area of the proposed sign is 29 sq. fL The second sign, which is considered a free-standing sign, is too high for its distance to the property line. DISCUSSION: Sat Nagar asked for the menu board dimensions. Walter Hallen stated that they are 75 Inches by three feet. ACTION: Paul D'Agostino moved to recommend approval to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded by James Wolinski and passed. (7-1). A. Alterson voted nay. SPAARC 1854 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sian Board Install one blade sign for "Lou Malnalis" PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The business is requesting a blade sign to place on the southeast comer of the building. The sign, as proposed, will require two variations from the sign ordinance. Plans show the sign mounted perpendicular to the building, located on either the building's angular comer wall or on its Sherman Street facade. In either case, a variation will be required because the sign regulations do not permit signs to be mounted perpendicular to the face of the building. The second variation is necessary due to the sign's total height. The 8-foot tall sign will be mounted 16 feet above the street, topping out at twenty four feet. The maximum height permitted is 15.5 feet. The sign is proposed to be internally illuminated. SPAARC Meeting Notes - November 10, 2004 . ^ Y DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski stated that she would not approve an internally illuminated sign. She would not oppose an externally illuminated sign that was more of a banner and consistent with the awning. W. Hallen stated that he had received several calls from the Sherman Garden residents who indicated that they would prefer the low level light generated by an internally illuminated sign. He thought they would be more concerned about the higher light level that would spread from external illumination. Chair Brzezinski stated that she didn't have a problem with the proposed height of the sign. ACTION: Jim Wolinski moved to approve the requested variations to the sign board. The motion was seconded by Rajeev Dahal. A. Alterson stated that this is residentially zoned property. W. Hallen noted that a commercial use, Copy Cat, was located directly across the street and that the area is a transition zone between residential and commercial uses. A. Alterson added that the building had been nicely rehabbed and should have a sign that complements its appearance. The motion was seconded by Rajeev Dahal and failed to pass (3-5). A. Alterson moved to recommend denial to the sign board. He stated that he thought that they should come back with a more "sensitive" design. Motion was seconded by Sat Nagar and passed. (5-3) SPAARC 1228 Emerson Construct Residential condominium building PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew Ferris, Andrew Szafaras GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The Plan Commission deliberation on this development was continued at the last meeting. Since then, the developer met with neighborhood representatives about the project design. These discussions have prompted some design changes to try to satisfy some of their concerns DISCUSSION: . There have been no changes to the site plan; the building footprint, parking, entry and exit remain the same. There have been changes made to the building design. The neighbors' big concerns are overall height, unit count, parking ratio, and placement of the building in reference to the other buildings south along Ridge Avenue. Starting with the fifth floor above grade level. the three upper floors of the building are now shown stepped back by about ten feet for each. Each end of the building now consists of four living floors, atop the lower garage level. The new design results in 48 units, which now includes some 3-bedroom units. The top floor houses four units, two of which are almost 3,000 sq. feet. The sixth floor, lost two one -bedroom units. It now includes two, 2-bedroom units that are about 2,300 sq. ft. Similar changes happen on the fifth floor. The new unit mix includes: six 1-bedrooms, forty 2-bedrooms, and two 34xdrooms. This is a reduction of 12 units from the prior design. The parking ratio now is almost two spaces per unit, which SPAARC Meeting Notes -- November 10, 2004 6 includes 15 spaces above what would be required by zoning. Mr. Ferris said that by removing one floor from the building, the unit count was 50. Stepping back the upper floors are intended to address the privacy concerns of homeowners to the west. This is also true on the south side of the building. The developer looked at trying to move the building closer to Ridge Avenue, in order to line up with the buildings to the south. This would result in making the parking ramp entrance off of Ridge steeper. This was not possible, as it was at maximum pitch already and could not be made any steeper. Other ramp locations were examined and found not to be practicable because of the site's topography, traffic flow, or the reduction in parking spaces. Chair asked how the grade level parking spaces would be managed. Mr. Ferris stated that these spaces would not be assigned. J. Wolinski asked about the neighbors' reactions to the new design. Mr. Ferris stated that he'd met with Barb Stanley, Lome and Greg Sommers, who represented the neighbors. The Sommers' main concern was that the building be moved forward to match the setbacks of the buildings to the south. He said that he had explained to them how this was not possible to do, given site constraints. Ms. Stanley's concerns regarding height, unit count, parking and price, were somewhat alleviated. Their other remaining issue was their dislike of the proposed architectural style. Mr. Ferris stated that he didn't think the style was ugly or would impact the sale of the units. Chair Brzezinski complimented Mr. Ferris on his work in addressing the neighbors' concerns. However, in terms of the architecture and the adjacent historic district, she noted that the new design is very symmetrical that makes the building appear as its standing alone. The chair stated that it no longer appears to be fitting into the rest of the corridor. She suggested that only the western end of the building, adjacent to the historic district, be stepped down, to acknowledge its single-family nature. D. Marino noted that there are three different groups weighing in on this project - Site Plan, Plan Commission and the neighbors - all of which had slightly different approaches. J. Wolinski noted that this design shows that there has been some attempt at addressing the issues raised by the neighbors and Plan Commission. C. Brzezinski asked about the building's base material. Mr. Ferris stated that they plan to use textured, pre -cast panel. Design could be added, if that was desired by the neighbors. ACTION: Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 10, 2004 SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 10, 2004 8 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES NOVEMBER 17, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski, Dennis Marino, Carolyn Brzezinski, James Edwards Design Professional: Other Staff: Carlos Ruiz, Walter Hallen, Frank Aguado, Donna Spicuzza, Susan Gudedey Chair Brzezlnski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 645 Custer Pro -Application Conference Change of use to a 14 unit, multiple family dwellings (condos) and 4 attached single-family dwellings (town houses). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: James Nagle, architect, Steven Lome, developer, Maura Crisham, J. T. Murray, attorney GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: This project had appeared previously before the committee for concept approval. Subsequently, the project team has since met several times with the area's neighbors and the development's plans have been somewhat modified. DISCUSSION: The project design continues to show four town homes in the front of the property, along Custer. However, the design previously included 16 units in the rear of the property. This number has been reduced to 14 units. The design has also been modified to incorporate a stepping back of the heights of the buildings. The front units have front facing roof terraces off of their third floor penthouses. The rear condo buildings reach a height of 4-stories, but are shielded by the town homes and not as visible from the street. The town homes have a 15- foot front yard and there is a 20-foot distance between the front and rear buildings. The tops of the townhouses are stepped back to allow light and air back into the central open space. The site contains about 40% open space, which includes side, front and central yard space. This includes the top of the garage, which will be a 'green roof. Garages for the town homes will be back -loaded. They will be entered from the alley, via the garage underneath the condominium building. The town homes floor plan will have ground, first, and second floors, along with a roof terrace, for a total of 3'/2 stories. The middle condo buildings will also be 3'/2 stories. Because the grade at the alley goes up approximately 6 Y2 feet, the rear condo buildings will be slightly higher, approximately 4 stories. The idea is that the rear units will have a view over the tracks, possibly of the city and the lake. The garage will contain a total of 28 spaces. This assumes two spaces per 3-bedroom units and 1 %: spaces per condominiums and town homes. Mr. Nagle stated that, for materials, the intention is to use masonry starting with the front town homes. A light red brick (possibly with a couple of colors) is being considered, accented with light silvery metal for the window bays, roof terraces and detailing. Masonry will also be used for the condo building, using a couple different colors, depending upon the exposure. The top of these buildings will also be accented will be the silvery metal detailing. Mr. Nagle stated that entrance to the town homes is from the front. The condominiums will be entered via a lobby, with each unit's entrance tucked into a different comer. All of the condominiums will have different exposures so that they will not look directly into one another. He noted that there will be a green strip as a buffer to the north and a transitional landscape space in the rear of the property. Fencing in the front of then town homes, on the balconies and on the roof terraces would be open, wrought iron. Enclos&J balconies will extend three feet into the 15 foot front yard, thus breaking up the scale of the, building and forming a canopy over the front door. A zoning analysis was completed prior to this development's last appearance before the committee. It has not been resubmitted to reflect the reds ction in the number of units. The site is located in the MUE District. F. Aguado highlighted the variations identified by that analysis. Zoning would allow four town homes, but only five multi -family units; fourteen units are proposed. The proposed FAR exceeds that permittec, within the district; .45 is allowed and 2.00 is proposed. A fifteen foot front yard setback is required; a setback of eleven feet was originally proposed. The requirement for the interior side Surd, to the north, is fifteen feet; a yard width of 4.33 feet is proposed. The required width for the east side yard is twenty-five feet; a yard width of 4 feet 8 inches is proposed. A zero lot line is proposed for the south side yard; zoning would require a fifteen foot wide setback. A fence variation would be required for the front fencing. A Planned Development is proposed. F. Aguado added that there might be a couple of remaining issues pertaining to off-street parking a nd loading. He suggested that there be another zoning analysis to clarify this. A . Alterson noted that the town homes do not have a loading dock requirement, so their area is not relevan! to that analysis. In that case, the amount of floor area proposed would not require a loading dock. Mr. Nagle said that d they had the opportunity to put one it, they might anyway. J. Wolinski asked if they would be sprinklers in the town homes. The developer stated that everything would be sprinkled. SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 17, 2004 2 C. Brzezinski complimented the developer on his design for this site, from the standpoint of siting, scale, materials, and the addition of complimentary, contemporary architecture. She added that the solution of the parking problem was critical to this location, and would not have been easily addressed as a Planned Development. The developer met with two neighborhood constituencies: the New Biscuit Loft Association and Reba Fellowship. The reactions of the former were generally good. Concerns over the loss of open areas on the site were somewhat ameliorated by the proposed design, which breaks up the mass of the buildings and orients them away from the adjacent condominiums. Discussions with the latter organization focused on affordable housing. There was agreement that, while affordable housing is a value worth pursuing, this development would not be provide the opportunity for such units. Mr. Lome added that that was not to say that they would not be interested in an off -setting contribution in the interest of promoting affordable housing. Chair Brzezinski noted that the condo market has been able to address a segment of the affordable housing market, namely moderate income, local workers. Mr. Lome stated that he did not yet have cost estimates, but that his units will be priced competitively. He described three basic unit types: the 3-bedroom town homes; two bedroom condominiums, some of which have 'bonus areas" usable as offices; and duplex penthouses, which are viewed for parking purposes as 3-bedroom. Mr. Nagle stated that these units are sized between 1,300 and 2,000 square feet. A. Alterson asked about the utility poles. Mr. Nagle stated that efforts will be made to put utilities underground. The trash will be disposed of via trash shoots to a trash compactor, In the basement. A. Alterson inquired about rooftop equipment. There are some generators and compressors surrounded by small enclosures. Arthur Alterson noted another concern raised repeatedly during Plan Commission review was that of newer buildings looking down upon adjacent residents. Mr. Nagle replied that the pinwheel design helps that by shifting windows to create both privacy and good sight lines. Donna Spicuzza asked if the developer would consider responding to affordability for working families. Mr. Tome stated that this would be one of the issues he would be studying seriously. Ms. Spicuzza asked about private open space for the town homes, noting that they only seem to have it on their roof terraces. Mr. Nagle noted that there would also be front yard space. Mr. Tome noted that each of the first floor condominiums would also have outdoor yard areas. Arthur Alterson asked if there were any security concerns regarding the central courtyard. Mr. Nagle noted that it is not at grade and not readily accessible from off site. Chair Brzezinski asked if they were considering gating the area off. They stated that they were not currently considering a gate. The Chair agreed, noting that if security problems arose a gate could be added later by the condo association. Ron Walczak stated that security concerns can be addressed by some form of gating. He noted that open gating would be most appropriate. Ms. Chrisham suggested that if a gate were erected, it should be placed further back so that it would be less apparent and give less of "gated community" feel. SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 17, 2004 ' To recap, the Chairman noted that: the design of the project was well received; there had been a request to eliminate utility poles and lines around the project, particularly along its southern edge; and that affordability of units needed to be considered and addressed. ACTION: Dennis Marino moved approval of the revised concept plan. The motion was seconded Arthur Alterson and passed unanimously. (8-0). Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley SPAARC Meeting Notes — November 17, 2004 4 SITE PLAN and DRAFT APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE NOTAPPROVED MEETING NOTES DECEMBER 1, 2004 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Chair, Paul D'Agostino, Arthur Alterson, .lames Edwards, Adova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Gavin Morgan, Sat Nagar, Dave Stonebeck, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski, Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff., Frank Aguado, Jill Chambers, Walter Hallen, Gavin Morgan, Moms Robinson Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting at 2:35 P.M. I. Approved Meeting Notes from November 3, November 10 and November 17, 2004 II & III. Erect a 4. 5 foot high, wrouaht iron fence at1235-1237 Emerson Street: Preliminary and Final PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew Spatz. Develoaer GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Acting as agent, Mr. Spatz provided the Site Plan members with design renderings Indicating the position of a proposed project to erect a four and one half foot high wrought iron fence in front of two residential buildings at 1235-12347 Emerson, owned by Mr. Leon Robinson, DISCUSSION: After providing clarification of the location of the buildings, the type, height and positioning of the fence, Member Marino presented a motion for approval and member D'Agostino provided a second to the motion. Member Walczak advised the Committee that he had conducted a security survey of the properties and determined that the basement apartment windows in the building at the comer of Emerson and Asbury have exterior burglar bars attached. The attachment of the bars Is a violation of fire codes. In order to comply with codes, bars with thumb release mechanisms should be attached on the inside of the windows. Property Standards Inspectors are scheduled to inspect the situation. Chair Brzezinski suggested that approval should be contingent on correcting the window bars situation. Mr. Spatz interjected that the owner is still waiting for an official document from the City, adding that the owner has intentions of complying once the notice is received. Mr. Alterson asked if the motion on the floor addressed the concern. Member Marino stated that although the window bars is an important issue and needed correcting, it is a separate issue. Chair Brzezinski and member Alterson argued that nevertheless it is a security and safety issue that needs addressing immediately. Mr. Spatz stated that the situation will be corrected immediately after the official notice is received. Member Walczak stated that the notification circumstance should have a resolution as soon as the next day. ACTION A brief discussion ended when Mr. Marino called for the question. The motion to approve passed with one abstention by member Friedman and one no vote cast by Chair Brzezinski. IV. Starbuck's Coffee Special Use Request for Tvae 2 Restaurant: Preliminary and Final PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Shellie Gazlay. Proiect Manager, Neil Laver, Develoament Manage GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Walter Hallen commented that when this new Starbuck's open at 2400 Main Street, in the Main Street Market Place shopping center, it will be the seventh to open In the City. Chair Brzezinski asked the Starbuck's representative to introduce herself and to first explain the trash receptacle and storage plan. Ms. Shellie Gazlay introduced herself as the Architecture Project Manager. Ms. Gazlay stated that this new store will not be a drive through facility and described the location and layout of the new type 2 restaurant within the shopping center. Ms. Gazlay then provided a detailed explanation as to where the trash receptacles will be placed. A trash plan has been submitted to the City and a dumpster, provided by the landlord is located on the property and the plan is in full compliance with applicable City codes. The restaurant is fully ADA accessible and excellent parking is available throughout the shopping center. Ms. Gazlay also provided the Committee with an overview of the signage requirement and explained why there will be a request for a sign variance. Currently the City allows for a minimum height of 15.6 feet, however, when centered on the building fagade the top of the sign will be 16.6 feet. The building design will not accommodate a lower sign. Chair Brzezinski stated that the request was very reasonable. Secondly, the developer's approved Unified Business Center Plan requires double lot I!ne signage to have 28-30 inches of spacing between the signs. The proposal presented will have 32 inches of space between the signs. Walter Hallen stated that the request for variances have been submitted and will be considered in the following week. 5PAARC Meeft Notes — December 1, 2004 2 DISCUSSION: Member Alterson led a brief discussion regarding the location of the trash receptacle and expressed his belief that another receptacle placement should be considered further south towards the Sam's Club, into the shopping center. Mr. Alterson received assurances that Starbuck's will be a good neighbor and will provide extra ordinary trash maintenance efforts as well as encouraging the landlord to provide extra ordinary efforts since the perimeter areas are his responsible. Mr. Marino made a motion for approval and member Alterson provided a second. Member Alterson asked about the green space in front of the restaurant and was advised that it really was two out lots slated for future development. Member Alterson then asked why the restaurant will not be a drive through. Mr. Rick Lauer, Development Manager for Starbuck's stated that the site does not meet the faster traffic flow pattern. The shopping center, neighborhood location was more of a destination site rather than a high traffic drive through, not to mention the construction expense involved with drive through restaurants. In addition the other locations in the City are drive through facilities and the need is not there in this instance. Chair Brzezinski asked if any consideration was given to installing awnings on the west elevation. The building lends itself to awning elements and it would make an attractive definition for the site. Chair Brzezinski was advised by Mr. Lauer that the landlord prohibited the installation of awnings to maintain exterior consistency in the shopping center, but Starbuck's would certainly entertain the possibility if allowed. Mr. Lauer agreed that the green Starbuck's awning would be a welcome addition and would appreciate staff support to add the elements. ACTION After a brief discussion, Chair Brzezinski called for the question and the motion was passed with a unanimous vote. V. Construct a Mixed Use Develooment at 1415 Howard Street: Conceot PROJECT PRESENTED BY: GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Nick Nicuvoico Mr. Nick Nicuvoico identified himself as an owner development partner of the 8 unit building located at 1415 Howard Street. Mr. Nicuvoico provided the Committee with photographs of the building and explained how he wished to convert the building into fifteen dwelling units and two commercial spaces, one of which his company would occupy. DISCUSSION: At the out set the concept met with several layout issues. The owner did not provide any architectural renderings with elevation plans indicating conformity to building codes. In addition the concept did not allow for a Howard Street entry. SPAARC Meeting Notes — December 1. 2004 It was apparent to the Committee members that an architect needed to be present. Members also expressed their belief that the building was a quality structure and that fad should be taken into consideration. ACTION: Mr. Marino moved to table the request until such time a zoning analysis, traffic engineering study, architectural renderings and water metering concerns can be presented and addressed. Member Alterson provided a second and the motion passed with a unanimous vote. Vl. Member Alterson next presented an off -agenda item for the purpose of soliciting Committee members comments that would then be communicated to the Plan Commission. The issue concerns the latest architectural iterations for 1228 Emerson Street (Green Bay Road and Emerson, SW comer). Because of previous concems and suggestions, the developer has reduced the height of the residential complex by one floor. In previous iteration(s) the design had a stepping affect on the west and south elevations. With the new design the stepping elements have been removed. The site plan remains the same but member Alterson was not sure if there was a reduction in residential units. The proposed project will have one floor of parking and five floors of residential. A prolonged discussion ensued with member Marino stating that SPAARC has already presented its opinions and that the Plan Commission should proceed with its consideration of the project. Chair Brzezinski and design professional Hans Friedman voiced an agreed opinion that the stepping element should be retained on west elevation. Mr. Hallen favored no stepping. Mr. Hallen and others also expressed concern about the manner in which a very vocal minority could lead to harmful development project results, citing examples in other parts of the City. After additional, general comments were made by other members, Chair Brzezinski adjourned the meeting at approximately 4:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Moms E. Robinson Economic Development Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes -- December 1, 2004 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES January 5, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Paul D'Agostlno, Rajeev Dahal, Ron Walczak, Arthur Alterson, Arlova Jackson, Jim Edwards, Sat Nagar, Jim Wolinskf Design Professional: Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Donna Spicuzza, Susan Gudedey Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the December 8 h and December 22nd meetings were approved 9-0 and 8-0-1(R. Dahal), respectively. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2535-2541 Prairie Avenue Final Condo conversion and deconvert from 49 units to 39 units PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew Heindel, Architect; Jim Laukkanen, and George Cyrus, Prairie Development Group GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Developers propose to convert existing building with 49 rental units to 39 condominium units. DISCUSSION: Mr. Heindel stated that only one change has been made to the proposed project since its last appearance before SPAARC. That is, instead of converting both ground floor commercial spaces to residential units, one of these will remain as a commercial space until the current user's lease runs out. Chair Brzezinski asked about the ownership of this unit, wondering who or what entity might eventually be responsible for the expense of converting it to a residential use. Mr. Laukkanen stated that the ownership of the unit would be retained by the original developers. Until that time, this storefront will retain its existing windows and front door. Upon conversion, its front windows will be replaced to those more resembling a residential use, including decorative iron grillwork, and the unit will take its access from an interior halfway. Chair Brzezinski asked whether the developers were still considering the addition of "Jullef balconies on the courtyard windows. Mr. Heidel stated that they were not. However, he noted that they intend to eventually add a wood porch to the rear of the building. This will require a zoning variation. In response to a question from staff, Mr. Heidel added that this porch will not needed as a form of egress; a secondary stairway for the units is located within the existing building. Chair Brzezinski asked what type of windows would be used for replacement. Mr. Cyrus stated that the majority of the front windows have already been replaced and that this same type will be repeated in the courtyard and elsewhere. Chair Brzezinski asked about the existing, rear garage units. Mr. Heindel noted that there currently are eleven interior garage spaces. The developers will be seeking another zoning variation to establish an exterior parking pad to replace the enclosed spaces. Ron Walczak asked about the presence of security lighting. Mr. Heindel noted the proposed kXatlons for exterior lighting. ACTION: Arthur Alterson moved to grant final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded by J. Wollnskl and passed unanimously. (9-0). JPAARC 843-849 Ridae Avenue Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior remodeling for proposed condo conversion. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Morton Kaplan, developer; Rachel Bomgaars, architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Applicant proposes interior and exterior work prior to converting building to condominiums. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked Mr. Kaplan to clarify his purpose in applying for a permit to begin work on only a portion of the building's total number of units. He explained that his bank financing requires him to stage his redevelopment in order to have case flow from the safe of these first six units. He informed the committee that he had, however, ordered the approved type of replacement windows for all of the building's windows. J. Wolinski told Mr. Kaplan that there needed to be better and more responsive construction management on this project. He said that his office had been compelled to issue a stop order when the project's manager had failed or refused to install a chute to comply with a City citation for construction debris and trash being thrown from upper story windows. Mr. Kaplan told the committee that he had only recently been made aware of these incidents and that he has instructed his manager, Bryan Thomas, to comply fully with City codes. Ms. Somgaars presented the site plan for the project, noting the locations for the new stairways and the parking lot design. Mr. Kaplan told the committee that his project had been before both the ZBA and the preservation commission and had received the necessary SPAARC Meeting Notes - January 5.2005 2 .4 approvals. Carlos Ruiz confirmed that the preservation commission had approved the replacement windows, the porch relocation and construction, and parking recommendation. Ms. Bomgaars stated that, since the Preservation Commission's action, the proposed parking configuration had been rotated to create a 24-foot aisle. This subsequent design had been approved by the ZBA. In response to questions from staff, she noted that a utility pole will need to be relocated within the alley in order for cars to be able to access the parking area. The site plan shows four of the parking spaces located directly along the alley. The remaining spaces are shown inside a gated area. The gate will be electronically activated by the drivers. Also located within this gated area is a landscaped courtyard. The Chairman asked about the landscape plan for this and other portions of the site. Mr. Kaplan said that one has not yet been completed. Chair Brzezinski also asked about the lighting scheme for this area. Ms. Bomgaars suggested lighting be mounted on the building and possibly a pole light. Chair Brzezinski stated that the lighting needn't be excessive to be effective; she suggested lighted bollards as one possible solution. ACTION: Arthur Alterson moved to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval conditioned upon the applicant's submittal of a landscape plan and its approval by Paul D'Agostino. The motion was seconded by Ron Walczak and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 1415 Howard Street Preliminary Construct a mixed use development with two commercial spaces and fifteen dwelling units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nicu Voicu, developer, Lawrence Gold, architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Construction of a mixed use development with two storefronts and fifteen dwelling units. DISCUSSION: Frank Aguado confirmed that the zoning analysis for the building has been completed and approved. He noted that one minor revision had been made to the design seen previously, affecting a rear balcony. As now proposed, the building may be built "as of right. Mr. Voicu responded to the committee's prior criticisms regarding his desire to add a third, first floor entrance, on the buildings east elevation. He stated that this entrance was intended to directly serve the adjacent community room. It was his intention that this arrangement would facilitate residents' use of the community room and the adjacent side yard for casual gatherings, such as barbequing, and for association meetings. Chair Brzezinski said that her greatest concern with the entrance was security. By introducing a third, less visible means of ingress/egress. she believes this design compromises the building's security. She also questioned the functionality of the proposed space for Mr. Voicu's intended purpose. The committee observed that the side yard is essentially a deep, narrow gangway. Even if paved as proposed, it would be difficult to use it for more than a pass -through. Ron Walczak expressed concern about its use as a passage way, due to lack of visibility and its isolation SPAARC Meeting Notes - January 5. 2005 I from internal monitoring. Chair Brzezinski suggested that the architect try changes in the plane of the building in this location, possibly pulling it in to create more space to achieve the intended purpose. Ald. Rainey stated that she supported the project and asked if roof -top space for this purpose was possible. Chair Brzezinski said that this would be, provided structural considerations related to the additional load were met and that two means of roof -top access were provided. Chair Brzezinski agreed that outdoor space for condominium developments was very important. Walter Hallen noted that the building will require a second stairway to the basement. Mr. Gold said that he could add one where a parking space is currently shown, noting that the plans currently include more parking than required by ordinance. Chair Brzezinski noted the continued lack of elevations in the submittal and stated that she was particularly concerned about the appearance of the front fagade. Sat Nagar stated that easements would not be granted so that front balconies could extend out over the public way. Chair Brzezinski observed that south -facing balconies in the building's front fagade could be very desirable, but that they would need to be pulled into the building and would impact interior space. The committee agreed that they needed to see all four elevations in order to complete Its review of the project. ACTION: Jim Wolinski moved to table any further preliminary site plan and appearance review until the applicant provided the committee with required elevations. Sat Nagar seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. (9-0). SpAARC 320 Lake Street Recommendation to ZBg Construct a one story rear addition. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Paul Janicid. architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant wishes to remove a non -original addition to his home and replace it with a new one, resulting in a net addition of 98 square feet of lot coverage. DISCUSSION: Mr. Janicki noted that the existing residence was a modified farmhouse, located within Evanston's Lakeshore Historic District. The current owner wishes to remove the existing rear addition and to add a new one. The new space will accommodate a small entryway and a breakfast room. He displayed an elevation of the proposed addition showing that the interior space will be cantilevered over the foundation, resulting in a compact foot print. Mr. Janicki stated that the project has been approved unanimously by the Preservation Commission. The requested zoning variations are for increases to the permitted F.A.R. and lot coverage and a reduced rear yard setback. SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 5, 2005 4 Chair Brzezinski asked if there had been any comments received from neighbors. Arlova Jackson stated that she had not received any. Mr. Janicki said that he had suggested that the owner to discuss the project with his immediate neighbors but he was not sure whether or not he had done so. ACTION: Ron Walczak moved to recommend approval of the requested variations to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Arlova Jackson seconded motion, which passed unanimously. (7-0). Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley sPAARC Mee ft Notes — January A 2005 5 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JANUARY 12, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeeve Dahal, Dennis Marino, James Wolinski, Paul D'Agostino, Jim Edwards, Arlova Jackson, Arthur Alterson Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Frank Aguado, Carlos Ruiz, Gavin Morgan, Jill Chambers, Susan Gudedey Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. J. Wolinski moved that the minutes of the January 5, 2005 meeting be approved. The motion was seconded by Arlova Jackson and passed. (84-1) Hans Friedman abstained from voting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2460 Main Street Preliminary and Recommendation to ZBA Construction of an Automobile Service Station with 6 gas pumps at Sam's club site. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jun Narciso GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Revised plans to add a gas station, with 6 gas pumps, within the existing Sam's Club parking lot. DISCUSSION: Referring to the site plan, Chair Brzezinski asked Mr. Narciso to show the committee how vehicles would approach the station and its proposed traffic circulation pattem. Mr. Narisco located painted islands and drive aisles. He indicated that some of the islands shown would be reduced or combined. He showed how cars would enter, via a one-way drive to either pull in or circle around the pumps. Rajeev observed how one turn was very tight. He asked about the effect of a parked tanker truck upon the proposed circulation system. Mr. Narciso stated that they will have the truck parked outside of the traffic pattern. Rajeev asked whether this design eliminated any parking spaces. He also asked how customers parked to the east of the station would exit the parking lot. Mr. Narciso said that customers would either drive to the aisle in front of the store or drive through the station. He asked if the City wanted them to eliminate the landscape islands to make more room for traffic circulation. Walter Hallen stated that the committee needed a larger scale drawing of the station depicting the proposed circulation pattern, including the aisle widths and directional flows (one-way vs. two-way). Rajeev Dahal asked that it be made to 1 `-20' scale and show both the turning movements and radii. Walter Hallen asked that plans be of a larger scale for the building department; suggesting V-16' scale. Mr. Narisco stated that after this review they would be submitting the full set of plans for permit. Jim Edwards asked that the new drawings also show the location of the fire hydrants. He knew that there are two in the area, but was unsure as to their precise locations. Rajeev Dahal said that his main concern was the impact of the proposed station location upon the parking lot's traffic circulation, particularly with regard to the exiting movement of vehicles parked between the station and the store. The proposed site plan blocks easy vehicular access to the outer exit lane to Main Street and encourages traffic to use the drive aisle in front of the store. He stated that he didn't want to introduce more traffic where there would be more pedestrians and loading activities. He thought that there should be another access lane provided. Chairman Brzezinski suggested adding a cross aisle. The Chairman also suggested that some of the site plan information could be provided at a smaller scale - fire hydrant locations, locations of access and drive aisles and traffic flow. The rest of the Information— traffic circulation, landscape plan and other details - could be presented at a larger scale. Mr. Narciso said that the issue of adding another drive lane would need to be discussed with Sams Club, because it would remove more parking spaces. Frank Aguado stated that the proposed gas station removes 90 spaces and that he would need to check to see if there was any problem with further reducing the parking supply. Chair Brzezinski asked for information on the proposed landscaping plan. Mr. Narisco stated that It will include trees and shrubs planted around the station. C. Brzezinski explained that final site plan approval would require a detailed landscape plan. D. Marino cautioned that the plantings should not create any safety issues. S. Levine noted that the proposed location of the station resulted in an oddly shaped area of parking lot isolated from the remainder of the site. W. Hallen stated that this area was used for employee parking. D. Marino added that North Shore Towing also uses these spaces for cars towed for parking violations. C. Brzezinski asked if the use of this area could permit rotating the station 90 degrees to provide better vehicular access to the pumps. Mr. Narisco stated that they had looked at that possibility but it did not work for tanker truck access. D. Marino asked for the proposed hours of operation. Mr. Narisco said that he did not have this information but believed it may be until midnight. Mr. Marino stated that the city may want the hours to be coterminous with the store's hours and would be concerned about late hours, from a safety standpoint. Staff asked whether the station would be manned by attendants. Mr. Narisco stated that there would be one or two attendants. Their duties would include acting as cashier and supervising SPAARC Meeting Notes - January 12, 2005 2 some convenience shopping. D. Marino asked that their final submittal include an operational statement addressing hours, staffing, access to the restrooms, and how the hours relate to Sam's Club. ACTION: J. Wolinski moved to table action of the project until the issues of parking lot circulation, business operations, and landscaping are addressed. D. Marino asked what zoning issues would be before the ZBA. F. Aguado stated that they are requesting a special use for the gas station and a variation for the height of the canopy. The motion was seconded by D. Marino and passed unanimously. (8.0). PPAARC 1225 Chicaao Avenue Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior alterations to accommodate a Tanning Salon, "L4 Tan" PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Veer Sharma GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Exterior and interior remodeling of existing one story, commercial storefront resulting In a conversion from one space to two spaces. DISCUSSION: Chairman Brzezinski noted that the applicant was in for a building permit. She remembered that at his last appearance before the committe the applicant had proposed to straighten the existing recessed fagade. She asked whether he had reconsidered this design. Mr. Sharma stated that they had not reconsidered. Mr. Sharma identified L.A. Tan as the new business tenant of one of the remodeled commercial spaces. He named several other store locations. He showed committee members the existing and proposed site plan for the building, photos of the existing storefront and proposed facade. He explained that the proposed design for the new fagade would eliminate the recessed front entrance to the building. Chair Brzezinski noted that one of the roof top HVAC units is too close to the front of the building. She asked if they had considered signage. Mr. Sharma noted that they planned to attach it to the front of the building Hans Friedman asked why he was eliminating the recessed entrance. Mr. Sharma stated that it would yield more interior office space and would "look better'. Ms. Brzezinski disagreed regarding the physical appearance. She stated that the proposed design would result in an ordinary building. She added that the current design offerer shelter to persons entering and exiting the building and adds pedestrian area in front of the building. She questioned the amount of interior space gained by eliminating the recessed entryway. ACTION: Dennis Marino moved approval of preliminary and final site plan approval, as proposed. Rajeev Dahal seconded the motion. Chair Brzezinski stated that she could not support this SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 12, 2005 design, for the reasons she had previously stated. She observed that Chicago Avenue's sidewalks are extremely narrow and afford little area for pedestrians. Because it provided added space to the adjacent streetscape, the ex°sting building design was superior to the new one proposed. Dennis Marino agreed. He also noted that this building is at a slight bend in Chicago Avenue and, therefore, well suited for its present configuration. He amended his motion to recommend preliminary and final site plan approval, conditioned on the fagade retaining its existing configuration. R. Dahal agreed to amend his second. The motion to recommend approval, with conditions, passed. (7-1) Artova Jackson voted nay. SPAARC 1600 Church Street Preliminary and Final Demolition and addition to Mason Park Field House and park renovation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Stephanie Levine GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Renovation of this park will entail the renovation and expansion of the existing field house, reconstruction of its lighted basketball courts, installation of fencing and landscaping. DISCUSSION: Ms. Levine noted that the reconstructed basketball courts will be located in the same area now used for basket ball. Most of the new courts will be full sized; there will also be a round court Installed for smaller players. The lights now serving the courts are not functional. The new lights will be both timed and user controlled. This means that the City will provide power to the lights within a certain time frame — for example between 3-10:00 p.m.; however, the lights will only go on if activated by users. Lights will also be timed to go off after a pre -determined period of time. Ms. Levine displayed photos of the existing field house. She discussed some of its design deficiencies, which include no identifiable entry point, a lack of storage, and poor interior lighting. The renovation will add a user entrance in the building's north elevation. Leading to this, a round patio with seating and landscaping will be constructed, A "bump -out" will be added at each of the building's four comers. These additions which will provide extra storage space for sports equipment and supplies. An existing sky light will be replaced with new dear story lighting to allow more daylight into the building. The interior of the field house is currently very dark. Depending upon funding, the renovation plans also include a plan for landscaping the street frontage of the field house (north elevation) and creating a comer "feature" at Church Street and Florence Avenue. The renderings of the comer showed a stone marker, engraved with the park name, and decorative wrought iron fencing. Staff asked whether wrought iron fencing could be used the length of the park's Church Street frontage. Ms. Levine stated that using all wrought iron fencing would be cost -prohibitive, therefore chain link fencing will be used. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- January 12, 2005 4 D. Marino asked whether the park is currently used for summer basketball leagues. Ms. Levine stated that this is currently not the case. However, it is the Parks and Recreation Department's intention to reinstate it after the planned improvements. She stated that these leagues will be supervised by Parks and Recreation staff. She noted that the field house is used as one of the locations for the summer food program and contained several refrigerators for this purpose. After its renovation, the building will also be used for soccer and baseball teams, their sports equipment storage, and to provide bathroom facilities. ACTION: Dennis Marino moved to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded by Rajeev Dahal and passed unanimously. (8-0). SPAARC 1950 Greenbav Road Recommendations to the Sian Board Change gas pump canopy signage PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Waiter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: W. Hallen stated that the operator of this gas station must change his canopy signage to comply with Mobile Oil's new corporate image and signage. The specific changes include the canopy signage and its lighting. DISCUSSION: Walter Hallen showed the committee the rendering of the proposed canopy design and its color scheme. He noted that the applicant has stated that the rim of the canopy will be continuously illuminated. He added that there will also be soft down -lighting under the canopy. Chairman Brzezinski stated that she thought that illuminating the canopy as proposed was excessive and that she could not support its approval. Walter Hallen noted that there are no residential uses immediately adjacent to the canopy and that the gas station blocked its view from the homes to the west. He added that the under lighting would be very soft. J. Wolinski noted that there are police issues at this location and that the lot has been used as a gathering place for homeless individuals. Chair Brzezinski stated that over illumination is not necessarily safety lighting. Rajeev Dahal asked if the planned changes included redesign of access to the site. Mr. Hallen stated that the changes did not involve either the canopy's structure or location. ACTION: Arthur Alterson moved to recommend denial to the Sign Board. The motion died for lack of a second. Jim Wolinski moved to recommend approval to the Sign Board. The motion was SPAARC Meeting Notes -- Jenuaryr 12, 2005 5 seconded by Dennis Marino and passed (7-2). Arthur Alterson and Carolyn Brzezinski voted nay. Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley SPAARC Meeting Notes — January IZ 2005 6 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JANUARY 19, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski, Paul D'Agostino, Arthur Alterson, Arlova Jackson Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Gavin Morgan, Stephanie Levine, Susan Guderley Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 904-914 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Storefront replacement PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Maeir, property manager, Mark Siegel, architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Applicant proposes to replace five storefronts, including new windows, doors, sidelights and signage. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked whether the new plans would retain the recessed doorways. Mr. Maeir answered that these entrances would not be retained and that the storefronts would become flush with the sidewalk. He said that this would result In more store area and prevent heat from escaping. The Chair observed that this was a distinctive feature which contributed to the charm of the building and the streetsccape. She asked if there was any way to retain this feature, while making the necessary window and door upgrades to eliminate heat loss. Mr. Siegel asked whether this was a landmark building and whether there was a requirement to retain the recessed vestibule. The Chair said that having a protected doorway was a public benefit, as well as a design preference. D. Marino noted that changing the front, as proposed, changes how the building relates to its site and therefore is a site plan issue. W. Hallen noted that retaining the existing vestibules ties the tenants to old fashioned window display spaces. He stated that the proposed changes would add more floor space to each storefront. Chair Brzezinski disagreed, noting that since the doors must be changed to swing inward the net amount of usable interior space gained will be minimal. Sat Nagar asked, "What is the net area of interior spade gained?" Mr. Siegel estimated that each storefront would gain about 12 square feet. The average square footage of eache storefront is 800-900 square feet. Even though some of the storefronts will be combined for its tenants, each bay will be given its own, individual door. Existing sign panels will be retained. Chair Brzezinski asked whether the panels between storefronts were made of stone. Mr. Siegel stated that they were and would be retained. The Chair asked what the plans meant by 'insulated panel" for the new storefront base detail. Mr. Siegel said that they would be bronze colored, aluminum panels. ACTION: Arthur Alterson moved to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded by Ariova Jackson and passed. (5-4) C. Brzezinski, R. Walczak, D. Marino, and Hans Friedman voted nay. SPAARC 3324 Grant Street Preliminary and Final Reconstruct tennis and basketball courts, and drainage system at Cartwright; reconstruct tennis courts at Ackerman. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Stephanie Levine GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The City's Parks and Forestry Department intends to update the existing tennis and basket ball courts in Cartwright and Ackerman Parks. DISCUSSION: The two project sites are Ackerman Park, located at Central Street and McDaniel Avenue, and Cartwright Park, at Grant Street and Prospect Avenue. The existing tennis and basket ball courts at Cartwright Park will be replaced, in kind. Chair Brzezinski asked if there would be changes in the lighting at the park. Ms. Levine said that no lighting proposed. She added that there will also be a drainage structure installed to address an significant drainage problem. An existing tennis court will be replaced, in kind, at Ackerman Park. Also, all of the chain link fencing will be replaced, in kind. There is no lighting and none is proposed. J. Wolinski if there were any changes proposed for the shelter at Cartwright Park. Ms. Levine stated that this project only addresses the courts and surrounding fencing. ACTION: Sat Nagar moved to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded by Dennis Marino and passed unanimously. (9-0). SPAARC 101 Lake Shore Blvd. Preliminary and Final Remove and replace existing exercise stations along the lakefront path. SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 19, 2005 2 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Stephanie Levine GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The Lakefront Rotary is donating a new fitness course as part of its 100ei Anniversary celebration. They intend to purchase the course equipment and hire the contractor to complete the installation. The Parks/Recreadon Department is assisting with plan review and approval. DISCUSSION: D. Marino asked if there were plans for reconditioning the lakefront paths. He observed that the surface is uneven, for either runners or bikers. Ms. Levine stated that the Recreation Department is trying to include it as one of its CIP projects. However, they want to fold that work into a more comprehensive approach to the lakefront park that would also look at deteriorating buildings, problematic beach entrances, and a number of other issues. Hans Friedman asked how the new stations would differ from the current course. Ms. Levine said that there is very little left of the old stations; they were constructed of wood and have rotted away. The new stations will be steel post construction and more durable. Colors will probably be neutral, to blend in with the natural surroundings. The course layout will stretch between NU and the Lee Street beach. Ten equipment stations were hand selected by members of the Rotary Club and are all adjacent to the walkingrjogging path. Carlos noted that this park is located within the Lakeshore Historic District. He asked if a construction schedule had yet been determined. S. Levine said that the course has to be in the ground before June I", for the Club's anniversary celebration. ACTION: Arthur Alterson moved to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded by Dennis Marino and passed unanimously. (9-0). Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 19, 2005 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES JANUARY 26, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Rajeev Dahal, Adova Jackson, James Edwards, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Sat Nagar, .fames Wolinski, Arthur Alterson, Stephanie Levine, David Stoneback Design Professional: None Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Gavin Morgan, Carl Caneva, Jill Chambers, Susan Gudertey, Morris Robinson, Sally Lufkin, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brrszinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Minutes from the January 12, 2005 and January 19, 2005 meetings were approved, with Mr. Dahal abstaining from the vote for the January 12 minutes. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1710 Orrinaton Avenue Revision to Fins! Exterior storefront changes to South Restaurant, outdoor seating and landscaping. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Roger Peck (Project Manager), Gina Deary (Archited), Douglas Hills (Landscape Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION t DISCUSSION: Mr. Peck, project manager, stated that the Orrington Hotel has decided to operate a restaurant Instead of having an outside tenant. It will be a high -end steakhouse called Narra. Ms. Deary, architect, presented a photo of the former entry (McDonalds) and elevations for all views (e.g., large windows like those for The Globe at the other end of the building, decorative awnings and canopies, blade sign at the comer of the building). The main entry will be on Orrington with a secondary entry on Church for sidewalk cafb use only. Chair Brzezinski and Mr. Hallen described the City's procedure for signs and awnings. Mr. Wolinski asked how far the canopies extend, which is 2'. Mr. Hallen stated that the sign rules have changed, and canopies are now required to extend a minimum of 3'. Mr. Wolinski asked if the restaurant is one level. It is mostly one level, with a private dining room on the second floor above the secondary entry. SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 26, 2005 Mr. Hills, landscape architect, presented the landscape plan for the comer and distributed information, including a site plan, list of species, and types of furniture. Chair Brzezinski and Mr. Alterson described the City's procedure for sidewalk cafes. Mr. Wolinski thought that licensure was needed for a private use on public space. Mr. Morgan agreed to work with the applicants on this matter. Mr. Caneva noted that the planters could contribute to a rodent problem and that there have been recent problems with garbage. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval of the revision to final, subject to approval of the species by Parks and Forestry. Mr. Wolinski amended the motion to include consideration of a licensure agreement with the City for the sidewalk cafb area. The motion passed unanimously. SPAARC 715-721 Seward Street Preliminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling to existing multi -family residence (17 du's) for proposed condo conversion. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Eugene Zaslaysky and Eitan Coresh (Owners) GENERAL PROJECT PRESEN-i ATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Zaslaysky, owner, stated that this is an existing three story, beige brick, courtyard building that is being remodeled for condos. Windows along the inner courtyard will be modified for metal balconies. The brick exterior will be cleaned and tuckpointed, and new windows will be Installed. Chair Brzezinski asked about the type of windows, which will be vinyl clad wood. She asked for photos of the building and information on landscaping and lighting, but these items were not available. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to table discussion pending more information, and Mr. Morgan seconded. The motion passed unanimously. SPAARC 1010 Greenleaf Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a three-story rear addition (exit stair). PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Aubrey Swift (Architect) and Joan Pine (Evanston Monthly Meeting of Friends) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Swift distributed a packet of information, including the zoning application, a plat, photos, and elevations. He stated that the proposal is to remove an existing shed to allow for the addition of a fire exit stairway (2-112 stories). The addition will match the existing architecture, Including the roof, details, and windows. Committee members commended the applicant for this, as well as the life-saving improvement to the building. Mr. Alterson asked if neighbors have been consulted, and there will be a meeting on February 13. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned approval. Ms. Levine seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 25. 2005 2 SPAARC 801 Chicaao Avenue Concept Construct a 20 dwelling unit multiple family dwelling with retail space on the ground floor. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: David Haymes and Patrick Shanahan (Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Haymes, architect, stated that the previously proposed planned development for this site was not approved, and the development team is now proposing an as -of --right building. The zoning is C1a, and there will be 20 two -bedroom units, a 1,400 sq ft ground floor retail space, vehicle access off the alley, and a 30-space garage (13 spaces on the ground Floor, 17 on the second floor). There will be a 3' setback from Kedzie although none is required. Floor plans were then presented. floors 3-5 each will have six two -bedroom units with storage space and balconies. Floor 6 will be set back from Kedzie and have two large two -bedroom units. Elevations were presented (the north elevation was not available). Discussion followed on the screening the loading area and whether this would impact alley traffic and visibility. DISCUSSION: Ms. Guderley described the Chicago Avenue streetscape efforts In progress, and discussion followed on whether a setback on Chicago Avenue was possible. Mr. Haymes stated that the site configuration and the requirement that parking not occur within 20' of the property line would not enable a setback on Chicago Avenue. Chair Brzezinski noted that this building Is not as tall as it neighbors and suggested showing this on future elevations and renderings. ACTION: No action required for concept review. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet SPAARC Meeting Notes — January 26, 2005 3 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 9, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Rajeev Dahal, Artova Jackson, James Edwards, Sat Nagar, James Wolinski, Arthur Alterson (Chair), Ron Walczak, Paul D'Agostino Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Tracy Norfleet Chair i8rzezinski was not present, and Mr. Alterson was designated as the Chair. He determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Minutes from the January 26, 2005 meeting were approved with Mr. Friedman abstaining. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 715-721 Seward Street Preliminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling to existing multi -family residence (17 du's) for proposed condo conversion. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Eugene Zaslaysky (Owner), Marc Kalman Segel (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: The applicants stated that since they last appeared before SPAARC, they have met with Chair Brzezinski and Ms. Levine regarding landscaping. A site plan and photos of the existing conditions were presented. Discussion followed on tree spacing, and a compromise of 30' was reached. Lighting was discussed, and a sample fixture was provided. ACTION: Mr. Hallen motioned approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 610.616 Hinman Recommendation to Z13A Demolish existing and construct new rear enclosed porches and stairway. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Tom Rath (Condo Association Secretary) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Rath stated that the proposal is to replace three -season porches with four -season porches and make them flush with kitchen floors. The decision to replace the porches was reached by SPAARC Meeting Notes - February 9, 2005 Page l T," the condo association after a structural engineer found the existing porches to be beyond repair. Discussion followed on lot coverage and impervious surface. Mr. Friedman commended the new porch design. ACTiON: Mr. Wolinski motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA as soon as possible due to structural problems with the porches. Mr. D'Agosbno seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2450 Main Street Preliminary and Recommendation to ?M Construction of an Automobile Service Station with 6 gas pumps at Sam's Club Site. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Jun Narciso (Representative for Sam's Club) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Narc iso stated that traffic circulation was raised the last time he appeared before SPAARC. He presented a site plan and described circulation. The proposed gas station will be located in the southwest comer of Sam's Club parking lot, removing 94 parking spaces from the lot. It was unknown if Sam's Club will still meet the parking requirements after losing these spaces. It also was unknown if the gas station can be used by non-Sam's Club members. Chair Alterson asked if other items will be sold at the gas station, and small pre -packaged Items will be sold at the kiosk. Mr. Aguado asked about hours of operation, which will be one hour before the Sam's Club store opens to one hour after it doses. There will be two employees at the gas station. The landscape plan was presented, and Mr. Hallen commended the applicant for considering landscaping. Mr. D'Agostino referred the applicant to the approved species list for trees. Mr. Nardso stated that the building materials will be masonry block to match the Sam's Club store. Mr. Hallen asked if the roof will be the same, and it will. Mr. Friedman asked if the block will be textured, but it was unknown. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned to recommend approval to the ZBAtpreliminary approval subject to textured block material for the building. Ms. Jackson seconded, and vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2942 Central Street Preliminary and Final Interior remodel, new air handling unit, and new windows, for a beauty salon. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ann Goldshaft (Owner), Barry Newdelman (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Newdelman presented photos, a site plan, and color samples for this interior renovation. Exterior changes pertain to two new windows and lowered sills. SPAARC Meeting Notes - February 9, 2005 Page 2 r ACTION: Mr. Hallen motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous, .§PAARC 555 Howard Street Recommendation to ZBA Establish a convenience store inside an existing automobile service station. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: John Peterson (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: The applicant is proposing to establish a convenience store selling pre -packaged items (no hot food) inside an existing automobile service station. This will meet customer requests for this service and increase revenue. Hours of operation will remain the same. Chair Alterson was conceived about the potential for loitering. Ms. Jackson was concerned about litter. The owner expressed his ongoing commitment to preventing loitering and litter. Mr. Walczak supported the project because this is a family -owned business since 1960 that is trying to stay competitive yet is willing to limit their hours of operation. ACTION: Ms. Jackson motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA subject to the continued hours of operation and a litter plan. Mr. Friedman seconded. The motion passed with Chair Alterson voting 'nay.' §PAARC 140 Chicaao Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Erect a freestanding sign with illuminated digital gas prices. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mobile gas station is proposing a freestanding sign with illuminated digital gas prices. It will be the same height as the existing sign. Mr. Friedman thought this could set a precedent, but Chair Alterson noted that this is a unique location. ACTION: Ms. Jackson motioned to recommend approval to the Sign Hoard, Mr. Friedman seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 807 Church Street Recommendation to Sipn Board Attach multiple temporary wall signs on construction canopy and fencing. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION i DISCUSSION: Sherman Plaza is proposing multiple temporary wall signs on the construction canopy and fencing. The signs vary in size. The amount of time they would be up was unknown. SPAARC Meeting Notes — February 9, 2005 Page 3 ACTION: Mr. Friedman motioned to recommend denial to the Sign Board, and Mr. D'Agostino seconded. The motion passed with Chair Alterson voting 'nay.' SPAARC 2518 Green Bav Road Recommendation to Sian Board Reface freestanding sign, wall signs, and window sign. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Kinkos is proposing to reface freestanding sign, three wall signs, and a window sign. This will be a one -for -one replacement in existing locations resulting from Kinkos recent merger with FedEx. ACTION: Mr. D'Agostino motioned to recommend approval to the Sign Board, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1560 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to Sian Board Put up two temporary wall banners on building garage walls for 100 years anniversary. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Rotary International is proposing two temporary wall banners on building garage walls (one on Grove, the other facing the tracks) for their 100 year anniversary. The banners will be in place for a year. ACTION: Mr. D'Agostino motioned approval to the Sign Board, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes — February 9, 2005 Page 4 IN SITE PLAN APPROVED and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 16, 2005 A#ondow: Committee Members: David Stoneback, Paul D'Agostino, Ron Walczak, James Edwards, Dennis Marino (Chair), Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, Sat Nagar Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Waiter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Carlos Ruiz, Andrew HucluTm, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski was not present, and Mr. Marino was designated as the Chair. Ho dottermined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. For the February 9, 2005 minutes, Mr. Aguado added that the proposed Sam's Club gas station at 2450 Main will have two employees. The amended minutes were approved with Mr. Stonebaak abstaining because he was not present at that meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1319-1323 Maple Avenue Final Consttvct a four (4) story, multiple family dwelling cmdaining twelve (12) dwelling units. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Mike Greco (archited) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing an as -of -right residential building with the same scale and mass as nearby buildings. A site plan, photos, elevations, floor plans, and material samples were provided. Materials will be cast stone and brick (modular size on the front wrapping to the sides, utility size on the rear wrapping to the sides, colors of brick will match). DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen and Ms. Chambers noted code issues with the interior stairwells leading to the first floor. For the front fagade, Mr. Friedman suggested lowering the brick over the entry or on the side towers. Mr. Dahal asked about the tandem parking. There will be seven tandem spaces in addition to eight in the rear and 14 in the basement for a total of 29 spaces. Mr. D'Agostino noted that the parkway tree is not on the approved species list. Mr. Marino asked if utility connections are visible from the front, and they are not (wires will be buried, water meters will be at the south end). The applicant is working with an engineer on detention. Mr. Hallen asked about the zoning analysis, and Mr. Aguado stated that it had been completed. SPAARC Meeting Notes - February 16, 2005 Page 1 ,t J ACTION: Mr, Walczak motioned final approval, and Mr. Dahal seconded, Mr. Friedman suggested that the design of the front facade be reconsidered (e.g., lower the brick above the entry or on the side towers), and Mr. Greco agreed to consider this. The motion passed unanimously (10-0). SPAARC 2408 Orrinaton Avenue Revision to Conceot Change of use for Kendal! College site to sixteen (16), detached single family dwellings and thirty-six (36), attached single family dwellings. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Bernard Citron (attorney), Kerl LaJeune and Diana Luu (architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Citron stated that this is a revision to the concept for 32 townhouses and 16 detached single family homes. The Preservation Commission has recommended landmark status for the former administration building (Wesley Hall). It has not been acted on by City Council, which has requested that all items related to this project come to them at once. Revised plans and elevations were provided, with building materials noted on the elevations. The Preservation Commission continued their review of this revision to the March meeting. Revisions include decreased density, increased setbacks, increased private open space for single family homes, decreased height, and a smaller common park. There are three access points, and parking is hidden with access from private alleys. DISCUSSION: Mr. Alterson asked about ownership for the common area and private alleys. Mr. Citron stated that the detached homes will probably have fee simple lots, townhomes will have a condo association, and there will be a master association for the park and alleys that everyone will pay into. Landscape maintenance for the detached homes is to be determined. Mr. Dahal and Mr. Edwards were concerned about drive aisle widths and access by emergency vehicles If Owe are parked cars. Mr. Citron stated that parking will not be allowed in the drive aisles and that they will be plowed. Mr. Citron stated that this development will provide an alternative to vertical condos, and he noted that there are very few attached townhomes in Evanston. Townhome price points are expected to be in the $600,000-$650,000 range. Tax revenue to the City will increase over the previous amount. Mr. Wolinski asked about single family home price points, which are expected to be in the $1 million-$1.2 million range. Mr. Ruiz asked if there were elevations for the townhouses showing the garages and rear elevations of the single family homes, but they were not available. There being no further comments or questions from Committee members, public comment was taken. Mr. Tom Gemmell, 720 Colfax, stated that he is the Director of Kendall Neighbors, a group that has been working with the developer for a year. He stated that they were surprised to see the project before SPAARC when the developer told the Preservation Commission that they would not be back before SPAARC until there was a determination on the landmark status of the administration building from the subcommittee (e.g., Planning S Development Committee of SPAARC Meeting Notes — February 16, 2005 Pepe 2 the City Council). He also noted that the neighbors requested copies of the current plans, but they were not provided. Mr. Gemmell asked if he could read comments from several neighbors who could not attend today's meeting. Mr. Citron agreed to this. Mr. Gemmell stated that the plan fails for the same reasons it was rejected before. He read aloud from SPAARC minutes the requests made by Committee members. He noted that the plan has been barely altered since then and requested that SPAARC reject it again. He noted issues pertaining to height, setback, traffic on Colfax, zoning (not R1 to match surrounding area), and that it does not mirror the historic homes in the neighborhood but should be all single family. There is support to landmark the former administration building and to keep existing trees on the site. Mr. Gemmell stated that neighbors have put together a proposal B, which he presented to SPAARC members. Mr. Citron objected to this. He stated that if the proposal Is denied here, they will proceed to the Plan Commission and City Council anyway. Mr. Gemmell withdrew the exhibit. Mr. Nick Agnew, 819 Colfax, stated that he has participated in the ongoing process with the developer. He thought that the developer had snubbed the neighbors and was now snubbing a City Committee. Ms. Jeanne Undwall, 625 Library Place, stated that she had worked on the Northeast Evanston Historic District nomination. She thought it was important to incorporate existing buildings into the proposal. She noted that it is a unique neighborhood with varying heights. She suggested converting the proposed landmark (administration building) to condos. She noted that the existing five -story dorms are approximately the same height as the proposed townhouses. Mr. Citron stated that at a recent Planning & Development Committee meeting at which the referral from the Preservation Commission was on the agenda, there was discussion about whether the developer should come back to City Council with everything as a package. The Planning Wevelopment Committee directed everyone to move forward, which is why the proposal is returning to SPAARC. He stated that copies of the current plans were not provided to the neighbors because they were finished yesterday evening. He noted that the alley onto Colfax has always been there. The original proposal called for it to be vacated, and they Initiated the process, but there was no response from the City Manager's office. Mr. Nagar noted that concept review does not require a vote and stated that he did not support the project because it is too dense. Mr. Friedman agreed. Mr. Wolinski appreciated the reductions made in this revision but noted the Preservation Commission recommendation to landmark the former administration building and convert it to condos, with the rest of the site being R1. Mr. Ruiz stated that the Preservation Commission continued the hearing for construction/demolition to March 15, and if they deny the construction, then the demolition cannot occur. Mr. Alterson noted that it will be before the Plan Commission on February 23. He asked about existing trees, and Mr. Citron pointed to them on a site plan, noting which ones would be removed. SPAARC Meeft Notes - February 16, 2005 Page 3 ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned not to support the plan, and Mr. Nagar seconded. Chair Marino expressed concern about voting on the project at this time because of Mr. Ruies inquiry about additional elevations and because the matter is before two Commissions. Ms. Jackson agreed. Mr. Friedman thought the Committee should disapprove the proposal, and several members agreed. Mr. Huckman staled that there should be criteria for the motion. Mr. Wolinski cited the following reasons to not support the plan: • The proposed R4 zoning is not compatible with the surrounding R1 area and does not comply with the Comprehensive General Plan; • There are no other townhouses in the surrounding neighborhood; • He could not support the density and number of units; • The lots do not meet the minimum lot area for single family homes; • Mr. Nagar added that there is minimal open space; and • Mr. Friedman added that it is incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The motion was amended to include all of these reasons. The vote was taken, and the motion passed with Mr. Alterson and Ms. Jackson voting nay and Mr. Marino abstaining (7-2-1). Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Nates — February 16, 2005 Page 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES FEBRUARY 23, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, Dennis Marino, Rejeev Dahal, Adova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair) Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Chair Smazinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The February 16, 2005 minutes were approved with Chair Brzezinski abstaining since she was not present at that meeting. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 933 Chicaao Avenue Preliminary and Final Elevator addition and interior remodeling of bathrooms to be accessible. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ellen Galland (Architect) GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: The applicant is proposing an elevator addition and interior remodeling to Improve accessibility to the Church and community services offered onsite (e.g., pre-school, soup kitchen). Photos and site plans were provided. Ideally, the addition will be stucco, but for cost reasons, it may be split face block. Mr. Friedman suggested brick to match the existing structure. Mr. Ruiz agreed and noted that the addition should not affect the integrity of the building. Discussion followed on circulation in the rear parking area (activities are phased, there is no pre-school during soup kitchen hours), whether to stripe it (the parking area has been grandfathered in), lighting, and landscaping. SPAARC members disagreed with the loss of green space for one additional parking space. Mr. Alterson thought that that landscaping in the front of the building should be improved. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned preliminary approval only, subjed to a landscape plan for the front yard. Mr. Alterson seconded and clarified that his concern with the front yard was that the grass be maintained at a minimum. Mr. Friedman added the consideration to use brick. The motion passed unanimously. SPAARC Meeting Notes — February 23, 2005 Pape i SPAARC 1640 Chicaao Avenue Preliminary and Final Addition of two condensing units and extension of sound screen on roof of existing grocery stone. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Steven Guslott (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Guslott stated that Whole Foods is proposing to install additional condensers on the roof for new refrigerated produce display cases. The existing enclosure would be expanded to accommodate the new condensers with the loss of one parking space. Photos and condenser information were provided. Ms. Jackson stated that the zoning analysis has been completed. Chair Brzezinski asked about noise levels, which will be less than the existing units. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1010 Greenleaf Street Preliminary and Final Construct a three-story rear addition (exit stair). Agenda item canceled at the request of the applicant. SPAARC 405 Church Street and 1800 Sheridan Road Preliminary and Final Install four (4) freestanding sidewalk lighting fixtures at 405 Church Street and five (5) freestanding sidewalk lighting rixtures at 1800 Sheridan Road. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: David Prokop (Electrical Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Northwestern University is proposing to install lighting at 405 Church and 1800 Sheridan for security reasons. Chair Brzezinski stated that other lights recently installed have not been a problem in terms of spillage or brightness. Mr. Prokop stated that the poles will be 12' tall, and the lights will be 9' high. Mr. Ruiz stated that a Certificate of Appropriateness will be needed since these are landmark properties in the historic district. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion to allow time for preservation review. Mr. Nagar seconded. Chair Brzezinski noted that a member of the audience wished to speak. Ms. Judy Fiske requested that the matter go before the Preservation Commission instead of being administratively reviewed because it is the first proposal to install lighting within the historic district and in front of a landmark. The vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norlieet General Planner SPAARC WeUng Notes — February 23, 2005 Page 2 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES MARCH 2, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, James Woiinski, Raleev Dahal, Gavin Morgan, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arlova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino, David Stoneback, Sat Nagar Design Professional: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Carlos Ruiz, Sally Lufkin, Morris Robinson, Andrew Huckman, Donna Spicuzza, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The February 23, 2005 minutes were approved. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 933 Chicano Avenue Pnellminary and Final Elevator addition and interior remodeling of bathrooms to be accessible. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Ellen Galland (Architect), Rev. Lisa Telomen (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: At a previous SPAARC meeting, the applicant was asked to consider brick, and cost estimates were presented at today's meeting. Ms. Galland stated that using brick will cost $3,000 less than the original bid, and using block would save $6,000. They were concerned about going over the budget. Mr. Wolinski asked if they could return to the Community Development (CD) Committee to request additional CDBG funding to cover the costs of using brick. Ms. Sally Lufkin, CDBG Grants Administrator, stated that they can do so at the March 15 CD Committee meeting. Discussion followed on front and rear landscaping and the rear parking area. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned preliminary and final approval subject to asking the Community Development Committee for S3,000 in additional CDBG funding to cover the cost of using brick; if this funding cannot be acquired, then they may proceed as designed and presented. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Chair Brzezinski motioned to allow re -striping and paving consistent with the coverage there, with existing open space to be kept green. Mr. Wolinski seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. SPAARC Meeft Notes — March 2, 2005 Pepe J A SPAARC 1613 Church Street Concept Rezone property to an R5 Residential District and construct forty four (44) attached single family dwellings. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Walter Kihm and Ron Fleckman (Developers) Fedrico Vidargas (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Kihm stated that they have been paying attention to the proposed TIF and other efforts in the area and have partnered with Hines Lumber to redevelop this site. They are requesting a zoning change for 44 moderately -priced townhouses (mid-$300s) as part of a planned development. A zoning analysis has been completed. Mr. Vidargas presented the site plan. The townhouses will be 1,800-2,200sf with 3 levels, 2-3 bedrooms, and garages for each unit. A preliminary elevation also was provided. Chair Brzezinski asked if a more traditional courtyard design had been considered. She was concerned about the amount of paved area. Mr. Vidargas stated that there was not enough space. Mr. Hallen asked if the on -street parking would be for guests, which it will. Mr. Friedman asked if they considered breaking up the long block of buildings with green space. Mr. Kihm stated that they have, but a reduction in the number of units for more open space would affect the price points, which they want to keep in the moderate range. Discussion followed on different layouts for more green space and the issue of children crossing the street to get to Mason Park. Ms. Jackson noted that the proposal exceeds the impervious surface limit for R5 zoning. Mr. Stoneback provided water/sewer information to the applicants. Chair Brzezinski asked if wires will be placed underground, which they will. Mr. Alterson noted that the Fire Department cannot turn their trucks around and would have to back out Instead. ACTION: No action was taken; concept review does not require a vote. SPAARC 2341 Marcv Avenue Recommendation to ZM Construct a rear addition to a detached single family dwelling. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Vince Weber (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Weber stated that they are proposing to extend the kitchen by constructing an addition to a detached single family home. A plat, photos, and a site plan were provided. Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors had been contacted. Mr. Weber stated that they are in the process of doing so and have not had any objections. Chair Brzezinski noted that the windows are not 3' from the property line, and discussion of options followed. She complemented them on the design, which is reasonable for the site. ACTION: Mr. Friedman motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA, Chair Brzezinski seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Wolinski voting 'nay.' SPAARC Meeting Was - March Z 2005 Page 2 SPAARC 1732 Central Street Preliminary and Final Construct a four story six dwelling unit multiple family dwelling over one office tenant on the first floor. PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Nathan Vjpnis and John Yi (Architects) Darush Mabadi (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Kipnis stated that they are proposing to replace the existing one-story building with a four- story building. A site plan, photos, elevations, and material samples were provided. There will be a ground floor commercial use and three floors of residential with two units per floor. There will be roof access, small basement storage, and at -grade parking in the rear (nine spaces). The current zoning requires the project to be built to lot line, but the project has a small setback due to an upcoming City Council agenda item regarding setbacks. Chair Brzezinski commended them on the design. Mr. Alterson asked about the public access easement across the front of the building. Mr. Yi stated that they have looked into it and found nothing regarding such an easement. Mr. Marino asked if there will be lighting above the first floor, and there will not on the front of the building. Mr. Marino asked about price points, which are estimated to be between $439,000 and $459,000. Mr. Friedman commended them on the floor plan. Mr. Stoneback provided water/sewer information to the applicants. Chair Brzezinski asked about rear lighting, and information was provided. Discussion followed about construction/excavation, whether the tree in front can be kept, replacing the sidewalk, and the placement of utilities (wires will go underground, meters will not be in front). ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned preliminary and final approval subject to the drawings being compliant with Building Department review and the setback issue being resolved by City Council. Mr. Friedman seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Marino abstaining. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes - Marc': 2, 2005 Paim 3 P.?PFR"WJ 1. . SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES March 9, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Arlova Jackson, Carolyn Brzezinski, Rajeev Dahal, Mark Younger, Ron Walczak, Jim Edwards, Arthur Aiterson, James Wolinski, Brian Barnes, Dennis Marino. Design Professional: Hans Friedman, Tad Cook Other Staff.- Frank Aguado, Carlos Ruiz, Jill Chambers, Susan Gudedey Chair BrzwJnski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minubs of the March 2, 2005 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: .VPAARC 1207 Greenleaf Street Recommendation to IBA Raise roof to existing rear portion of single family residence PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Marc Kalman Segel GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Segal distributed the site plan, survey, drawings for the proposed project. He stated that the subject property is a single family residence. The building consists of the original front, 2-story structure with a rear, 1- story addition. The building has been designated as a landmark and is also located within the Ridge Historic District. The work proposed by this project will only affect the rear single story addition. Plans call for Increasing the pitch or slope of the rear addition, to improve drainage off of the roof and to Increase the ceiling height of the interior space. The overall height of the roof will be raised approximately three (3) feet. Mr. Segal believes that this shouldn't have a significant effect upon adjacent neighbors and will not be visible from the front of the site. There will be no change to the building's footprint. Chair Brzezinski asked the status of Preservation Commission review and the nature of the requested zoning variation. Mr. Se gjal stated that he'd spoken with Carlos Ruiz and was tentatively scheduled for the April 5 Preservation Commission meeting. He said that there were two requested variations, both related to the fact that the existing building is a non- conforming structure. The two requests are for relief from the required rear yard (30 feet) and from the required side yard (5 feet) requirements. Notice to neighbors has not yet been mailed, however the petitioners have spoken with three adjacent homeowners and have not heard any objections. Chair Brzezinski noted that the runoff from downspouts will need to be properly managed on site. ACTION: Arlova Jackson moved to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded by Carolyn Brzezinski. Dennis Marino amended the motion to be subject to Preservation Commission approval. The motion passed unanimously. SPAARC 1613 Church Street Concept Rezone property To R5 Residential District and construct 42 attached single family dwellings PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Kihm, Ron Fleckman, Federico Vidargas GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Applicants were returning with a concept design that was revised to reflect staff comments from a prior appearance before the committee. Mr. Vidargas showed drawings depicting alternative site layouts and explained why each had been rejected. In the end, the selected design was preferred because it capitalized upon frontage across from Mason Park, yielded sufficient units (including an additional four comer units), and provided separate pedestrian and vehicular access. He added that he believes that when the areas between the rows of building are landscaped it will create a "courtyard effect". The revised site plan now features breaks between the buildings along the former railroad embankment. The developers stated that they also intend to landscape the embankment. Brian Barnes asked for the number of units which would be disabled accessible. This had not yet been determined. Mr. Barnes also asked about the type of surface used for pedestrian areas. Mr. Vidargas had not yet considered outdoor paving materials and invited input from Mr. Barnes. Carolyn Brzezinski stated that she still questioned the number of units proposed for the site, particularly as they are arranged in the eastern half of the site. She noted that the rear units in this area aren't connected to the street, the park, or the rest of the neighborhood. Dennis Marino asked what the density for the site was and how this might compare to other townhouse developments. Mr. Vidargas answered that the present site plan yields a density of 26A d.u.s 1 acre; he stated that the two developments he has used for examples have densities of 30 d.u.s 1 acre. Brian Barnes asked that future submittals reflect consideration of the accessibility issues raised in developing this site. He also asked that the final number of units be split evenly between those not needing additional retrofitting for disabled residents and those which are not fully accessible. SPAARC Meeting Notes - March 9, 2005 Mr. Vidargas noted that vehicular access will be only from Church Street. He added that he has met with the Evanston Fire Department regarding the necessary tuning radii for their emergency vehicles. D. Marino asked for the distance between the stacked buildings along the site's eastern border. Mr. Vidargas stated that this was 24 feet. Mr. Marino stated that, depending upon the materials used, the project's Church street elevation appears attractive and appropriate. However, he was concerned about the stacked rows of units behind this and the resulting project density. Mr. Vidargas stated that they were proposing wider units in the rear (23' rather than 20', with end units wider still) and emphasizing the 'livability' of their second floors to address this concern. The design is also trying to lower the entry stoops. C. Brzezinski noted that there is still a lot of internal site area devoted to vehicular use and that it's not organized to convey the same streetscape image projected by the front elevation. She suggested reorganizing the units around a central green space, with all of the traffic on the perimeter of the property. Mr. Fleckman replied that there is a market for the project as proposed and to make the suggested changes would eliminate approximately 8 units. He noted that to lower the number of units would increase the cost -per -unit beyond what they believe they could charge in this location. D. Marino agreed that a courtyard design was preferable to the "stacking" design shown. He suggested that the developers attempt a courtyard design and see how many units could be accommodated. Ron Walczak stated that a courtyard concept is consistent with SEPTED principles. Jim Wolinski suggested that Design Evanston might be involved in the design of the project. ACTION: Concept review only - no action was taken SPAARC 821 Davis Recommendation to Sian Board Install muNple temporary wall signs on construction fencing of new parking garage PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Carolyn Brzezinski GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: C. Brzezinski noted that the committee had previously approved sidewalk canopy signage for this project. The current application is for multiple (3), temporary wall signs to be erected on the construction fence surrounding the Sherman Plaza parking garage. The locations of the signs were not clear. ACTION: It was moved and seconded to recommend approval to the Sign Board. The motion passed unanimously. SPAARC Meebhg Notes - March 9, 2005 SPAARC Multiple Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Caf6 • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd far type 2 restaurant (Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream) • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (Cafe Express) • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd for type 2 restaurant (Unicorn Cafrs) • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafa for type 2 restaurant (Taco Bell Express) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bhasker Patel, Mgr., Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream Wads Paik, Mgr., Caf6 Express, South Trade Dahlke, Owner, Unicom Caf6 Barry Edelman, Mgr., Taco Bell Express GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the sidewalk caf€ regulation checklist simultaneously with the representatives of the four establishments. She asked Jean Speyer to confirm that all of the applications were signed. All four establishments will request a waiver from the requirement for the use of only reusable, non -disposable tableware in order to accommodate 'to go" patrons at their outdoor tables. Arthur Alterson reminded applicants that liquor service may not extend past 10:30 p.m. on weekdays and 9:30 p.m. on weekends. Any establishments found guilty of doing so risk losing both their sidewalk caf6 and liquor licenses. J. Wolinski introduced Cheryl Janes-Scherbaum, a property inspector whose territory covers most of the downtown. She discussed property maintenance issues associated with restaurant operation, principally trash and litter control. She reminded all applicants that one of the most critical Issues was keeping dumpsters dosed and locked. Brian Bares informed the applicants that service animals are the only animals permitted within the food service areas. Pending completion of the required notification, these applications may be considered at the March 28°t, 2005 Planning and Development Committee and City Council meetings. ACTION: Dennis Marino moved to approve the applications of all four applications. The motion was seconded by Rajeev Dahal and approved unanimously. SPAARC Multiple Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe ILiauorj • Review Application for Sidewalk Caf6 with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 fleet of ,residential zone (Tommy Nevins Pub). • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafa with liquor for type 2 restaurant (Noodles & Company). • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential zone (Las Palmas). • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafa with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of Liquor Control Regulations Cone Area (Oceanique). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 9, 2005 Rohit Sahajpal, Tommy Nevins Pub Robin Lewis -Smith, Noodles & Company , Las Palmas Renee Andre, Oceanique 4 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the sidewalk caf6 regulation checklist simultaneously with the representatives of the four establishments. She reminded the applicants of the restricted hours for outdoor liquor service. Only Noodles & Company will request a waiver from the requirement for the use of only reusable, non -disposable tableware in order to accommodate `to go' patrons at their outdoor tables. Brian Barnes informed the applicants that services animals are the only animals permitted within the food service areas. Applicants were reminded to get their notice out in time to be considered at the March 28, 2004, Planning & Development and City Council meetings Chair Brzezinski observed that this was Las Palmas's first sidewalk cafd application. She asked if they had any questions about the requirements. The managers did not. A. Afterson asked how many tables they intended to set up outside. The manager stated that he hoped to set up five tables. Sat Nagar stated that he was unsure where they intend to set up their tables and needed to make a site visit for this purpose. Neighboring residents were present to report that they have concerns about the proximity of the proposed dining area to their units. They are already experiencing noise when patrons wait outside. Chair Brzezinski informed both the managers and neighbors that the application will be reviewed for conformance with the ordinance. She observed that staff still needed Las Palmas to submit a plan showing the outdoor seating scheme. This will need to be reviewed by staff before proceeding to the Council for action. She advised the neighbors that they will have opportunity to make comments when the application appears before the P&D Committee and the Council. ACTION: Sat Nagar moved to table the Las Palmas sidewalk caf6 application, pending staff review and approval of a revised outdoor seating plan. The motion was seconded by Dennis Marino and passed unanimously. Dennis Marino moved that the applications for the other cafes be approved. The motion was seconded by Ron Walczak and passed unanimously. §PAARC Multiale Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Caf6 fliauorl • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd with liquor for type 2 restaurant outside (Flat Top Grill). • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd for type 2 restaurant (Cafd Mozart). • Change use to a Type 11 Restaurant, "Trattoria Demi" PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom McDermott, Flat Top Grill Carol Angelopoulos, Cafi6 Mozart GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski observed that there was no one present representing of Tratoria Demi's application. Chair Brzezinski reviewed the sidewalk caf6 regulation checklist simultaneously with the representatives of the two establishments. She emphasized the instructions regarding litter and trash control, liquor service restrictions and service animals. SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 9. 2005 5 •- Apr. ACTION: Raleev moved approval of the sidewalk cafe applications for these restaurants. The motion was seconded by Brian Barnes and passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley Neighborhood Planner SPAARC AimUng Noes — March 8, 2005 6 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES March 23, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Rajeev Dahal, James Wolinski, Stephanie Levine, Carolyn Brzezinski, Arthur Alterson Design Professional: Hans Friedman, Tad Cook Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Brian Barnes, Mill Chambers, Susan Guderley Chair Smazinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the March 9, 2005 meeting were approved. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 922 Novas Street Recommendation to ZEkA Change use to a type 11 restaurant selling ice cream. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Susan Dejanovic, business owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Ms. Dejanovic and her husband propose to establish a restaurant selling gelato and espresso in this location. She informed the committee that she expects to carry 18 different flavors of this ice cream; there will be no cooking on the premises. The applicant will be renting this space from Garrett Theological, which will rehab its interior prior to their taking possession of the storefront. Neither the building owner nor the applicants propose any exterior modifications to the building, other than signage. Staff was informed that the interior space is approximately 720 square feet, composed of two adjacent storefronts. The door in only the easternmost of these will be operable and the two bays are connected by an interior passage way. There is also a rear door, leading to an outer gangway and the alley. B. Barnes asked whether the doorway will be modified to be eerily opened by persons in wheelchairs, such as a push button opener. The applicant stated that she had not considered Installing such a device, but that she knew that the door must dose automatically. W. Hallen noted that she must also comply with requirements governing maximum opening force for doors. C. Brzezinski asked if refuse will be removed via the rear door. The applicant answered yes and noted that, located in the rear alley, there is a dumpster assigned to the storefront. C. Brzezinski explained that the ZBA's review of the project will focus heavily upon the trash and litter maintenance strategy proposed by the restaurant. For this reason, she recommended that advance consideration and planning be given to issues such as: litter pick-up within 250 feet of the storefront; the regularity of dumpster pick-up; and store cooperation in monitoring and emptying (when necessary) nearby public garbage cans. W. Hallen stated that plans need to show the exact number of seats and furnishings within the store. These will be used to determine the adequacy of bathroom facilities for patrons and employees. J. Wolinski stated that he thought that this was an excellent location for an ice cream store. He asked whether or not the business would be a franchise. The applicant said that this would be an independent business and would work at keeping a 'neighborhood business" feel. J. Wolinski advised her that the Council will wish to speak to the person responsible for managing daily operations of the business when it considers her special use application. The applicant identified herself as that person. J. Wolinski advised her to be prepared to answer questions of this nature. C. Brzezinski noted that this storefront did not qualify as a unified business sign district. Therefore, she was advised to comply with the requirements of the Sign Ordinance in obtaining a sign permit. B. Bames volunteered to assist her in evaluating her business layout in terms of its accessibility by the disabled ACTION: J. Wolinski moved to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded by R. Dahal and passed unanimously. JSPAARC Multiole Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Caft • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd for type 2 restaurant (liquid) • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafd for type 2 restaurant (Einstein Brothers Bagels) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Adriana Staiceu, Mgr., Liquid Joseph Draniczarek, Gen. Mgr., Einstein Brothers Bagels GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the sidewalk caf6 regulation checklist simultaneously with the representatives of the two establishments. Both establishments wish request waivers from the requirement for only reusable, non -disposable tableware in order to accommodate *to go' patrons. The Chair also noted that only service animals were permitted in the cafes. Brian SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 23, 2005 Barnes explained how questions regarding what may or may not be considered a service animal may be processed through his office. She reminded Mr. Draniczarek that outdoor seating must be removed when the restaurant doses for business. J. Wolinski also reminded him to monitor the city's garbage can outside the restaurant. When garbage overflows its capacity, he was instructed to notify the city or empty it himself. The manager observed that this most often becomes a problem on Sunday evenings, after his store has closed at 3:00 p.m. ACTION: J. Wolinski moved to recommend P&D Committee approval of the applications for both applicants. The motion was seconded by H. Friedman and approved unanimously. SPAARC 1740 Sherman Preliminary and Final Change in use to "Cosi" a type I restaurant. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tracy McIntosh, Owner, John A Jankowski, Mario Valentini GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Representatives for the applicant told the committee that the only exterior changes to the existing building would be the relocation of the entry and installation new awnings. New signage was also noted, particularly the inclusion of a perpendicular sign at the comer of the building. C. Brzezinski stated that this type of sign is not permitted by right by the sign ordinance. She observed that they have the options of starting out with signage that is allowed by the sign ordinance and later changing it or immediately applying for a sign variation. C. Brzezinski asked if they had also considered changing out the storefront's windows and fagade material. The applicants stated that this was not part of their proposal. C. Brzezinski observed that this was unfortunate because the existing windows are neither original nor complimentary with the architecture of the building. A. Alterson asked the applicants to clarify their dining operation for the purposes of determining whether they are, in fact, a type I or type II restaurant. It was explained that the customer reviews wall menus, places his/her own order at a counter, is seated and then Is served the meal by wait staff. Given this explanation, A. Alterson declared Cosi to be a type 11 restaurant. The distinction made by the zoning ordinance is based upon how the meal is order, rather than on how it is served. To proceed with the project, the options available to the applicant are: to apply for a special use permit to operate as described; or open and operate as a type I restaurant while applying for a type 11 special use permit. It was observed that the tatter method is how Comer Baker had opened and operated after having been designated a type II restaurant. Brian Bames noted that service counters need to be the proper height for wheel chair patrons. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- March 23, 2005 3 C. Brzezinski noted that the awnings and signage will need to be reviewed by the Sign Board. She also asked if they would be offering a delivery service. She noted that the tight parking situation in downtown, parking a delivery vehicle in this locatoin might prompt some concern. The applicant stated that they would be doing deliveries, but that it would be for their catering function only. Furthermore, their delivery vehicle would utilize a private parking space in the rear of the building. For individual orders, the restaurant will utilize an existing delivery service. A. Alterson asked whether the committee wished to also consider including a recommendation to the ZBA for a special use permit in their action. H. Friedman complimented the applicants on the proposed interior design and urged them to include exterior facade and window Improvements in the project. He noted that the existing storefront ;materials do not match the rest of the building, particularty the infill siding below and between the existing windows. ACTION: J. Wolinski moved approval of Preliminary and Final Site Plan review and to recommend ZBA approval of the special use permit, if deemed a Type 11. He amended his motion to include a recommendation that the applicant consider adding improvements to the windows and exterior facade of the building. The amended motion was seconded by Rajeev Dahal and passed unanimously. SPAARC 1613 Church Street Pre-ADDllcation Conference Rezone property to an R5 Residential District and construct 42 attached, single- family dwellings PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Kihm, Ron Fleckman, Cyrus Homes; Federico Vidargas, architect; James Murray GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski observed that the Pre -Application Conference Is a step in which the committee reviews the proposal, makes and records comments, but does not take any formal action. She noted that the Chair of the Plan Commission was present to facilitate the flow of Information between SPAARC and Plan Commission. Federico Vidargas displayed several layouts which he had developed to test the concept of a central green space and a circular drive around the site. He said that these studies demonstrated that this design could not meet the goal of providing a variety of housing footprints and unit widths. In particular, it would not allow the developer to offset the cost of including smaller, affordable 2-bedroom units, by constructing 2300 sq. ft, comer units. He added that the use of a circular drive precludes interactivity opportunities for the residents and results in units backing onto Church Street. For these reasons, Mr. Vidargas said their final design reflects their original site plan. He stated that he believed that the long drive could be an exiting urban space and contribute to SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 23, 2005 4 s �J social Interaction on a difficult site. Jim Murray mentioned that this site design had been presented to the ECDC and had been approved. J. Wolinski asked if Design Evanston had been approached for input into the design. Mr. Vidargas stated that they had not. C. Brzezinski asked if he intended to do so and he stated that he would. Mr. Fleckman said that they were open to the idea of 'tweaking' things. However, he stated that the project design meets their sales and marketing plan, whereas opening the development to Mason Park would be a hindrance to it. B. Barnes asked if they had given some early thought to paving material. Mr. Kihm said that they would welcome his recommendation concerning that issue. Displaying their final site plan, Mr. Vidargas said that it met their goal of providing several different housing footprints and widths. J. Wolinsk asked what was the size of the turnaround area. Mr. Vidargas said that it would be approximately 100 feet by 80 feet. Mr. Murray said that they have been working with the EFD regarding emergency vehicle access and have had discussions with the northerly property owners for emergency access to Lyons Street. C. Brzezinski observed that the front -facing garage doors and driveways shown for the three westerly buildings will create problems for children and other pedestrians, because of the number of curb cuts involved. Mr. Vidargas said that this layout results in better visibility and better Church Street access, with regards to its distance from the old railroad viaduct wall. H. Friedman asked how close the buildings are to the toe of the former railroad bens. Mr. Vidargas said that the berm's slope starts at the property line. C. Brzezinski noted that the runoff from the slope would flow directly into the subject property. Mr. Murray said that the bean Is permeable sand and wouldn't produce substantial flow. H. Friedman stated that the western units should be moved eastward so that they have some backyard and don't simply took out at the slope. C. Brzezinski said that many of the site problems noted by staff are the result of too many units being proposed. In particular, there is a need for more green space within the property. W. Hallen agreed and said that it is a difficult site only because there are too many units proposed. J. Chambers questioned whether people would actually use a small, central area of green space. She did feel that there should be some minimal area of private outdoor space. J. Wolinski said that he sees the number of proposed units as as a balancing act. He noted that there hasn't been any new development in West Evanston, with the exception of the Jacob Blake senior citizen housing. This would be the first, substantial new single-family housing development that would be of quality. While there have been some small-scale, infill developments, he felt that these have been of poor quality and have come at the expense of the neighborhood. He said that he hopes that because the word "affordable" is being used, that we are not meaning cheap. He said that if these units are selling for around $250,000, they should be quality construction. He said that he would be willing to go with a few more units, provided that the finishes within the unit are of top quality, there is some green space, and the City gets good quality housing. A. Alterson observed that given the City's experience with two current PDs, this request prompts a discussion of what is the appropriate zoning designation of this parcel. By his quick calculation, if this property were zoned R4 rather than R5, there would be sufficient land area SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 23, 2005 5 = A for 27 dwelling units. This property, and the industrial area to the north and east, is the gateway to the Ridge Historic district. He asked, "Should this whole area be R5?' He answered that he thinks this zoning designation is too dense. M. Robinson agreed with J. Wolinski and wanted to remind the committee of several efforts to spur redevelopment in West Evanston, namely the establishment of a TIF district. He felt that if this development can provide good quality, affordable housing this would be a rationale for allowing some additional density. Lyn Heidt said that she will be marketing the units and that there is "comfort in numbers' when people are 'pioneering" a neighborhood. She added that if priced property these units "will fly', even if located in this neighborhood. A. Alterson took exception with this, noting that this is only one block away from the Ridge Historic District where home prices range from $700,000 to $1 million. Mr. Fleckman stated that he also thinks that this area is the entrance to the west side of Evanston. L. Widmayer asked for the width of the east side yard, which was 5 feet. He stated that his quick reaction was that this location will probably be perceived as the entrance to the historic district. However, he felt that good architecture and quality of development would alleviate concerns about the density. He cautioned that it looked a little crowded and might remind people of the Dubin townhome project. He said that the price point will be very important, noting that the benefits derived from good quality, affordable units may be worth some give and take on density. He also urged that consideration be given to landscaping. Delores Holmes said that the quality of this project is also important to the community on the west of the project. She noted that these developers have been before her community group, ECDC, for its input into this project. She added that ECDC intends to monitor all other west Evanston development proposal, as well. J. Wolinski cautioned that there is a fear amongst some west Evanston residents over `gentrification". For them, the prospect of having $500,0004600,000 town homes being built In their neighborhood will raise fears of displacement. He thought that if the proposed mix of units enables the developer to offer units in the $275-300,000 price range, then it might be demonstrated that new development is not something to be feared. He distinguished between 'gentrification" and "good housing opportunities. A. Alterson said that unlike all of the other for -profit developments this one is unique because a partner in the development is actually a current property owner. He noted that, due to the length of ownership by Heinz Lumber, there is not a recent property transaction driving the cost of the project. B. Barnes urged the developers to consider providing new housing opportunities for disabled Individuals. J. Wolinski asked whether he was suggesting that a certain number of units be adaptable. He said he was, if it could be done reasonably. He suggested three or four units. Morris Robinson said that instead of looking at this site as a gateway in either direction; rather it could be viewed as a transitional area. SPAARC McOng Notes - March 23, 2005 6 �Iql .i, 1, l� .� . • � . ♦ti � •, .. A . . h� ,Ali ,._ • .y .�11i, i. l.,l - � f� r C. Brzezinski explained that, while she believed the site plan contained too many units, she didn't oppose having townhomes in this location or the goal of affordability. She said that before the committee can address other design details, e.g. massing and materials, there must be a workable site plan. She asked if it was the sense of the committee that 42 units were workable, or it there was some other number. She thanked Mr. Vdargas for his studies, but felt that they had not demonstrated to her that 42 units could fit on the site. C. Brzezinski dosed the discussion, stating that she hoped it would assist the developer proceed with their application for a Planned Development. Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley Neighborhood Planner SPAARC Meettog Akdes - Msn h 2a ZOOS 7 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES March 30, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Arlova Jackson, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, James Wolinski, Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino, Carolyn Brxezinski (Chair) Design Professionals: Hans Friedman, Tad Cook Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Brian Barnes, Jill Chambers, Morris Robinson, Tracy Norfieet Chair Brzezinski was expected to arrive during the meeting, and James Wolinski chaired the meeting until then. He determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the March 23, 2005 meeting were approved with Mr. Marino and Ms. Jackson abstaining because they were not present at that meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2900 Central Street Preliminary and Find Replace existing storefront and repair masonry above building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Janice Berkenheier (Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Ms. Berkenheier stated that to replace a defective lintel, they must remove the front window and redo the brick work. Photos and drawings were provided. Chair Wolinski asked if there will be significant changes to the tagade, and there will not (it is a replacement project). Mr. Barnes asked if the entry will be ADA accessible. Ms. Berkenheier stated that there will not be a push-button to open the doors, but they are not heavy. Chair Wolinski asked about the construction schedule and whether they will remain open during that time. Ms. Berkenheier stated that they will begin as soon as possible and expect to remain open during construction. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2401 Lee Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a second -story addition utilizing the existing building footprint. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Isaias and Juanita Mendoza (Owners) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Mendoza distributed photos and drawings for the proposed second story addition. Ms. Jackson summarized the zoning issues: two minor zoning issues pertain to setbacks, and a major zoning issue pertains to the eaves extending to 1.5' instead of the maximum of 6". Ms. Jackson asked about the materials. Ms. Mendoza stated that the existing building is brick, and the addition will be vinyl siding. Mr. Wolinski asked if the neighbors have been consulted, and they have. Mr. Marino asked about the final height, and Mr. Friedman noted on the drawings that it will be 32'. Mr. Marino asked if there are other two-story houses nearby, Ms. Mendoza stated that the houses next door and behind are both two stories and the same height as proposed here. Mr. Aguado stated that if there will be central air-conditioning, condensers must be 10' from the property line. Mr. Wolinski asked about roofing materials, which will be asphalt shingles. Mr. Marino noted that the owners have lived there for 15 years. Discussion followed on the design of the east elevation, and a suggestion was made to eliminate the half -round window and use rectangular windows to be more compatible with the gables. Committee members agreed that the concept of an addition was appropriate but had questions about the design and materials for the architect, who was not present. The applicant agreed to return with the architect. Ms. Jackson stated that recommendations to the ZBA pertain to variations, not elevations. Chair Brzezinski, who had arrived during the presentation, noted that architecture review is non -binding, and this is a single-family home. ACTION: Noting that the applicant had agreed to return with the architect, Mr. Marino motioned concept support for the second story with the caveat that the architect return to answer questions about the proposed architecture and materials. Mr. Wolinski seconded. The motion passed with Ms. Jackson voting 'nay.' SPAARC Muttiale Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Caf6 • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of Liquor Control Regulations Core Area (Blue Stone, 1932 Central Street). • Sidewalk Cafe for a type // restaurant (Cold Stone Creamery, 1611 Sherman Avenue). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jennifer Enright (Blue Stone) and Tushar Vaidya (Cold Stone Creamery) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski described the approval process and reviewed the required checklist, including rules for liquor (where applicable), litter, delineation of the sidewalk caf6, bringing in all furniture at night, etc. Mr. Dahal noted that the sidewalk by Blue Stone is narrow and has parking meters, and car doors could swing into the sidewalk caf6 area. He asked if Blue Stone has valet parking, and they do not. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Alterson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC MeeSng Notes —March 30, 2005 Page 2 ,2PAARC 2209 Howard Street Exterior site and facade renovation for "Target". Final PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jason Hill (Engineer), Jason Knoppe and Doug Bailey (Construction) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski read aloud the description of the project. Mr. Alterson stated that the City had received a letter from Target addressing garbage issues. Mr. Marino stated that he and Mr. Robinson, Economic Development Planner, also reviewed the letter. Mr. Marino noted the City"s interest in this site over time as a redevelopment project in a TIF district. He also noted that the Ward Alderman has made a number of complaints over time about the cleanliness of the lot and exterior landscaping (e.g., lack of maintenance and enhancement thereof). He stated that Target's recent letter to the City tries to address that with a litter plan and a landscaping commentary, but he and Mr. Robinson had an issue with the landscaping maintenance. Specifically, they disagreed with Target's statement that they had made 'significant progress' in landscape maintenance. He and Mr. Robinson did not have a problem with the other bullets in the letter, but Mr. Robinson noted that the issue of scattered shopping carts was not addressed, and there was not an update on the berms and buffered landscaping along Howard Street as previously discussed. There is also an issue with plantings in the parking lot, or lack thereof. Ms. Chambers added the issue of consistently full trash bins in front of the store. Chair Brzezinski stated that the letter should be revised to address these issues. Mr. Marino clarified that there has not been a problem with the dumpsters but rather, the trash containers in front of the store, which should be emptied seven days a week. He added that the last bullet needs to be enhanced to reflect what Target is doing to address the landscaping weaknesses on the periphery of the property but still within the shopping center, including a program of maintenance, and in addition to what is being done inside the shopping center to retrofit the parking lot with landscaping. Chair Brzezinski turned discussion over to the applicants, and Mr. Knoppe and Mr. Bailey deferred to Mr. Hill, who was expected to arrive during the meeting. Chair Brzezinski asked to review the drawings while they waited for Mr. Hill, but the latest ones were not available. Chair Brzezinski asked about lighting for security (e.g., low level lighting in the planters or grade -level along the store), but the information was not available. Chair Brzezinski reviewed comments from a previous SPAARC meeting (e.g., litter plan, landscape plan, lighting). It was determined that a landscape plan has not yet been submitted to the City for review. Chair Brzezinski clarified that the litter plan needs to be revised and reviewed by the City, the landscape plan needs to be submitted and reviewed, and questions about lighting remain. Discussion followed on whether to table the issue until the revised litter plan and a landscape plan had been received and reviewed by the City or whether to wait for Mr. Hill to arrive today. To give time for Mr. Hill to arrive and respond to issues raised, Mr. Alterson motioned to table the issue. Mr. Wolinski seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Marino opposed. When Mr. Hill arrived, he apologized for being late and distributed information (e.g., site plan, updated landscape plan, existing conditions plan, updated elevations, detailed layout of sidewalk with joints (etc), lighting plan including lights in the planters (cut sheets were SPAARC Meeting Notes - March 30, 2005 Page 3 available), aerial photo for reference, and litter plan previously submitted to Mr. Aguado). Mr. Marino summarized the revisions to the letter that SPAARC is requesting. In bullet 3 regarding landscape enhancement. the perimeter of the property should be addressed. Specifically, this should be a written confirmation of the ongoing plan to seasonally replenish landscaped areas where necessary and enhance them over time. In addition, there is a concern about the front trash bins not being emptied as they should be. Mr. Robinson added the shopping cart containment issue, which is a particular concern of the Alderman. Chair Brzezinski summarized the issues for the applicants: carts, trash bins, and enhancement of bullet 3. Mr. Barnes asked about ADA accessible routes (e.g., from Howard Street, etc), and Mr. Hill Indicated two routes on the site plan. Mr. Barnes stated that these routes, and particularly the curb cuts, should not be blocked with shopping carts (etc). Chair Brzezinski asked where they put plowed snow and whether it blocks sidewalks and ADA accessible routes. Mr. Robinson noted that plowed snow could be stored at the northeast comer of the lot. Chair Brzezinski thought this should be added to the letter as well. Mr. Barnes agreed and added that these routes should be plowed and salted at all times. Mr. Friedman noted that the Target's letter was from November of 2004, which was six months ago, and asked about the history since that time and whether there is a record of it. Mr. Marino stated that there have not been any complaints, but the City typically gets complaints on the first windy day of the spring (e.g., today) unless it is not a problem. Mr. Friedman clarified that they do not have a record of anything (e.g. greatly improved or otherwise), and Mr. Marino's response was 'not recently.' Mr. Robinson stated that they have gone to the managers of the store often enough about the shopping carts and while they may in fact be policing it better, that does not mean it should not be put in the letter as a standard operating procedure. Mr. Marino stated that the experience has been that managers change, and quality changes (same for vendors, etc). Mr. Alterson noted that shopping carts is an ongoing issue. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to a revised letter addressing issues raised and subject to approval of the landscape plan. Mr. Dahal seconded. Chair Brzezinski reiterated her comments from a previous SPAARC meeting in which she commended Target for paying attention to this site and adding landscaping. The vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes — March 30. 2005 Page 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 6, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: James Edwards, Stefanie Levine, Artova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Arthur Alterson, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), James Wolinski Design Professionals: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Brian Bames, Jill Chambers, Carlos Ruiz, Susan Guderley, Donna Spicuzza, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the March 30, 2005 meeting were approved as amended (Mr. Aguado noted that the presenter for 2900 Central Street was the contractor, not the owner). Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1031 Sherman Avenue Cgnce d Construct two principal buildings each containing rive attached single-family dwelling units (10 townhouses) with underground parking, PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: William James (Contract Purchaser) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski read aloud the description of the project and noted that Alderman Bernstein was present. Mr. James stated that he is proposing two rows of five townhouses with center pedestrian access, which should be wide enough for emergency access. There is a pedestrian connection to nearby transit and minimal surface parking. Units will be three - bedroom / two -bath with lower level garages and individual patios. The exterior will have a cottage look and use natural stone (different stone for the base), copper bays, and a synthetic slate roof. A site plan, elevations (except street elevations), and a bulleted summary of the layout and design were provided. Feedback and issues raised include: • Underground parking is commended, but a grading issue was noted for the vehicular entry from Custer to the underground garage; • Whether the center pedestrian access is a dead end vs. a wall and steps down to the guest parking / dumpsters near the garage entry; • Emergency vehicles cannot turn around or go through the site; • Whether units will be sprinklered (encouraged by SPAARC); • Alley repaving/costs; • Whether there will t>e units for the elderly or persons with disabilities; • Zoning ordinance requirement that townhouses address the street; • Amount of lot coverage and whether there are too many units; • Refuse removal (dumpster near garage entry vs. residents opting to have a private hauler come into the garage to remove refuse); • No yard space for individual units and unusable space between the proposed buildings and existing ones on adjacent lots; • Request for a site plan showing adjacent lots for context. ACTION: No action taken —concept review does not require a vote. OPAARC 713 Mulford Street Preliminary & Final Surface (gravel -to -asphalt) and stripe existing open parking area for multi -family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Irwin Axelrod and Wassim Kmeid (Contractors) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Axelrod stated that since the last time they appeared before SPAARC, they have received approval from Engineering. Chair Brzezinski asked about the proposed fence and landscaping. Mr. Axelrod stated that at the last meeting, they proposed a 4' high board -on- board fence on the side of the parking lot but have since learned that this would require a variance. SPAARC members clarified that a variance would be needed if the fence was within 3' of the front building facade. Chair Brzezinski asked about a landscape plan, but it was not available. Mr. Kmeid showed on the site plan where landscaping and the fence would be, and discussion followed. Mr. Axelrod asked if landscaping on Mulford could be continued for 3' to avoid asking for a fence variance, and SPAARC members agreed to this. Chair Brzezinskl noted that a landscape plan must be submitted to Ms. Levine. Mr. Dahal asked if wheelstops will be provided for the parking spaces, and they will. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned preliminary and final approval subject to a 4' high board -on -board cedar fence running 3' from the front building facade to the existing alley and approval by Ms. Levine of a landscape plan for the area along Mulford. Mr. Friedman seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Muitivie Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Caf6 • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., 711 Church Street). • Review Application for a Sidewalk Cafe for a Retail Food Store (Foodstuffs, Retail Gourmet Foo(t 2106 Central Street). • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (Starbucks, 1724 Sharman Avenue). SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 6, 2005 Page 2 PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Miro Kosoov (Chipotle), Steven Wessel (Foodstuffs), and Sarah Svrchek (Starbucks) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked the applicants if they had a sidewalk caf6 permit last year, and all did. She then reviewed the required checklist, including rules for fitter, delineation of the sidewalk cafe, bringing in all furniture at night, no animals except service animals, etc. Mr. Barnes provided additional guidance on serving customers with service animals. ACTION: Ms. Levine motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC M"ft Notes — A0 8, 2005 Pape 3 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 13, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, James Wolinski, Rajeev Dahal, Jim Edwards, Stephanie Levine, Artova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino Design Professional: Hans Friedman, Tad Cook Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Frank Aguado, Jill Chambers, Brian Barnes, Susan Guderley Chair Brzozinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The meeting notes for April 6e' were approved, as amended, to clarify that for 713 Mulford the fence must be located 3 feet from the front facade of the building. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1700 Orrinaton Avenue Preliminary and Final Storefront replacement for Narra, a Type ( Restaurant PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Seamus Byme, Architect GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Mr. Byme stated that this review is for the work proposed on the restaurant's exterior storefront. This facade work was not covered by the interior permit for the restaurant because It was, at that point, going to be by landlord. Nor, had it been covered by the original hotel permit. The applicant is proposing to have the restaurant's storefront match exactly that of the hotel. C. Brzezinski asked if there were any exterior lights proposed. Mr. Byme stated that there were, but that they were not included in this permit application. He noted that they had been discussed at the January 26t' SPARC meeting. C. Brzezinski asked if the proposed lighting scheme of lights mounted along the columns of the building was still the case. Mr.Byme stated that it was and confirmed that the comments regarding wider awnings and the elimination of the blade sign were still proposed. Chair Brzezinski informed the committee that the applicant had subsequently decided to only utilize signage permitted by right; eliminating the need to go before the Sign Board. _A Chair Brzezinski asked whether the detail of coming down to the ground would be utilized for this portion of the facade. She noted that this is less than desirable given the snow conditions. Mr, Byme confirmed that this detail will be carried all the way through the facade to keep the appearance as consistent as possible. There will be no new openings. C. Brzezinski voiced displeasure over the cool lighting used in the sconces on the hotel's facade and asked if some other lamps could be used. Mr. Byrne said that this could be investigated. C. Brzezinski asked about the proposed window coverings. Mr. Byrne stated that there would be a sheer, backed by drapery panels, that would allow for visibility. C. Brzezinski asked if there were any plans for an outdoor caf6. Mr. Byrne said that there are plans for outdoor seating, but that this was not part of this application. R. Dahal stated that he has seen plans which call for the installation of permanent planters. He advised the applicant that these plans need to come before SPARC. J. Wolinski said that he wanted to revisit the proposed blade sign. He stated that he felt it was an attractive feature of the earlier design and that it helped to break up the flat eastern facade. He felt that this would add something to this comer of the building for which it would be worth seeking a variation. C. Brzezinski said that a blade sign could provide more identity to this comer, although she questioned the scale of the first sign proposed. Mr. Byme stated that he would pass this along to the restaurant. Brian Barnes asked whether both doors would have an accessible route. Walter confirmed that this was the case and that the door would comply with the pull requirements of the Illinois Accessibility Code. There will be an enclosed shaft, platform lift to provide accessibility to both restaurant floors. ACTION: A. Jackson moved to grant preliminary and final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded by S. Levine and passed unanimously. §VARC 2123 Harrison Street Concegi Subdivide existing rot into 6 lots of record. Portion of existing church to be converted Into twr>- family residences. Construct single family residences on two of the newly created parcels PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Raffi Arzovmanian, Architect, Peter Dinneen, Developer GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION; Mr. Arzovmanian, architect, confirmed that his clients have taken title to this property. He said that the concept under discussion will explore incorporating the existing church building into the redevelopment this site. SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 13, 2005 He stated that the owners intend to develop the property as permitted by right under its current zoning designation, which permits one duplex unit (two dwelling units) per zoning lot. This proposal would create 5 lots, which would allow a total of ten (10) dwelling units. Mr. Arzovmanian observed that the existing church building is a legal nonconforming structure with regard to its side and rear yard setbacks. Determining project feasibility for this concept must consider both zoning and building life/safety issues. The alternative concept under consideration would be to raze the church and construct all new units. C. Brzezinski asked whether they had applied for a zoning analysis. Mr. Arzovmanian said that they had applied but that it hadn't been completed. The architect noted that the masonry of the church is quite sound. The main part of the existing church would sit on proposed Lots 1, 2 and 3. The existing daycare building would be razed, and its site would be subdivided into four lots, each constructed with a duplex unit (2.5-story townhomes). This would yield an additional four units. Covered, at -grade parking would be in the rear of the new townhouses. Access to the church dwelling units from the garage would be provided via a basement hallway. C. Brzezinski asked what was meant by 'saving the church`. Mr. Arzovmanian stated that the structure would be gutted, leaving only the facade. Chairman Brzezinski applauded that concept as opposed to the wholesale clearing of the property. She noted the beautiful masonry work in the existing church building and observed that its comfortable setbacks are consistent with the rest of the neighborhood. She stated that it would be a selling point to have a modem unit inside a beautiful, traditional building. Mr. Arzovmanian stated that realtors had given him negative feedback on retaining the church. They opined that this proposal is not consistent with "the traditional residential setting" in West Evanston, meaning larger backyards. D. Marino countered that there is also a lot of demand for smaller housing, that is not detached single-family housing, as a way of getting into this neighborhood. W. Hallen noted that new townhomes on west Central, which had no backyards, had sold immediately for around $700,000 each. Mr. Arzovmanian stated that if the developers decide not to save the church they intend to incorporate elements of its architectural vocabulary into the new buildings. C. Brzezinski noted that if the church is razed, the context for the remainder of the project is gone. Walter Hallen agreed saying that retaining the church would maintain the "fabric" of the neighborhood and would also be received more positively by the neighbors. Arthur Alterson cautioned that this would not guarantee that the neighbors would accept all other aspects of the redevelopment project. Arthur Alterson asked how many units were proposed. Mr. Arzovmanian stated that, if they are to retain the church in the site design, they would need to construct a total of 11 units. Mr. Deneen explained that the area of the site comes within 20-25 square feet of permitting 11 units. With the added cost of rehab, they feel they would need to apply for a variation that would grant them this extra unit. C. Brzezinski noted that saving the church structure might apply to addressing the standards for either a variation or special use permit. SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 13, 2005 3 Arthur Alterson suggested that the developers work with the alderman and neighbors In finalizing their development plan. ACTION: This was a concept review only. No vote was taken SPAARC 618.628 Judson Final Miscellaneous interiorlexterior remodeling for proposed condo conversion of 20-unit, multi- family residence PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Drew Heindel, George Cyrus, Jim Laubbaner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Drew Heindel described the project as the condominium conversion of an existing 20-unit apartment building. Mr. Heidel noted that the building is also located within the Lakeshore Historic District. The project is scheduled to go before the Preservation Commission on April i e. The bulk of the work is interior renovation work. The exterior work proposed includes: leaning, tuckpointing and repair to the building's brick fagade; reintroduction of ornamental iron railing, where there is evidence of prior railings; repair and replacement of rear wooden stairways and porches, including adding some 5' x 7' porch extensions; 3 minor window changes affecting the rear porch wall, to allow for additional kitchen cabinetry; and the installation of a French door as one rear entryway. In response to committee questions, Mr. Heindel stated that the roof and parapet wall are both in good condition and that there will be roof -mounted condensing units. Arlova Jackson stated that the rear porches will require a zoning variation. She noted that she had not yet received their response to the information she had mailed them concerning this matter. Mr. Heindel stated that they are intending to apply for a variation for one porch, but that this item was not included in the work for which they are now seeking a permit. They will leave that porch as is, until they get a variation. Chair Brzezinski asked whether they would be staining or painting the porches and was told they would be stained. In response to committee questioning, Mr. Heindel stated that they would be installing a full fire alarm system. Chair Brzezinski asked if there were any other exterior changes proposed. Mr. Heindel answered that there is a proposed landscaping plan. Mr. Heindel noted that the proposed plantings were selected to provide interest throughout the seasons. They included ornamental trees (hawthomes and magnolias), rhododendrons, daylilies, shrubs (servicebeny, yews, vibemums) and roses. Stephanie Levine recommended that the landscape plan specify a thornless hawthome. Exterior fighting will be provided in traditional fixture locations over doorways and in the stairwells. Brian Barnes asked if any of the units would be accessible. None of the units are presently accessible and Chair Brzezinski noted that this is not required of the developer by the Illinois SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 13, 2005 4 Accessibility Code. Brian Barnes said that he was disappointed that the developer didn't directly address this consideration, from the standpoint of equal ipportunity for the public. Chair Brzezinski noted that they could provide lever hardware. Brian Barnes added that the selection of walkway materials could also address access issues. ACTION: D. Marino moved to grant final site plan and appearance review approval. The motion was seconded by Rajeev Dahal and passed unanimously. SPAARC 1314 Ridge Avenue Preliminary and Final Renovation of the former District 65 Administration Building PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Scott Prestangen, Architect, Tiffany Danielle, Architect, Mike Niazmand, owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: The applicants have pulled permits for demolition and exterior remodeling on the mansion. Mr. Prestangen stated that the site plan has been in for permit review for some time. The developer wishes move forward with construction of site improvements. The project consists of eight (8) lots, seven of which are undeveloped, single-family lots. Five of the new R-1 (Single Family) lots will be located along Dempster Street; two will be located along Asbury Avenue. The existing coach house and mansion are located on Lot 8. Mr. Prestangen said that site development work will include internal roads, walkways, detention basin and related underground utilities, garages and landscaping. He noted that there will be two curb cuts, both occur on Asbury Avenue. There are currently two existing curb cuts. The northernmost will remain in the same location; the southern one will be shifted northward approximately 20 feet, to allow greater distance from the Dempster Street intersection. Brian Barnes noted the importance of maintaining an accessible route at these curb cuts. Vehicular entry is achieved via the southern approach, which leads to a one-way loop. There is access to each lot off of this drive. There is an existing drive along the north side of the mansion that must be left, as is, due to preservation review. Arthur Alterson said he thought that this was supposed to be closed off and was told that that was not the case. Walter Hallen opined that it is a dangerous driveway, due to its slope and the location of the entry point off of Ridge Avenue. He thought there should be concrete barriers at its west end to prevent its use via the internal road. Carlos Ruiz said that the preservation review had primarily addressed the concern of parking along the driveway. Mr. Prestangen noted that there had been preservation commission approval of an area for cars to drop off passengers, in the front of the mansion. The committee agreed that signage was necessary to allow only right-in/right-out turning movement for this driveway. Stephanie Levine asked whether there are any existing trees within the detention area shown on the site plan. Mr. Prestangen, noted that there are some existing trees in the area, but that the actual location of the detention basin is an open one. S. Levine what is proposed to be SPAARC Meeting Notes - April 13, 2005 planted in this location. Mr. Prestangen said that it would be mostly grass. They will be doing landscaping, but it will be focused on Lot 8, which contains the mansion and coach houses. Brian Barnes asked about the design of the single family homes. C. Brzezinski said that these will be sold as undeveloped lots. She added that their design is not currently proposed and will not necessarily come to SPARC; they may go to the Preservation Commission. Arthur Alterson asked for the depth of the detention basin and was told that it was 5 feet. Mr. Prestangen added that they have both above ground and underground detention utilities. A. Alterson asked if the open detention basin was originally on the plans for this project. Mr. Prestangen said that the exploration of this had been done very early on. Sat Nagar asked whether it would be a wet or dry basin detention basin. He was told that it would be a dry bottom and that only an extreme storm event would result in a significant amount of water collecting in the basin. The release rate will be controlled by a restrictor. S. Levine noted that a couple of the existing trees look very close to the area proposed for the basin. She cautioned them to review their proposed grading plan to see if the shape of the basin can be adjusted to protect the root systems of these adjacent trees. She also suggested that they review their landscape plan for this feature and consider plant materials that like wet conditions, in order to create something other than a big grassed bowl. Tiffany Danielle asked if there were any published guidelines that had been recently updated or revised. As none currently exist, C. Brzezinski asked the developer to work with S. Levine or P. D'Agostino in developing their final landscape plan. Rajeev Dahal asked whether they were proposing internal sidewalks for pedestrians. Mr. Prestangen identified some walkways, both new and old. They will be constructed of concrete. All of the drives are pavers, with concrete curbs. The plan under consideration located one single point for trash collection for the mansion and coach house. The individual houses would use the drive as an alley for their garbage pick up. James Edwards asked if the garage locations and turning radius for the driveway had received approval from the Fire Department. Mr. Prestangen said that it had been approved by Mr. Kelly. Brian Barnes asked whether any of the existing buildings are currently accessible. W. Hallen stated that they weren't accessible as originally built and that they are not required to be remodeled as such under the Illinois Accessibility Code or the BOCA building code. ACTION: Dennis Marino moved to grant preliminary and final approval for everything except landscaping and garages. The motion was seconded by Arlova Jackson. Stephanie Levine asked if the motion could be amended to recommend that the detention basin be modified to allow for as much of the root structure of existing trees as possible. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 2 nays, and 9 abstention. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- April 13, 2005 SPAARC 2212 Bennett Avenue Recommendation to the ZBA Construct a one- and two-story addition at the rear of the existing structure PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Barbara Murphy GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION/DISCUSSION: Homeowner proposes rear addition to home, which will include extra bedroom, kitchen and mudroom. in order to construct the addition, as proposed, variations from setbacks along Noyes Street are required. Chair Brzezinski asked whether there have been any objections received from the neighbors. Staff reported that none have been received. The Chair asked what type of exterior material(s) are proposed. Ms. Murphy stated that it would be a "stucco -like' material. She told the committee that the building materials used for the existing structure are brick on the bottom with stucco above. ACTION: D. Marino moved to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded by A. Jackson and passed unanimously. 11PAARC 3050 Colfax Recommendation to the 7M Construct a canopy over the existing porch PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mark Wilcox GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Homeowner seeks to construct a permanent cover over the front entrance to his home. Because the existing 5'xT front stoop is immediately adjacent to the sidewalk, this request will require a major variation (the encroachment permitted as a minor variation would be 1.5 feet; that proposed for the canopy is 5 feet). ACTION: A motion was made to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously. SPAARC 2111 Orrinaton Avenue Recommendation to the ZBA Enclose an existing carport to create a two -car detached garage PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jacob Lassner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Homeowner distributed copies of the proposed site plan, as well as photos of his and the surrounding homes. Staff stated that notice of the request had not yet been sent; nor had the homeowner discussed the project with his neighbors. The homeowner stated that he wished SPAARC Meeting Notes - April 13, 2005 to enclose an existing carport, which is immediately adjacent to an existing one car garage, to form a two car garage. This will be accomplished by erecting a wall and garage door; no other change to the existing structure, its footprint, or its driveway will be required. His plans also call for constructing two doorways between the house and new garage, to provide direct, interior access. The variations are requested to maintain the existing non -conforming setbacks in the street side yard and rear yard. The homeowner acknowledged that he was located within the Northeast Historic District and that this request would appear before the Preservation Commission on April 190'. ACTION: Rajeev Dahal moved to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded by S. Levine and passed. (5 ayes, and 2 nays) SPAARC 702-704 Reba Place Recommendation to the ZBA Create an additional dwelling unit for a total of 15 units and construct new porches PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Odel Cohem, Moshe Calamaro, Moshe Calamaro & Associates GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: The applicants stated that this is currently a rental property, but that they may eventually convert it to condominiums. Their request is to be allowed to convert the vacant, lower level (formerly the coal and boiler room) of the building into an extra residential unit and to construct porches for all of the dwelling units. The proposed changes require variations to the allowable lot size per dwelling unit, lot coverage (45% permitted, 63.8% requested) and impervious surface (60% permitted, 73% requested). The structure is an existing nonconforming structure with regard to the number of units. The required lot area for 14 units would be 14,800 square feet; the lot contains 8,417 square feet. The property provides six parking spaces. Staff reported that two neighbors had voiced opposition to the proposed variance. ACTION: A. Alterson moved to recommend denial to the ZBA. The motion was seconded by A. Jackson and passed (6 ayes, 1 nay). SPAARC 739 Howard Street Erect two wall signs PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Recommendation to Sian Board Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: The business at this address, Clothespin Laundry, has two requests. First, it would like to install a front wall sign that is 23% larger than permitted by the sign regulations. Secondly, it SPAARC Meeting Notes - April 13, 2005 wants to install another sign on the building's side wall. This sign would be perpendicular to the street, which is prohibited by the ordinance. ACTION: Carolyn Brzezinski moved to recommend denial of both signs to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded Stephanie Levine and passed unanimously. §PAARC 2736-2746 Central Recommendation to Sign Board Proposed unified Business Center sign plan PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: The building has more than four stores and is seeking a unified business center signage plan. The proposal is for a consistent awning system, on which will be displayed tenants' addresses and business titles. The color of the awning will be green; lettering, numbers and logos will be white. The application included neither illumination, nor window signage. The Chair asked whether the applicant knew that if window signage wasn't covered by the application, it would not be permitted. Mr. Hallen said that he would inform the applicant of that fact. ACTION: Stephanie Levine moved to recommend approval to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded by Rajeev Dahal and passed unanimously. SPAARC 2129 Rldae Avenue Recommendation to Sfi In Board Erect temporary wall sign PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: The apartment building at this address has erected a 4'x 8% green banner that reads 'For Lease". The City's sign regulations prohibit any signage in a residential district other than exempt signage. There are only two types of exempt signs allowed in a residential district: 2'x 3' real estate signs and permitted, 4'x 8' condo signs. Therefore, this banner requires a variation. The applicant requests permission to erect the banner 60 days per year. It is currently mounted at a height of 12-15 feet on the wall of the apartment's facade. The applicant requests this variation because of high vacancy rates, finding that banner signs are a cost effective way to solicit tenants. Staff noted that, if granted, this would establish a precedent for many rental properties within the city. A temporary banner permit is not allowed in a residential district ►T611111Le]i!1 SPAARC Meeting Notes -- April 13 2005 9 f Arthur Altenson moved to recommend denial to the Sign Board. The motion was seconded by Tad Cook and passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Susan Gudedey Neighborhood Planner SPAARC Meebfng Notes — Aprd 13, 2005 10 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 20, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Arlova Jackson, Paul D'Agostino, Sat Nagar, James Edwards, James Wolinski, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Rajeev Dahal, John Burke, Arthur Alterson, Dennis Marino Design Professionals: Tad Cook Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Frank Aguado, Brian Barnes, Jill Chambers, Sally Lufkin, Morris Robinson, Tracy Norfleet Chair Srzezinslki determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1031 Sherman Avenue C9nC01A Construct two principal buildings each containing five attached single-family dwelling units (10 townhouses) with underground parking. Revisions to previous proposal. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: `A illiam James (Contract Purchaser) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. James thanked SPAARC members for their comments on the concept proposal presented two weeks ago. The revision still has ten units, but they are smaller and have been reconfigured into a more traditional courtyard layout. A revised site plan that included footprints of adjacent buildings was provided. He noted on the site plan that the rear access also has been reconfigured and now includes a turnaround that accommodates emergency vehicles while providing some green. He also presented revised elevations for the Sherman side and courtyard side, noting that each unit will have its own patio. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski clarified that the center/courtyard access is for pedestrians only and that there is no connection to the lower level (e.g., the original stairway has been removed), which Is correct. Mr. Dahal asked how residents will access the dumpsters at the rear without the stairway. Mr. Jaynes stated that the underground parking area will allow for individual garbage cans instead. Mr. Atterson noted that the site is split between two zoning districts and asked about a map amendment. Mr. James stated that he will ask for a map amendment for MUE zoning, along with other variances as part of the planned development. Chair Brzezinski asked about give - backs to the neighborhood. Mr. James noted the Custer Street improvements discussed last time and added landscaping, drainage, and other site improvements. Mr. Dahal asked if he had contacted the neighbors since the last meeting, and he is in the process of doing so. Mr. Barnes asked about guest parking. Mr. James noted on the site plan that there is some in the rear but thought that most guests would park on Sherman. Mr. Hallen stated that there must be two legal exits from the underground parking area. SPAARC members encouraged sprinklers in the units. Mr. Edwards noted that there are no hydrants in the rear, and Chair Brzezinski suggested that providing one could be a give -back. Mr. Barnes encouraged him to provide some ADA accessible units and guest parking spaces. Mr. Dahal asked if there will be garage doors, which there will. Chair Brzezinski stated that they must be ventilated, and Ms. Chambers suggested using slatted gates instead of garage doors. Chair Brzezinski commended Mr. James for more green space, more private space, the courtyard design, and that it is not overly dense. Mr. Alterson agreed and suggested looking at the school across the street for additional architectural clues. ACTION: No action taken --concept review does not require a vote. SPAARC 1549 Sherman Avenue Recommendation for Sidewalk Caft Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for a type 2 restaurant, "The Italian Coffee Bar": PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Chris Casas (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the required checklist, including rules for litter, delineation of the sidewalk caf6, bringing in all furniture at night, etc. Mr. Wolinski asked if they had tables outside a couple of days ago. Mr. Casas apologized and stated that it was an accident that happened while he was out of town, and the situation has been corrected. Mr. Barnes provided guidance on serving customers with service animals. ACTION: Mr. Cook motioned approval, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2213 Noves Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a second -story addition. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Matthew Slattery (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Slattery stated that he is purchasing this house and proposes to construct a second -story addition for a fourth bedroom. He distributed information, including a plat, floor plans, and photos. Ms. Jackson summarized the variations requested. SPAARC Meeting Notes — April 20, 2005 Page 2 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if he has talked to the neighbors. He has, with no complaints. Ms. Jackson stated that she has not received any complaints. Mr. Wolinski asked about materials, which are expected to be wood siding. Discussion followed on condensers. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2401 Lee Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct a second -story addition utilizing the existing building footprint. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Faruic Corvic (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Ms. Jackson stated that the applicant has already received approval from SPAARC and ZBA to construct a second -story addition utilizing the existing building footprint. However, SPAARC approval was subject to the architect returning to SPAARC to discuss design and materials, which took place at today's meeting. ACTION: No further action was taken —the applicant fulfilled the conditions of SPAARC approval. SPAARC 2201-2401 Oakton Street Content Construct a 4,500 s.f. Financial Institution (Bank One) with 5 drive through lanes on Lot 3. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Robert Zacharias (Contract Purchaser) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski read aloud the description of the project and noted that the drive through lanes are a special use. Mr. Zacharias stated that the site has been undeveloped for some time and can be difficult to see. He is proposing a bank for this location because it is compatible with nearby existing tenants (i.e., Home Depot, Petsmart, Steak & Shake) and the surrounding neighborhood. SPAARC members agreed. Mr. Marino asked if he will be developing on the existing pavement instead of the nearby green space, which he will. Mr. Hallen clarified that there will be a net gain in parking, which is correct. Mr. Aguado suggested orienting the drive through lanes so that cars face the parking lot instead of the residential area (e.g., prevents headlights from shining in neighbor's windows). Mr. Dahal noted that this would also prevent cars from stacking up and blocking parking spaces. Mr. Marino was concerned that trees would be removed from the existing green space, which originated from an agreement with the neighbors when the shopping center was first built. He emphasized retaining existing trees in the landscape plan. For design, SPAARC members suggested various bank locations to look at for guidance. ACTION: No action taken —concept review does not require a vote. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- April 20, 2005 Page 3 SPAARC 2670 Central Park Avenue Recommendation to ZBA, Demolish existing near sunroom and construct new one-story addition in same location. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ella Booty (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing rear sunroom that Is in poor condition and to construct new one-story addition with similar materials in the same location. Information was provided, including photos and drawings. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Nortleet General Planner SPAARC Mee ft Notes — AprO 20, 2005 Page 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES April 27, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, Ron Walczak, Sat Nagar, Arthur Alterson, Arlova Jackson, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), James Edwards, James Wolinski Design Professionals: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzuinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Meeting notes from April 20, 2006 were approved. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 2221 Pioneer Road Recommendation to ZSA Demolish existing, construct new single family residence and detached garage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jon Floyd (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to construct a 2-1/2 story single family house on roughly the same footprint as the existing house and a detached garage. It is a comer lot, and zoning variations include lot coverage, setback, and a fence. Mr. Floyd noted that the existing entry is on Noyes even though the address is on Pioneer. To correct this, the new entry will be on Pioneer. Drawings, a plat, and floor plans were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked the reason for the proposed demolition/construction. Mr. Floyd stated that he and his wife bought the house three years ago because his wife's family lives nearby. The house had been on the market for over a year and was not considered desirable (e.g., crawl space instead of a basement, no other storage space). Because it was at a good price, they hoped to do construction when they were ready. Chair Brzezinski asked if standard size brick will be used, and it will (light brown color with black windows). Discussion followed on the design of the new house, and suggestions were made for window spacing and projections/bays. Ms. Jackson asked about the use of the garage's second floor. Mr. Floyd stated that it will be for storage and will have stairs instead of a pull -down ladder. Ms. Jackson was concerned about lot coverage and noted that the new garage is rather large. Mr. Alterson asked Mr. Floyd if he had talked to his neighbors, and he has. Mr. Alterson wanted it noted for the record that if this was an issue in which the neighbors were coming out in opposition, they would 'eat you alive.' Mr. Alterson continued that they would say that you are building two gigantic bams on this property, and if you get that far and the neighbors do not come because they are being respectful of you or for other reasons, and you wind up getting the variance, this is not what variances ought to be judged by (e.g., it is not a popularity contest). Chair Brzezinski noted that this is an owner building their own home, as opposed to someone coming in who does not own it yet or ever plan to own it, which provokes a different neighborhood feeling. Chair Brzezinski agreed that this should not be the basis for judging a case, and Mr. Alterson stated that he was rankled by the unfairness of the whole process. Mr. Friedman asked if the roof will be metal since the design lends itself to that, but asphalt shingles will be used for cost reasons. Mr. Friedman noted the limestone strip on the lower part of the building and suggested extending the limestone to the ground. Mr. Floyd stated that this had been considered, but being on a comer lot would require this on at least three sides, which was too expensive. He suggested putting a second limestone strip at the top, but SPAARC members disagreed and suggested just a big strip at the bottom. Ms. Chambers noted on the drawings that the scale of the house stairs and landings did not match. Chair Brzezinski suggested removing the garage stairs to reduce lot coverage. Ms. Jackson agreed and noted that the new house will have a basement for storage. ACTION: Mr. Friedman motioned approval, and Mr. Nagar seconded. The motion passed with Chair Brzezinski and Ms. Jackson opposed. SPAARC 1324 Central Street Preliminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling for proposed condo conversion (6 du's). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew Werth (Attomey/Principal) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing exterior changes and landscaping for a condo conversion of a six - unit brick vintage building. Exterior changes include adding condensers on the center of the roof, replacing the back doors, and filling in obsolete ice boxes with brick to match existing. Drawings and photos were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about the basement's use, which will be for storage only. Chair Brzezinski asked about parking. There are three garage spaces, two stalls, and in the past, additional parking has been arranged at Ryan Field. Mr. Friedman suggested heatingt000ling alternatives that may be more in keeping with the building, and discussion fbllowed. Chair SPAARC Meeting Notes - April 27, 2005 Page 2 Brzezinski asked about landscaping. A landscaping plan was not available, but a consultant has been hired. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned approval subject to an approved landscape plan, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. SPAARC 1311 Chicago Avenue Concept Install 12 roof mounted cellular antennas. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Al Leyto (Representative for T-Mobile) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing to install 12 roof -mounted cellular antennas (four antennas in three sectors) on a condo building. Drawings and photos were provided, including a photo mock-up showing RF-permeable screening to look like brick, centered behind the parapet wall, and visible from the street. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if the screen could be moved back from the front of the building, but it cannot because there is a penthouse. Ms. Chambers noted on the drawings that the screen will not be centered in the front of the building, unlike how it is shown in the mock-up photo. Chair Brzezinski suggested that the screen match the existing limestone parapet instead of brick. Mr. Friedman suggested moving the antennas behind the penthouse, but this would require an increase in height to compensate for distance (effectiveness decreases if RF waves hit the parapet wall). Mr. Halien noted that a new overhead wire will be needed for the new service. Chair Brzezinski stated that new wires have to go underground and suggested that Mr. Leyto put other existing overhead wires underground at the same time. Mr. Leyto agreed to ask the condo association about this. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned preliminary approval subject to securing the owner's permission to bury existing and proposed electrical lines, as this is good compensation for the visual impact of the new antennas/screening. Chair Brzezinski seconded, and the motion passed with Ms. Jackson and Mr. Friedman opposed. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes - April 27, 2005 Pape 3 1 . V.1.* SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 4, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Stefanie Levine, Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, Adova Jackson, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Rajeev Dahal, Brian Barnes, Gavin Morgan Design Professionals: Hans Friedman, Tad Cook Other Staff: frank Aguado, Walter Hallen. Carlos Ruiz, Sally Lufkin. Susan Guderley, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinskl determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Meeting notes from April 27, 2005 were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 309-323 Howard Street Facade restoration and store front replacement. Prellminary PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andy Patras (Representative for the owners) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The applicant is proposing facade restoration and storefront replacement (e.g., windows, terra cotta). He has met with Planning Division staff regarding this project and CDBG funding. The building has been vacant. Existing and proposed elevations, floor plans. and photos showing the current condition of the building were provided. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wolinski asked if the burglar bars will be taken down, and they will. Mr. Patras stated that new aluminum window frames will have glass that is harder to break, and additional security will be provided inside. They are proposing to move up the recessed doorways (not to the lot line) to limit the space for people to stand in. They will clean the terra cotta, restore the decorative bands, and bring the columns back into the facade of the building. Chair Brzezinski asked how the window frames will be handled. Mr. Patras stated that he is considering standard aluminum frames with thermal pane windows. Discussion followed on snap -on covers/profiles (e.g.. detailing that adds character). Mr. Hallen suggested using stone (e.g., granite, limestone) for the base of the windows. Chair Brzezinski noted the missing columns at the large storefront. Mr. Alterson asked if anyone had checked the City's microfiche for an original drawing of the building. No one had, and Mr. Patras was interested in doing so. Mr. Alterson stated that if it is not on microfiche, he might have a copy of the original drawing in his office. Chair Brzezinski commended Mr. Patras for providing an identifiable area for signs but thought Its small size could make it hard to attract tenants. Mr. Patras stated that he will consider making the area larger. Chair Brzezinski asked if upper floor windows will be replaced. They will try to restore as many as possible, but a number of them may have to be replaced. Mr. Friedman thought that the original columns extended to the ground but were tom out for the big store. He thought the terra Gotta could be difficult to replace. Mr. Patras stated that he has found a company that does terra Gotta -like material. Mr. Ruiz stated that the perspective of the City staff who met with Mr. Patras regarding CDBG funding is that the project should concentrate on cleaning up the building before doing repairs, and then emphasizing the restoration of the terra Gotta and the replacement of the bays. For the storefronts, they looked at what exists and have not contemplated complete restoration of the fagade. If this were the objective, that would change the configuration of storefronts (e.g., number of storefronts, entries), and this is different from the facade improvement program. The question is the project's intent vs. funds available. Discussion followed on what is allowed under the fagade restoration program and CDBG. Chair Brzezinski applauded the owner for his efforts and thought that any improvement helps. Mr. Atterson noted the art deco detail over address 317 on the building, and discussion followed. Mr. Barnes asked about the type of doors. They are currently aluminum, and the new ones will also be aluminum. Mr. Barnes stated that they should not be too heavy for someone with a disability to open. Alderman Rainey stated that this is one of her favorite buildings, and it has caused her the most sorrow to see it deteriorate, especially over the last eight years. She thought that because it is on Howard Street, they have to go beyond anything being an improvement. If it is going to be improved, it needs to be improved correctly. It sounds like there is interest in doing that but over the years, there has been suspicion and concern because of the deterioration and lack of upkeep and maintenance. She hopes there is some way they can control the project if in fact it is eligible for the facade improvement program. She noted that the Community Development Committee is reviewing and recommending approval on all facades now. whereas they did not before. She stated that she is looking to SPAARC to make certain that the materials and the quality of workmanship are something to be proud of as a responsible job. She is looking for something more than just some improvement. Mr. Ruiz stated that he has met with Mr. Patras and recommended how the building could be restored, as well as contractors specializing in masonry and terra cotta restoration. However, because of the limited funds that the City can provide, part of the responsibility Iles with the applicant to show that it will not just stop at the City funds but rather be a matching situation. He stated that if the original elevations can be located and implemented, this can Improve the SPAAW Meeting Notes — May 4, 2005 Page 2 appearance, but more money would be needed. He thought that himself and Mr. Hallen could work with the applicant to see how much can be done to get the highest possible quality for the amount of money the City will put into this. Chair Brzezinski agreed. Mr. Alterson stated that this is a location in which an improvement makes a big impact, and it will send a statement to do a nice job on refurbishing the building. He noted that the terra cotta Is in better condition than some buildings that people think should be landmarks. He asked about the schedule and tenant. The schedule is to be determined, but one tenant will be a regional retail clothing store. Alderman Rainey noted that the building is in a TIF district, which was identified to make the community more marketable, and she suggested keeping this in mind. Chair Brzezinski added keeping in mind the storefront details (e.g., door handles) and encouraged Mr. Patras to continue working with City staff. Mr. Barnes asked if the building is a landmark, and it is not. Alderman Rainey asked SPAARC about bringing the facade out to the property line. Chair Brzezinski noted that the plan shows that they are recessed, although not as much as currently exists. She recommended leaving as much of the configuration as they can, although it is not original to the building. She preferred the existing depth and noted that leaving it makes things simpler. Mr. Patras agreed but noted the exception of storefronts 3 and 4, which are smaller since the building is slanted there. Mr. Alterson noted a case at Sherman/Main where the recess was removed, and it did not look as good as it could have. ACTION: To give time to locate the original drawing, put together additional signage information, and work with City staff, Mr. Friedman motioned to table the case. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1010 Greenleaf Street Pretiminary and Final Construct a three-story rear addition (exit stair), PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Aubrey Swift (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION i DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski stated that this project was at SPAARC before as a zoning recommendation Is now In for permits. Mr. Swift stated that the project is a 2-112 story addition to a church. Chair Brzezinski asked if the brick matches the building. It matches three major facades. ACTION: Ms. Jackson motioned approval, Mr. Wolinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Multiole Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Cali • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe (Whole Foods Market, 1640 Chicago Avenue). • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe for type 2 restaurant (JK Sweets, 720-1/2 Clark Street). SPAARC Meeting Notes - May 4, 2005 Page 3 • Review application for a sidewalk cafe, a type 2 restaurant (Pick a Cup Coffee Club, 1813 Dempster Street). • Review application for a sidewalk cafe for a type 11 restaurant (Cafe Ambrosia, 1620 Orrrngton Avenue). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Yi-Young Cha (JK Sweets), Carol Kent (Pick a Cup), Adrienne Saunders (Whole Foods), Mike Renollet and Matt Steponik (Caf6 Ambrosia) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the required sidewalk cafb checklist. Mr. Barnes provided guidance on serving customers with service animals. Mr. Wolinski asked if Pick a Cup had been robbed. Ms. Kent stated that it was broken into four months after opening. She thought that adding a sidewalk caf6 would help put eyes on the comer. ACTION: Ms. Jackson motioned approval, Mr. Friedman seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Multiple Locations Recommendation for Sidewalk Caf6 • Review Application for Sidewalk Cafe with liquor for type 1 restaurant within 200 feet of residential use and outside of Liquor Control Regulations Core Area (JacWs Bistro, 2545 Prairie Avenue). • Review application for sidewalk cafe for a Type 1 Restaurant (Davis Street Fish Market, 501 Davis Street). • Review application for sidewalk cafe (Hilton Gardens, 1818 Maple Avenue). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Steve McSweeney (Jacky's Bistro), Mark Robbins (Davis Street Fish Market), David Streeter (Hilton Gardens) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Ms. Levine asked if a drawing was available with Davis Street Fish Market's application to clarify how much sidewalk is available. Chair Brzezinski stated that the City's Engineering Department reviews this. Mr. Robbins provided dimensions. Mr. Dahal asked if Davis Street Fish Market hung a banner that interfered with pedestrians. Mr. Robbins stated that the only time they hung a banner was for a week around Mardi Gras, and it was up high. Chair Brzezinski stated that banners require permits. She then reviewed the required sidewalk cafe checklist. Mr. Bames provided guidance on serving customers with service animals. Discussion followed about the location of Hilton Gardens' sidewalk cafb, which will be on University Avenue and not on the right-of-way. Mr. Alterson stated that because it is on private property, this process does not apply to them. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPMRC Meeting Notes — May 4, 2005 P*ge 4 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 11, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Paul D'Agostlno, Rajeev Dahal, Arlova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, Ron Walczak, James Wolinski, Dennis Marino, Judy Aiello, Gavin Morgan Design Professionals: Hans Friedman, Tad Cook Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Halien, Jill Chambers, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and Megan the meeting. Meeting notes from May 4, 2005 were approved. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 2209 Howard Street Recommendation to ZBA Renovate a food court containing three Type 2 restaurants inside the existing Target retail stone. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Scott DeBell (Engineer), Jeff Bisso (Target Manager) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION i DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski read aloud the description of the project and stated that SPAARC is interested in learning how the trash pick-ups will be handled and whose responsibility that is. Mr. DeBell stated that Target is proposing to remodel the existing food court as part of the remodeling of the store. The new food court will be the same size and have a Food Avenue Express, Pizza Hut, and Starbucks. Drawings, floor layout, and a site plan were provided. Chair Brzezinski asked if there will be advertising for the food court on the exterior of the building (e.g., Starbucks), and there will not. Mr. DeBell stated that the food court is owned and operated by Target rather than a destination. Chair Brzezinski asked if the food court employees will be Target employees, and all of them will be. Mr. Hallen thought that the seating was unusual/too limited for three restaurants and asked If there will be a lot of carry -out or walking around the store with food. Mr. Bisso stated that a high percentage of customers will take -and -go, and the menu is not a typical restaurant menu but more of a snack -type menu. Chair Brzezinski asked if you can get pizza to -go, but only personal size pizzas will be available. '1' Mr. Hallen asked if the food court will be near the door, and it is near the east entry. Mr. Bisso stated that the food court is based on a new prototype, and research has shown that the amount of seating is more than adequate because it is not a destination. While some customers get something when they walk-in, most of the traffic is people exiting because the food court is at the end of the check-out lines, and it tends to be a last-minute decision. Chair Brzezinski noted that this raises the issue of people taking their garbage with them and asked what Target will do to catch garbage that may be near the door or in the parking lot. Mr. Bisso stated that he is new to the area but understands that they have recently received some feedback from the City on their garbage collection process as part of the remodel project for the entire store. Target has changed the vendor for trash, and the frequency of emptying the bins will be increased, especially the bins by the food court (from 1-2 times per day to 3-4 times per day). He did not expect the new food court to generate more trash than the existing food court. Chair Brzezinski recommended that before going to the ZBA, they have the frequency of trash pick-ups that they have a contract for and the exact number of bins. Mr. Bisso stated that it is the store's responsibility to collect from the bin closest to the door. Chair Brzezinski noted that the door is wide and suggested a bin on each side of the entrances to prevent people from littering instead of walking over to a bin on the other side of the door. Mr. Bisso noted that some garbage is windblown. Ms. Chambers emphasized the need to empty bins often. Chair Brzezinski agreed and noted that one bin may fill up faster than another. Mr. Alterson did not think there were any trash receptacles in the parking lot. Mr. DeBell reiterated the issue of wind-blown trash, especially from the east, and trash collects against the wall. Mr. Alterson stated that if customers pick up food on their way out, they may not be prepared to throw anything away as they immediately exit the store, but they may be by the time they get to their cars. Mr. Alterson stated that he would like to see a plan for putting trash receptacles in the lot and a scheme for picking up the trash from the parking lot. Chair Brzezinski agreed and added that they should pick up blowing trash. Mr. Alterson asked what Food Avenue is. Mr. Bisso stated that it is Target's name for the food court area within their stores. Chair Brzezinski clarified that they will not be serving meals but rather, snack -type foods. Mr. Bisso stated that they are getting rid of the fryer and grill to serve ready -to -go snack items. He added that Pima Hut will not have delivery, just personal pizzas. Alderman Rainey was concerned about shopping in a store where people are allowed to walk around with pizza. She asked who the third vendor is, if Food Avenue is the name of the food court area, and what they provide. Mr. DeBell stated that Food Avenue is the name for the convenience store. Mr. DeBell read aloud the menu items. Alderman Rainey asked which items were available in the existing food court, and Mr. Bisso estimated that roughly half of the items were available. Alderman Rainey thought it was a huge difference and the concept was fabulous, but she thought that a lot of paper will be leaving the store, especially pizza boxes and cups. Ms. Chambers asked about the issue of trash blowing from Jewel. Mr. DeBell stated that in the litter plan submitted with the remodeling, the new landscape service will have a day porter on the site for six hours a day to monitor the trash and empty the cans, and the staff will monitor the front trash bins after hours. Mr. Marino asked if this would be seven days a week. SPAARC Meeting Notes - May 11, 2005 Pape 2 r Mr DeBell stated that it will, and it includes the entire site (e.g., behind the store, behind the tenants, and behind the landscaping). Mr. Alterson noted that most litter collection plans require everything within 500' of the property, including Chicago. Alderman Rainey thought that in the redevelopment agreement or the establishment of the shopping center, Target was responsible for everything beyond the premises. Mr. DeBell stated that in the current agreement, Target is responsible for the shopping center, but they are looking to diversify the responsibility to each store being responsible for their own lot. He did not know if that has happened yet. Mr. Bisso stated that Jewel will be responsible for Target, Best Buy, and Office Max. Alderman Rainey stated that the deal the City made with this shopping center is that Target is responsible for everything beyond the premises. Ms. Aiello stated that if that is going be changed, then they must come back to the City to get modifications to the agreement. ACTION: Ms. Jackson motioned to recommend approval, Mr. Alterson seconded subject to comments on trash, and the motion passed with Mr. Wolinski opposed. SPAARC 1931 Central Street Preliminary and Finale Interior and exterior remodeling of a type I restaurant, "Pinto Thai Restaurant" PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Pongpat Chingchitr (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: The owner presented drawings for the proposed renovation to a Thai restaurant (former May Wah Chinese restaurant). The owner stated that he will create a vestibule and remove the air conditioner above the front door. Mr. Marino stated that you cannot see in the restaurant now and asked if that will be changed. The owner showed on the drawings that it will be dear glass all the way up, and there will not be window coverings/shades. Mr. Marino noted the sun issue from the south exposure and suggested tinting the glass. Chair Brzezinski suggested an awning instead, and Mr. Marino agreed. Chair Brzezinski asked about trash, and the dumpster location was shown on the drawing. She noted that it must be kept locked and will be inspected. Chair Brzezinski asked about signage. The owner said it is to be determined, but the box sign will be removed. He liked the window neon sign for Bluestone Caf6. Chair Brzezinski suggested putting a simple design on the awning. Ms. Aiello asked if this will be a Type it restaurant. Mr. Aguado stated that is a Type I. He asked if take-out orders will be less than 25% of business. It is to be determined, but the owner thought there would be take-out traffic because of the train. Mr. Wolinski asked about replacing kitchen equipment. The owner stated that some can be used, and some will be replaced. Mr. Marino noted that another Thai restaurant opened west on Central. The owner stated that its selection is a little different (e.g.. sushi), and his is a little cheaper. Chair Brzezinski noted that the other restaurant is a ways down Central and may get less train traffic. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval, Mr. Walczak seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Meeting Notes - May 11, 2005 Page 3 .J SPAARC Sherman Plaza Preliminary and Final Consider architectural changes to City parking garage within Church Street Plaza. It was noted that the agenda mistakenly listed this item as Church Street Plaza when it should have been Sherman Plaza. The item was cancelled at the request of the applicant. SP_AokRC 1800 Maale Avenue Recommendation to Sian Board Install a blade wall sign for "Enterprise Rent a Car" PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that this location is part of a special sign district, and this proposal requires a minor variation. The wall sign conforms with the special sign district, but the other is a small blade sign. Mr. Marino asked if there are other blade signs in the district. Mr. Hallen stated that the district includes blade signs, but they are concealed by awnings. Chair Brzezinski stated that they are pedestrian oriented, but this one is for cars, and since it is for a car rental, that makes sense. Ms. Aiello stated that Enterprise will be renting spaces in the City garage, pending Parking Committee approval. Drawings for the proposed Enterprise car rental sign were provided. Chair Brzezinski did not think that 1-800-rent-a-car was needed on the sign because it is considered to be advertising. Chair Brzezinski noted that a sign for I -Go car sharing could be a good idea, which also operates out of the parking garage. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to recommend approval with the condition of removing 1-800-rent-a-car from the sign. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous, §PAARC 1235 Dodae Avenue Recommendation to Sian Board Install a blade wall sign, for "Spec Car Wash' PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen presented a mock-up of the proposed sign for the south side of the building. Mr. Hallen stated that a neighbor complained that her driveway is already congested with drivers turning there instead of the car wash because of the existing sign. Members thought the proposed sign was too large and would only make the problem with the neighbor worse. ACTION: Ms. Aiello motioned to recommend denial, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2026 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Establish an open parking space and a 5.00' solid fence in the street side yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Peter Durski (Owner) SPAARC Meeting Notes — May 11, 2005 Page 4 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Durski stated that this is a small comer lot, and there is a driveway but no parking or garage. The proposal is for a parking space in the back yard. A plat was provided, and an existing curb cut was noted. The house is being renovated, and it is to be determined if the owner will remain in the house or rent it. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if photos were available, but they were not. Mr. Wolinski motioned to table discussion, but Ms. Jackson stated that this case is on next week's ZBA agenda. Mr. Alterson asked what exists now, and it is a patio. Mr. Alterson clarified that a curb cut is there now, and it Is. He noted that proposing parking in side yards is an issue, but this is an area where parking is tight. Chair Brzezinski asked if they have talked to the neighbors, and they have. Ms. Aiello asked if the curb cut was legal. Mr. Dahal stated that he would have to check. Ms. Aiello asked if it is too close to the corner. Mr. Dahal thought it was fine. Ms. Aiello asked if the neighbor's house has a driveway, and it does. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion due to insufficient information to make a recommendation (e.g., photos including all surrounding properties). Ms. Aiello seconded. Mr. Dahal added verification with Engineering of the curb cut. Mr. Aguado noted issues with the placement of the proposed fence for privacy (e.g., cannot see sidewalk if backing out of the driveway). The vote was unanimous. SPAARC 807 Howard Street Recommendation to Sian Board Install a wall sign perpendicular to the street and a freestanding "pole" sign. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that a previous proposal had been denied. The new proposal is for signs that require major variations. Mr. Wolinski noted that this is a destination oriented place (e.g., laundromat), not a drive by and drop in kind of place. Chair Brzezinski was fine with some identity because they pay taxes for the parking area, but signage should be low to the ground and landscaped instead of what is proposed. Alderman Rainey noted that there is a metal bumper guard serving as a fence around the parking lot so that people know it is there. ACTION: Mr, Marino motioned to recommend denial, Mr. Alterson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1100 Davis Street Recommendation to Sian Board Install a wall sign. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen SPAARC Meeting Notes - May 11, 2005 Page 5 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that this location is part of unified sign district that includes window and wall signs with limited colors (e.g., white, gold, yellow). Size limits were not available, but Mr. Hallen thought the plan defers to the regulations. Chair Brzezinski thought that the City does not have the plan and suggested that an approved plan must be received before more permits can be issued. Mr. Wolinski thought that the original signage did not make this comer easy to notice and thought that brighter signage would help. Chair Brzezinski agreed but was not sure about brighter colors. Mr. Cook thought this is a drab comer compared to across the street (e.g.. Pine Yard). ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to recommend denial, Mr. Marino >econded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2300 Main Street Recommendation to Sion Board Install a wall sign. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that this a proposed sign for a new paint store in a unified business district. Photos of the existing sign and a mock-up were presented. Members did not think there was enough information. ACTION: Ms. Jackson motioned to recommend denial, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 822 Dempster Street Recommendation to Sign Board Install various signs. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen presented information for a window sign and awning, including neon signage. Members did not think there was enough information. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to recommend denial, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norlteet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes - May 11, 2005 Page B 4 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 18, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Sat Nagar, James Wolinski, Rajeev Dahal, John Burke, Artova Jackson, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), James Edwards, Paul D'Agostino Design Professionals: Hans Friedman Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Donna Spicuzza, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Meeting notes from May 11, 2005 were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1881 Oak Avenue Concept Construct an 18 story mixed use building with 175 dwellings, 175 off street parking spaces and 10,000 square feet of commercial use. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bob King (Developer), Fritz Biederman (Architect), James Urhausen (Consultant) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: The agenda mistakenly listed this item as 1880 Oak. Mr. King stated that this proposed redevelopment of the vacant parcel at Oak and Emerson has the following objectives: 1) build a beautiful building, 2) use Evanston contractors/labor, 3) set aside a percent of affordable units or a make monetary contribution for affordable housing, and 4) generate tax revenue. Mr. Biederman then presented a site plan, elevations, and photos showing the context of the site. The L-shaped building will havel8 stories: 14 residential (175 units), with the remainder having parking, ground floor retail and lobby, and a penthouse/mechanical penthouse. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski was concerned about the mass of the building and requested a model showing the building and nearby sites for context. Mr. King stated that the context is fluid since it is a transitional area from downtown. Chair Brzezinski noted that some buildings are new and not all are residential. In addition, some are L-shaped and form a courtyard, but this proposal does not complement this. A previous proposal had a T-shaped building, and there was much discussion about having an L-shaped building. Mr. Wolinski noted that the Plan Commission has been requesting models and suggested including properties across the street. Parking was discussed. Mr. Dahal asked about a traffic impact study at Oak/Emerson, which is in progress. Mr. Burke suggested a separate meeting about the study when it is complete. Mr. Nagar added that water, sewers, etc also should be discussed. Chair Brzezinski thought that the massing issue had to be settled first. Mr. Wolinski noted the detention issue, and discussion followed (e.g.. whether there is one system for the area and whether it was designed for redevelopment as a 3-4 story commercial/office building instead of the proposed 18-story residential building). Chair Brzezinski noted that planned developments require give -backs. Mr. King stated that through discussions with the Alderman and community, he saw a need for affordable housing (% affordable units or monetary contribution). Discussion followed on variations requested (e.g., height, FAR). Mr. King stated that they have submitted for a zoning analysis, so variations are to be determined. Alderman Jean -Baptiste asked SPAARC to keep in mind the larger context, especially the proximity to downtown instead of being confined to the immediate structures. He noted that there will be discussions with the surrounding community, including the church. He also noted the public good from this project (e.g., using local contractors/labor, affordable housing). He referenced the job fair for Sherman Plaza for using local contractors/labor. Chair Brzezinski was not opposed to residential in this location and thought that its proximity to downtown could enable people who work there to live nearby. She reiterated concerns about massing and agreed with Alderman Jean-Baptiste's comments about the larger context. She suggested doing a big model that includes larger downtown buildings. Ms. Chambers suggested a massing model. Mr. Wolinski noted that the proposed height provides opportunities for lake views, which is a selling point. He suggested doing a shadow study. ACTION: Concept review does not require a vote. SPAARC 917 Greenleaf Street Preliminary Construct a five story, five dwelling unit, multiple family dwelling containing ten off street parking spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Brian Wilk (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Wilk stated that the proposal is for an ADA-accessible condo with five units, two elevators, and no underground parking. The rear parking structure will have 5 car lifts to accommodate SPAARC Meeting Notes — May 18, 2005 Page 2 IN 10 spaces. A site plan, elevations, and car lift information was provided. Materials will be limestone, brick all around the building, and rear wood porches. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wolinski asked if this project is before the ZBA. Mr. Wilk stated that the decision on a previous proposal is currently being appealed, and today's proposal is an alternate. Mr. Burke asked if the zoning ordinance allows car lifts. The zoning ordinance does not mention them. Discussion followed on landscaping (pavers, grass, shrubs) and detention (access to relief system). Ms. Chambers noted that the Disability Coordinator was not present, but this proposal meets his previous comments. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the motion passed with Ms. Jackson opposed. SPAARC 1906 Grant Street Recommendation to 06 Construct a one story addition to a detached single family dwelling. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Anthony Hurtig (Architect), Paul Reber (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Hurtig stated that the proposed modest addition to a house has a sideyard issue. Mr. Wolinski noted that this block of Grant is changing (e.g., many second story additions). Photos, a zoning analysis, and a floor plan were provided. Chair Brzezinski asked Mr. Reber If he had talked to the neighbors, and he had (one owner, one. renter). ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1044 Elmwood Avenue Recommendation to ZM Convert an existing church into a single-family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Leo (Troy) Henikoff (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Henikoff stated that the project is an adaptive reuse of an existing non -conforming use (a church) on a small comer lot. Chair Brzezinski commended him for the adaptive reuse, especially since it is on the comer. Chair Brzezinski noted the value in keeping the structure compared to what could replace it. She also commended him for using reclaimed brick for detached garage. Discussion followed on zoning issues (e.g.. lot coverage, impervious surface, and sideyard setback, R1 zoning for this site). Mr. Wolinski asked Mr. Henikoff if he will live there, and he will. He described interior changes (modifications to make it residential and more energy efficient, not a gut rehab). Mr. Friedman commended him on the garage design and suggested that the garage doors be in keeping with the character of the building. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval, Mr. Wolinski seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Meeting Notes - May 18, 2005 Page 3 SPAARC 610-616 Hinman Avenue Preliminary and Final Construction of new rear porches to existing multi -family residence. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tiffany Danielle (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Danielle stated that she was here before for a recommendation to the ZBA for the proposed enclosed porch replacement and is in for permit. Chair Brzezinski asked about landscaping. The lawn will be maintained, and green will not be taken away. A landscape plan is not needed because this is not a condo conversion but rather, an addition to an existing condo building. ACTION: Mr. Friedman motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and vote was unanimous. SPAARC 913 Forest Avenue Preliminary{ and Final Interior/exterior remodeling for proposed condo conversion, de -convert from 6 du's to 5 du's and install roof -top a/c condensing units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ronald Piekarz (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Piekarz presented east/west elevations and stated that the windows will be replaced all around the building (prairie style, simulated divided light, double hung). He then presented the landscape plan (restore existing grass, add shrubs, keep parkway trees, brick pavers in back). Chair Brzezinski suggested additional landscaping (e.g., perennials). She asked about parking. There are four spaces in a garage and one space next to it. She asked what the existing sixth unit will become. It will be duplexed to make a large unit. She asked about condensers, which will be on the roof toward the back of the building. She suggested putting them on an isolation pad to reduce noise. Mr. Friedman noted that this site is just outside of the historic district and thought that the proposed changes were very nice. ACTION: Mr. Friedman motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 555 Lincoln Street Preliminary and Final Window replacement at COE Water Department. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Stoneback GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski noted that this City building is a landmark (not in a historic district), and this window replacement project will be reviewed by the Preservation Commission. Mr. Stoneback presented photos, elevations, and a sample of aluminum trim. Mr. Friedman asked about the current windows, and the majority are double hung steel (lower level has awning). Some windows have already been replaced. Chair Brzezinski asked if the glass will be dear or SPAARC Meeting Notes - May 18, 2005 Page 4 �J tinted, and it will have a slight tint to match existing. Chair Brzezinski stated that obscure glass, where used, should not look white (or use clear glass with blinds). ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. *PAARC 2215-2219 Maole Avenue Preliminary and Final Interior remodeling & window replacement. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Thomas Petty (Garrett Evangelical Church) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Petty is proposing to replace roughly 270 windows and presented a sample. Discussion followed on how to replace the windows without changing the character of the building. Mr. Hallen asked about trim color. Mr. Petty stated that it will be warm white, which is the original color based on his research. Mr. Aguado asked if utilities can be put underground, but there is no space. Chair Brzezinski asked about the windows on Noyes. Mr. Petty stated that only the residential windows will be replaced since the storefronts were recently replaced. ACTION: Mr. Friedman motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2026 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Establish an open parking space and a 5.00'solid fence in the street side yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Peter Durski (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski stated that applicant was here before and more information was requested. Mr. Durski distributed photos of the site and surrounding properties. Chair Brzezinski asked about the driveway permit. Mr. Durski checked back to 2000 but did not find anything. He did not check with Engineering. Mr. Nagar said he would check. Chair Brzezinski was concerned that the proposed fence would affect visibility while backing out. Landscaping to a certain height was suggested, which would avoid a fence variation, but Members were concerned about enforcing the height of the landscaping. Ms. Jackson suggested an open fence. Mr. Hallen suggested no fence. ACTION: Mr. Dahal motioned approval subject to a fence/landscaping stopping within 5' of the edge of the driveway. Mr. Friedman seconded. The motion passed with Mr. Wolinski, Ms. Jackson, and Chair Brzezinski opposed. ;PAARC 2642-2644 Prairie Avenue Prellminary Construct 3 story, four unit multi -family residence. E PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Potter (Architect) SPAARC Meeting Notes — May 18, 2005 Rage 6 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: The agenda mistakenly listed this item as 2442-2444 Prairie. Mr. Potter stated that the project was here for concept review, and concerns were that cedar shake was not appropriate for the bulk of the building. They are now proposing cedar clapboard for the majority of the building, with cedar shake at the top. In addition, a bay projecting 4' has been added to break up the side elevation. Revised elevations and a site plan were presented. Photos of the existing site and surrounding properties also were provided, including a photo of an elm tree Identified by the City Forester as the oldest in Evanston. The tree has been inoculated, and an arborist put together a tree protection plan for construction comprised of a series of steps: protection area of 30' radius, 4-5' of mulch, root pruning, construction fence. Mr. Hallen asked about detention. Mr. Potter stated that he has worked with Engineering (Ingrid EGcersberg). There will be drain tiles in the front and side. The building has been flipped so that the driveway is on the other side, the building has been shortened by a foot, and sideyards increased. Mr. Dahal asked about parking and the new design guidelines. Mr. Potter stated that he has worked with Ms. Eckersberg on this as well. Mr. Dahal asked about trash, which was indicated on the site plan. Ms. Marsha Sullivan stated that she is the neighbor who owns the tree in question. She noted that the tree canopy needed to be addressed during construction, and any cut limbs must be painted to prevent infection. Chair Brzezinski agreed and thought this should be added to the tree protection plan, which Parks & Forestry can sign off on. She commended the owner for her efforts to protect the tree. Chair Brzezinski asked about material samples, but they were not available. Windows will be aluminum Gad with warm white trim. Exterior lights will be minimal, and locations were shown on the drawing. Mr. D'Agostino noted a grading issue with the tree protection area with regard to a fence. Discussion followed about the fence and existing hedgerow. Mr. Aguado asked about putting utilities underground, but the sewer line does not allow it. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval subject to parking review and a revised tree protection plan (to Include painting branches pruned for construction). Mr. Friedman seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes — May 18, 2W5 Page 6 1 J4 '. J SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES May 25, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Paul D'Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, Arthur Aiterson, Jill Chambers, James Wolinski, Sat Nagar, Brian Bames, Dennis Marino (Design Professionals: Tad Cools Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Walter Hallen, Carlos Ruiz, Sarah Robinson, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Meeting notes from May 18, 2005 were approved as amended. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1578 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Reopen eleven window openings and instal! windows. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Irene Zemenides (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Ms. Zemenides stated that the proposal is to replace existing windows (no new openings) on the north facade. A drawing was provided. The windows will be double hung, wood clad, dear glass. Two windows by the trellis will be a different style. The Preservation Coordinator has reviewed this project. Chair Brzezinski asked how the fire rating will be handled since it is on the property line. Mr. Hallen stated that there will be interior shutters, and discussion followed on their operation. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned approval, Mr. Cook seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2650 Ridae Avenue Final Modification and addition to loading dock area at Evanston Hospital. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David J. Behles (Project Manager), Tim Van der Molen (Owner's Representative), Mark Nichols (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Mr. Nichols presented a photo of the existing site, a mock-up showing the proposed mod ificationladdition to the loading dock, and mock-up taken from a distance to assess visual Impact of proposed changes (minimal). Materials will be brick and limestone. ACTION: Mr. Aguado motioned approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2510 Ashland Avenue Preliminary and Final Interior, exterior remodeling and construction of accessible ramp. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Dirk Danker and Julianne Scherer (Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Mr. Ruiz noted that this address is listed as a landmark, but it was not known if both the church and school are landmarks or if they occupy one lot or two. Mr. Danker stated that the proposed changes pertain to the school, not the church, and include: • Expand the landing at the front entry to accommodate an ADA ramp with handrail; • Close and fill in an existing door with material to match the building (existing steps to door will remain for cost reasons); and • Add a door with an emergency light above it. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Cook seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2636-2638 Green Bav Road Prellminary and Final Interior and exterior alterations to building for "Enterprise Rent -a -Car". Agenda item canceled at the request of the applicant. SPAARC 2301 Howard Street Preliminary "Best Buy" Facade renovation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Amanda Clark (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Ms. Clark stated that Best Buy has updated its prototype to replace the existing steel grid with a new sign. A photo of the existing sign and a mock-up were provided. Chair Brzezinski asked if the bollards in front will stay, and they will. Mr. Marino asked if there will be other exterior changes, and there will not. Mr. Hallen asked if the sign will extend to the ground. Ms. Claris stated that it will extend down to an 8" curb. Members were concerned that the proposed sign material could be damaged. Mr. Nagar noted that there is no landscaping. Mr. Marino stated that the store is now 13 years old and suggested that as part of the renovation, other changes could take place such as landscaping and litter control. Chair Brzezinski agreed and suggested that Ms. Clark confer SPAARC Meeting Notes - May 25, 2005 Page 2 with the owner about installing landscaping and removing the bollards. Mr. Hallen noted the major project being undertaken by the Target store in the same shopping center, including landscaping improvements. Mr. Marino noted that the shopping center was done as a redevelopment project with a monetary contribution from the City and noted that this project should be looked at comprehensively, including the rear of the property (there have not been issues with the dumpsters but there are other things that can be looked at). Chair Brzezinski asked if Best Buy owns the lot, and they do. She noted that there are no landscaped islands in the lot but that Target is proposing to install them in its lot. She also suggested using smaller bollards or granite balls (common in Europe). Mr. Hallen noted that most of the trash in the shopping center comes from Jewel and Target, but he had noticed an empty TV box in a shopping cart, and this sort of thing contributes to the little problem. Ms. Chambers agreed and stated that she had seen the same thing. Chair Brzezinski noted that the exterior of the building is split face block, and she did not think that a dryvit sign helped. She suggested a metal panel (e.g., anodized aluminum). Ms. Chambers noted that signs have been replaced elsewhere in the region and asked Ms. Clark how they have stood up. Ms. Claris stated that they have done well. Ms. Chambers stated that the City of Chicago has banned dryvit. She thought that a metal panel could be a better solution but acknowledged that Best Buy knows best how the signs are holding up. Chair Brzezinski rioted that the sign is part of a unified business district and asked if it will be bigger than the existing sign. Ms. Clark stated that it will not. Discussion followed on whether it will have to go to the Sign Board (e.g., height variation). Mr. Marino noted that Best Buy could get a sign with the same look as proposed, but SPAARC is just asking for a different material. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned to table discussion, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2450 Main Street Final Construction of an Automobile Service Station with B gas pumps at Sam's Club Site. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jansun Ting (Engineer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Ting stated that since the last meeting, landscaping has been modified, and species now comply with the City's list of approved species. A site plan, photos, and elevations were provided. A sample of split face block was provided, and Mr. Ting stated that it will be painted to match the Sam's Club store. DISCUSSION: Mr. D'Agostino stated that he has reviewed the landscape plan. Mr. Ting asked who should sign the plans, and Mr. Marino suggested having someone at the corporate level sign them because store managers change. Chair Brzezinski asked if the landscaping will have sprinklers, and it will not. She was concerned about die -offs and whether they would be replaced. Mr. Marino thought there should be a maintenance agreement to address this. SPAARC Meeting Notes - May 25, 2005 Page 3 ,j...r . ' Discussion followed about the canopy height (issue with drawing presented). Mr. Wolinski asked if non-members can buy gas. Mr. Ting stated that they cannot. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the motion passed with Chair Brzezinski and Mr. Alterson opposed. SPAARC 2750 Gross Point Road Preliminary and Final Lovelace Park renovation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Stefanie Levine GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Ms. Levine stated that the proposed renovation of Lovelace Park is scheduled for fall 2005. She presented site plans of the existing park and proposed changes. Most work will be In the central area. Modifications include resurfacing the parking lot, pavement at the field house, new ADA pathways, installment of gazebo -like picnic shelters, and enhancements to the pond (e.g., aeration, emergenttwetland plantings, removal of part of the wall and grade the bank). DISCUSSION: Mr. Marino asked if work will affect the bike path, and it will not. Ms. Levine added that the old lighting system along the path will be replaced. Mr. Marino asked if the new lighting will be as subdued as the existing, and Ms. Levine thought so. A drawing of the fixture was provided. Chair Brzezinski asked if the tennis courts will be resurfaced. They will not because they were redone a few years ago. Mr. Barnes asked if all pathways will be ADA compliant, and they will. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1800 Ridge Avenue Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior remodeling for two model units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Thomas Engel (Owner & General Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Engel stated that he is proposing a first floor renovation of the two westernmost units at 1800 Ridge Avenue. The only exterior renovations to this building will be in the form of 5 new glass doors with transoms, and new windows on the western fagade. Advertisement for these units will occur on a website, and on a sign at the site. This prompted concern from Chair Brzezinski, who noted that the location of the site signage may negatively impact automobile safety (e.g., motorists might not seek the sign until it is almost too late and hit the brakes). A suggestion was made by Chair Brzezinski to install another sign, at a greater distance from the entrance to the property, and Mr. Barnes suggested it advertise the units' disabled accessibility. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Alterson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Meeting Notes - May 25, 2005 Page 4 SPAARC 2142 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Establish driveway and one (1) open parking space in front yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Mayumi Naramura (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION i DISCUSSION: Ms. Naramura would like to build a driveway and parking space upon her property, which currently lacks any existing area to store their car. Mr. Marino began the discussion by asking whether other properties on her block of Sherman have driveways, and they do not. Mr. Marino then voiced his concern for creating curb cuts in areas where they do not exist. Chair Brzezinski was also not in favor of breaking the expanse of uninterrupted space along this block of Sherman Avenue. However, Mr. Wolinski mentioned that adding a driveway may make the property more desirable to families in this typically student area. Mr. Marino suggested that the case be tabled to give time for staff to visit the site. Mr. D'Agostino agreed as he could not identify the trees from the photos and therefore could not assess impacts of the proposed driveway. ACTION: Mr. Marino moved to table, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Discussion followed on when to reschedule the case (the applicant wants to appear at the meeting but will not be available next Wednesday). SPAARC 528 Dempster Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review sidewalk cafe application for a type !l restaurant, "Starbuck's Coffee Company". PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Natalie White (Manager) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the required sidewalk cafes checklist, including rules for litter, delimiting the sidewalk cafes area, and bringing in furniture at night. Mr. Bames provided guidance on serving customers with service animals. Ms. White stated that she is familiar with these issues since her background is in paratransit. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet Sarah Robinson General Planner Planning Intern SPAARC Meedrpg Notes — May 25, 2005 Pop SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 1, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: David Stoneback, Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, David Jennings, Rajeev Dahal, Paul D'Agostino, James Edwards, Brian Bames, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), John Burke, Arlova Jackson, Jill Chambers, Sat Nagar, Dennis Marino Design Professionals: Tad Cook Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Prank Aguado, Sally Lufkin, Susan Guderfey, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezlnski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Meeting notes from May 25, 2005 were approved as amended. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1800 Ridqe Avenue Preliminary and Final Addition and remodeling for thirty-four (3.4) condominium dw fling units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Thomas Engel (Owner & General Contractor), James Murray (Attorney) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Murray stated that this project has received approval from City Council and referenced the ordinance. A site plan and material samples were presented. Circulation and lighting were described (a photometric study has been done). Mr. Dahal asked if there will be planters on the front sidewalk, and there will not because it is too narrow. Instead, there will be planters in the recesses. Mr. Nagar asked about detention. Mr. Engel stated that they have been meeting with the City for six weeks and did not know until yesterday's meeting that retention was needed for this adaptive reuse project. He could not get the information in time for today's meeting but committed to providing it to Mr. Nagar as soon as it is available. Chair Brzezinski suggested that the fence along the parking lot be wrought iron instead of board -on -board. The applicants stated that the Preservation Commission has purview over the lot and during their review of the project, they took testimony from neighbors who wanted the board -on -board fence to screen headlights. Mr. Murray thought the fence Issue was Incorporated into the ordinance. Discussion followed on ingress/egress from Ridge and whether the existing median should be extended. Chair Brzezinski was concerned that southbound traffic on Ridge would miss the turn -in and suggested that the sign for this site be illuminated. Mr. Engel presented the landscape plan. Chair Brzezinski was concerned about maintenance and asked about watering. There will not be sprinklers, but hose locations were discussed. Mr. Aguado asked if there will be a problem with trees overhanging on the adjacent property, but the species selected grow more upward than outward. Mr. Engle presented elevations. Windows, balconies, and the green screen were discussed. Mr. Aguado noted on the drawings the brick infili areas on the alley view and asked if this is a change since the ordinance was passed. The applicants stated that it is, and Mr. Hallen stated that it was triggered by a code issue (% open area). Mr. Alterson asked about the fill material, which will be brick to match the existing building. Chair Brzezinski asked about condensers. Mr. Engel stated that they will be on the roof behind the parapet and can be further screened if needed. Chair Brzezinski suggested putting condensers on a vibration isolation pad. Mr. Stoneback provided information on water and sanitary sewer lines. He recommended looking at the sewer line, and Mr. Engel agreed to do this. Discussion followed on whether an existing manhole on the site is private or the City's. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to an approved landscape plan. Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Sherman Plaza Revisions to Final. Consider architectural changes to a city parking garage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Max Rubin GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION i DISCUSSION: Mr. Rubin presented elevations and drawings for the garage portion of Sherman Plaza, as well as material samples (brick, concrete, perforated panels, glass, lobby tile). Photos of light fixtures were available, and Mr. Rubin stated that the same ones will be used as the Maple Garage. Changes since the project last appeared before SPAARC include: the base will be black granite all around, and textured paint will not be used on the alley side. He noted that full mock-ups are available at the Maple Garage. Mr. Rubin described the layout of the panels on the garage exterior and noted that Images can be printed on the panels. Mr. Marino asked who will decide what images will go on the panels. Mr. Rubin stated that the committee is to be determined. Mr. Marino suggested that Mr. Hallen be on that committee. SPAARC Meeting Notes -,June 1, 2005 Page 2 ACTION: Chair Brzezinski stated that a motion could be made for preliminary and final approval for the garage and noted that approval at the last meeting was for the foundation only. Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to Mr. Hallen being involved with the committee that will decide panel images. The motion was not seconded. Mr. Jennings motioned approval as presented. Mr. Burke seconded, and the motion passed with Chair Brzezinski, Ms. Jackson, and Mr. Cook opposed. ,,SPAARC 2636-2638 Green Bav Road Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior alterations to building for "Enterprise Rent -a -Car". PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Greg Taste and Gina Frizzo (Enterprise Representatives) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Ms. Frizzo presented photos of the existing building. Chair Brzezinski asked about changes to the parking lot. It will be resurfaced, striped, and one ADA parking space will be provided (Members indicated that this will suffice since the lot contains less than 25 spaces). Mr. Toste presented a site plan and elevations. He described changes to the storefronts, including new windows and brick at the base. There will be two entries. Mr. Barnes noted that the existing front entry has a step and asked if this will change. Mr. Taste stated that it will for ADA compliance. Chair Brzezinski asked about the sign, which will remain and be cleaned up. Discussion followed on landscaping and the driveway configuration. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2535-2541 Prairie Avenue Recommendation to Z13A Recommendation to the ZBA for a Building Lot Coverage variation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Drew Heindel (Architect) and Jim Laukkanen (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Heindel stated that this condo conversion proposal has been here previously. It is back because they are proposing to demolish the existing rear garage and instead provide an uncovered rear parking area. This change, plus the previously reviewed porches, require a lot coverage variation. Photos, elevations, a site plan, and floor plans were provided. DISCUSSION: Mr. Marino asked about porch materials, which are expected to be metal columns and railings with wood infill. Chair Brzezinski asked why the garage is being torn down. Mr. Laukkanen stated that it is functionally obsolete because it is narrow and hard to get in/out. Mr. Heindel added that it is also in poor condition. Mr. Laukkanen noted the tradeoff in losing marketable covered parking with getting more open space and eyes on the alley from the rear porches. Mr. Hallen asked about the garbage area, and it will remain. SPAARC Meeting Notes - June 1, 2005 Peg& 3 Mr. Marino asked if there are standards for what can be put on the porches. He was concerned that residents would use the porches for storage, and this would be visible from the nearby business district. He asked if clutter on the porches could be a fire safety issue. Mr. Aiterson noted that these are balconies, not stairs. Mr. Marino asked the applicants if they would consider a covenant limiting what can be put on the balconies, and Mr. Laukkanen agreed. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to the condo documents reflecting limitations to what can go on the porches. Mr. D'Agostino seconded, but the motion failed to pass. Ms. Jackson motioned approval as presented, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Marino and Mr. D'Agostino opposed. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeft Notes — June 1, 200 Page 4 SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES OF WEDNESDAY, dune 8, 2005 ROOM 2404-2:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Brzezinski, Judith Aiello, James Wolinski, Dennis Marino, Arthur Alterson, Arlova Jackson, David Stoneback, James Edwards, Brian Barnes, John Burke, Jill Chambers, Sat Nagar, PRESIDING OFFICIAL: Carolyn Brzezinski, Chair STAFF PRESENT: Moms Robinson, Walter Ha11en, Susan Guderley, Stefanie Levine, Carlos Ruiz L Chair Brzezinski called the SPAARC Meeting to order at 2:30 P.M. 13. 2142 Sherm'n Avenue -Recommendation to ZBA Profeet presented bv: Ms. Mayumi Naramura, owner. Chair Brzezinski stated that the first agenda item was a request for the establishment of a driveway and one (1) open parking space in the front yard of 2142 Sherman Avenue. The required Committee action is for a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals {ZBA}. Ms. Mayumi Naramura was asked to present her request. This was the second appearance before the SPAARC for Ms. Naramura who was accompanied by her fiancee. Ms. Naramura presented photographs of three other houses in her neighborhood which had curb cuts in front for driveway access and explained that she too would like to create front yard parking for her home. Ms. Nammura stated that she has no other alternative in placing a driveway and would welcome any suggestions from the SPAARC members. Staff member Stefanie Levine, Parks/Forestry, stated that the position of the proposed curb cut would kill two large trees if the request were allowed. Chair Brzczinski indicated that the odd center yard positioning of the proposed driveway was unfavorable and stated that approval of the request could establish an undesirable precedent. Ms. Naramura stated that a precedent had already been established as evidenced by the three photographs. Ms. Jackson explained that the curb cuts were made many years ago, prior to current codes and one of the homes was presently under investigation. APPROVED SPAARC MEETING MINI;TES-JUNE S, 2005 PAGE 2 Additionally, the driveways on the other homes were situated along the side of the residences, not down the center of the front yard as requested by Ms. Naramura. Unfortunately there isn't an alley behind Ms. Naramura's home and there doesn't appear to be any other off street parking alternatives. Staff member John Burke, Public Works, stated that both traffic flows resulting from the proposed curb cut as well as the actual curb cut would not be desirable for the community. Action Taken: SPAARC member Dennis :Marino expressed his objection to the project and stated that he could not support the request. Cars parked in the center of a residential front yard would crate a negative impression for the community as well as set an undesirable precedent. Member Marino then made a motion to deny the request. Member John Burke provided a second to the motion and the committee voted unanimously to deny the request. Chair Brzezinski advised Ms. Naramura of her recourses if she intended to pursue the matter further. III. 930 Pitner Avenue -Concert Protect presented bv: Mr. Andy Spatz, owner & Mr. Matt Bevy Mr. Andy Spatz, a well known developer of small properties in Evanston has acquired the properties at 930 Pitner Avenue. The site, which was formerly an old film studio, consists of two single story buildings with approximately 5,000 square feet each and one two story steel frame building which is approximately 10,000 square feet in size. The property owner proposed extensive interior and exterior renovation of the buildings creating twelve, 1,400 to 1,800 square feet, affordable commercial and office spaces for small businesses. There are thirteen existing outdoor parking spaces and the intent is to create four additional indoor spaces. A curb cut will be required. Member Brian Barnes advised the developer of the disabled accessibility requirements and other non -required but desirable amenities. Mr. Spatz stated he would meet all requirements but his intent is to keep the purchase price per unit as low as possible and the "nice to have" features could be cost prohibitive. Estimated price points for the units are $140 to $145 per square foot. Mr. Spatz suggested that perhaps the non -required features can be made available to the purchasers of the units on an a -la -carte basis. Member Marino advised the committee that this project fits nicely with the endeavors the City is making to enhance this particular area. In general the project received praise from the SPAARC members. A site plan will be presented at the next SPAARC presentation. Staff member Hallen advised the developer that each floor must have two exits as the plan is further developed. APPROVED SPAARC .NiEETING MINUTES-JU E S, 2005 PAGE 3 Action Taken: although considerable input was provided by the committee there wasn't an actionable item requiring a vote. The committee praised the project and encouraged the developer to proceed with the approval process. IV. 2620 Green Bav Road -Concept Project presented by: Atty. John Malarkey, Developers Jack Crocker and Jim Ticus and Architects Jack Murchie, Todd Niemic, Marta Gazda-Auskalns of SMNG-A The developer is proposing a re -subdivision of a rear lot owned by Duxler Tire & Car Care Company, creating two lots of record, for the purpose of constructing a four story, mixed use residential building. Duxler would like to reduce the size of the property and its activities at this site and is willing to sell the parcel to the developer. The property is currently zoned C2 and a zoning change to 132 would be required for the project. Additionally, a curb cut will be required to enable access to the parking area. Properties on either side of the site are zoned B2 and 84. The developer and his team presented architectural renderings illustrating the positioning of the proposed structure and how it would blend with the other existing buildings elements. Various committee members provided the developer with design and code advice. Chair Brzezinski reminded the developer of the three feet set back requirement and member Marino suggested that the width of the sidewalk needed investigation. Member Alterson and Chair Brzezinski both underscored the need to arrange for a zoning analysis as soon as possible. Member Marino stated that he could support the concept of the mixed use development project providing a B2 zoning designation can be achieved. Chair Brzezinski also considered the concept to be acceptable. Action Taken: Considerable input was provided to the developer by the committee. The developer was advised to apply for a zoning analysis as soon as possible and was encouraged to proceed with the approval process. Since the project was presented as a concept, no vote was required. V. 2300 Main Street -Recommendation to Sign Board Prolect Dresented hv: Walter Hallen Member Mien presented a Proposed Unified Business Center signage plan for this 2300 Main Street shopping center location. Action Taken: The committee voted unanimously to approve the signage plan with the condition that the sign letters do not exceed the two feet high size limitation of the logo. APPROVED SPAARC MEETF.NG '%il:N'LTES-,TUNE 8, 2005 PAGE 4 VI. 614 Davis Street -Recommendation to Sign Board Project presented by: Walter Hallen Member Hallen explained that the tenant at this location requested approval to install wall signs and a banner because the property owner, Ursula Bryant, occupies the entire exterior signage space for her own signage needs. Action Taken: The committee concluded that the request would constitute an unfavorable "bill -board" effect and that the issue was actually between the property owner and the tenant. The committee voted unanimously to deny the request. VIL The SPAARC Meeting Summary of June 1, 2005 was unanimously approved. VIIL There being no further business, the SPAARC Meeting was adjourned at approximately 4:00 P.M. The next SPAARC Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, June 15, 2005 at 2:30 P.M. at the Civic Center, in Room 2404, second floor. Respectfully submitted, Morris E. Robinson Economic Development Planner SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 15, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski, Chair. Kevin Kelly, Sat Nagar, John Burke, James Wolinski, Ariova Jackson, Arthur Alterson, Bob Domecker, Sgt. Bob Mayer. Design Professional: Tad Cook Other Staff: Jill Chambers, Frank Aguado, Susan Guderley Chair Brzezlnskl determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. The minutes of the meeting were approved. Prolects Reviewed: WAARC 1311 Chicago Avenue Install 12 roof mounted cellular antennas PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Al Lehto, T Mobile FlnId GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: At a prior SPAARC meeting this project was granted preliminary site plan approval, provided permission was granted by the building's owner to run both its and the antennas' electric service underground. This permission has since been secured and the revised plans reflect this fact. The committee had also requested that the screening material around the antennas be changed from fal. !x brick to a sand color; this has been done. Plan review also showed that the antennae's proposed location was too close to the south parapet wall, which was set on the property line. The equipment platform has been relocated on the current plans. C. Brzezinski asked whether this building was located in a historic district. Mr. Lehto stated that it was not. However, they have screened all four sides because the historic district Is behind the building. He also displayed a letter from the Historic Preservation Society approving the project. J. Wolinski noted that this is not the Evanston Preservation Commission. The Chair asked what will happen when this equipment is no longer being utilized. Mr. Lehto stated that the lease stipulates that T-Mobile must remove it and restore the roof. Arlova Jackson stated that, according to the City's web site, this building is located within the Lakeshore Historic District. Mr. Lehto said that this site is not on the map. Chair Brzezinski said that Historic District status must be corroborated by building address. Mr. Lehto read a letter from Carlos Ruiz which stated that the subject building was outside of, but immediately adjacent to, the west boundary of the Lakeshore Historic District. It further stated that the Preservation Commission has determined that the proposed activity does not have an adverse effect upon designated historic properties or the district. In light of the discrepancy with the GIS information, Chair Brzezinski noted that this matter will need to be confirmed by Zoning. Arthur Alterson said that a new state statute, effective July 2004, regulates the public notice requirement for new telecommunications facilities within 1'/2 mile of a municipality. The statute requires that the company notify, by certified mail, all properties owners within 250 feet of the affected parcel. Chair Brzezinski asked the applicant to read this statute and to address it appropriately. Chair Brzezinski noted that the Assistant City Manager had submitted some questions regarding this project. These questions were: What are the heights of the antennas? Will they be visible from the street or other buildings. What do they look like? It was noted that the questions presumed a free-standing antenna and not one mounted on an existing building. Mr. Lehto said that the height to the top of the enclosure would be 62 feet 8 inches. Chair Brzezinski noted that the antennas will not extend, unscreened, above any existing structure. ACTION: J. Wolinski moved to approve the installation of the proposed 12 roof -mounted cellular antennas, according to the drawings and modifications presented, subject to further investigation of the issue of notification by the City or the applicant. The motion was seconded by Arlova Jackson and approved. (8-1) Arthur Alterson voted nay. SPAA.RC 2058 Greenleaf Street Concept, Construction of a 399' tall Media Broadcasting Tower at the near of the property PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Richard Riley and Sara McNear, Lakeshore Media GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Because of shifting demographics, the company broadcasting Univision wants to relocate their primary transmitter site to Evanston. The company has spent the last year looking at potential sites, including the old WOJO tower on Main Street and the WONX tower. Both are very old and in excess of 200 feet in height. These sites have subsequently been eliminated from consideration. The company also explored other sites, including the City's public works yard but encountered engineering problems. The subject parcel is part of an old CBNW spur line. It is now a public utility corridor, housing a ComEd high tension line. The line's towers are 150-1 fi0 feet high. The applicant proposes to use a tower which has a 76-foot wide leg spread, then tapers into a central shaft. An exact duplicate (400-feet tall) is located in downtown Bloomington, Illinois. FAA regulations will SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 15, 2005 2 require that aircraft warning lights be mounted on the tower. In its application, the applicant Included an analysis of the impact of the tower's visibility upon the City's historic districts. Mr. Riley stated that they have walked the site with the alderman of the 2"d Ward and that the project has his support. At the ground level, the lot will be cleaned and cleared of discarded machinery. The tower will be situated at the far south end of the parcel, in order to have adequate clearance from the ComEd high tension lines. Mr. Riley noted that the exact nature of the applicant's community contribution has yet to be determined. The applicant has agreed to provide an FM radio system to provide emergency information to Evanston's citizens. In addition to the two Spanish language radio stations, other radio and TV broadcasters are also considering the proposed tower as a back-up transmitter location. The two applicant stations are currently broadcasting from Arlington Heights and the John Hancock Building, Walter Hallen asked what type of fencing was proposed for the base of the tower. Mr. Riley stated that they could install any type of fencing desired. Mr. Hallen asked if that would also be without razor wire. Mr. Riley said that razor wire will not be used. He added that, as per his discussions with the alderman, the applicant has agreed to clean up trash and landscape this site. He noted that his client only leases a portion of this parcel and does not have control over the remainder's appearance. Jim Wolinski commented that the City's tallest structures are currently defined as the MBD Bank building, Park Evanston and Optima Views. He stated that he wouldn't want it now to be defined as a TV antenna. Chair Brzezinski asked how tall the ComEd power poles were. The applicant's exhibit states they are 114-feet tall. Arthur Alterson questioned the value of the public benefits of either an emergency radio system or the landscaping of an area that is visible only from the rear parking lot in an industrial area. Mr. Riley added that his client has also made offers to both of the other radio tower owners, previously mentioned. Neither owner has indicated an interest in selling these sites. Chair Brzezinski asked whether the applicant had looked into mounting their towers on an existing Evanston high-rise, as was being done on the John Hancock. Mr. Riley said that they had, but that this would require the construction of a tower on top of one of them. in their estimate, this presented more aesthetic issues than their current proposal. He said that he would love to move a tower atop the City's public works garage, however this option was eliminated because of its proximity to the new high rises in downtown Evanston. Sgt Mayer asked what security measures have been in place with the Bloomington tower? He also wondered what impact would this have for the Fire Department if they had to do a rescue at the tower. Mr. Riley stated that the applicant would construct a fence designed to keep people out of the premises. The tower in Bloomington has an elevator built into one of the legs. He wasn't certain if an elevator is in the plans for this tower. As to the adequacy of the fire department's equipment for a rescue, he assumed that the tallest ladder in town would be able to serve a 28-story building. Sgt Mayer asked if there has been any consideration of an alarm system for the tower. 5PAARC Meeting Notes —June 15, 2005 Kevin Kelly noted that the address given for the property is In question and would require additional investigation. They were advised to work through Engineering to either confirm the address or to apply for a new address. He asked if this tower could also be used for cellular equipment. Mr. Riley said that it could. Chair Brzezinski stated that she would recommend keeping the tower as clean an architectural statement as possible. Brian Barnes said that he is working on emergency contingencies for persons with disabilities and would be in favor of having radios made available to them. He also questioned the concern for green space in this location. Chair Brzezinski noted that greening, associated with this project, could also be done at other more visible community locations to mitigate the impact of high tech appearance of this tower. Walter Hallen cautioned about allowing the uncontrolled addition of antennae to this tower. Arthur Alterson noted that this project would require a special use permit and hearing for same. Mr. Riley noted that there may alsc be a need for one or more variations. Chair Brzezinski noted that it is impossible to hide a 400 foot tower and urged the applicant to consider the project as an opportunity to provide a sculptural approach to a utility tower. Staff advised Mr. Riley to apply for a zoning analysis and for any needed zoning relief. ACTION: This was concept review only. No action was taken by the Committee. SPAARC 801 Chicago Avenue Preliminary and Recommendation to ZBA Construct a 6 story, 20 unit multiple family dwelling with commercial space on the ground floor. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Patrick Shanahan and David Haymes, Architects GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: This project was seen previously as a concept plan in December 2004; no action was taken. Mr. Haymes, Architect, reviewed the project and the changes made since its last appearance before the Committee. The proposal is for a 20-unit residential condominium building with a small amount of ground floor retail space. Thirty parking spaces will be provided for residential use. The proposed height of the building is six stories. The project adheres to the Cla zoning district regulations, with one exception: the zoning administrator has determined that a parking .appurtenance' (parking ramp) is located within the required 20' setback from the property line. It is for this requirement that the project has applied to the ZBA for a variation. The ground floor retail is accessed via the Chicago Avenue frontage but wraps around the comer onto Kedzie. The entrance to the residences is located along Kedzie. Some additional, ground floor office space, with windows along the Kedzie frontage, has been added to the ground floor under the ramp to the upper parking area. SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 15, 2005 4 Parking is provided for the residences only —none is required for the commercial space. All of the parking is accessed via the rear alley. There will be two garage doors, one leading to ground floor spaces and one leading to the parking ramp. A loading berth is also located in the rear, immediately adjacent to the trash collection area. The site plan reflects the Chicago Avenue Streetscape plans in the size, number and placement of street trees. The plan also shows the bulb or bump -out for the sidewalk crossing at Keeney. The building's Chicago Avenue fagade has a small setback for the commercial area. A front canopy feature, included in earlier versions of the project, has been eliminated. The project has provided an 8-foot wall along the alley edge and a fabric canopy to screen the loading berth. Condo units will be served by a single elevator, located in the residential lobby. The second floor plan consists of parking and clear story for the ground floor commercial space. The typical floor plan for the 3 upper floors has six units each, all of which will be two bedrooms. Individual unit storage rooms are located along the northern corridor located on each floor. The third floor plan has a continuous terrace area, while floors above have exterior balconies. The penthouse level will consist of two larger residential units. Mr. Haymes noted that other design changes which respond to previous staff comments include: moving direct access into the commercial space entrance from Kedzie Street to Chicago Avenue; setting in the residential entryway to allow a covered outdoor zone; and expressing the Kedzie elevations with two different colors of brick to distinguish the building's bays, cleanly wrap the comer to the front facade, and incorporate the parking ramp. The balconies will be perforated metal to provide some screening of items left on balconies while also allowing light to enter the units. Another concept, not shown on the plans, is the desire to introduce iron cables to allow vines to grown up portions of the building. J.Wolinski asked whether prior encroachment by parking into the front yard had been eliminated. Mr. Haymes showed how all of the parking had been pulled out of this area. However, a zoning variation is still required because a portion of the parking ramp passes through this setback. Frank Aguado asked if there will be any outdoor space provided for the penthouse units. If so, will this have railings? Mr.Haymes stated that there will be some outdoor space, maybe 10X15 in dimensions, but that this has not been fully developed. Sat Nagar asked how the building had responded to staffs request to allow greater streetscape area along Chicago Avenue. Chair Brzezinski said that the building had been pulled back inside the columns. John Burke stated that the city is proceeding from the conceptual to actual design for portions of the Chicago Avenue Streetscape and that it will be Important to coordinate on this with this project. Mr.Haymes said that they had reflected the rhythm of street trees and the bump -out of the sidewalk at the comer of Kedzie. Mr. Burke said that this development provides an opportunity to continue the streetscape up the block. Chair Brzezinski added that the construction on this site will demolish the existing SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 15, 2005 5 sidewalk, which the developer will be required to replace. The City would expect the developer to do so in a manner that is consistent with the approved Chicago Avenue plan. Mr. Burke said that the City already has hired a consultant to complete the construction drawings for sections of the streetscape. The city has the flexibility within their contract to expand their work scope to include active developments. Chair Brzezinski asked the developer to alert Mr. Burke as soon as the development has ZBA approval. The build out would then better correspond with the desired occupancy schedules of the condos and commercial space. The Chicago Avenue elevation will be window wall, with a painted aluminum system. The glass will be slightly tinted. Chair Brzezinski noted that a model would be very helpful to visualize the building. The alley elevation will have an 8-foot wall and sloped canopy at the loading area, louvers to ventilate the garage, and the masonry will wrap around from the north side. The design of the north elevation has not been completed. The building to the north will be at least one story taller. Several 3D views of the building were shown, including one which represented a potential greening scheme along its Kedzie frontage. Sat Nagar asked if they have yet identified the location of the building's detention. Mr. Haymes stated that they haven't yet done the civil engineering for the building, but that he is certain that detention will be provided in underground pipe. Walter Hallen asked if the building's parking spaces and lanes complied with the City's guidelines for parking. Mr. Haymes was told that these have changed in the last 6 months. Sat Nagar said that changes affect driveway slope, space size, and column location. He offered to send Mr. Haymes a copy of these. Chair Brzezinski asked if they had given any thought to increasing the energy efficiency of the building by incorporating such as green roofs, solar panels, or high efficiency windows. Mr. Haymes noted that they typically use Low-E glass that is slightly tinted. Beyond that, they haven't given this matter significant consideration. The Chair said that this feature might be viewed very favorably by City boards and by future residents. Brian Barnes recommended that the developer consider some sort of push plate door opener. Mr. Haymes said that they could, they will definitely meet the 8.5 pound weight requirement for all doors. Brian Barnes stated that he felt the building's design was accessible. Mr. Haymes said they will be meeting ISU requirements. Chair Brzezinski stated that the southern elevation could be improved by changing the base's rhythm, or by some other means, in order to distinguish the area devoted office space. Such a change would serve both to identify the different space use and make the facade more interesting. Arthur Alterson asked if the condo association for the building to the north had been contacted for the current design. Mr. Haymes stated that their prior efforts to contact them have gone unanswered. Chair Brzezinski noted that they have had zoning notification. The Chair asked them to consider grouping the storage rooms in such a way so that they could install recessed halfway windows. These would introduce natural light into a very long interior space. SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 15, 2005 6 ,,- I John Burke questioned whether the last two spaces on the second floor parking area were easily accessed. Mr. Haymes stated that these spaces have been made a bit wider to make their entry/egress easier. Staff agreed that this should be examined for adequacy of turning movement. Sat Nagar noted that the Chicago Avenue commercial space doors cannot swing outward. Chair Brzezinski noted that if this entry was recessed, the doors could then swing outward with no net loss of commercial space. Kevin Kelly asked whether the retail space will have its own separate address along Chicago Avenue. Sat Nagar noted that Engineering assigns addresses and he said that the residences will have a Kedzie Street address and the commercial space will have an address on Chicago Avenue. ACTION: S. Nagar moved to grant preliminary site plan approval and to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded by J. Wolinski and passed 7-1. A. Alterson voted nay. SPAARC 1851 Lincoln Street Recommendation to ZBA Installation of a brick paver patio in the front yard PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Paula Hlavacek, homeowner GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Ms. Hlavacek showed the plats of survey for her townhouse unit and for the entire development of which it is a part. She stated that there is no backyard for these units; the near of the building is all paved for the driveways to the units. Neither are there any side yards. The only yards are those in front. These are relatively small (20'X30'), grassed areas. She stated that she would like to have a paved surface for her use as an outdoor space. She Is proposing to use stone pavers. These are a natural material that matches her building's brick and stone. She sees it used by many Evanston residences for their sidewalks. The only reason she needs the variance is that patios are not permitted in front yards. Frank Aguado asked if the patio is at grade. The applicant stated that it was. Chair Brzezinski observed that this is no different than others the committee has allowed, such as the one at 1939 Sherman. However, she also stated that she is not generally in favor of having front yard patios because they blur the line between pubic and private space for both the residents and pedestrians. Ms. Hlavacek said the Arbor vitae planted on the periphery of the units' yards screens them from each other and the sidewalk. She also said that she would not be grilling in this area, only using it for seating. ACTION: J. Wolinski moved to recommend denial to the ZBA due to its elimination of the City's finite amount of green space. The motion was seconded by A. Alterson and passed 5-2. T. Cook and S. Nagar voted nay. SPAARC 1319 Dobson Street Recommendation to the ZBA Construct a second story dormer addition PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Joel Freise, contract purchaser of property SPAARC Meefing Notes - June 15, 2005 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Freise stated that he needs a 5-foot setback from the lot line in his west side yard to add the proposed dormer. However, the existing dimension of this yard is only 3 feet, 1-inch. Mr. Freise said that the proposed dormer would allow him to construct a full height stairway leading up to the attic, in which he wants to add a bathroom and closet area. He noted that two doors down from this house, neighbors have added a full second floor to an existing home. Mr. Freise showed pictures of this neighboring project and said that his proposal would not be as big. Chair Brzezinski asked if he had spoken to his neighbors. He said that he has spoken to the neighbor affected by the proposed side yard encroachment. She has requested that no windows face her house. Mr. Freise proposes to use skylights to accommodate this request. ACTION: A. Alterson moved to recommend approval to the ZBA. The motion was seconded by S. Nagar and passed unanimously. SPAARC 1507 Colfax Recommendation to the ZBA Install solar panels on house roof PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kim and David Strandberg, Brandon Leavitt, solar contactor GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. and Ms. Strandberg have already had the panels installed on the roof of the residence at this address. Mr. Strandberg explained that they are before the committee and the ZBA because their panels have been found to be in violation of zoning. They have simultaneously appealed the decision of the zoning administrator and requested a variance. The Strandbergs passed around pictures of their home showing the panels from different angles. J. Wolinski asked whether the City had seen and approved the plans for the panels. Chair Brzezinski stated that the panels had been installed without a permit. Mr. Strandberg said that it was their understanding that the installation of solar panels on existing homes never required a permit. He noted that there are 40-50 such installations in Evanston. He said that they have pictures of some of these. Mr. Strandberg stated that the panels are fixed in place, facing south. They provide troth heat and hot water. The panels are ten feet tall and mounted about 7 feet off above roof height, at an angle. Arthur Alterson said that the zoning ordinance includes passive solar panels and related equipment amongst the permitted accessory building structures and uses. Further, the ordinance states that these may not be more than 10 feet in height, nor a length longer than 20% of the wall of the principal building to which the structure is attached or adjacent. J. Wolinski asked if this case has been interpreted as total length of the roof line. Mr. Alterson indicated that it was. Ms. Strandberg stated that the total length of the roof line 31 feet, which would allow a panel length of 6.1 feet. However, she noted that if principal roof line and adjacent would allow 11.11 feet. The panels are 8 feet, which would be permitted if the ordinance was interpreted as SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 15, 2005 8 allowing both principal and adjacent roof lines. She said that the zoning administrator's interpretation only considers the wall mounted and that is not how it is stated in the zoning ordinance. Therefore, she doesn't think that the panels are non -compliant. ACTION: J. Wolinski moved to recommend approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The motion was seconded by Sat Nagar and approved unanimously. JEAARC 1725 Orrin ors Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct accessible exterior ramp (McManus Living and Learning Center, Northwestem University) PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor, Architect, Jessica Abrams, project Manager, Northwestern University GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chairman Brzezinski noted that this project is in for building permit approval. R. Nestor explained that this facility has a large, elevated courtyard. Underneath the courtyard is a parking garage, half way below grade. The proposed project is the construction of an ADA accessible ramp up to the courtyard, around an existing stairway. There are several obstructions the ramp design must accommodate: a Siamese connection, a transformer and some significant and valuable landscaping. He has been working with NU's landscape architect to disturb as little of the landscape as possible and to develop a landscape restoration plan to follow the ramp construction. The ramp material is a tinted concrete in "winter beige' to match the existing limestone cap on the retaining wall. The railing system will be powder coated aluminum in architectural brown. Brian Barnes asked if this will be a ramp or a raised walkway. The ramp slope is 1:12. Chair Brzezinski noted that the plans call for the use of pre -cast concrete. She further noted that the City uses expensive brick pavers and brick quality materials for its sidewalks, not colored concrete pavers. She felt that because this project is in the downtown area, the quality of the paving system should match the City's example. Mr. Nestor clarified that the plans call for pre - colored concrete, not colored concrete pavers. He added that the landscape architect had also wanted brick pavers but that the garage structure could not support their added weight. Therefore, only concrete will be used for the sidewalk. Chair Brzezinski asked how the ramp would be illuminated. Mr. Nestor stated that there will be two recessed ramp lights and that there are adjacent, existing public and private lights. ACTION: Sat Nagar moved to grant both Preliminary and Final site plan approval. The motion was seconded by Ariova Jackson and approved unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Susan Guderley Neighborhood Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes — June 15, 2005 9 \3 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 22, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, John Burke, Paul D'Agostino, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arlova Jackson, Robert Mayer Design Professionals: Tad Cook Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Frank Aguado, Susan Guderley, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Discussion of the June 8 and 15 minutes was tabled until next week. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1625 Pavne Street Preliminary and Final Interior /exterior remodeling to establish a nursery school inside the existing structure. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Michael Dolphin (Agent for Owner), John Tomassi (Architect), Tina Vanderwalker (Executive Director, Covenant Nursery School) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Dolphin stated that they are proposing to convert a former garage into a nursery school. He presented photos of the existing site, drawings for the build -out, and floor plans. Chair Brzezinski asked about adjacent properties. Half of the property to the north is vacant, and the eastern half is an open yard for storage for a landscaper. Covenant owns the property at 1601 Payne. Mr. Wolinski asked if there are ADA issues with the mezzanine. There are none since they are below the square footage and occupancy limits. Mr. Tomassi presented elevations and described materials. Windows and a new entry will be installed, and a garage door will be replaced Kith an architectural panel. Chair Brzezinski suggested using color on the front entry because this will be a nursery school. Discussion followed on landscaping, a drop-off area, and traffic issues during drop-off/pick-up times. For traffic generation purposes, Ms. Vanderwalker estimated that there will be roughly 80 students split between morning and aftemoon sessions. Mr. Hallen noted that Covenant's previous location was more congested. Discussion followed on parking requirements. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval for the building portion of the project only, subject to resolution of the traffic portion before occupancy. Mr. Cook seconded. The motion passed unanimously. SPAARC 1100 Claris Street Preliminary and Final /nstaU surface mounted cabinet for SBC / Ameritech. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ingrid Eckersberg (City of Evanston) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Eckersberg presented drawings for the proposed cabinet for SBC/Ameritech, which will be placed on the parkway of Oak south of the alley, along the side of the church located on the northwest comer of Church and Oak. Mr. Hallen asked if it could be placed in the garage instead, but Mr. Akerson noted that there might not be enough space. Members thought that It could be a target for graffiti. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to deny the project and find another location within the complex, Mr. Burke seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeft NOW — Jwne 2Z 2005 Page 2 -3 -w a SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 22, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, John Burke, Paul D'Agostlno, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Adova Jackson, Robert Mayer Design Professionals: Tad Cook Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Frank Aguado, Susan Guderley, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Discussion of the June 8 and IS minutes was tabled until next week. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1625 Pavne Street Preliminary and Final Interior/exterior remodeling to establish a nursery school inside the existing structure. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Michael Dolphin (Agent for Owner), John Tomassi (Architect), Tina Vanderwalker (Executive Director, Covenant Nursery School) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Dolphin stated that they are proposing to convert a former garage into a nursery school. He presented photos of the existing site, drawings for the build -out, and floor plans. Chair Brzezinski asked about adjacent properties. Half of the property to the north is vacant, and the eastern half is an open yard for storage for a landscaper. Covenant owns the property at 1601 Payne. Mr. Wolinski asked if there are ADA issues with the mezzanine. There are none since they are below the square footage and occupancy limits. Mr. Tomassi presented elevations and described materials. Windows and a new entry will be installed, and a garage door will be replaced with an architectural panel. Chair Brzezinski suggested using color on the front entry because this will be a nursery school. Discussion followed on landscaping, a drop-off area, and traffic issues during drop-off/pick-up times. For traffic generation purposes, Ms. Vanderwalker estimated that there will be roughly 80 students split between morning and afternoon sessions. Mr. Hallen noted that Covenant's previous location was more congested. Discussion followed on parking requirements. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval for the building portion of the project only, subject to resolution of the traffic portion before occupancy. Mr. Cook seconded. The motion passed unanimously. SPAARC 1100 Clark Street Proliminary and Final Install surface mounted cabinet for SBC / Ameritech. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ingrid Eckersberg (City of Evanston) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Eckersberg presented drawings for the proposed cabinet for SBC/Ameritech, which will be placed on the parkway of Oak south of the alley, along the side of the church located on the northwest comer of Church and Oak. Mr. Hallen asked if it could be placed In the garage instead, but Mr. Alterson noted that there might not be enough space. Members thought that it could be a target for graffiti. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to deny the project and find another location within the complex, Mr. Burke seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted. Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC M"fing Nodes — June 2Z "M Pape 2 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES June 29, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, Stefanie Levine, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Adova Jackson, Sat Nagar, James Edwards Citizen Member. Tad Cook Other Staff: Carla Bush, Frank Aguado, Waiter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Arthur Aiterson determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Minutes from the June 8, June 15, and June 22 meetings were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2001 Sheridan Road Preliminary and Fin8j Enclose partial arcade at the first floor level with new curtain wall at the Kellogg School of Management (Northwestem University). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew McGonigle (Representative for Northwestern University and Project Manager) and Bryndis Pape (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. McGonigle presented photos of the exterior and interior space to be modified for a new quiet study room. He noted that much of the existing arcade is screened by landscaping. Mr. Nagar asked if the bike racks located outside the arcade will be removed. They will remain because the project will not go outside of the existing building footprint. Mr. McGonigle described the materials for the new curtain wall (e.g., bronze tinted glass to match above, granite base to match existing). He also presented renderings, elevations, and site plan. Mr. Hallen commented that they have done an excellent job of bringing the space inside the building while keeping the vocabulary of the building intact. Mr. Aguado asked about the travel distance to the nearest door, and Ms. Pape indicated the doors on the drawing. Mr. Aguado asked how the enclosed space will be heated/cooled. They will use Low-E glass and extend the mechanical system for air conditioning. Mr. McGonlgle stated that this project has undergone Preservation Review because the building is on the same lot as a landmark, and Mr. Ruiz confirmed that is has been approved. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 3440 Thaver Street Recommendation to ZBA Construction of a deck and patio in the front yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Foley (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Foley stated that he acquired the house in November, and the lot is oddly shaped (triangular, on a cul-de-sac). The front of the house faces Lovelace Park and a ComEd generator roughly 25' from the door, the back is bounded by an alley, and the side of the house faces Thayer, which is the only place for the deck and patio. He described the materials (stone, wood) and layout of the deck and patio. Ms. Jackson stated the variance requested is for a proposed deck and patio in the front yard approximately 16' from the front property. Discussion followed about the orientation of the house to the park and Thayer. Mr. Foley stated that the house was moved and placed at a 45-degree angle. Mr. Alterson asked if this was the only house facing Thayer, and Mr. Foley stated that it is. Mr. Hallen noted that this is a remote location and thought this was a good solution for the deck/patio. Mr. Wolinski noted the hardship issue for the project. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA for the construction of the deck and patio in the front yard. Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2916 Central Street Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior remodeling for "The New Day Cafe" a type 1 restaurant. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom O'Malley (Owner) and Ryan Nestor (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Ryan introduced Mr. O'Malley and noted that he also owns Bluestone Cafri. Mr. Ryan stated that the proposal is to convert the former Asian Essence space into a breakfastAunch restaurant. Exterior changes pertain the rear (south) facade and include infilling several windows and adding a duct enclosure up to the roof to accommodate the commercial kitchen. They cannot run the duct through the second floor office tenant due to the existing lease. The duct enclosure will be steel frame with hardy plank siding with some detailing. Photos, material descriptions, a south elevation, and a site plan were provided. Mr. Hallen noted a discrepancy on the drawings regarding where the enclosure ends, and discussion followed. He also noted that hardy plank is not in the vocabulary of the masonry building and that the enclosure will be very visible from the street. Mr. Ruiz asked if the windows must be infilled. Mr. Ryan said that they will be infilled for the commercial kitchen because the wall space inside will be used for the restaurant. Mr. Ruiz suggested recessing the infill brick to be respectful to the building. Ms. Chambers agreed, SPAARC AfeeUng Notes — June 29, 2005 Pape 2 Chair Brzezinski was concerned about allowing an exterior duct and noted its visibility/long vista. Mr. Wolinski asked Mr. Ryan if he talked to the landlord, and he has. Mr. Ryan noted that this enclosure is an extra expense for Mr. O'Malley, and the project will add a use that is needed at that end of Central Street. Chair Brzezinski noted that the building has remained as dose to the original design as possible, and this is rare. She thought it was unfortunate to have to put the addition on the back of the building, even with the efforts to make it nice, to accommodate a forced situation. Mr. Ryan agreed but noted that there is little space for building necessities, and this is the only space left. Mr. Hailen thought the enclosure was awkward but acceptable. Discussion followed on the color of the enclosure, which will match the terra Gotta. Ms. Carla Bush asked about the dumpsters, which will be located in the alley where there are existing dumpsters. Chair Brzezinski asked if parking is available. Mr. O'Malley stated that Uwe are two spaces behind the building and public parking on the street. Mr. Aguado asked if exterior lighting will be kept, and it will not. Mr. O'Malley stated that a new awning will be installed with awning lights. The design was not available, but Mr. O'Malley thought that it might be dark blue and wrap around the building. Mr. Ruiz suggested looking at the sign next door because it is in the time period of the building. He suggested having a similar sign, then an awning at the comer above the entry, and another sign after turning the comer. Chair Brzezinski noted that this could define the entry, and they probably do not need the sun protection provided by an awning. She also suggested additional landscaping, and Mr. O'Malley agreed. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval and noted design recommendations. Mr. Edwards seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Wolinski opposed. SPAARC 1233 Dodge Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Special use request to establish an automobile repair shop within the existing Spex Car Wash building at 1233 Dodge Avenue. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Judith Lomas (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Lomas stated that she and her husband own the car wash. They recently purchased the space next door to operate a minor repair shop and convenience store. A plat and site plan were provided. Ms. Lomas showed on the site plan that the repair shop will be located in an existing building with interior modifications (no exterior modifications). She described access to the repair shop through the existing car wash and alley. Discussion followed. Mr. Atterson asked where they will store cars that are waiting to be worked on or picked up. Ms. Lomas stated that there is a lot across the alley. Mr. Alterson noted that it is zoned residential and was concerned that this proposal could encourage a much more intensive use in the residential area than what is there right now. He noted that he has received complaints in the past about cars stacking up in the alley waiting to use the car wash. if there are cars waiting for repair in the lot across the alley, which is zoned residential, then this could worsen SPAARC Meeting Notes -- June 29, 2005 Page 3 the problem. Ms. Lomas did not expect to need the lot for car storage because only while -you - wait services will be offered (e.g., oil changes, air conditioning servicing). Mr. Wolinski was concerned that if a special use for auto repair is obtained, the present owners' intent may be only limited service, but if the property is sold, the next owner could have a more intense use, which would be a problem with the adjacent residential zone. Discussion followed about ingress/egress through the car wash and alley. Ms. Jackson suggested preparing a plan indicating how cars will travel through the site for the ZBA meeting. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to recommend denial to the ZBA, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 640 Church Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafe Review application for sidewalk cafe, OSashlmi Restaurant" a type 11 restaurant. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: William Na (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the required sidewalk cafe checklist, including rules for litter, delimiting the sidewalk cafi§ area, and serving customers with service animals. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to recommend approval of the sidewalk cafe, Mr. Alterson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Nees - June 29, 2005 Pape 4 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 6, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: John Burke, Brian Barnes, Stefanie Levine, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arthur Alterson Citizen Member: Tad Cook Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Carlos Ruiz, Jill Chambers, Moms Robinson, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Minutes from the June 29, 2005 meeting were approved. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 1401 Lincoln Street Recommendation to ZBA Constfuct a two-story addition and create an open, off-street parking space. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jane Hampson and Florin Berca (Owners) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION/ DISCUSSION: Ms. Hampson presented photos of the existing and adjacent houses and driveways (no alleys). Their driveway is next to the neighbor's driveway, but the neighbor's garage is further back. A site plan and elevations for the proposed two-story rear addition were provided. The existing garage will be tom down to allow for the expansion, and a one -car garage will be constructed further back on the lot. An area off the main driveway will be constructed where another car can be parked, or the space can be used to orient a car exiting the garage to face forward while passing through the driveway instead of having to back out. Mr. Alterson asked about variations. Ms. Hampson stated that a major variance is required for not having the parking space within 30' of the lot line. A minor variance is required for the addition because it maintains the existing nonconforming sideyard setback. Ms. Hampson and Mr. Berca showed on the floor plans that if they conformed with the setback requirement for the addition, the new interior space would be useless because of disruptions to the first floor kitchen and second floor bathroom. Mr. Alterson asked about the garage width, which will be 13' wide. He thought this was too nanxw, but the owners stated that they did not want to take up most of their yard with a wider garage. Mr. Aguado asked if overhead electric lines will be buried, and it is to be determined. Committee members encouraged them to do this, especially if they are requesting an upgrade, but noted that it will be at their expense. Mr. Marino asked the applicants if they talked to their neighbors about relocating the garage parallel to the neighbor's yard space, and they have. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA, Ms. Jackson seconded. and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 718 Mulford Street Window replacement for a condo conversion. Preliminary and Final PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Scott Ruswick (General Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Ruswick stated that the proposal is to replace the existing steel casement windows, which are in poor condition. He presented a photo of the front of the building, elevations, and a double -hung vinyl window sample with white trim (actual trim will be brown). Chair Brzezinski was concerned that the new windows will change the appearance considerably because of the larger frames and suggested a center -fixed window and two casements instead. She thought this was a very attractive 1960s building and could be very handsome in the remodeling if they keep with the vernacular of how it was designed, including the windows and cleaning up anything else that is not consistent with its original design. She requested photos for other sides of the building, but they were not available. Mr. Alterson asked about the number of units in the building, and Chair Brzezinski asked about parking. There are 5 units (4 upstairs and 1 garden) and 5 rear parking spaces. A site plan was provided. Chair Brzezinski asked about a landscape plan, but it was not available. Mr. Ruiz asked Mr. Ruswick if he considered restoring the windows. He had but noted that there still would not be any storm windows or screens (they are single -pane windows). Mr. Ruiz suggested woodtaluminum Gad windows with narrower trim. Ms. Chambers noted that vinyl windows with narrower trim are available. Mr. Alterson and Chair Brzezinski encouraged Mr. Ruswick to focus on the modem look of the building, which is very popular now. Chair Brzezinski noted that the door and overhead light look colonial and could be changed to be In keeping with the building. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion to give time for photos of all sides of the building, a landscape plan, and new window elevations. Mr. Cook seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2510 Pioneer Road Construct a second -story addition. Recommendation to ZBA PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Benjamin Beard and Chip Hackley (Architects) SPAARC Meeting Notes — July 6, 2005 Pegs 2 GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Hackley presented photos of the existing site and elevations for the proposed second -story addition within the existing footprint of the building. He showed on the site plan that a variation Is required because of existing nonconforming sidetrear yards on the irregularly -shaped lot. Chair Brzezinski asked if the owner has contacted adjacent neighbors, but it was not known. Chair Brzezinski noted that the size of the addition was significant but not out of character with the neighborhood, and the irregular shape of the lot is a hardship. She noted that it appears to be at the rear of the neighbors. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA with the recommendation that the owner contact neighbors before the ZBA meeting. Mr. Burke seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1318 Chicaao Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Install a blade sign. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Chair Brzezinski GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski presented a drawing for a small blade sign and noted that blade signs are not allowed In this area. A spelling error was noted on the proposed sign. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned to recommend approval to the Sign Board noting that the sign should have the correct spelling. Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. PPAARC 309 Howard Street Recommendation to Sign Boaro Proposed Unified Business Center signage plan. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Chair Brzezinski GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski presented elevations for the signage plan and noted that SPAARC has seen the building before for proposed remodeling. Mr. Ruiz was concerned about approving the signage plan before knowing details about the building's rehabilitation and noted that they had heard from the Alderman that she is looking for a first-rate rehabilitation. Chair Brzezinski was glad to see that they were not drilling into the terra cotta and suggested limiting the amount of window signage. Discussion followed on existing/proposed sign placement relative to entries. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned to table discussion to allow time to get more information from the applicant, Mr. Burke seconded, and the motion passed with Ms. Jackson voting 'nay.' Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes — July 6, 2005 Pape 3 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 13, 2005 Attendees: Commlttee Members: Brian Barnes, Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Dennis Marino, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arthur Atterson, Gavin Morgan, James Wolinski, Robert Mayer Citizen Member: None present Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Carlos Ruiz, Jill Chambers, Sally Lufkin, Susan Guderley, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Minutes from the July 6, 2005 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 309 Howard Street Recommendation to Sign Board Proposed Unified Business Center signage plan. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Chair Brzezinski GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski stated that after last week's discussion about this proposal, she contacted the owner's representative for further information. She presented a drawing and photos and stated that for new tenants, the proposal is to remove the sign and put in new channel letters (terra Gotta will not be affected). Signage for existing tenants would remain until there is a new tenant. Discussion followed regarding: • Inconsistent placement and height of existing signs (e.g., Jackson Hewitt's sign is taller than the others); • Whether signs should be replaced all at once or new signs should be phased in as existing tenants leave (cost issues and duration of existing tenants noted); o Whether there should be a specified timeframe for completion of the work; o Enforcement of sign replacement (several SPAARC members noted concerns); o What to do about signs above vacant stores; • Status of owner representative's application for the fagade improvement program and whether some of the funds can be used to replace existing tenants' signs; and • Status/extent of proposed building rehabilitation. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to recommend approval to the Sign Board for the Unified Business Center signage plan for new tenants, with the condition that within 12 months all signs must be in compliance. Mr. Mayer seconded, and the motion passed with Chair Brzezinski, Ms. Jackson, and Mr. Dahal opposed. VA RC 1905 Church Street Conceo4 Construct a two story addition. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kenneth Coe (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Coe stated that the proposal is for a second story addition to the barber shop, part of which was recently damaged in a fire and will be rebuilt. Drawings, photos, and floor plans were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski noted that the property line goes through the barber shop and asked about ownership. Mr. Coe stated that he is working with an attorney to resolve the ownership issue. Members noted that SPAARC cannot approve the project and a zoning analysis cannot be completed until the ownership issue is resolved. Discussion followed about the facade materials and relation to the property line for both the existing and proposed structures. Mr. Coe noted that the existing structure will not be tom down, and an engineer's structural report indicates that it can support another floor. Discussion followed about zoning and use. The first floor will be commercial, and the second floor will include both office space and residential uses. Members were concerned about a side entry for a proposed beauty shop/retail space instead of a front entry and noted concerns for safety and the viability of this use. Mr. Aguado asked about parking. Mr. Coe stated that there will be two spaces in the rear. A complete site plan indicating the location of off-street parking was not available. Discussion followed about the location of load -bearing walls, how the existing structure will be modified to accommodate the addition, and materials. Mr. Aguado asked if elevators will be required for the second floor use. SPAARC members noted that elevators are required for the square footage proposed. ACTION: No action was taken; concept review does not require a vote. Chair Brzezinski summarized the issues and suggestions for the applicant: eliminate the side entry, provide an elevator, ensure the facade does not extend beyond the property line, resolve the property rights issue, provide a site plan (including parking), and submit for a zoning analysis once the ownership issue is resolved. SPAARC Meeting Notes —July 13, 2005 Page 2 .111r.:T SPAARC' 2120-2122 Cleveland Street Recommendation to ZBA Separate abutting lots to create two zoning lots; construct a single-family detached resldenre and two -car detached garage on west lot (2122 Cleveland). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Irving Turner (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION/ DISCUSSION: Mr. Tumor presented a plat showing the two lots. He owns both of them, one of which Is not considered a buildable lot under zoning. On the lot that used to have a garage, he is proposing to remove the slab and driveway and build a house. A drawing of the new house was provided, and parking will be off the alley. On the other lot, a new detached garage will be constructed in the rear (access off the alley). Ms. Jackson stated that the variations requested for the project include lot width, lot size, and a setback issue along the west property line due to the proposed separation of ownership and creation of two zoning lots. Mr. Turner stated that he used to live next door to this property, and his intention with this project is to eliminate an eyesore in the neighborhood. Chair Brzezinski noted that the new house Is appropriately scaled. Mr. Aguado noted issues with the eaves/overhangs, and Ms. Jackson stated that she has spoken with the applicant about how to resolve the issues. Discussion followed about other community benefits of the project, in addition to removing the eyesore. Chair Brzezinski noted the benefit of eliminating the vehicle/pedestrian conflict by removing the driveway. Mr. Dahal suggested that the applicant meet with Engineering about restoring the parkway and curb line. Mr. Turner stated that he has met with Engineering regarding back yard flooding from the alley. Chair Brzezinski suggested offering to pay for parkway landscaping as another benefit of the project. SPAARC members encouraged Mr. Tumor to meet with his neighbors about the proposal. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned to recommend approval to the ZBA He thought the variations requested were minimal, and this is a project that would fit in with the neighborhood due to its modest size. Ms. Jackson seconded. Chair Brzezinski asked if the motion can be amended to Include a suggestion that the house be built as shown in the drawing (e.g., all brick, roof pitch). Mr. Alterson agreed and added the suggestion to his motion. Ms. Jackson seconded the amended motion, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meetfng Notes - July 13, 2005 Pape 3 K. .0 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 20, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Dennis Marino, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arthur Alterson, James Wolinski, Sat Nagar, Ingrid Edcersberg Citizen Member. Tad Cook Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Carlos Ruiz, Walter Hallen, Donna Spicuzza, Jill Chambers, Carl Caneva, Tracy Norfleet Mr. Wolinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Minutes from Om July 13, 2005 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2400 Sheridan Road Install accessible platform lift and concrete walk. Preliminary and Fina( PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor (Architect), Rids Nemec (Representative for Northwestern University) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Nestor stated that they are proposing to install an interior platform lift for an entry that is currently not accessible (not at grade). The fallowing minor exterior changes will be made to the Colfax elevation: remove a planter and covert the area to a door at grade, install a bollard with a push-button to open the door, and extend the concrete walk to the new entry. Photos, drawings, and information on materials were provided. Mr. Hallen asked about the existing bike rack, which will be relocated. Mr. Aguado asked if additional exterior lighting will be Installed, and it will not (existing lighting is sufficient). ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Ms. Jackson seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2100 Greenwood Street Pre -A mOication Conference: Concord Convert industrial building to 261iveAvork condominiums with open interior courtyard; change zoning hom 12 to MU. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Steven Yas (ArchitecVDeveloper), Lon Porter (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Yas stated that they are proposing a map amendment and planned development for 26 live/work units in a former industrial building. He presented a map and noted that the site is located in the proposed West Evanston tax increment financing (TIF) district and near the Evanston Township High School. Mr. Marino clarified the next steps for the proposed TIF. Mr. Yas stated that as a benefit to the community, they have talked to the high school about establishing a vocational training program in architecture for at -risk students. Chair Brzezinski supported this idea and encouraged them to develop it further. Photos of the existing front elevation were provided, which has a one-story structure in front with two taller buildings behind it. The brick will be cleaned and tuckpointed, windows will be replaced, landscaping will be added, and part of the roof will be removed to create an open interior courtyard (reduces the total area compared to existing conditions). The 30' high building to the east will have all of the parking for the project on the first floor with loft units above. Discussion followed on the number of spaces required. The 20' high building to the west will have live/work units. Floor plans and perspective drawings were provided. Mr. Marino asked if they have contacted the neighbors, and they have reached all but one. Mr. Aguado noted on the site plan that there are no ADA spaces in the garage. Mr. Yas stated that one is possible in the garage, and Mr. Porter stated that additional spaces are possible in the driveway (e.g., ADA, visitor). Chair Brzezinski noted that if there will be ADA spaces in the garage, then clearance should be sufficient for a van. She thought this is an interesting project and noted that it is between townhouses and multi -unit housing in the Illinois Accessibility Code, which require a percentage of accessible units. She suggested getting clarification on the requirements. Mr. Hallen noted that unless upper levels are mezzanines, then two exits are required. Mr. Alterson noted that under zoning, the project is considered multi -family (not townhouses or single-family attached) because there is one entrance from the public way. He added that SPAARC recently reviewed a project with car lifts in the garage and suggested this for the garage. Mr. Yas did not think there was enough room. Mr. Dahal asked about trash containment, which will be in the garage. He noted that the City has new parking garage design guidelines. Mr. Alterson asked if the diagonal street parking will be maintained for the residential use, and it is expected to be. Mr. Nagar asked about detention. Mr. Yas stated that since this is an adaptive reuse and the footprint will be decreased due to the new courtyard, they were not anticipating providing additional detention. Mr. Nagar stated that this will have to be looked at anyway. Mr. Marino asked if single family neighbors across the street had any concerns. Mr. Yas stated that neighbors had been invited to tour the building and review the plans, which were well -received. Chair Brzezinski noted the property line distances shown and while the building will be sprinklered, she suggested continued attention to the amount of glazed area and fire rating. She also asked if there will be covenants on the work use or if they will rely on zoning for regulating use. Mr. Yas stated that he will consider this due to concerns for code issues, noise, odor, etc. SPAARC Meeting Notes — Jury 20, 2005 Page 2 Chair Brzezinski asked about other give -backs as part of the planned development. Mr. Yas stated that in addition to creating the hands-on architecture program for high school students, which could be extended after this project, the neighborhood will benefit from cleaning up the derelict building, and the City will benefit from bringing the property back on the tax rolls. Chair Brzezinski suggested using recycled materials, in addition to recycling the building, so that the project is more green and energy efficient. Mr. Hallen suggested having affordable units. Chair Brzezinski suggested accessible units as well. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski thought this is an exciting project and very positive for the neighborhood since it was previously underutilized and also includes an incubator concept. Mr. Alterson agreed. No aeon taken; concept review and pre -application conferences do not require a vote. SPAARC 1625-1627 Sherman Avenue Preliminary and Final Interior / exterior remodel of commercial store, Hanig's Footwear (former Edwards Shoes). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Peter Hanig (Owner), Dana Terp (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Terp presented a photo of the existing building (ground floor retail space with office space above). The use will not change, but the storefronts will be replaced within the existing limestone openings. The recessed north entrance, which is locked and not used, will be replaced with glass straight across. The south entry was deeper than a standard recess and will be made shallower. The base of the south storefront will be retained. The large sign will be changed to be more consistent with the others. A floor plan and rendering were provided. Chair Brzezinski asked about the vents on the Little Chick half of the store, which will be kept and painted. Mr. Alterson asked Mr. Hanig if he will be buying Edwards. Mr. Hanig stated that he has known the owner for some time, who retired this year. They reached an agreement for Mr. Hanig to buy some of his assets. Mr. Hanig stated that he seeks to retain the best parts of Edwards/Little Chick while getting a fresh look for his merchandise. Chair Brzezinski asked about signage/awnings. Mr. Terp stated that they have looked at several options: awnings with no signage on them and metal box above with cut-out letters (interior illuminated) or a sign with letters attached and subtle lighting. He noted that signage will depend on conditions behind the large mansard sign. Mr. Aguado asked if there will be central air. Mr. Terp stated that there was a transom unit above the north entry and central air in the south store. The north unit will be removed, ducts from the south store will be extended, and a new compressor will be installed in the rear courtyard. Mr. Ruiz asked if a unified business sign plan is required. Chair Brzezinski stated that it is, but the City does not have a plan on file. It is up to the building owner to correct this, but a temporary sign permit can be issued in the meantime. Mr. Ruiz thought the proposed sign options might be good for business but not for the building. Mr. Hanig stated that one option mimics the sign for his other location, which is a landmark building on Michigan Ave. SPAARC Meeting Notes — July 20, 2005 Page 3 Mr. Ruiz asked if the storefront materials will match other storefronts. Mr. Hanig stated that the existing two storefronts did not match each other, but they will after this project. Mr. Terp stated that there is no consistency among other storefronts in the building. Mr. Ruiz was concerned about introducing additional different materials. Discussion followed. Mr. Terp stated that they wanted to return to the original storefronts, but they would not meet today's code. As a result, they decided to keep the limestone openings and proceed with something standard that could be used by future tenants. Chair Brzezinski thought the design was clean and kept within the character of the building while retaining the traditional ground floor use. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the motion passed with Ms. Jackson abstaining. §PAARC 309-323 Howard Street Preiiminary Facade restoration and store front replacement. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andy Patras (Property Manager) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski stated that that SPAARC has seen this project before, and it is being considered for the facade improvement program. She noted that she heard from the Alderman who expressed dismay about the amount of garbage in front of the building and the tax servioe banner sign that was promised to be taken down. Mr. Alterson suggested contacting the Alderman to discuss these concerns, and Mr. Patras agreed to do so. Regarding the building restoration project, changes based on feeback from the last meeting include: • Brinaina the columns on the west side of the building down for a more uniform look. A revised elevation was provided. Mr. Patras stated that he is considering replacing the bases of the extended columns with a replication of the base material for the east columns, depending on cost. • Cleaning the terra cotta and replacing where necessary. Mr. Patras stated that he is evaluating several suppliers, depending on cost. He did not have a sample but will have one made. He noted that some companies can take several months to provide replacement terra cotta, which is expensive. • Reconfiourinq the entry to the second floor use. Chair Brzezinski was not in favor of how the entry way was delineated in terms of design and noted that it does not align with windows above or have prominence as an entry to something different from the storefronts. Discussion followed on the depth of the recess and other ways to define the entry (e.g., decorative door, lighting, transom). • Installabon of new sign bands. Chair Brzezinski stated that the proposed dryvit was not appropriate. Mr. Hallen suggested perforated metal for mounting the signs. Mr. Ruiz suggested attaching signs to the frame over the windows. Chair Brzezinski suggested SPAARC WoUng Notes — July 20, 2005 Page 4 awnings since the storefronts are south -facing, but Mr. Patras did not think tenants would want that type of signage. • Reolacina the base material. Mr. Patras thought the existing base material was marble and in poor condition. Depending on costs, he might replace it with marble or something better suited to trafficJvibrations, such as a pre -cast material. Chair Brzezinski noted that a light -color pre -cast material would get dirty and suggested a granite or dark pre -cast material. Mr. Hallen suggested a protective coating for a pre- cast material. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski liked the direction that the project was headed and encouraged the applicant to further develop the elevation and to get material samples. Mr. Altenson motioned to table discussion pending material samples. He noted that this is a crucial location, and the project may receive City funds. The motion was not seconded. Ms. Jackson motioned preliminary approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1000 Davis Street Recommendation for Sidewalk Cafd Recommendation for sidewalk cafe !or Benison's Bakery, Inc. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jory Downer (Owner) GENERAL- PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski reviewed the required checklist, including rules for litter, delineation of the sidewalk caf6, bringing in all furniture at night. Guidance for serving customers with service animals was provided. ACTION: Mr. Alterson motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes — July 20, 2005 Page 5 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES July 27, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Dennis Marino, Paul D'Agostino, James Wolinski, Adova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Sat Nagar, Judy Aiello, John Burke Citizen Member: Tad Cook Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Carlos Ruiz, Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Moms Robinson, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC Shennan Plaza Revision to Final Consider architectural changes to the retail facade at Sherman Plaza. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Wade Giomo (Developer), Jim Kiutznick (Developer), Tim Schmitt (Architect), Gary Collins (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Giomo stated that the revisions result from a request by the athletic club tenant, which will take up most of the second floor, for a more prominent entry. Mr. Schmitt presented revised elevations and drawings and described materials. Mr. Hallen asked about the length of the athletic club's lease, and Mr. Klutznick stated that it will be for 15 years. Chair Brzezinski noted that the doors swing into the public way and was concerned about pedestrian conflicts. Mr. Schmitt stated that most of the development's retail doors do this. Ms. Chambers noted the sidewalk width relative to other downtown locations. Mr. Robinson suggested putting planters by the doors. Chair Brzezinski suggested a large revolving door that would accommodate gym bags. Mr. Schmitt stated that this was considered, but the tenant was not amenable to it. Ms. Aiello noted that revolving doors raise accessibility issues. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski stated that this can be considered a minor adjustrnent to the planned development approval and can be approved administratively. Mr. Wolinski motioned approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the motion passed with Chair Brzezinski opposed and Ms. Jackson abstaining. SPAARC 2729 Garrison Avenue Construct a two story addition to a single family dwelling. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David O'Dea (Owner) Recommendation to ZBA GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. O'Dea presented photos of the existing house and a site plan, drawings, and floor plans for the proposed two story rear addition. His neighbor to the south is the hospital, and since it has a larger, open sideyard setback than the neighbor to the north, the addition will be oriented more to that side of Mr. O'Dea's lot. He has spoken to both neighbors about his proposal. He stated that variations include sideyard setback (south side) and relocation of the air conditioning unit (south side). Ms. Jackson noted that variances also are needed for building lot coverage and impervious surface. Discussion followed on how to shift the addition to eliminate/reduce some of these variations. Mr. Aguado noted that windows shown on the addition's south elevation may be too dose to the property line. Discussion followed on how to correct potential building code Issues (e.g., inset windows, shift the addition to increase the setback). ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the motion passed with Mr. Aguado opposed. SPAARC 2400 Main Street Preliminary and Final Resubdivide property into three lots of record. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Steve Engelman (Attorney) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Engelman presented an existing plat of Main Street Commons and a proposed plat of resubdivision into three lots of record. He stated that resubdivision would aid in allocating taxes among tenants and re -tenant retail space. Mr. Wolinski asked if the resubdivision is for the purpose of construction. Mr. Engelman stated that this has been discussed, but there is no prospective user at this time, and the intention is to re -tenant the retail portion first. Discussion followed about sidewalk location relative to the property line and maintenance. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2144 Pioneer Road Construct a two-story near addition. Recommendation to ZBA PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Slattery (Project Manager/Contractor), Matt Temrolen (Owner) SPAARC Meeting Notes - July 27, 2005 Page 2 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION ! DISCUSSION: Mr. Slattery stated that the proposal is for a two story addition to a single family home, which they have tried to match :o the setbacks of the existing house. Photos of the existing house and neighbors houses were provided, along with drawings of the addition. Ms. Jackson stated that the variances are for sideyard setback (major variation) and lot coverage. Mr. Aguado asked if central air will be installed. Mr. Slattery stated that a new system will be installed for the addition, and the location of the condenser is to be determined. Discussion followed on the square footage of the addition and the existing home and the heightlbulk relative to the neighbors. Chair Brzezinski asked if the applicants have contacted their neighbors. Mr. TemvAen stated that they have lived there for 91 years and know their neighbors. They have marked the footprint of the proposed addition, and the neighbor to the north supports it. They are in the process of contacting other neighbors. Discussion followed on how to shift the addition to eliminate or reduce the variances, but the applicants indicated that if the addition does not match the setback of the existing house, this would affect the interior space of the addition. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfieet General Planner SPAARC MWft Motes —July 27, 2005 Page 3 r h� SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES August 3, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Brian Barnes, Dennis Marino, Paul D"Agostino, Arilova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Robert Mayer, Gavin Morgan, James Edwards Citizen Member: Tad Cook Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Waiter Hallen, ,sill Chambers, Tracy Norfleet Mr. Hallen determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Minutes from the July 20 and July 27 meetings were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2434 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Establish an open off-street parking space in the front yard PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Sebastian Koziura and Karla Tennies (Former Owners), Scott Lipscomb (Current Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Koziura stated that when he bought the house in November of 2003, he was told that a parking space was included. He noted that this is an unusual lot. part of which is in the alley. He remodeled the house and relocated an existing fence along the alley approximately V closer to the alley, but neighbors complained that this made the alley too narrow. He also replaced the concrete space in front with pavers. When Mr. Lipscomb bought the property In September of 2004, he began parking in the front space, which had previously not been used. Neighbors began complaining that they were parking in the front of the property, which is how they became aware of the violation. A plat and photos were provided. Mr. Marino asked if the fence is on their private property. Mr. Koziura stated that it is, and Mr. Lipscomb stated that it is located 1' from their property line. Mr. Koziura noted that there is no other place to park on the property. Ms. Jackson summarized the variances requested: parking in the front yard, the parking space is technically too short, and lot coverage. Mr. Lipscomb presented a photo showing that a neighbor has the same situation with a front parking space, which apparently was grandfathered. Mr. Dahal asked about a curb cut and suggested that the applicants check with Engineering about the parking space. Mr. Koziura stated that there is no curb cut since the space is off the alley. Mr. Marino asked if a fire truck could get through the alley. Mr. Lipscomb stated that garbage trucks regularly go through the alley, but he has not seen a fire truck there. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion to give time for further review by staff and a site visit, since It is an unusual case. Mr. Mayer added the need for alley measurements to determine if safety equipment can fd. Mr. Dahal requested a complete plat of survey showing property lines. Mr. Mayer requested photos taken from the street and from the alley. Mr. Hallen seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1725 OrrinAton Avenue Preliminary and Final Window replaruvment, sliders to double hung (McManus Living and Learning Center, Northwestem University). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Paul Zack (Northwestern University, Project Manager), Richard Erickson (Window Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Marino asked if the property is a landmark or in the historic district, and Mr. Zack stated that it is not. Mr. Erickson presented photos of the existing building and drawings indicating where horizontal sliding windows are to be replaced with twin aluminum double -hung windows. For openings with air conditioners, they will be set inside a panel in the lower sash of the double -hung window (either the right or left side). Discussion followed on the placement of window air conditioners and ways to minimize dripping (e.g., hose, alternate placement of units). A mock-up photo was provided. Mr. Hallen noted that increasing the glass area will increase the amount of light for each unit. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2642-2644 Prairie Avenue Final Construct 3 story, four unit multi -family dwelling. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Potter (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Potter presented a site plan for the proposed 3-story, 4-unit building. They have worked with the City of Evanston's Parks and Forestry Department and the neighbors to the south to save a large tree on the edge of the site, which has been vaccinated. Photos of the tree and site were provided. A 30' tree protection plan is in place and includes: snow fence, root pruning, 3-40 mulch, construction fence to protect the tree during construction, and all access to the site through the gate on Prairie instead of the alley. In addition, the building has been moved up to match the neighbor's setback, and the building has been shortened slightly. The SPAARC Meeting Notes —August 3, 2005 Page 2 ramp to rear underground parking has been lengthened and will be heated, and access is from the alley. There will be 8 parking spaces and an elevator. Mr. Potter then presented floor plans and elevations for the building. All units will be duplexed 3-bedroom, 3-bath. The exterior will be all cedar clapboard/shake, accented with natural stone (sample provided). He noted the location of rear decks and patios. For the side elevations, he noted that the third floor has been set back to minimize impacts of height, and a 4" projection has been added. Mr. Hallen asked about detention. Mr. Potter stated that it will be handled onsite, with underground tiles in the front and along the north side yard. He noted that electric wires cannot be buried because of the location of the poles, detention tiles, and tree protection area. Ms. Chambers noted that a mechanical unit is located in the tree protection area. Mr. Potter stated that zoning requirements limit where the unit can be placed. He has worked with the City Forester to put it here, which is the only possible location for the unit. Ms. Chambers noted that the building is still very close to the tree protection area. Mr. Potter stated that they talked to the City Forester about various measures related to this (e.g., sheet piling). Mr. Barnes acknowledged that ADA units are not required but suggested providing an option for wider doors and lever handles, especially for the first floor units. Mr. Potter was amenable to this. Chair Brzezinski asked if electric wires could go beneath the parking ramp or detention tiles, but they cannot because it would be too far down. Mr. Dahal was concerned about tandem parking spaces in the garage and requested a 1:20 scale map. Chair Brzezinski asked about the windows, which will be white, aluminum clad, wood interior casements with SDL and low-E. Discussion followed on exterior lighting. Chair Brzezinski asked about the possibility of an overhang at the front entry, and Mr. Potter agreed to consider it. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to review by Mr. Dahal of the tandem parking. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 3, 2005 Page 3 SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES August 10, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Frank Aguado, Stefanie Levine, Dennis Marino, Rajeev Dahal, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Robert Mayer, Ingrid Eckersberg, John Burke, James Wolinski Citizen Member: Tad Cook Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Susan Gudedey, Sally Lufkin, Jean Speyer, Carton Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Minutes from the August 3, 2005 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 140 Rldoe Avenue Preliminary and Final Construct a four-story six -unit multiple family dwelling with 10 off-street parking spaces. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Gregory Gerdov (Owner/Engineer) and Arkady Katz (General Contractor) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Gerdov stated that the proposal is to construct a four-story six -unit condo building. He presented a site plan, drawings, elevations, and photos of the existing building. Zoning variations include lot width, lot coverage, and impervious surface. Price points will be in the $350s, and units will be two -bedroom and include parking. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked about outdoor space. Mr. Gerdov stated that each unit will have a balcony. Chair Brzezinski asked about parking, and there will be 10 enclosed spaces at grade. She asked if there will be a front awning or overhang. Mr. Gerdov stated that the entry is inset several feet. Mr. Mayer asked if the entry will be double -door, and it will be single door (no vestibule). Chair Brzezinski asked if the building will be brick all around, and it will. Windows will be aluminum clad, double -hung, trim color to be determined. Brick and window samples were provided. There will be limestone sills and decorative brick work. Mr. Aguado asked if the garage will have the same brick as the building, and it will. Mr. Aguado asked if overhead electric lines will be buried, and discussion followed. Chair Brzezinski encouraged them to put the wires underground as part of the upgrade. Mr. Hallen asked about landscaping and lighting. A landscape plan was not available, but Mr. Gerdov showed on the site plan where landscaping could be. Chair Brzezinski encouraged more landscaping, especially along the front. Lighting was shown on the drawings. Mr. Mayer suggested additional light along the sides of the building and a recessed light over the front entry placed high enough that it cannot be tampered with or broken. Mr. Gerdov agreed to consider it, noting that he did not want additional light to affect the neighbors. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to the submittal and approval of a landscape plan. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2200 Main Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct second -story addition for a child day care center (Baby Toddler Nursery). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ellen Galland (Architect) GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Ms. Galland presented photos and a site plan for the proposed 200 sq ft rear addition to an existing one-story brick classroom. She stated that the zoning variation is for setback, and Mr. Alterson had determined that it was an expansion of a special use. Chair Brzezinski asked if neighbors had expressed their thoughts. Ms. Gallan stated that the neighbor has been sympathetic to the use over the years. She noted that they are not increasing the number of staff, so this should not affect parking. ACTION: Mr. Burke motioned approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2434 Sherman Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Establish an open off-street parking space in the front yard. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Sebastian Koziura (Former Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION I DISCUSSION: Mr. Koziura presented photos taken from both the street and alley, which were requested at the last meeting. Mr. Dahal stated that he checked the records, and the property extends into the alley. He looked at aerial photos, and there was no pad in 2004 or 1998. Mr. Koziura stated that there was approximately 1' of dirt over the concrete. Chair Brzezinski asked there is a parking problem on the street. Mr. Koziura stated that if the owners park on the street and have to go out of town, then they must have someone regularly move their car, and there is the issue of street parking in winter. He thought that parking in the front space is less of an impact than parking on the street. Mr. Mayer asked for a complete plat, which was presented. Mr. Aguado stated that he checked central records, and a record from 1975 showed that the property had no legal off SPAARC Meeting Notes —August 10, 2005 Page 2 9 street parking spaces. Mr. Mayer did not think the alley was wide enough for fire equipment. Mr. Koziura stated that there is a 10' clearance from their fence to the neighbors. Mr. Hallen noted that his fence has been set back I'from the property line. Chair Brzezinski thought that it could be difficult for fire equipment to turn into the alley. Chair Brzezinski asked if they could park in the rear instead of the front yard. Mr. Koziura stated that this would require a variance. Mr. Burke stated that he discussed this with the Traffic Engineer, including angled parking, but there is the issue of backing into the alley. Another option might be to set the fence back and pull through the alley instead. Chair Brzezinski noted a rear stairway that prevents moving the fence further back. Mr. Koziura stated that he could move the fence up 3' and park the car behind it. Chair Brzezinski thought this would minimize the impact of the parking space. Mr. Dahal asked if they needed the fence. Mr. Koziura stated that the current residents have dogs. Chair Brzezinski noted possible pedestrian/vehicle conflict from backing out of a front parking space. Mr. Kozuira noted that the neighbor also backs out of the driveway. He thought that the rear stairway could be moved so that the fence could be set further back, pavers removed, and the area landscaped. Mr. Burke offered to meet separately with the applicant to work through the options discussed. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to recommend denial to the ZBA with encouragement to pursue another alternative. Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1712 Church Street Preliminary Construction of a new scale and scale house, for Onyx Waste Services transfer station. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bob Wemeiwski (Consultant) and Raymond Strong (Representative for Onyx) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION l DISCUSSION: Mr. Wemeiwski presented a site plan and photos showing the existing scale and house. The proposal is to add a new scale and relocate/replace the existing office trailer with one that is comparable in size. Mr. Marino asked why a trailer is needed instead of a booth. Chair Brzezinski noted that the existing one does not meet ADA requirements. Mr. Wemeiwski stated that the trailer is for staff weighing the trucks and noted the cost of bringing in a trailer vs. constructing a booth. Mr. Hallen asked if there is a rodent problem. Mr. Wemeiwski stated that there is a rodent control plan. Ms. Speyer stated that there is a severe rodent problem, and residents are working with the Health Department to correct it. Mr. Wemeiwski presented a site plan showing the relocationlconstruction of the trailer from near the wall to near Church. Discussion followed on the impacts of being closer to Church. Mr. Hallen suggested a concrete or concrete block foundation due to the rodent problem. Chair Brzezinski agreed and asked about fighting. Mr. Wemeiwski showed on the site plan SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 10, 2005 Page 3 M where an existing pole will be relocated. The pole height and a cut sheet for the fixture were not available. Chair Brzezinski requested a photometric plan. Mr. Marino asked about landscaping, especially for the berm. Mr. Wemeiwski stated that there is mostly volunteer vegetation on the berm and was not aware of a plan for additional landscaping. He noted that there are four new parkway trees on Church and ivy along the wall. Mr. Marino thought that more time is needed to check the file to make sure that landscaping and other requirements for approval have been met. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to table discussion to give time for further review by staff. Mr. Wolinski seconded, and the motion passed with Chair Brzezinski, Mr. Aguado, and Ms. Levine opposed. SPAARC 708 Church Street Recommendation to Sloan Board Proposed Unified Business Center signage plan. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Waiter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen presented the plan for signage/awnings. which primarily restricts location and size. It will be implemented by tenants, starting with Mr. Hanig. Chair Brzezinski asked about window signs. Mr. Hallen stated that the plan defaults to the Cityis sign regulations. Chair Brzezinski noted that the plan pertains to storefronts on three major downtown streets. Mr. Dahal asked about the difference between this building and the one on Howard where a time frame for compliance was required. Members did not think it was necessary for this building since its fagade is fairly homogenous. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1755-1765 Maole Avenue Recommendation to Sian Board Proposed graphics / text for previously approved banners at Church Street Plaza. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Hallen stated that wall banners for the theater at Church Street Plaza have previously been approved, but wider banners are needed for legibility. A drawing was provided. Ms. Guderley asked about banner materials and maintenance, but the information was not available. Chair Brzezinski was concemed that the banners would set a precedent and border on advertising. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval subject to banner maintenance, and Mr. Dahal seconded. The vote was split with Mr. Marino, Mr. Dahal, and Mr. Aguado voting 'aye' and Chair Brzezinski, Mr. Cook, and Ms. Levine voting 'nay.' SPAARC Meeting Notes -- August 10, 2005 Page 4 Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC MOO ft Notes — August 10, 2005 Page 5 SITE PLAN and DRAFT -NOT APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE APPROVED MEETING NOTES August 17, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Frank Aguado, Paul D'Agostino, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Robert Mayer, James Wolinski, James Edwards, Loyce Spells Citizen Member: Tad Cook Other Staff: Walter Hallen, .fill Chambers, Susan Guderiey, Jean Speyer, Carlos Ruiz, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Prolects Reviewed: SPAARC 718 Mulford Street Preliminary and Final Review window replacement and landscaping plan fora condo conversion. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Scott Ruswick (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Ruswick stated that exterior changes for the condo conversion will be window replacements and front door replacement, in addition to landscaping. He stated that since the last meeting, he worked with an architect on four window replacement options, each wrth pros and cons. A main concern is security for ground floor rear windows. Drawings were provided, and photos of windows in similar buildings within a few blocks also were provided. Mr. Ruswick stated that the front door will be replaced with a wood door, and side lights will be replaced (light will not affect neighbors). A photo of the existing front entry was provided. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wolinski noted the potential for lead and advised the applicant about lead procedures and considerations (e.g., lead testing, lead removal contractor, Health Department involvement, temporary tenant relocation during work). Mr. Ruswick agreed to lead testing and other steps as applicable. Regarding window replacements, Mr. Ruswick was concerned that rear sliding windows would present a safety issue at the ground level, and discussion followed. Chair Brzezinski thought that the new windows and door mixed architectural styles. She noted that one of the options had divided light windows and a Georgian door when the building is modem. She suggested F w11 that the windows not have divided lights and that the front entry not be Georgian style since it does not match with the time period of this particular building. She preferred scheme B with Chicago windows (picture windows) and double -hung windows on each side without divisions. She thought that the casements on the sides were fine except for the west side ground level _ and suggested double -hung instead. Mr. Hallen and Ms. Chambers suggested sliders, but Mr. Ruswick thought it was too narrow. Mr. Mayer suggested glass block with vents, but Chair Brzezinski thought this would not provide enough light and ventilation to the units. Mr. Ruswick presented the landscape plan, including brick pavers and drought tolerant plants. Members suggested replacing the rear chain link fence with landscaping. Mr. Aguado noted the new rear patio and will check that it complies with the impervious surface requirements. He asked if there will be wheel stops in the parking area, and there will. Chair Brzezinski asked about the amount of parking. Mr. Ruswick stated that there will be four spaces and a dumpster (not enough room for five spaces). Chair Brzezinski stated that the parking area should be striped, including the area for the dumpster. Chair BrzezinsKi asked about air conditioning units. Mr. Ruswick stated that existing units will be replaced. She asked if electric service will be upgraded, and it will. She encouraged underground utility service. She asked about lighting. Mr. Ruswick described the lighting and provided photos of fixtures, including the rear parking area. Mr. Nagar stated that lights should not affect neighbors. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval subject to no divisions in any windows, no elliptical transom above the front entry door, provision of underground electric service, fixed windows on the west side allowed, wheelstops and striping of the rear parking area (including an area for the dumpster), and review of amount impervious surface. Mr. Aguado seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 2320 Pioneer Road Preliminary Three story addition to The Swedish Retirement Association / Three Crown Park and Minor revisions to previously granted Planned Development. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Cronin (Architect), John Malarky (Attorney), Tracy Schnick (Project Manager/Architect) GENERAL_ PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Malarky stated that the planned development was approved in April, but proposed architectural changes pertain to balconies, a breezeway, and parapet wall height. Mr. Cronin stated that during marketing, seniors asked for balconies for fresh air and outdoor space. As a trade-off for seven units located deep in the courtyards on McDaniel, they are proposing to add small balconies (12'x 3.5', slightly curved). A drawing was provided. Mr. Cronin stated that the second change pertains to creating a breezeway for simulated outdoor space for nursing home residents. It would be created by modifying a large third floor window on both sides of the building and adding screens. A drawing was provided. SPAARC Meeting Notes —August 17, 2005 Page 2 Mr. Cronin stated that the third change pertains to parapet wall height. Ms. Schnick stated that when the drawings were detailed out, the height increased by several inches. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wolinski stated that they may have to return to City Council, and Mr. Ruiz stated that they have to return to the Preservation Commission. Chair Brzezinski agreed with adding balconies to some units, especially for senior places, because it encourages them to step out for fresh air. It also fosters a relationship with the street that helps them be part of the community instead of tuming inward like the stigma of so many senior homes. She thought that the breezeway design could be refined. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to table discussion to give time for further review by the Preservation Commission and determination of whether the proposal needs to return to City Council. Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1171111 Church Street Preliminary Construction of a new scale and scale shed, for Onyx Waste Services transfer station. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bob Wemeiwski (Consultant) and Raymond Strong (Representative for Onyx) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Wemeiwski stated that at the last meeting, a photometric plan was requested. He presented the plan (new light fixture, existing wall packs to remain and new ones for shed). He submitted the materials, including cut sheets, to the Engineering Department. Mr. Nagar stated that detention needs to be finalized. Discussion followed about shed location and foundation, as well as landscaping and berm use. Ms. Guderley stated that she reviewed past SPAARC minutes pertaining to this site and did not find anything about berm landscaping, although there was an understanding that containers would not be stored on the berm. Mr. Wemewski stated that they will work with the developer of the Hines site on the other side of the berm and with the City regarding berm conditions (to be determined). Ms. Speyer stated that rodents have eaten their way through the fence in two places, and there are at least three locations where the mesh is not intact with the fence. Mr. Wemeiwski agreed to check the locations described. Ms. Speyer asked if a stronger material was available, and Mr. Wemeiwski agreed to check. Chair Brzezinski noted that rat -proofing was part of the code and suggested several options to rat -proof the fence. She also suggested working with the Health Department. Mr. Wolinski noted that the fence should protect neighbors from operations and rodents. Mr. Wemeiwski suggested having an onsite meeting to review existing conditions and options. Members agreed, and Mr. Mayer suggested that the neighbors be included since they can point out where the rodents are escaping. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval, Mr. Edwards seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Weting Notes — August 17, 2005 Page 3 d SPAARC 1015 Chicaao Avenue Preliminary Interior/exterior facade renovation and site improvements for the existing Automobile Vehicle Sales. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Leslie Baluga and Andrew Lipowski (Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Lipowski stated that Richard Fisher, owner of the Autobam, currently has his Volkswagen dealership in Evanston. Since the Toyota dealer has left, he is looking to restore/convert the Toyota building into a Volkswagen dealership and replace the single -story showroom portion of the Chrysler building with a three-story showroom. Changes pertain to the Chicago Avenue elevation (no changes to Greenleaf) and include a projection as part of facade modifications. A site plan, floor plans, renderings, and photos of existing buildings were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski was concerned about the impact of the projection on Chicago Avenue's narrow sidewalks. She suggested a recessed entry or arcade that would encourage shoppers to stop and look without blocking the sidewalk. Mr. Nagar noted the arcade at 900 Chicago. Chair Brzezinski also noted the lack of landscaping on Chicago Avenue and suggested in - ground landscaping, noting that plowed snow also could be stored there. Ms. Guderley clarified the status of the Chicago streetscape project, and Chair Brzezinski suggested that streetscape design at this location be implemented as part of the project. The applicant was amenable to this, and Ms. Gudedey agreed to provide the specs. Mr. Mayer suggested having a place on the premises to unload trucks instead of in the street and lowering the PA system height/volume to alleviate two common complaints. Mr. Lipowski stated that they will be using beepers instead of a PA system, and he agreed to consider an onsite area to unload trucks. Mr. Mayer also noted complaints about noise from the maintenance bays and suggested keeping them closed at all times, soundproofing them, and/or relocating them away from the residential area and toward Greenleaf Street, which is a business district. Mr. Nagar stated that he has received complaints from neighbors across the alley about fight spillage. Mr. Lipowski agreed to provide a photometric plan and take down existing wall packs. Ms. Chambers noted potential issues with brick cleaning. Chair Brzezinski suggested testing for lead. Mr. Aguado noted that the proposed second floor cafe in the showroom could be a Type 11 restaurant (to be determined). The third floor will be offices. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned to table discussion to give time for further review of Committee suggestions by applicant. Mr. Mayer seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 17, 2005 Page 4 SPAARC 702-704 Reba Place Preliminary and Final Condo conversion and construct new porches. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Oded Cohen (Developer) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Cohen stated that the ZBA granted approval for the new porches, which have been permitted and are under construction, but the ZBA denied the impervious surface variance for the additional unit. Photos of the existing building and a site plan were provided. The existing sidewalk will be replaced, and a fence with a gate will be installed in front. Chair Brzezinski stated that front yard fences are not allowed or encouraged. Mr. Cohen decided not to seek a fence variation. He then described the landscaping, rear access, and parking improvements (e.g., replace concrete/asphalt, spaces in the garage separated by walls). The new porches will be larger than the existing ones and will be wood frame, natural finish. Chair Brzezinski encouraged him to paint or stain them. Mr. Aguado asked about underground electric service, which Mr. Cohen agreed to do. Mr. Aguado asked about air conditioning units, which will be on the roof. He asked what will happen in the space that was to be the 15'" unit but was denied by the ZBA. Mr. Cohen stated that it will be duplexed (the only duplex in the building) and described access to the unit from the garage. Mr. Aguado thought the parking spaces were narrow, and discussion followed. Chair Brzezinski suggested not putting walls in the garage and including a door from the garage to the rear yard. Discussion followed. Mr. Nagar asked if grades will change when concrete will be removed in the rear. Mr. Lipowski stated that they will not. Mr. Nagar requested that grades be submitted to the Engineering Department. Chair Brzezinski requested a more detailed landscape plan. ACTION: Mr. Nagar motioned approval subject to review of landscape plan by Parks and Recreation Department and review of grades by Engineering Department. Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes — August 17, 2005 Page 5 A SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES August 24, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, Sat Nagar, Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), James Wolinski, Brian Bames, John Burke, Arlova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Ingrid Eckersberg Citizen Member: Tad Cook Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Moms Robinson, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Minutes from the August 10 and August 17 meetings were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1416 Sherman Avenue Prellminary and Final New wood porch and partial window replacement. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Ryan Nestor (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Nestor stated that the existing frame house was originally a single family home but has been converted to two-family residential. The apartments have separate entries. A dilapidated stair structure that touches the adjacent building will be removed, and so will the dilapidated front porch. They will restore the front elevation to what they think it originally looked like (including new entry) and replace several windows (several have already been replaced). Photos of the existing building, drawings, and a site plan were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if the parking area off the alley is paved, and it is not (crushed stone). She asked if the alley is paved. It is (concrete), but it is very old. Chair Brzezinski noted that the parking area is not delineated. Mr. Nestor stated that they do not plan to change it. Mr. Burke thought it was acceptable. Chair Brzezinski asked about lighting, and locations were shown on the drawing. Chair Brzezinski asked about siding, which will be vinyl (color to be determined) with aluminum details and new downspouts and gutters. She asked about the roof, which will remain as is. Mr. Nestor noted that the owner has two residential properties and the comer commercial property. His intention is to improve this currently vacant residential property and rent it. Mr. Dahal asked if the parking area is by the alley or the sidewalk, and it is by the alley. There is not a sidewalk, nor is there one across the street because of the railroad embankment. The walkway from the building will go to the curb. Chair Brzezinski noted that since the porches will be demolished, this frees up space for landscaping. She asked if utilities will be upgraded, and they will not. She asked about window replacements, which will be white vinyl casements. Mr. Wolinski asked if there are zoning variations, and Ms. Jackson stated that there are none. ACTION: Mr. Burke motioned approval subject to landscaping in front, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. $PAARC 2200 Greenleaf Street Preliminary and Final Partial interior and exterior building renovation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Sara Gensburg (Architect) and Karen Mandel (Project Manager/Designer) GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Ms. Gensburg presented photos of the existing industdai/manufacturing building. Ms. Mandel stated that the front of the building has private offices, and the back has a nail manufacturing area The proposal is to change the HVAC in the front offices and redo the windows and framing in keeping with the building. A drawing was provided. Chair Brzezinski clarified that the windows and door will be replaced, and they will (office portion only). Ms. Mandel stated that the windows will have some reflectivity for privacy, and frames will be black anodized aluminum. A sample was provided. There will be a single door with a sidelight. Chair Brzezinski asked if the door will be ADA-accessible. It will, and there is are existing ADA-accessible entry on the side where the ADA parking is. Mr. Barnes asked about the number of ADA spaces, and there are two existing ADA spaces. He asked about the total amount of parking. The applicants stated that the information is not available because the lot is not striped, and it is shared with the use next door. Chair Brzezinski noted that the number of ADA spaces is based on the total amount of parking. Mr. Bames and Chair Brzezinski referred the applicants to the Illinois Accessibility Code for the ADA entries and parking issues. Discussion followed on rooftop mechanical equipment and parapet wall height. Chair Brzezinski asked about landscaping. Ms. Mandel stated that there are some existing bushes and grass in front. Chair Brzezinski asked about lighting and security. Ms. Gensburg stated that existing exterior lights will be replaced. Chair Brzezinski noted that the lights should not affect neighbors ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned approval, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC Meeting Notes - August 24, 2005 Page 2 SPAARC 1015 Chicago Avenue Prellminary Interior/exterior facade renovation and site improvements for the existing Automobile Vehicle Sales. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Leslie Baluga and Andrew Lipowski (Architects) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Lipowski presented a revised site plan and described the driveways. There will be four curb cuts, two of which already exist. One new curb cut is for transport vehicle access (allows cars to be unloaded onsite instead of on the street) and car parking and display. The other new curb cut is for customer access to the Mazda service area, and up to ten cars can wait there to be serviced instead of on the street. Volkswagen will have a similar waiting area. If there are too many cars, they can be parked in the rear or on the second level where the service lifts are. Mr. Wolinski asked about evening drop off, but the information was not available. Mr. Lipowski presented drawings for the Volkswagen and Mazda showrooms and noted that they aim to reduce the number of cars onsite in this urban setting (e.g., for Mazda, key models are stored under the storeroom canopy for test driving, rather than having every type of car on the lot). Mr. Llpowski stated that trees will be added at the front. Chair Brzezinski noted the landscaping for the Volkswagen showroom and suggested doing something similar for the Mazda showroom. Mr. Dahal noted the alley width on Greenleaf and asked for time for further review. Mr. Nagar noted that the drawings do not incorporate the Chicago Avenue streetscape plans and a wider sidewalk. Mr. Lipowski noted that the Volkswagen showroom's projection has been removed and now has a recessed entry. Chair Brzezinski asked if they considered an arcade. Mr. Lipowski stated that it would require them to give up too much interior space. Discussion followed about landscaping and planters (not recommended). Mr. Dahal noted the need for time to review the proposal with regard to the streetscape plan. Chair Brzezinski asked if this project will cover the cost of the streetscape, but it was not known. Mr. Morrison noted that this issue came up in an Economic Development Committee meeting, and Mr. Wolinski noted that the owner is receiving City funds. Mr. Nagar asked about lighting. Mr. Lipowski indicated the changes on the site plan and stated that a photometric plan is in progress, which he will submit when it is available. Ms. Eckersberg noted complaints from neighbors across the alley. Mr. Dahal asked about the Volkswagen showroom design. Mr. Lipowski stated that the Volkswagen showroom will have stucco since the brick is not in good condition. There also will be an awning and recessed windows. An elevation was provided. Signage includes a backlit Volkswagen logo, Autobam sign, and plaque with hours of operation. Chair Brzezinski noted that signs are permitted separately and referred them to the sign regulations. SPAARC Meeting notes — August 24, 2005 Page 3 Chair Brzezinski asked about the Mazda showroom design. Mr. Lipowski presented elevations for the Mazda showroom and described materials and colors. He offered to bring photos of dealership locations with similar facade design and materials. ACTION: Chair Brzezinski noted the need for further information exchange between the City and the applicant, and Mr. Daha) suggested a separate meeting with the Engineering Department. Mr. D'Agostino motioned to table discussion, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Niles — August 24, 2005 Page 4 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES September 7, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair). James Wolinski, Arlova Jackson, Rajeev Dahal, Ingrid Eckersberg, Dennis Marino, Paul D'Agostino Citizen Member: Tad Cook Other Staff: Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Morris Robinson, Susan Gudertey, Sally Lufkin, Tracy Norfleet Chair Bmazinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Minutes frem the August 31 meeting were approved. Proiects Reviewed: SPAARC 2911 Lincoln Street Recommendation to ZBA Establish boat storage in the front yard driveway. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Lisa Kupferberg (Owner) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Kupferberg stated that the request is to store their boat for the summer only on existing pavement in front of the house next to the driveway. She presented a plat and photos showing the driveway and parking space. Ms. Jackson noted that boat storage is only allowed in the rear yard. Ms. Kupferberg stated that the garage is too narrow to pull the boat through to the back yard. They have owned the boat for a number of years and stored it at a nearby secure location but the place dosed three years ago. For the past three summers, she has managed to find another location to store the boat that is secure (per insurance requirements), in the vicinity, and offers flexibleliate hours. However, that location is no longer available, and she could not find a place to store the boat this summer. She contacted the neighbors and Alderman about parking it in the front parking space. She received no objections, although an anonymous neighbor called to complain about the boat being parked there. She has learned that it is legal to park the boat on the street if it Is attached to a car, but she did not want do that. She stated that other Evanston residents share the summer boat storage problem. Mr. Wolinski was sympathetic to the issue but did not think boats were meant to be stored in driveways. He was concerned about setting a precedent for other seasonal vehicles parking in the front yard (e.g., landscaping trucks, trailers). Chair Brzezinski also was sympathetic to the issue but did not think this was the solution in the long term. Ms. Jackson asked if the boat can fit through the alley to get to the back yard. Ms. Kupferberg stated that it would require the removal of a tree, and there still might not be enough of a turning radius. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to recommend denial, Mr. Dahal seconded, and the vote was unanimous. IPAARC 1015 Chicaao Avenue Conceo lnterror/exterior facade renovation and site improvements for the existing Automobile Vehicle Sales use. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Richard Fisher (Owner) and Andrew Lipowski (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: As a follow-up from the last SPAARC meeting, Mr. Lipowski provided photos of a dealership in Indiana that is similar to the one proposed here, and he stated that they have met with Mr. Dahal regarding transport vehicle access. Mr. Fisher stated that there is no need for unloading on Chicago Avenue. The prep center will be on Greenleaf, which is a wide street, so car unloading can occur there. Discussion followed about facility operation and the purpose of each curb cut and driveway. Chair Brzezinski stated that the City aims to minimize curb cuts due to potential pedestrian/ vehicle conflicts and to provide opportunities for street trees. She asked if test drives could exit through the alley instead of onto Chicago Avenue. Mr. Marino stated that issues with alley traffic were raised during the Chicago Avenue neighborhood planning study. He thought it made sense for a car dealership to have access to Chicago Avenue. Mr. Fisher was concerned about people having to navigate ice/snow in the alley while test driving an unfamiliar vehicle. Mr. Hallen thought that two of the driveways will have limited use, and Mr. Fisher agreed. Chair Brzezinski asked about changes to the Volkswagen building. Mr. Lipowski stated that at the last meeting, the projection was discussed. Recesses would be very difficult because they would require structural changes to the building and loss of square footage. Chair Brzezinski was concerned about a projection's impact on an already narrow sidewalk and the loss of potential area for landscaping. Mr. Fisher stated that he has committed funds for landscaping. To follow up on the exterior paging issue raised at the last SPAARC meeting, Mr. Fisher stated that they have not done that for seven years and do not plan to in the future. Regarding lighting, Chair Brzezinski requested cut sheets for the light fixtures and a photometric plan. She asked if anything will project over the public way. Mr. Lipowski stated that a canopy will, and Mr. Fisher described the canopy design. Mr. Lipowski stated that he is looking into how to recess the doors, per Volkswagen corporate rules. SPAARC Meeting Notes - September 7, 2005 Pape 2 Mr. Wolinski asked how customer parking will be handled. Mr. Fisher stated that there is street parking currently, but onsite parking will be offered as part of this project. Mr. Wolinski stated that as much as he would like to think that Chicago Avenue can be a beautiful pedestrian way, he does not think that certain sections can, particularly this block because it is destination - oriented. Ms. Guda.fey disagreed and stated that an objective is to connect Main and Dempster. She noted that doing so could encourage people to stop in at the coffee shop in the Mazda dealership. Mr. Fisher stated that they have tried to design the facade so as not to Impede pedestrian traffic. Ms. Guderley noted that tree grates and parking meters pinch the already narrow sidewalk. Mr. Upowski asked if the streetscape plan is available. Ms. Guderley explained the process and stated that it will not be available until next spring. Ms. Jackson asked about fagade materials. Mr. Lipowski stated that it will be stucco. She was concerned that trash will collect around the projection. Mr. Hallen asked if the 10' projection was a Volkswagen requirement. Mr. Fisher stated that it is typically bowed, and the proposed flat 10' projection is already a concession, in addition to the dealership's location in an urban environment. Chair Brzezinski was concerned that the base would get dirty and suggested a black granite base, at least at the entry point. Mr. Lipowski agreed to consider it. Chair Brzezinski noted that the Autobam sign shown on the rendering was still too high. Mr. Fisher thought that it was roughly the same height as the Toyota sign. Ms. Guderley asked about the timeframe for construction. Mr. Fisher stated that everything needs to be done and operating by next spring. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned concept approval with the condition that the streetscape issue and projection come back for review. Mr. Wolinski seconded, and the motion passed with Ms. Jackson abstaining. SPAARC 1515 Chicago Avenue Pre-Aaalication Conference Construct an 18-story mixed -use building with grade level commercial and 150 dwelling units. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: David Hovey, Todd Demeris, Bill Duke (Representatives for Optima) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Chair Brzezinski noted that Alderman Wollin and Plan Commission Chair Widmayer were present. Mr. Hovey presented a site plan for the mixed use building. He stated that they will open up the Chicago/Davis comer with green space and a courtyard with reflecting ponds. There will be two levels of underground parking with access from the alley. He then presented a model of the building and a larger context model and noted that the streetscape does not have a consistent height. For this reason, the building is shaped to blend in with existing buildings and has varying heights (3-18 stories) to break up the fagade. Mr. Hovey stated that the ground floor will have retail (10,000 so, the first and second floors above grade will be offices (30,000 sf), and higher floors will have various sized residential units (175 units). Materials will be glass and natural stone (granite). The parking structure will SPAARC Meeting Notes - September 7, 2005 Page 3 ..� not be visible from the street and will have the same materials as the rest of the building. Mr. Hovey then presented elevations for Chicago and Davis and floor plans, noting the recessed terraces and outdoor landscaped areas. DISCUSSION: Alderman Wollin asked if there will be commercial parking for retail. Mr. Hovey stated that there will be 1.8 spaces/unit, in addition to the required amount for the office and retail uses. Alderman Wollin asked if the courtyard will be open to the public. Mr. Hovey stated that it will, and the idea is to invite people into it. He stated that the depth of soil will allow for trees, shrubs, and other landscaping in the courtyard. Also, rooftops will be landscaped. Mr. Cook thought the building was creative/different and asked if he has seen a similar building elsewhere. Mr. Hovey stated that it is something he has been interested in for a number of years and thinks this is the right location. Ms. Chambers asked if light studies have been done for the courtyard. Mr. Hovey stated that light availability has been discussed. The courtyard may have shade tolerant plants and other types of plants that will make it lush year-round. Chair Brzezinski thought that the courtyard at Sherman Gardens was a good example. Ms. Jackson noted that at the last meeting, the unit count was 150 and clarified that it is now 175. Mr. Hovey stated that discussions with lenders have indicated that more than 150 units is preferable. Prices will start at $325,000, with a standard unit at $900,000 and a duplex up to $1.5 million. A total of 175 units is the minimum for the project to be viable. The average unit size will be roughly 1,350 sf, and there will be a mix of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units which can be combined. The amount of retail and office space remains the same. Chair Widmayer asked if commercial parking will be open or managed. Mr. Hovey stated that It will be open. Chair Widmayer asked if guests of condo owners can use it, and they can. Chair Brzezinski thought that the site planning was excellent, including all access from the alley. She commended him for opening up the comer and handling the building heightlmassing within its context. Discussion followed about breaking up the plane of the highest roof. Mr. Marino asked about the number of parking spaces above grade. Mr. Demeris stated that there are two levels of parking below grade and four levels above grade, which are hidden by the fagade. There are roughly 160 spaces of above ground parking. Chair Brzezinski asked if loading will occur off the alley. There will be two loading berths. She asked if trash will also be off the alley, and it will. Alderman Wollin asked about the location of mechanical equipment. It will be on the fourth floor. She asked about the status of the alley vacation. Mr. Demeris responded that they have submitted the application. ACTION: No action taken —pre -application conferences do not require a vote. sPAARC Meeting Notes-- September 7. 2005 pane 4 .OPAAR,C 741 Howard Street Recommendation to .Rdgn Board Proposed Unified Business Center signage plan. PROJECT REPRESENTED SY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Hallen stated that the proposed unified business center signage plan complies with sign regulations and is before SPAARC for review because it pertains to more than four units. The proposal Is to put a sign area above each store, which will be located above existing awnings (awnings will remain). There are no limitations to typeface or logos. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if the signs will be illuminated, Mr. Hallen stated that they will be uplit and presented a drawing. Discussion followed on whether this would affect residential above the shops. ACTION: Mr. Wolinski motioned to recommend approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes— Sephunber 7. 2W5 Page 5 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES September 14, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), James Wolinski, Arlova Jackson, Sat Nagar, Ingrid Eckersberg, Dennis Marino, Paul D'Agostino, John Burke, David Stoneback, Judy Aiello, Gavin Morgan, James Edwards Clitlzen Member: Tad Cook Other Staff: Ellen Szymanski, Carl Caneva, Jill Chambers, Carlos Ruiz, Morris Robinson, Susan Guderley, Tracy Norfleet Chair Brzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Minutes from the September 7 meeting were approved. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2320 Pioneer Road Preliminary Three-story addition to Three Crowns Park retirement community. Minor revisions to previously granted Planned Development. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Malarky (Attorney), Tracy Schnick (Architect), Susan Morse (Executive Director, Three Crowns Park) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Ms. Szymanski stated she will work with Mr. Wolinski to determine if the proposed changes are a major or minor variation from the previously approved planned development. If it is a major variation, the project must return to Plan Commission and City Council. Ms. Schnick stated that during marketing, they learned that patios and balconies are desired. They are proposing to add small concrete patios to first floor units (landscaping will be adjusted accordingly) and Juliette balconies for select few units. A new breezeway will be added and will match the balcony and patio doors. Revised elevations were provided. Mr. Wolinski asked about building height. Ms. Schnick stated during detailing, they realized that the height needs to be increased 7% " to make the roof framing work. Mr. Wolinski asked what would happen if the height increase was denied. Ms. Schnick stated that this would change the framing and add to the cost. Mr. Wolinski noted that height has been an issue from the beginning and thought it was unfortunate to be discussing height after the planned development has been approved. Chair Brzezinski asked about building materials. Ms. Schnick stated that it will be brick, with renaissance stone banding and bases. Because the cornice cannot be made of stone, they are considering plaster. Chair Brzezinski asked about brick size, which will be utility. Mr. Malarky stated that the proposal is subject to review by the Preservation Commission. Mr. Ruiz stated that the next available meeting will be October 18. Mr. Wolinski asked when they expect to start construction. Ms. Schnick stated that it will be in February. Mr. Ruiz stated that they have appeared before the Preservation Commission twice, which recommended approval with the condition that they come back for final review. However, the design was not the same as It is today, and he was not sure the current design would satisfy the Preservation Commission's standards for construction. Since Preservation Review is binding, he advised the applicants to review the standards. He was concerned that the elevation was developed without Preservation Commission involvement, which must adhere to the standards. He requested a massing model for the Preservation Commission, and Ms. Schnick agreed to it. Chair Brzezinski stated that given the size and setback of the project, she did not think that the 7%0 height increase would be noticeable from the street. She supported the idea of balconies and thought it was important for residents to feel like they are part of the community rather than being isolated. Mr. Stoneback asked about detention and offered to provide information on water service. Ms. Schnick stated that a consultant is working on detention. Mr. Caneva asked if the current kitchen will be remodeled. Ms. Schnick stated that there will be a new commercial kitchen, and the existing kitchen will become a serving kitchen space. Mr. Marino suggested that SPAARC not take action since the Preservation Commission must act, and there could be further changes. Ms. Aiello agreed and noted that the legal question of whether this is a major/minor variation also needs to be resolved. ACTION: Ms. Aiello motioned to table discussion, Mr. Nagar seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1890 Maole Avenue Content Construct an eight to ten story hotel with 126 to 158 rooms. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Daniel Heider and Sanjeev Misra (Representatives for Atirs Hotels), Steve Cavanaugh (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Misra stated that they proposal is to construct an extended stay hotel (e.g., residents staying more than four days) that is targeted to the hospital and university. Mr. Misra stated that they looked at several options for reusing the existing office building, but site constraints SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 14, 2005 Page 2 and the new use preclude it. Mr. Beider stated that the current owner also owns several nearby buildings and knows the office market, and he is in favor of demolishing the building. Mr. Cavanaugh presented a site plan and stated that the idea is for a Marriott brand. The prototype is a U- or L-shaped building with a gate house. He tested the fit on the site, with the following conclusions: • The prototype did not work with the natural courtyard created by nearby L-shaped buildings; • It does not work if it is flipped because the gate house would be behind the building; and • Saving the existing building and constructing a high rise behind it does not work because the depth of the building would not be appropriate, it would force the tower portion to be higher than they want, and there would be issues with the core (e.g., elevator service for the existing low-rise office building and tower). Their objective is to satisfy the brand while adding value to the urban context. The solution proposed is an angled variation, which allows the gate house to be in front, the right room depth, street orientation, and amenity spaces to complement the existing courtyard while having a southwest exposure. He presented elevations, noting that they are preliminary but give an idea of massing. Materials are to be determined. DISCUSSION: Ms. Aiello asked if it will be 10 stories, and it will (120' to penthouse). Chair Brzezinski asked about a zoning analysis, but they are not there yet. Chair Brzezinski asked if it will comply with existing zoning. Mr. Beider stated that it will be a planned development. Ms. Aiello asked if they have done a market feasibility study. Mr. Beider stated that it is in progress. Ms. Aiello requested a copy of it when it is available. Mr. Marino asked them to describe the gate house function. It contains the front desk with an office behind, a prep room for continental breakfasts, a serving area, a meeting room for guests, and common space for residents. Mr. Wolinski asked if there will be parking in the Maple garage. Mr. Beider stated that the owner has a current arrangement and expects that to continue. Ms. Aiello thought a new arrangement would be needed for a hotel. Mr. Burke asked about circulation. Mr. Cavanaugh stated that there is existing service access off University Place, which they plan to utilize. In addition. they have considered curb cuts on Emerson for a drop off area (one-way with enough room for two vehicles). Ms. Aiello suggested an indentation like Hilton Gardens instead. Mr. Burke agreed and noted that left turns within 100' of the intersection would have to be reviewed. Ms. Guderley asked about landscaping at the comer, particularly in relation to the semicircle area in front of the townhouses across the street. Mr. Cavanaugh stated that the plans are very preliminary, but there will be landscaping. Ms. Aiello encouraged them to consider the semicircle area across the street and address the comer during their design. She also was concerned that the gate house did not address the street. She noted that the existing building's lobby has glass and is lit at night. Chair Brzezinski thought that glass along the first floor of the gate house could be elegant, but Ms. Aiello noted that it might not be possible due SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 14, 2005 Page 3 to the uses behind it. She was concerned that they were treating the location as if it was suburban instead of urban (e.g., two curb cuts, not addressing the comer that is a gateway to downtown, the gate house not addressing the street). Discussion followed. Mr. Robinson asked if the rear of the hotel will have a pool, and it will (it will be enclosed and also have a fitness area). Chair Brzezinski requested a massing model. She thought the building was very boxy -looking and suggested varying the height. Ms. Aiello thought it looked more like an office building. She suggested using the service drive for drop off, locating the gate house there, and providing a landscaped pocket park at the comer as a public benefit for the planned development. Mr. Misra was not sure if Marriott would allow the main entrance to be off a service road but agreed to look into it. Mr. Marino asked if a hotel at this location will strengthen surrounding offices. Mr. Beider stated that the owner hopes so, given his two nearby office buildings. Mr. Misra stated that the hotel is geared to those on extended stays, compared to other hotels in the area, and it will be oriented to office users by offering high speed Internet and meeting space for clients (larger meeting space may be available in another of the owner's buildings). Mr. Marino asked about building materials. Mr. Cavanaugh stated that they are to be determined. Chair Brzezinski advised against dryvit, and Ms. Aiello advised against jumbo brick. Mr. Marino noted that some Marriott prototypes look nice, while others are not desired for this location. Chair Brzezinski asked about the public benefit as part of the planned development. Mr. Misra noted the need for an affordable quality hotel. Mr. Beider stated that based on an economic Impact study, there is no Marriott product within 15 miles, nor extended stay hotels. Chair Brzezinski suggested public open space with art. Mr. Marino noted that the comer is a gateway and suggested enhancing capital improvements. Mr. Burke noted the potential pedestrian and traffic impacts and the need to address the intersection. Mr. Misra stated that they are considering donating meeting space for job fairs and community events and employing roughly 30 people from the community. Mr. Beider stated that they are looking at programs for summer jobs and internships for students. Mr. Stoneback noted the location of the mechanical room in the middle and stated that water service cannot come in there since there is no space for meters. Discussion followed on options. Mr. Marino noted that water service should not be visible from the public way. Chair Brzezinski was concerned that they are not providing parking. Ms. Aiello stated that parking is required, just not onsite. They must agree to lease space in the Maple garage from the City, which is to be used for overnight guests only (not employees). Mr. Beider stated that extended stay hotels probably require the least amount of required parking. Discussion followed about management, franchising agreements, and what would happen if the property is sold in the future. Chair Brzezinski noted that Evanston is concerned about energy efficiency, and demolishing an existing .wilding is not energy efficient. She encouraged them to consider green roofs, SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 14, 2005 Page 4 energy efficient windows and mechanical systems, etc. She asked if they have considered a green or LEED building and noted that as an ownerluser, they would benefit from energy efficient measures. Mr. Cavanaugh stated that they will consider this, depending on costs. Mr. Misra stated that the hotel association has a green program. Chair Brzezinski commended this but noted that the building's construction is very important to the overall green goal. ACTION: No action taken --concept review does not rewire a vote. SPAARC I I I I Chicaao Avenue Recommendation to ZBA. Establish a Type 2 restaurant (Wild Oats) inside the existing People's Market grocery stone. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Paul Machalek (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Machalek stated that approval for a special use is requested to establish a Type II restaurant (Wild Oats) within the existing People's Market. The intent is to provide a seating area with roughly 30 seats (mix of tables and a fixed -seating counter). Exterior changes include the installation of a new concrete curb to contain shopping carts. Photos and a floor plan were provided. DISCUSSION: Chair Brzezinski asked if they considered locating the restaurant along the outside wall. She thought this would improve the exterior because the windows are currently covered. Mr. Cook agreed. Mr. Morgan noted that they have started building a wall inside. Mr. Machalek stated that interior remodeling is in progress, but they would not proceed with the restaurant until they have received approval. Mr. Morgan asked if the existing food prep area will remain in the same place, and it will. Mr. Marino asked if the restaurant location must be near the food prep area, and it must. Mr. Caneva clarified that there will not be additional food prep, just additional seating. Mr. Machalek stated that this is correct. Ms. Chambers noted that they have an existing seating area, which is not heavily used. Mr. Marino asked if the restaurant will be operated by the store, and it will (no new vendor). Mr. Burke asked if changes to the required parking are anticipated, and they are not. Chair Brzezinski asked if a change to the garbage collection schedule is anticipated, and it is not. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned to recommend approval, Mr. Burke seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARG Meeting Notes - September 14, 2005 Pepe 5 SPAARC M wft Ncos — September 14, 2005 Page B SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES September 21, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members; Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), James Wolinski, Arlova Jackson, Sat Nagar, Dennis Marino, Paul D'Agostino, John Burke, David Stoneback, Judy Aiello, James Edwards, Dale Fochs, Rajeev Dahal, Frank Aguado Citizen Member: Tad Cook Other Staff: Ellen Szymanski, Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Carlos Ruiz, Moms Robinson, Susan Guderley, Donna Splcuzza, Tracy Norfleet Chair Orzezinski determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting. Mr. Edwards introduced Mr. Fochs, who will now be representing the Fire Department at SPAARC. Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 1711 Greenwood Street Recommendation to Z9A New single-family detached residence with a detached garage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Joshua Gilbert (Owner/Architect) GENERAL. PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Mr. Gilbert stated that the proposal is to demolish the existing house and construct a new one with a garage. A sideyard setback variation is requested for a deck. Drawings and photos of the existing house were provided. Chair Brzezinski asked if the project could work without the variation. Mr. Gilbert stated that this would affect the interior function. The focus of the project is the kitchen, and the idea Is to combine the kitchen/dining area in the center of the house and have the deck for more useable space outdoors. A floor plan was provided. Chair Brzezinski commended him for using solar panels since the City encourages energy efficient measures, as long as they are within limitations under zoning (e.g., solar panel height). She stated that the City also encourages more eyes on the street, which front/side yard spaces contribute to, whereas many suburbs tend to have back yard decks. She asked if the neighbors have been contacted. Mr. Gilbert stated that he held a meeting last weekend in which the drawings were presented. They received no objections, and a neighbor across the street Indicated that s/he will attend the ZBA meeting to testify in support of the project. Mr. Hallen thought this was a minor intrusion and encouraged SPAARC to recommend approval. Chair Brzezinski agreed. ACTION: Mr. Aguado motioned approval, Mr. Marino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. $PAARC 3003 Harrison Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Enlarge an existing one -car attached garage. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: James Wall (Owner) and David Roberts (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Roberts presented a photo of the existing garage and a drarwing of the proposed garage. Chair Brzezinski asked about the zoning and lot coverage. Mr. Roberts stated that It is an existing non -conforming lot. Mr. Wall stated that the garage was meant for a small car. It is now deteriorating, and he is using it for storage. Chair Brzezinski asked if he has talked to his neighbors. Mr. Wall stated that he has, with no objections. Mr. Dahal asked if widening the driveway will affect the parkway trees. Mr. Roberts stated that it would not. He noted that there is no sidewalk. Discussion followed. Mr. Wolinski asked about the variations requested, which are for street side yard setback, rear yard setback, and building lot coverage. He suggested orienting the garage to the alley. Mr. Walt stated this would require the removal of a large tree, which he does not want to do. He would rather use the existing curb cut. Mr. Aguado stated that because it is a comer lot a street side yard driveway will be permitted. ACTION: Mr. Marino motioned approval, Mr. D'Agostino seconded, and the vote was unanimous. SPAARC 1604-1608 Chicago Avene / 601-603 Davis Street ConceDt PUD-20-story mixed -else residential / retail building at 1604-1608 Chicago Avenue and 601- 603 Davis Street. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kent Swanson and Zanna Goldblatt (Representatives for Owner), Steve Friedland (Attomey), Tim Sheridan (Architect) GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Mr. Swanson stated that this project pertains to 1604-1608 Chicago and 601-603 Davis. as well as the vacant lot on Davis. He presented a context model and stated that the proposal is to preserve/enhance the landmark University Building and construct a new tower on the vacant lot next door. To maintain the integrity of the University Building, they will transfer its air rights to the vacant site. Mr. Friedland stated that the planned development will include the total air rights for the University Building and vacant site, which will be allocated to the tower. SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 21, 2005 Page 2 Mr. Swanson stated that because the site is small, entry to the parking structure will be from the Park Evanston garage (8 spaces will be removed to allow for this). There will be a reciprocal easement agreement, which the condo board will hold. Ms. Aiello asked what would happen if the Park Evanston converted to condos. Mr. Swanson stated that there would be a recorded easement. Chair Brzezinski commended them for the clever parking solution on such a small site. Drawings, a site plan, and elevations were provided. Ground floor retail will continue the line from the University Building and have the same setback. There also will be an entry to second floor apartments. Four levels of parking will be provided. Discussion followed on parking structure materials (e.g., glass, glazing) and whether headlights will be visible. There will be a wire structure for ivy, and the setback to the residential portion of the tower also will be landscaped. The location of balconies on east -facing units will vary depending on the number of units per floor (5 units on lower floors, 4 units on upper floors, penthouses). Chair Brzezinski asked about alley use. Mr. Swanson stated that it is a private alley, and they are working with the University Building owners to allow access for the planned developments loading area. For the Davis elevation, Mr. Swanson stated that materials will be compatible with the University Building. Mr. Sheridan noted the repetition of the University Building bays in the proposed building. Mr. Swanson noted that behind the entry to the second floor apartments, there is extra parking (tandem spaces). Ms. Aiello asked if they will annex the landmark. Mr. Ruiz stated that landmark status applies to the lot of record. Mr. Swanson stated that this is a separate lot from the University Building. They will apply for an address for the tower. For the Chicago elevation, the tower is located behind the University Building, and it steps in on the sides to allow for all glass solariums. There will be a fitness room for residents on the floor above the parking structure. He noted that they have reserved the right to add another level of parking at the Park Evanston. While the parking is not currently being utilized because of the nature of the rental market, this could change if it is converted to condos. Chair Brzezinski asked about the western edge of the building, which is at the property line and has glass instead of a solid wall required by the building code. Mr. Swanson stated that discussions are underway with JP Morgan Chase, the owner of the adjacent site, regarding a transfer of air rights, which would allow the glasslglazing. Mr. Swanson stated that they are still studying the garage design for this elevation. Mr. Hallen noted that the outcome of discussions about the transfer of air rights will affect its design. Mr. Ruiz noted that the balconies project over the base of the building and was concerned about the visual impact to the University Building. if it impacts the landmark, it must be reviewed by the Preservation Commission. Ms. Aiello asked if the balconies could be recessed. Mr. Swanson stated that they would prefer not to, and Mr. Hallen noted that the floor plates are small. Mr. Marino stated that the City is encouraging recessed balconies. Ms. Chambers noted that units with recessed balconies typically receive less light in their interior, SPAARC Meeting Notes - September 21, 2005 Page 3 • which raises an energy efficiency issue. Chair Brzezinski was not opposed to the balconies as presented (no cables, etc). Mr. Stoneback provided information on water infrastructure. He thought that the biggest challenge would be connecting to the combined sewers, and he noted that there are several development proposals in the immediate vicinity. He was very concerned about stormwater and emphasized the need for detention with slow release to the system. Mr. Ruiz asked if there will be exterior work for the University Building. Mr. Swanson stated that an ADA elevator will be installed, the HVAC system will be replaced, and the roofs appearance will be improved. Chair Brzezinski asked if they are considering LEED certification. Ms. Swanson agreed to look into it. Mr. Marino asked if they considered underground parking. Mr. Swanston stated that the site size limits circulation and since the Park Evanston is above ground, there is no way to go below ground at this site. In addition, there is the issue of where the loading dock would be located. Mr. Sheridan thought that going underground could affect the University Building. Mr. Dahal asked about the number of parking spaces, which will be 90. The vacant lot has an easement to use an additional 10 spaces in a nearby interior parking lot (mid -block of Davis). Mr. Friedland stated that they estimate that 96 spaces are needed for the 63 units. Mr. Dahal asked if the alley is used by Park Evanston. Mr. Swanson stated that it is for the University Building only. He asked if there will be a drop off area on Davis, but it is to be determined. Mr. Dahal noted that there are new parking standards, and Mr. Burke stated that they are available online. Mr. Aguado noted that the parking module does not work out to 60 when the walls are added. Mr. Swanson stated that they are studying this and noted that the spaces are wider than usual. Mr. Aguado asked about the vertical clearance on the door for the loading berth. Mr. Sheridan stated that it is 15' and noted the grade change. Ms. Aiello asked about the public benefit from the proposed planned development, which is under discussion. Mr. Burke noted Mr. Stoneback's comments about stormwater and that LEED certification would count toward this. Chair Brzezinski noted that the doors open onto the sidewalk, which is not allowed. Ms. Guderley asked if the sidewalks will match the existing streetscape. Mr. Swanson stated that they do not expect to vary from the existing conditions. Chair Brzezinski suggested using pavers in the alley. Mr. Marino asked about the setbacks on Davis. Mr. Swanson stated that above the garage, the setback will be between 10-12', and a variation is requested to have solariums at the lot line. Mr. Hallen noted that the first four floors will be at the lot line. ACTION: No action taken —concept review does not require a vote. Respectfully submitted, Tracy Norfleet General Planner SPAARC Meeting Notes — September 21, 2005 Page 4 APPROVED SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES SEPTEMBER 28, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Walter Hallen, Ailing Chair, Paul D'Agostlno, Carla Bush, Tad Cook, Dale Fochs, Arlova Jackson, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Dave Stonebeck, James Wolinski Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Susan Guderley, Moms Robinson Acting Chair Walter Hallan determined that a quorum existed and began the meeting at approximately 2:35 P.M. I. Construction of a new truck scale and scale buildina for Onvx Waste Services Transfer Station at 1711 Church Street Final Protect Reoresented bv: Mr. Robert Wiemewski, Consultant and Mr. Raymond Strong, General Manager General Protect Presentation: Onyx representatives proposed constructing of a 12' X 15' truck, vinyl sided scale house and for the installation of a new truck scale at the Onyx transfer station located at 1711 Church Street. This proposed project was previously presented to the SPAARC for preliminary approval which was granted by the committee at that time. Discussion: Acting Chair Hallan asked if the facility will have an accessible bathroom as well as an accessible ramp. The answer was affirmative for both features. Acting chair Hallan also asked about the illumination aspects for the project and if photometric had been provided. Mr. Wiemewski advised the committee that photometric had been delivered in August 2005 and member Nagar confirmed that they were received and reviewed. Member Nagar stated that the photometric were not complete. The illumination as presented was at ground level and the photometric should indicate the illumination at the height of the fence and berm with zero illumination at the property line. Mr. Wiemewski stated that the additional information in the form of a revised photometric will be provided. Member Nagar had concerns about the height of the light pole and asked if there had been a community meeting concerning the light pole. There was no community meeting held that was September 29. 2005 Site Plan And Appearance Review Carrmmnee Page 1 NI � associated with the scale house but Acting Chair Hallan assured member Nagar that the pole height was not out of the ordinary. After a brief discussion about the direction in which the light would reflect, Acting Chair Hallan asked if the committee could be provided with a "fixture cut" diagram. Mr. Wiemewski advised the committee that one had already been provided. A brief discussion ensued concerning the height of the scale house (12' to 14') hours of occupation which can be up to 6:30 P.M. daily and detention for the overall project occurring at the site. Afterwards, Acting Chair Hallan proposed a motion to recommend approval of the project contingent on receipt of revised photometric to be reviewed by the Engineering and Planning divisions. Member Nagar provided a second. Action: The committee voted unanimously to recommend approval for the proposed project as stated in the motion. ll. Buildina Facade Renovation for Flader Plumbing & Heatina Comoanv. 3000-3004 Central Street. Preliminary and final Protect Presented bv: Mr. William Flader, Proprietor General Prolect Presentation: Mr. Flader, the proprietor of this plumbing business proposed removing damaged and deteriorating facade material from the front elevation of the commercial building located at the above referenced address. Mr. Flader further proposed replacing the old material with "stucco at the top and stone or brick face at an undefined bottom". The proposals were before the SPAARC for preliminary and final disposition. Discussion: Although Mr. Flader provided one sample of stucco, at the outset the concept met with several material and installation issues raised by committee members. The owner did not provide any architectural renderings with elevation plans indicating all of the types of materials to be used or method of installation. It was apparent to the committee members that either an architect or the contractor needed to be present to explain the proposed project. Action: It was determined that the proprietor did not have renderings of the site elevations; a complete set of material samples and details of the method to be used for installation. Member Marino moved to table the request until such time as the owner can return with his contractor or architect to provide answers to the issues raised as well as provide the committee with complete samples of the materials to be used on the project. The motion was passed with a unanimous vote. 2 Ill. While waiting for the next presentation, the SPAARC approved the SPAARC Meeting Notes for September 14 and 21, 2005 with members Fochs and Nagar abstaining. N. The Housinp Opportunity Development Corporation. 1708-1710 Darrow Avenue Concept PO reounst for 27 dwellinq unit multi famliv bulldina with 2.000 sauare feet of retail Protect Presented bv: Mr. Richard Koenig, Director- Mr. Dennis Langley, Architect General Protect Presentation: Mr. Richard Koenig, the Executive Director of HODC and members of his development team have site control at the comer of Church Street and Darrow Avenue. The site is composed of a vacant comer lot and two residential buildings facing Darrow Avenue. Attempts to acquire contiguous properties on Church Street, west of Darrow proved to be unsuccessful Discussion: Mr. Richard Koenig presented the committee with the concept for a proposed low/mod, twenty- seven rental unit, multi -family mixed use residential building with 2,000 square feet of ground level retail. The structure will face Darrow Avenue. Mr. Koenig provided illustrations of the proposed project and explained how the parking will be situated for the residents. What will be unique about the units is that the renters will have the right of first refusal for the option to buy after residing in their unit for fifteen years. The units will remain affordable by way of an appreciation formula limiting appreciation to 3% per year in the event an owner wishes to sell. Action: Because the proposed project was presented for concept opinions and suggestions, no vote was required. The committee was pleased with the proposed development project concept, and provided the development group with constructive suggestions and opinions. This proposed project will be within the boundaries of the new West Evanston Tax Increment Financing District #6. V. Lee Fry Comaanies, Inc. 2424 Oakton Street Concept Plan Development request for a proposed commercial redevelopment and re - subdivision into 8 lots of record. 3 Proiiect Presented bv: Mr. Lee Fry, Developer, Mr. Joe Zgonina, Site Engineering General Proiect Presentation: Mr. Lee Fry owns 7.09 acres of land located at 2424 4akton Street. This address is the former site of the recently razed J & F Steel Corporation. Mr. Fry and members of his development team appeared before the SPAARC to present a concept for a proposed shopping center development project. The proposed development will have considerable green space as well as sculpture art and an attractive screening wall to the east and a green space berm to the west. The proposed shopping center will have a Culver's restaurant; a Citgo Station' a car wash and/or detailing operation; a car lubrication business; a Dunkin' Doughnut and four, free standing commercial condominiums for sale. Mr. Fry stated that an attempt will be made to attract a Trader Joe's at the behest of City staff but did not express confidence in achieving the objective. Discussion: Mr. Fry provided the committee with illustrations of the planned project and photos of the screening wall, as well as other photos of structures erected at a similar center he developed in another suburban Chicago community. Questions concerning detention, entry and egress issues were handled. When Member Fochs asked about the ability of fire trucks to maneuver within and behind the center, Mr. Fry illustrated how all sections could be accessed by fire equipment if required and referenced an existing road that could be brought into play also. Action: As in the case of the previous presentation, this proposed development project was presented as a concept and as such no SPAARC vote was required. The committee expressed enthusiasm for the project concept and offered constructive suggestions and encouragement. 111. Adiournment: There being no further business the SPAARC adjourned at approximately 4:15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Morris E. Robinson Economic Development Planner 4 SITE PLAN and APPROVED APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES October 5, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Walter Hallen, James Wolinski, Rajeev Dahal, Dennis Marino, Dale Fochs, Judy Aiello Design Professional: Tad Cook Other Staff: Sally Lufkin, Susan Guderley, Frank Aguado, Brian Barnes, Morris Robinson Protects Reviewed: SPAARC 2819 W. Central Concept Harris Trust and Savings Bank — Feasibility Study PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kory Fox — Bank Manager for Corporate Real Estate Jutta Stone, Jeanna Bridges, Hetti B. Ensign, Tacy Salvia, Jose Luis de la Fuente, Alyssa Joy Stone GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Kory Fox, presented the concept plans for a new bank branch to be located in Evanston. The bank would support a drive up and walk up ATM. There will be a walk up ATM with this branch because it is a highly populated pedestrian district. Concept plans for drive up lanes, for five car stacking and will provide ample room for waiting vehicles. Kory discussed the existing site plans, signage and the conceptual site plan. The plans reflect similar design elements used for their other urban/ suburban bank buildings. He spoke about the standard signage package and keeping with the standard of area signage and signage they have used on some of their other suburban locations. He discussed the architecture of the new building and intended materials. J. Wolinski pointed out that they have to be in compliance with lighting and noise issues, and D. Marino commented on the curb guts. R. Dahal was concerned with a traffic study and B. Barnes wanted to make sure the new building would be disabled accessible and that the teller machines would have Braille capabilities for both the drive up and walk up lanes. ACTION: Concept only - Staff noted that the building will have to be in compliance with the standard federal, state and local ADA codes. It was also noted that the project, as proposed, will require variations. Suggestions were made about the landscaping plan. Staff noted that the lights for the parking lot will need to be shielded so that the light will not carry over the property lines. ACTION: W. Hallen stated that there is normally no action taken on concept review. Rather, it is a opportunity for staff to give input into the proposed design. SPAARC 900 Church Street Prellminery CTA Viaducts In multiple location 900 Davis Sheet 700 Dempster Street 600 Greenleaf Street 850 Grove Sheet PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Deanna Zalas, Graham Garfield, Carlos Campor GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: Deanna Zalas, gave the opening presentation on the repair of viaducts at multiple locations throughout Evanston. She said that their budget will be reviewed tomorrow and she will report back to the City once the budget is approved. Graham Garfield presented the plans for the revitalization of the viaducts. Graham stated that six of the purple line viaducts will be reconstructed and the others will be rehabilitated. Graham presented the preliminary designs for the viaducts to be replaced, photos included. He stated that Main Street will be the prototype for all of the replacement viaducts. This rehabilitation work is supposed to open up the area underneath the viaducts, both In the streets and on the sidewalks. The rehabilitation should minimize the visual impact of structure and supports, open up and widen street and sidewalk areas below the viaducts, and create a consistent aesthetic for all replacement viaducts and abutments. The depth and height of the new viaduct retaining wall will not be conducive to walking up. The Bridge heights will not be lower than they are now. The goal of this project is the rehabilitation of the Purple Line viaducts to improve their visual aesthetic and vehicular and pedestrian circulation with the community in Evanston. Viaducts are on an accelerated design schedule — to be complete in about two months. ACTION: Move to approve preliminary for multiple location repairs of viaducts Motion: Motion was 2nd and approved unanimously SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 5, 2005 2 SPAARC 2314-16 Sherman Avenue Prellminary and Final Interior and exterior remodeling to accommodate 96 dwelling unit condo conversion. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Majic and Kris Osfojic GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION 1 DISCUSSION: The building at 2314-16 is currently vacant and has sixteen units, with one in the basement. (garden apartment.) The contractors brought a copy of the existing survey and landscape plan for the building, for review and discussion. The landscape layouts show all of the elevations as they exist now. The owners want to rebuild the existing porches so they are more usable. Old and rotten bricks will also be replaced. New landscaping proposed, include trees, bushes and flowers. The owners stated that the existing planting has not been maintained properly, and the sod is in deplorable condition. There was discussion about the availability of parking in the rear of the building. The owners stated that parking spaces are not sold with the units. However, there might be room for at least three parking spaces. The owners wish to explore creating spaces in this location. The future condo association would dictate the terms on their use. Staff noted that exterior light fixtures must be cut off at the property lines. Unit owners will be responsible for transferring their garbage for pick up. ACTION: Move for preliminary only with condition that the landscape plan be approved MOTION: Motion was 2nd and approved unanimously SPAARC 1100 Clark Street Recommendation to Plan Commission Revision to existing Planned Development to increase # of dwellings PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Tom Roszak GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Tom Roszak, presented his plans to reconfigure the town homes in his Sienna projed. He has received negative feedback on the size and pricing of these units. He is having problems selling these units. He explained that older people, who can afford the units, do not like the design. They want to avoid stairs in particular, and would prefer penthouses. Younger buyers like the units but can not afford them. However, he wished to reconfigure the units to much smaller, one bedroom condos. The units were duplex, but are now being split into small ones. which still will appear to be town homes at street level. He has received approval for up to seventeen town homes. The proposed design choice would increase the number of dwelling units In this project from two hundred and thirty seven (237) to two hundred and fifty six (256). SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 5, 2005 3 Rajeev Dahal noted that the original plans showed diagonal parking on Clark Street. After, further review committee members determined that due to the street width, it would not be feasible to provide diagonal parking along Clark Street. Therefore, the existing parallel parking in this location needs to be retained. One of the concerns about the diagonal parking was that cars would overhang onto the sidewalk. Since the parallel parking along Clark Street will be retained, the sidewalk on its south side should be widened to provide a wider pathway for pedestrians if meters or trees were installed in the future. R. Dahal recommended widening the sidewalk, since Clark Street is wide enough to do so. ACTION: Move to approve recommendation of revision to the Planning Committee MOTION: Motion was 2" d and approved unanimously SPAARC 1911-1917 Clark Street Preliminary and Final Store front replacement, new A/C, eliminating back stairs and windows PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Delroy Moungal and Daniel Chelfetz Kiril Mirintchev, Delray Moungal, Daniel Cheifetz GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION: Applicants seek permission for renovation work on building, Including replacement of its storefront, back stairs and windows. DISCUSSION: The applicants discussed how the storefront of the building needs renovation. Additional work is also required on its stairs and some of its windows. Although, the second floor is not currently being used, it has a need for steam cleaning, tuck pointing and other work. The original intent for the property was to provide a place for people from the community, and people who support the community to both have businesses and create jobs. The community service aspect has been a little more challenging than they originally thought. It was suggested that the owner put some landscaping outside of the front of the building, and/or at least a large potted plant. ACTION: Move to approve the preliminary and final site plan with condition that appropriate landscaping be added as noted by the committee MOTION: Motion was 2"d and approved unanimously SPAARC Meeting Notes - October 5, 2005 Respectfully submitted, Buche Jones Planning Division SPAARC Maeft Notes - Odober 5, 2005 5 APPROVED SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEE77NG NOTES October 12, 2005 AHendass: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinskl (Chair), Judy Aiello, James Wolinski, Dennis Marino, Walter Hallen, Rajeev Dahal, Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Captain Dale Fochs Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Brian Barnes, Carlos Ruiz, Sally Lufkin, Susan Guderley, Ingrid Eckersberg, Morris Robinson JlPAARC 1800 Ridne Avenue Revision to Preliminary snd ElgAI Consftcdon of car ports for the condominium building PROJECT PREPRESENTED BY., Tom Engel GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATIOMDISCUSSiON: Mr. Engel wishes to add covered parking in his existing parking lots. He brought in sketches to see if the city would allow it. They are proposing half the spaces be covered by the building. in the eastern lot, it is proposed, the carports cover the southern parking spaces and the northern parking spaces of the western lot. The carports design and materials will consist of steel frames, with an eye level band of wood paneling material, which is also used on the exterior of the building. The roofing material is a polychromic product, which is used in large format skylights or greenhouses. The team distributed images of carports using this material. The carports roofs will pitch moderately back to allow snow and water to run off at the end. Committee members pointed out, at least one of these carports drain onto the sidewalk. Staff suggested a gutter system be installed on both structures. The developer and staff discussed the required parking space dimensions. It appears that the proposed spaces of the carports support beams will accommodate this. There is one handicap parking space outside and two inside. It was noted trucks would have trouble making a 905 turn at the southwest comer of the eastern lot. The architect will need to angle the beam in the western wall to allow a proper turning radius. J. Wolinski stated this will go back to the planning commission, as these are major changes to the planned development. The developers have met with neighbors on two occasions to discuss their proposal. Each time there was acceptance of the designs. Mr. Engel was urged to go back to the neighbors, with this new design, which reflect the changes discussed by the committee. There were implications relative to historic preservation. The committee noted that the southeast comer of the site is landscaped and attractively done. The members expressed support for the proposed revisions; with the understanding the developer will notify the neighbors. If the carports are not approved, the developers will use wrought iron fences, as previously proposed SPAARC Meeting Notts - October 12, 2005 jJ ACTION. - Move to approve revision of preliminary after notification from the planning commission and subject to engineering. Motion was 2rd and approved with one member voting 'nay.' SPAARC 3000 — 3004 Central Street Preilminary and Final Building fafade renovation PROJECT PRESENTED BY., Bill Flader, representing mothers building GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION/DISCUSSION: At previous meetings the committee requested to see drawings of the proposed fagade. The interest was how the stone/brick would be supported below the windowsill. C. Brzezinski asked about the overhang issue. Mr. Flader stated they are changing the dimension, taking three quarters off and putting it back, all on private property. Mr. Flader said they will attempt to match the height and stay in line with the sandstone on the side of the building. Instead of stark white, stucco will be used to blend with the brick building across the street. Signage will stay the same. The current stainless steel trim on the building will come off, and the shape of the building's comer will be slightly modified. The heavy "V" angle will be made straight across, because of its weight. Mr. Hader presented the proposal from the sign company. The sign will be removed and replaced. Signage consists of bronze letters, Is not illuminated, and there is no room for landscaping. ACTION: Move to approve the preliminary and final site plan. Motion was 2nd and approved unanimously. SPAARC 1808 Greenwood Recornmondation to Interior and exterior remodeling of the west side dormer PROJECT REPRESENTED BY. Martin Lang GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Martin Lang at 1808 Greenwood wishes to add a dormer to the window on the west side of his house. The adjacent unit is rented and he has not been able to get in touch with its owner. He has not spoken with his other neighbors about the project. His plans show a window in the end of the proposed dormer. According to a survey of the property, that wall is only 2.62 feet and sits back from the property. C. Brzezinski stated, a window in a wall that is less than three feet (3) from the property line is not aikawed by the building code. Staff suggested various options - he might consider using a skylight in the dormer addition or recessing the window six (6) inches. It was suggested he speak with his Architect about this. His neighbor to that side is a critical person, and it was suggested Mr. Lang make sure they are not caught off guard, with something they would be unhappy with, and come to the zoning board with complaints. It was suggested he get in touch with his neighbors before the next meeting in reference to the dormer. Materials used to construct the addition must be fire rated. A fire rated window was another option for him to consider, however, it would then not be operable. !T41-T•M SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 12, zoog Motion to recommend approval to the ZBA. Motion was 2' and approved unanimously. SPAARC 1629-1631 Hinman Avenue Prellminary and Finai Construct near porches for multi -family building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Oded Cohen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Architect, Obed Cohen, want to construct three rear decks to the building at 1629-1631 Hinman Avenue. There are no rear porches. In the past there were porches and an exit door on the side. The project has had zoning analysis. Rear decks will have a wood trellis, but no roof. Although, two previous doors existed, they are proposing to construct new exit doors for the new decks. There will be concrete footing under the decks. A 2x8' wood trellis will be installed over the decks, and no stairs are associated with the proposal. Access to the decks will be directly from the apartment and not from the decks. Existing grotto, above the wood trellis collects rain and directs it into the down spout. Mr. Obed said the design is esthetically unique, similar to a New Orleans deck. The building is preserved as a landmark to articulate the new from the old. C. Brzezinskl emphasized the wood should be painted, given the detail on the front, and should stay within the character and style of the building. The front of the building has a Victorian porch with limestone railing and all white wood detailing. C. Brzezinski said the wood should not be exposed but painted. Mr. Obed could not locate any original pictures of the property from archives. The Preservation Commission will probably review the railing design, which is critical to their approval. Staff suggested the framing be reviewed for the building code. The committee emphasized to Mr. Obed the need to find the original designs of the decks for their review. C. Ruiz stated the Preservation Commission will need to know exactly what is being built. He advised Mr. Obed if they are not sure, to investigate, so it will be resolved before the next meeting. AC77ON: Motion to approve subject to preservation commission and that railing and decks are painted. Motion was 2"° and approved unanimously SPAARC 1613 Church Street Discussion Public Utilities Discussion PROJECT REPRESENTED BY. Dave Stoneback GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION/DISCUSSION: The discussion was previously a concept, and had not progressed to being on the Plan Commissions agenda. The proposal calls for the installation of three 8' water mains and five hydrants around the former Hines Lumber property. However, they will be dead end water mains. Mr. Stoneback asked, J. Wolinski if they had the authority to loop the water mains down the back side. Mr. Wolinski said he did. Mr. Stonebeck will check with the fire department for its hydrant specifications and requirements. Mr. Stonebeck stated the proposed fire hydrants are from building edge to building edge, at twenty four (24) feet. There was concern over the possibility of potholes, and who would repair. There is one valve serving this area. A water main break would require everyone to be without water service while repairs are made. Mr. Stonebeck suggested locations for SPAARC Meeting Notes — October 12, 2005 valves. If one breaks another is available. There are plans for this site, but there are no definitive dimensions for the proposed Improvements. This can create problems for the water service people. Mr. Stonebacks concern is looping. One problem is forty one (41) Individual meters with water service to each unit_ If the customer does not pay the water department, workers would have to go onto private property, shut down the valve, which would be located in the middle of private driveways. The option is a meter pick and the new Association pay water bills. C. Brzezinski asked about the specification of the Dubin property. Mr. Stoneback, will email the details, however, he said it Is five water services going into the Dubin properties. There are five buildings, twenty units, and one meter for each building with maintenance rooms. The committee said this would not work. They believed the amount of units is a problem. Mr. Soneback will Inform the committee of details after consulting with the water department Respectfully Submitted z"C41 faw Planning Division BPAARC Mecting Nofte — 0d06ee M ZW5 i SITE PLAN APPROVED and APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES October 19, 2005 Attendees: Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), James Wolinski, Dennis Marino, Walter Mallon, Rajeev Dahal, Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Captain Dale Fochs, Tad Cook, Other Staff: Frank Aguado, Carlos Ruiz, Sally Lufkin, Susan Guderley, Ingrid Eckersberg, Morris Robinson SPAARC 2123 Harrison Street Prellminary arid FIEWI Svbdlvlde exlsUng lot of record and construct dwellings. PROJECT PREPRESENTED BY: Raffi Arzoumamian GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATIOWDISCUSSION: Rafael Arzoumamian met with the commission to propose a subdivide lot and to construct dwellings. The property is being developed as five individual lots. Mr. Arzoumamian and his team brought in two versions of rendering, one with street trees removed and one without. Mr. Arzoumamians' team Peter and Nile owners, developers and builders, and Kevin the project architect presented the landscape and site plans. J. Wolinski voiced the confusion about zoning and this not being a planned development. Five duplexes require some review of a project this size. The lots are standard lots; but the comer lot is wider than the others. C. Brzezinski pointed out the discretion on the agenda in reference to subdivision. Mr. Arzoumamian stated they were not seeking a subdivision. There are five buildings, five duplexes and ten townhouses. Each building contains two units with a five feet minimum separation on each side, and a ten foot separation between the buildings on the side. There is access to free standing garages in the alley; each garage serves both buildings for a total of four spaces. The comer building bumps out and addresses the uniqueness of the unit. The rider lot, a side entry, has some stone detail on the top, but the rest of the units are pulled back so it's flush. The flat window and outdoor terrace side elevation does not bump out, and there are two floors with half a floor on top. The material on top is a narrow four (4') inch cedar siding. A slate roof exists on all the buildings with some variations of the same theme and material. The windows and opening are treated differently from building to building. Access to the outdoor deck is from the smaller bay. The Chimneys and base of cut limestone, and masonry go through the building. Only window surrounds are real limestone. Everything else that looks stone is limestone. Dimensions and sizing, with some variations, are correct and as historically accurate as possible. To keep some consistency they start with lighter masonry units in the center that gets darker at the comer. The uniqueness of the center unit is the detail and limestone. All windows are aluminum clad with a dark almost black frame. A citizen (architect), voiced concerns about the comer unit, the four very large trees to be protected, and the individual character of the building. The goal is to protect the trees, use fertilizer to strengthen them during construction to provide less stress. Garbage SPAARC MMting Notes - October 19, 2005 collection will be standard city in a landscaped area, with two flats by the garage. The commission will route this to the Parks and Forestry commission for review. Staff confirmed this project did not need site plan approval. Two family dwellings are exempt from site plan ordinance if not a planned development, and not being sub -divided. C. Brzezinski stated they do not need to take any official action. However, the commission appreciated the opportunity to review the project. C. Brzezinski said the neighbors would appreciate having another opportunity to review the project. Mr. Arzoumamian stated they were happy to address any concerns and will make the suggested changes. ACTION: This project did not need site plan approval. (Two family sub divided dwelling are exempt from site plan ordinance.) SPAARC 1603 Orrinaton Avenue Prelimfnary Review Install 4 roof mounted cellular antennas for "US Cellular". PROJECT PRESENTED BY: Roz Schaefer GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION/DISCUSSION. Roz Schaefer, of US Cellular came before the committee proposing to put four (4) antennas on the roof of 1603 Orrington Avenue. Two will face west, one northwest, and one southeast. The proposed site is called Northwestern University Evanston Bank, since the original search ring is on Northwester's campus. However, they are not allowed to put antennas on campus any longer. Ms. Schaefer brought in surveys of building orientation. Some antennas are facing east, and the survey show major items that exist on the rooftop. Noticeable antennas are on the eastern face of the building. The rooftop elevation is 270.3' and the top of antennas, for US Cellular as 278.3'. The pictures show however, it's less than a foot tall. An I-beam railing and equipment will run through a mechanical room just below the top floor. The cables that attach equipment to antennas will run inside of the building along the roof line. Two antennas will face a western exposure. The building sit back a distance from the edge of the road, is angled, and good for exposure. ACTION. Motion to approve the preliminary review. Motion was 2n4 and approved unanimously SPAARC 920 Chicago Avenue Recommendation t Install Wall Sign PROJECT REPRESENTED BY. Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: The Junior League of Evanston, a thrift shop, has a sign on the side of their building. The sign is obscured by the 900 Chicago Avenue building. They are asking for it to remain in its location. However, it's perpendicular to the public way and not permitted. This is the only variation. Height and area is perfect, but placement is not. Staff suggested a discussion at the next meeting to suggest the sign face Chicago Avenue. C. Brzezinski supports the use of street signage on Chicago Avenue. SPAMC YaMag Hafts - ocWbw 19. 2005 4 ACTION. Motion to recommend approval. Motion was 2nd and approved. (5.ayes—1.nays) 4PAARC 521-525 Dempster Street ftecomMendation to Sion EQnEd Proposed unlfled business center signage plan (also 1301-1305 Chicago Avenue). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION. W. Hallen explained the concept of the Unified Business Signage Plan. It's as simple as restricting businesses' to certain architectural ban on buildings, but not restricting colours, text or logos. These include, spacing and size in accordance to regulations, with restrictions only to signage plans, on particular architectural ban. The client proposed an awning on their 521 — 525 Dempster Street building, the ice cream shop at the comer of Dempster and Chicago Avenue. W. Hallen suggested the Unified Business Center Signage Plan to the owner_ They want wall signs above the awning. These comply with regulations of the Planning and Development committee. Staff suggested they limit the location of the signs to the same wall location, and proposed awnings are of the same colour. Unified. Staff would be in favor of the awning with limitation. Staff pointed out Blind Faith Caf6 sign is about the right height and weight, however, not sure If it is the maximum the sign ordinance would allow. C. Brzezinski proposed they limit the wall signage to the current area, and not go below sign regulations and cover any architectural features. With the change, there will be no text on the awning just addresses. ACTION: Move to approve sign board. Motion was 2nd and approved unanimously SPAARC 1925-1929 Central Street Recornnmmdation to Stan j2jW Proposed unMed business center signage plan. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY., Waiter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION/ DISCUSSION: The Central Street and Green Bay Road stores want signs in accordance with sign regulations. The currency exchange want a white sign, Bank of America — red, Verizon a blue canopy, the Post Office white window leathering and TI Louie a yellow sign. They are all box wall signs. All parties will agree to a resolution of the sign regulations. Staff stated they are proposing what they already have. They can take photos, get coloured copies, and add a few dimensions to help the commission understand what they want. ACTION: Motion to recommend denial. Motion was 2nd and approved unanimously. Respectfully Submitted Planning Division ZFAMC IMat!" Nabs - Ck"Mr 19, Zoos SITE PLAN and APPFARAIVCE REDZ$W C0AEV 7TEE NEE77JVG A07ES October 26, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), James Wolinski, Dennis Marino, Walter Hallen, Rajeev Dabs', Paul D'Agostino, Arlova Jackson, Captain Dale Fochs, Tad Cook, Jill Chambers Other Staff.- Frank Aguado, Carlos Ruiz, Susan Guderley, Ingrid Eckersberg, Delores Holmes, Larry Widmayer, Chair of the Planning Commission SPAARC 1708-1710 Darrow Avenue Pre-Annlicatilon Conference PD rsqusst for 27 dwelling unit multi -family building and 2,000 sq. JL of retail space (also includes the 1805 Church Street property). PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Richard Koenig Dennis Langley GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Richard Koenig, Executive Director of the Housing Opportunity Development Corporation introduced himself, the architect, Dennis Langley of Reese Langley Reese, his staff Michael Colon, and Tina Cress. The location, of the project, is the northwest corner of Church Street and Darrow Avenue. Currently, the official address of 1805 Church Street is currently a vacant lot. Included are two houses at 1708 and 1710 Darrow, which goes all the way to the alley. They have been working with the Evanston Community Development Corporation for the past couple of years attempting to do a development at this site. They have decided to develop it into an affordable rental property. They are proposing to construct a 27 unit apartment building. The building will have a mix of one, two, and three bedroom apartments. All apartments will be affordable to low income families based on 60% of the area median income, depending on family size. The financing would enable them to keep the rents substantially below market rate/value. One bedroom apartments would be between $500.00 and $600.00 per month, two's between $700.00 and $800.00, and three's between $800.00 and $900.00. HUHC will operate as property management. SPA"C Niceft Nom - October 26. ZM They will be working with ECDC to do screening of tenants eligible for the building. HODC has a building at 319 Demptser, 743 Brummel, and a couple of smaller buildings around Evanston. They currently manage 78 units in Evanston. They do affordable non profit housing throughout the northern suburbs, including Morton Grove, Highland Park, and several other areas. This project is slightly different from a typical affordable rental building. They anticipate a condominium conversion in fifteen (15) years. They plan, when affordability restrictions expire on the property, to sell the units as condominiums, to people living in those units at the time. They will do home buyers training classes to prepare people for home ownership. They anticipate selling the condominiums in fifteen years for approximately $150,000.00, substantially below today's market value. This is an overview of the program, to keep the building affordable, viable, and help build wealth in the community. In reference to the condominium conversion in fifteen years, Mr. Koenig, stated they will have flexible structures, with one year leases, and right of first refusal to tenants, living in the units. Whoever is in the units after fifteen years will have the first right to buy. They will make allowances for the difference by making it cheaper for people who have been there longer. They cannot build a savings plan, but can structure how pricing works. C. Brzezinski asked about eligibility and if tenants would have to move if not income eligible. Mr. Koenig stated that the project is financed by HUD Home which will require that residents be income eligible when they move in. If they stay in the building, they will still be eligible if their income technically crosses that threshold of 120°/n of their medium income. Mr. Koenig pointed out 60%, of medium income, for a family of four would be $45,000.00, the highest possible income of anyone living in the building. Mr. Koenig stated they will accept Section 8 certificates, and do not discriminate against anyone. It may be possible for people with a Section 8 certificate to rent a unit. There will be units set aside at 60%, 50%, and even 30% of medium income. There will be a couple of affordable units available for two person households (g 30% of medium income, which is, $18,000. There will be a mix of unit sizes, including, one, two, and three bedroom units. This mix will allow for both seniors and families. HODC will probably develop a lottery, depending on how applications come in, to select eligible tenants. HODC will perform tenant screening, credit checks, and home visits, to ensure people are eligible, while working with ECDC. Architect, Dennis Langley explained the site plan as tight and very dense. The building is elevated over a portion of the parking, with the offset in the alley and residential area. The main entry, an elevator lobby, and service core is accessed from Church street. The community room has a service phone and can be used by the community for various functions. Parking is within the prescribed dimensions of the requirements. There are zoning issues related to the proposed set back. The project complies with the original setback requirements of the "B" district. The Landscape design is in development, and is slightly different than the site plan suggests. SPAAAC Meeting Notes — O uAw 26. 2WS They will plant some tree clusters on one side of the elevation, and if there is available money, they will bring landscaping around the corner to the front. The facade is articulated. The large "L" shaped windows will be Iiving room areas where there will be more light. The bedroom areas have outside balconies with windows. Placement of the windows and balconies is to encourage and allow for natural ventilation of the units. They are proposing to keep the masonry and stone articulation along the facade. Along the side elevation, a grid that matches the grid on the storefront will enclose the ground floor parking area. There are three floors of units, with ground floor parking and support, at about 39,000 sq. ft. total. It was suggested that the community room, the toilets and the entries be secured from the rest of the first floor so they can operate at a later hour. They hope ECDC will want an office there. They have a part time staff person and have discussed job training programs, or housing counseling work at the location. HODC will not have full time staff on site, however, they are working to include such things into the programming. There will be a laundry on the first floor with a common area, as well as washers and dryers provided in each unit. Mr. Koenig stated they are doing landscaping on the Darrow side. The streets are paved from the property line, so there will be room for four (4) planters, and room for planting trees. There are thirty (30) proposed parking spaces underneath, which is not in compliance with zoning. In terms of water service, Mr. Koenig stated they will get by the combined sewer and get to the relief sewer, and their trash room/ trash shoot can be accessed form the parking garage. Staff, stated that their transformers, generators, and utility should be discreetly located on the site. The project plan is for open parking, not enclosed, so tenants will be able to see through one parking area into another, and onto the streets. There will be access from two locations of the building to the parking lot. The parking area will not be secured but will be well Iit. Light will not spill onto adjacent areas. Mr. Koenig stated they anticipate condominium conversions at some point. Funding requirements require 20%of the units are fully adaptable and accessible, which will help in the market of elderly residents. They will be meeting v6ith the community, and it was suggested they extend elevations down to neighborhood heights, and keep in mind energy efficiency. Staff asked if individuals will be paying their own utilities. Mr. Koenig stated they are seeking a grant from DECA with the State of Illinois to provide higher efficiency and mechanical energy star appliances, which has been done in the past for affordable housing projects. He said the point of the grant is to continue to make the properties affordable. That concluded the pre application conference. SPAARC 325 Greenwood Street Recommendation to 22A Enclose a rear porch and install an AC condensing unit. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Paul Janicld - Architect SFAARc Mnfog Nma - 00obff zb, zoos GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: The Preservation Commission, has approved the enclosure of the porch, located, in a historical district, and a favorable recommendation for the zoning was made. They are doing improvement throughout the house, of a late Queen Anne brick house, at 325 Greenwood. Improvements are being done throughout the house. They want to enclose a rear 4' x W post porch, and make it a room/vestibule/air lock. The renovations will mimic the dormers, which are split face, shingles, and Queen Anne diamond pattern, upper sash with double hung windows, and match the railing on the front of the house. Because of the configuration of the site, there is only one legal place to put an air conditioner connector, which would be in the middle of the back yard. Mr. Janicki proposed to locate it according to the site plan. Using a narrow carrier air conditioner, they have to go 8' from the building, although they will still be 8' from the lot line, which is in violation of the ten foot setback required by the zoning ordinance. Mr. Janicki is getting letters from all three neighbors; however, one of the neighbors is concerned about decibels. They investigated the decibels and discovered the units are very quiet. 64 decibels and Mr. Janicki stated there will be two units, one for the attic, and the other for the basement. The top of the stairs will lean into the porch. A new bulkhead will be on the other side, and they are mimicking the light that is on the front porch. Mr. Janicki said his neighbor on the east side of him does not have central air and he does not know about the other two. Arlova confirmed they received one letter of support for the project. There was a Motion to recommend approval to the ZBA. It was 2nd, and approved unanimously. SPAARC 930 Pitner Avenue Final Appal Convert existing space into 22 office condominium units. (film studio) PROJECT REPRESENTED 13Y: Andy Spatz GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: The subject property's dimensions are 185' x 120'. Mr. Spatz stated that it contains three buildings from the middle fifties: two bow string warehouses, and one two-story steel frame. The project is presently in for permit, and they have a permit for interior demolition. The units are under contract. The loading dock, at one time was a depressed short loading berth. The loading dock is now the entrance for unit six. The berth is in the back, per the ordinance. The building originally had ten parking spaces, as opposed to the, now twelve or thirteen on one side of the alley. Mr. Spatz, stated they are asking for one curb cut. He brought in photos to show his neighbors all have anywhere from two to four curb cuts. In reference to the truck loading zone, businesses can load from the street. spMRC Mwdng Dina - October 26, 2005 Mr. Spatz explained it's a easier to pull the truck inside the facility than to take stuff out and walk it across the concrete. Without the curb cuts, that is what they will have to do, stated Mr. Spatz. The parking lot is shared, and the property's line runs down the center of the road. Staff questioned a more street parking to get parking for ONLY one unit. Mr. Spatz emphasized that is the idea, however they will also have parking in the lot and parking for staff. He stated that all unit owners park in a speck area and for tenants on the second floor, they have to walk a distance. D. Marino stated he has worked in this neighborhood in the past five years. His experience is there is not a parking problem in the immediate area. He pointed out the problem was with abandoned buses and trucks. Staff suggested the parking across the street from the property is being ignored. Mr. Spatz stated he has to have a loading berth for the entire building. That the problem they are having is the ordinance is written a certain way, but their use is different from the intent of the ordinance. He emphasized these are individual units, not shared. Because of the separate entrance, some tenants cannot access the loading berth. According to zoning, the loading berth is for the entire building, and the loading berth has to meet the zoning requirements. One building, one property, and one loading berth is required. In terms of streetscape changes, the parking lot area will be planted with a low ornamental grass. They will remove overgrown ones, trim everything up, clean off the front, preserve three trees that are there, and leave some of the yews. They will clean up the corner and the bench. R. Dahal questioned the projecting panels on one side of the elevation, from a concept of being able to see. He also questioned whether the curb cut is for one unit only. Mr. Spatz said yes, to the first half of question, and stated curb cut is for two units, which is owned by one owner. The square footage is approximately 3,300. One unit does not extend back to the alley. There are no residential units. There are no garages. The garage is for storage and unused equipment, etc. It is for ease of loading and unloading equipment. They are using stock, insulated residential grade garage doors, insulated with a metal skin and painted it a colour matched to the perforated metal. The frequency of delivery wilt be two or three times a week. Although C. Brzezinski stated this is a great project, she questioned allowing a curb cut that would give up a street spot. She asked why they should approve that, Mr. Spatz stated they wanted to add a parking space inside but was advised not to because it created other problems. He pointed out the other businesses curb cuts, and the unfairness of it, since there was no ordinance for curb cuts before. srruac Now - odaw xs, was D. Marino stated the purpose of an industrial district is to accommodate industry, and stated we have less industry. He stated businesses have a tough time finding quality space in Evanston. D. Marino moved for approval. Staff continued with concerns about the curb cuts from a public safety perspective. The project is subject to a curb cut permit process. D. Stoneback asked about the water retention for the site. Mr. Spatz stated it is an existing system- The way it is designed the rain water and waste come together outside of the building and go into the same sewer. There is no accessible manhole. There are sewer taps. Mr. Spatz stressed there has been no change to the blueprints to the building. D. Stoneback stated they are looking for developers to improve the system as well. Mr. Spatz stated that the concept is to keep the units affordable, and charging the same amount on a monthly basis. He said the proposed changes would add things to raise the price, and make it more expensive to the purchaser. He stated there is a market at this price point. C. Brsezinski called for action on the earlier motion to approve. It was 2md and approved unanimously. SPAARC 608 Sheridan Road PreHminary and Find Disc. interior/exterior mnodeHng of multi family dwelling. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Doug Gillespie, Architect Rena Viner, Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: 608 Sheridan is a three story, plus basement building containing four apartments. The developers want to renovate the interior and exterior for rental. They want to gut the interior, some of the exterior and put in new windows. The windows will be replaced with clad double hungs. The developers proposed to clean and paint the front facade and install tech lightning. They will also re -roof the garage for four parking spaces. One for each unit. There are two large trees in the back. They plan to keep those, and all the other plant material. They might keep the hedge on one side, and clean up the shrubs. Mr. Gillespie stated he intends to tear the entire concrete patio out and replace it with concrete pavers, to reduce impervious surface. They stated the units will be rental; however, later they may consider condominium conversions. This building is not in a historic district and they will have a crushed stone terrace. SPAAAC Matins Notes - October Zb, 2M 1 Motion to approve Preliminary and Final. It was 2nA and approved unanimously. SPAARC 303 Dodge Avenue Preliminary Review Construct a new three story Religious Institution and private school for the Jewish Reconstr uetfonist Congregation. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Carol Ross Barney, Architect & Alan Saponsnik GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: The applicant is in preliminary stages of the building design. The architect gave a site plan presentation and some idea of elevation and size of the project. The synagogue is on the corner of Dodge and Mulford. Across the street, the congregation owns the parking lot. The proposed design requires several zoning variations. Those are for lot coverage from (35% to 43.5%) for building height (variation from 28' to 391 and the highest building variations from 32.5 to 46. The front door is on Mulford and access to deliveries off the alley. They are proposing a drop off, so the older congregants can be dropped off for services. For off street parking, they propose paving an unpaved block, and the lot across the street for thirty five spaces, which should meet the normal load. The first floor will contain offices and have a licensed education center. There is a small chapel and religious school on the second floor. The top floor will house the sanctuary, social club, and kitchen. The congregation wants to stay in Evanston, which is the reason they tried hard to get everything on this site. They have met with Alderwoman, Anne Rainey and the community several times to talk about the project. The response has been good with the immediate neighbors. They have tried to give the community as much information as they can. The preliminary elevations showed the buildings materials. The siding has been selected, and they are importing limestone and druselling stone. This closed the Preliminary Review session. Notion for preliminary review, 2■+, approved unanimously Respectfully submitted, ZU'Vi reonee qy- Planning Division SPA"C Mwdo= Nom - Omba 26, ZM SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COAVAITTEE MEETING !VOTES November 2, 2005 Ass: APPROVED Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Judith A. Aiello, John Burke, Tad Cook, Paul D' Agostino, Rajeev Dahal, David Jennings, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Carlos Ruiz, James Wollnaki Other Stab: Frank Aguado, Ingrid Eckersberg, Susan Gmderley, Walter Hallen, Morris Rubinson SPAARC 1881 Oak Avenue Concoct Construct a 19 story residential building, with 171 dwellings units and 260 off street parking spares. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY. Robert C. King GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION J DISCUSSION: This project is on the agenda as a concept. Bob King, of Carrol Properties and Development stated they have varied the project. Jim Urhausen, from the Urhausen Group, served as their planner, and Fritz Biederman, Architect and planner of this development. Mr. King stated since they last saw the commission they had a community meeting, and talked to people about the project. They received constructive criticism, which they have now incorporated into the new design. It is the exactly the same height as the old development, with fewer units. In talking to the community, one of the biggest criticisms was Parking. They have exceeded the parking requirement, as required by the zoning ordinance. They think it is a nicer project, to the extent it does some of the things people talked about in terms of seriating the edges, looking at the design features and making the project a little lighter. They suggested they have accomplished that at this point. Mr. Biederman stated they might take a took at having some setback. This project sits on a base that provides parking. Previously, the building is off the property lines. The columns are out at the property line, but the building first poor sits back. The basement plan has been revised, and there was a corner taken out of the site. They had difficulty in the previous scheme making the parking work. By going out to that property line on Emerson, permits them to sPA"C Mmin` Nota - Novemba I, 2M make the parking work. Above the parking Ievels, at an elevation of approximately 47' above grade, they set back considerably. They are off the property line at Emerson and Oak Street at above Vat the fifth floor level. When you get above the 5th floor level, part of the building goes out to the property line, and one foot is taken off. The basement and four levels above are parking; the lu floor has 18 cars, and is primarily entrances and e3dts. There are two sets of entrances and exits. One with access to parking. Their Traffic engineer has advised them that they would need a curb cut off, because of the traffic situation. One entrance is for the 1u floor and the basement. It comes around and arch's, and there is a two way ramp on the south end. The 5th level is going to be what is referred to as a transition floor, which is where they will collect all of the plumbing and mechanical and the horizontal distribution that goes into the garage. The 4th level of the garage is a structural transition level. They are taking the columns from the residential floors and transferring them over, so they are more appropriate. The 15th and 16th floors are typical. There are 13 units per floor. Previously their plan had 175 units, and 175 parking spaces. This proposal has 172 units, with 272 parking spaces. The people that owned the condominium surrounding the site stressed parking spaces. Previously they showed 7,000 sq. ft of commercial space. Everyone thought it would be more important to have parking. They have an emergency generator which is a requirement, because it is a high rise. They will use clear glass, or milk glass, to avoid just white walls. It will be illuminated. The project will set back with undercover spaces. These are improved elevations. The massing of the building can be seen from the site plan, in which the building tapers from west to east. The topmost elevation is 210 ft., which covers all the mechanical equipment. There will be no mechanical equipment exposed. What you see on the rendering is a mechanical penthouse. On the terraces, they are completing landscaped areas. They are going to put greenery and window boxes through openings in the garage. All of the units have balconies and all of the living rooms have corner windows. The Emerson Street fagade has landscaping. The zone of the emergency generator was noted. The Commonwealth Edison transformer is right outside of the zone so there is an economical location. On the Oak Street elevation, the building is not as wide as their previous scheme. W. Haden questioned the compatibility of this project underlying zones with the zoning across the street, in terms of the 85' height, and the R4 which is 35'. This is evident from their aerial shoot. He also stated that the strip on Emerson, in the research park zoning is limited to 85'. This project has more than doubled the intent of the zoning, in height and density. It was stated that is a transition area. In the center of the research park you can go, to 150'. Then down to 85' at the north and 85' on the other side of the street, then turnings steps down to the residential areas to the north. Mr. King stated, the entire research park has changed and it will continue to change. They found this project to be competitive, with the size of other SFA"C Media; Nota - November 2, Z003 buildings, being developed, in the area. To the extent this is downtown Evanston, they are asking for a new use, and the request is being made under the special use zoning request. C. Brzezinski emphasized they had previously talked about doing a model contextual model. She stated that she would be very hesitant to consider a positive recommendation on something without having a chance to see a contextual model of maybe several blocks to each side, with the building of scale. She strongly emphasized that a context 3D model, should be presented before the project can go to the Planning Commission. Otherwise, she could absolutely, not be in support of the project. Mr. King stated they thought they got more information, quicker, better and cheaper than using an aerial depiction of the site and buildings. C. Brzezinski disagreed and stated maybe cheaper. Mr. King stated that he hoped the way the plan was laid out against Downtown Evanston, would give the Commission a full perspective of everything. C. Brzezinski did not understand looking at their aerial photographs, they seemed out of place with the surrounding buildings, and suggested the use of tangible means to help people understand their vision. The intent is communication, and she stressed that a model would be very important for them to do that. She continued that the aerial photograph appeared a little distorted, massive looking, where you don't see the articulation in the design. Staff stated the building appeared similar to the prior proposal and rather massive looking. Mr. King, stated the aerial picture was done in April, however, if updated it would show a much larger and more massive Sherman plaza. C. Bmezinski noted that the decorative feature on the top of the building facing Oak Street seems to be aligned with the loading dock — which seemed curious. She continued that the classic reference to that kind of feature is the Phillip Johnson building in New York with the Chippendale top. On that building the top feature is aligned with entry. This design looks very added, as opposed to something that is purposeful. Mr. King stated, most of the traffic will be coming from the corner which is why they cut the comer out. J. WolinsK who attended the neighborhood meeting, stated public comments came from two condominium buildings, and not the single family home owners. When he contemplates this building, he considers the 1567 Maple Street building, which was just approved by city council. They were in a fringe district SPMBC Medina Notes - Noremba 2, 2M of downtown. That originally came in at 22 stories with the design, and was lowered to 18 and went down to around 150 feet. He suggested that the developers reduce their proposed height. Mr. King stated they had not considered that, but obviously, it is possible. They designed this building to match the competition. They are 18 stories taller than the building directly to the north and are smaller than, by a wide margin, 5, or 6 stories shorter than Sherman Plaza. Because of the cost of construction, they need to be able to provide the same kinds of attributes, in this building, that competition can offer. They did their planning around that, but stated they will look at it again as a practical matter. He, also stated, this building will generate a lot of new taxes. J. WoUnski stated if they lop off a couple of floors, they can take it down three or four stories. Mr. King appreciated the suggestion, and said it is to be considered. A. Jackson pointed out their 1st proposal was for 18 stories, and this one is for 19 stories. Mr. King said it is the same height; they just changed the floor to ceiling dimensions, to accommodate the additional parking. C. Brzezinski asked if there were remaining space for retail. Mr. King said it was taken out, and ground floor space is strictly for parking. J. Wolinski stated there was strong neighborhood sentiment about not having any retail in this location. Mr. King stated people thought it did not work. They took in all of the constructive suggestions they received and tried to consider them. He stated, in terms of parking and retail he thought they could accommodate those. Also, his traffic consultant suggested they leave things the way they are. They had a traffic impact study done, in which the commission has a copy of the original, and some time later the Commission will receive a copy of the updated one. C. Brzezinski reiterated A. Jackson's point, that there is no retail. This does not necessarily mean a retail store. It could be someone's office. Mr. King stated the only problem, he thought with that is the shopping concourse down the street. The second floor offices are about 40% vacant. C. Brzezinski stated as more residential get developed to the west side of Ridge Avenue, there will be more pedestrians moving down Emerson Street, and they want to encourage that pattern. Mr. King stated they may be able to rent. SPAARC Meeting Notes -- Novcn*u 2, 2M C. Brzezinski questioned if this was the right time for this project, and Mr. King stated, he thinks, it is certainly the right time for the residential portion. But, that is why they took the retail out, because they do not think the time is right. C. Brzezinski stated that if constructed as proposed there will never be any opportunity for retail in this building. She stated they should build in retail space and that will encourage the pedestrian traffic. That can reinforce the idea, if this is the first of its type in this portion of Evanston. It will set a precedence. The building is massive, very solid, very heavy at the ground floor and the parking base. She suggested the developers have a long way to go, and reiterated if they had a model the committee could see how it works in the community. They are not convinced that this size project is appropriate. B. Barnes asked if they have addressed the ADA issues covered. Mr. Biederman, practice is providing housing to people with disabilities. He is aware of the fair housing act 504, and stated the building will be an accessible building. In terms of set aside units, available for someone with a disability, who wish to purchase, they will provide 20% of those that are 5% accessible. D. Stoneback asked if they were taking their water and sewerage out to Oak Street, and emphasized that storm, water will have to go to Oak Street as well. The Developers stated Spaceco did the civil engineering, and they would design the storm water coming from this project. The report is on file with the city. Water service will also off of Oak Street. J. Wolinski state that he was concerned about detention, and that must also be addressed. C. Brzezinski asked if they had met with Design Evanston and stated that, if not, it would be a good idea to meet with the group. Mr. King stated they had rot, and will consider a second meeting with the community if the community could schedule it. J. Wolinski stated that he does not want to see more vacant retail spaces in projects, because it is required. He also, pointed out that this section of Emerson Street may never be a retail area. C. Brzezinski stated they are proposing a 172 homeowners, and think from a good planning perspective the city should not close off the possibility forever or this will be a dead pedestrian way. Mr. King stated the tradeoff is between parking and retail. The overwhelming demand from the community is they need parking. The reason they limited parking in the first proposal was they thought the economic change and consumer awareness would be mass transit, and the community said no. They said they need the space, and visitor parking. C. Brzezinski stated they are looking for a planned development. SPAARC Moetivg mate. - November z, zoos Mr. King stated they cannot do that if the neighborhood does not want them to. A. Jackson stated that the developer's depiction of the neighborhoods' desire for parking is a little misleading. The developer had been close to a hundred spaces short for parking. It was not a situation where they were ten or twelve short. Certainly, the cry for parking is stronger than if you were asking for only ten or fifteen fewer parking spaces. Mr. Biederman stated that the consensus from the community was to not only comply with zoning, but also provide additional parking for guests, which is what they have done. Staff stated that many condominium's have empty spaces that are not sold. C. Brzezinski stated that the proposed design is closing this area off to the possibility of a future business or retail tenant and creating a dead zone along Emerson Street_ She pointed out some developments on Sherman Avenue, and Opdman who has their office at 800 Elgin Avenue. To point out these things are possible, maybe they are placeholders for the future of what could happen. C. Brzezinskd concluded the concept review and said the Committee appreciated them coning in and getting its feedback. No action taken —concept review does not require a vote. Respectfully submitted, Z"e4 jamm Planning Division QAAaC Meeft Nona- Nowia2, ZOOS SITE PLAN and APPEARAAICE R.. A., rr COADUI73B AIEETIAiC'r AiOTES Novamber 9, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Judith A. Aiello, John Burke, Tad Cook, Paul D'Agostino, Rajeav Dahai, David Jennings, Kevin Kelly, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Carlos Ruiz, James Wounski sto Frank Aguado, Brian Barnes, J111 Chambers, Ingrid Eckeraberg, Susan Guderley, Walter Hallen, Stefanie Levine other. Delores Holmes SPAARC 2314 — 2316 Sherman Avenue Final, Lttwtor and exterior romodeting to a 16 dwstHng unit condominium conversion PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Maje, Partner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Maje stated the "L" shaped building is a two flat with a brick wall. They proposed adding new shrubs and trees. C. Brzezinski questioned the location of the horn bean tree, noting that it looks as if it's planted to closely. Staff suggested they may want to plant them further away. C. Brzezinski suggested planting beds with perennial type flowers, or shrubbery and yews with colour along Sherman Avenue for beautification along the street and sidewalk area to improve the area and add more interest. S. Levine stated the permit is already out, and they are going to allow them to proceed. C. Brzezinski stated they have permission to proceed. This is the only remaining item to give them the window of opportunity without stopping the work. Motion to approve final, 2a4, and approved unanimously. SPMRC MtRius Note - November 4, 2M I ram_ . . :I. + , SPAARC 2123 Harrison Street Discussion Construct Jlve, to o family dswltings. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Peter Dinneen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: This project is a discussion only. Peter Dinneen stated the committee suggested they make changes to the site for window treatments. They made changes to the top of windows making them smaller. He invited commentary and insight on what the commissions' opinion is, and stated the changes can be altered to their specifications. C. Brzezinski thought the treatments looked the same; Mr. Dinneen said they changed the top, per the suggestion of the committee, added window treatments around the front and on the side. C. Srzezinski stated they were suggesting opening up the corner with windows of the same size. Mr. Dinneen acknowledged the suggestion and said they could make those alterations to the window treatments. Make the corners look like corners as opposed to the side with large scale windows. It was suggested they replicate the corner and make the openings larger, regardless of flat window treatments. Staff stated, if those changes are made Mr. Dinneen can go through zoning to be approved and apply for foundation permits separately. Mr. Dinneen stated they are trying to be conscientious of their schedule. They want to get two end units ready as models before the spring. Their goal is to beat the weather with foundations. This concluded the Discussion of this project. SPAARC 648 — 700 Hinman Avenue PreUminary and Final ZWmoHsh and rebuild south side porch "in kind" PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Brian (something), property Manager Richard O. Marshall, Association Rvaident GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Project is a preliminary and final review to demolish and rebuild porches. Mr. Marsh all brought in pictures and drawings of the porch they intend to tear down. The pictures and drawings have been looked at and approved with appropriate revisions. Mr. Marshall stated they are removing the entire wood structure. SPA"c M aft Mora - Novcmbiar 9, 2m F. Aguado stated that there is no zoning issue, it has been reviewed and approved. It's the porch along the south property line and is not in a landmark district. Mr. Marshall stated the porch will not be stained or painted. They put water repellent on the north side of the building after the wood was a year old. Their contractor suggested they do that. In addition, the porch is treated with a fire retardant. C. Brzexinski stated they like to encourage to stain or paint the porch, which will help with longevity and give it a more finished appearance. She suggested they paint or stain the porch. More for approval of preliminary and final, 2sA, said approved unanimously SPAARC 2942 Central, Street Recommendation to Sign Board Proposed freestanding sign for Hair Salon and Spat, Owner occupied PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION /DISCUSSION: Ms. Goldchaft, owner of the Hair Salon and Spa at 2942 Central Street, building is set back 12' from the rest of the buildings in the area. They did not build to the lot line, and she would like to have a free standing sign. She should get one if the building is set back 30 R. (all phases of the building has to be set back). The sign would be 5 ft. high and 5 ft. back from the property line. It would be a 30' x 48" panel on Central Street with the Salon's name and not illuminated. The mason for a free standing sign is people are mussing the location of her business. There are no traffic issues associated with the location according to the site plan. The only issue is they are not 30 ft. back from the property line. Jim Wolinski motioned to recommend approval, 2nd and apprpued unanimously. SPAARC 1111 Chicago Avenue Recommendation to Sign Board Proposed signage change to new corporate name, Wild Oats PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Walter Hallen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: This project has some interest to the Alderman and the neighbors. Saying, the signs, were placed on the market, which were permanent, but brighter. W. Hallen's presentation: WAAYG Mfttbu Notes - Nowmber 9. M t '. They (Wild Oats) want blade signs. Walter stated we do not permit blade signs. They want commercial messages on their awning, which are limited by the sign regulation to name, Iogo, and address. They want free standing signs, higher to the distance of the property line, and within twenty feet of the circulation lane. C. Brzezinski stated they are not eligible, because their principal building is not set back thirty feet. W. Hallen stated, on the application to this site the parking lot is far away from the facade. C. Brzezinski stated, that was the reason they were able to get this particular sign not facing the public way. W. Hallen stated the west wall sign might be bigger than the 125 sq. ft. limit, however it is already there. They want to colour their windows with digital graphic panels, which moves the scene into the store nicely. They want to nail the last piece of it. They had tables and chairs toward the front and north end of the storage. They want to install digital graphics panels too block vision into the store. This is a chance for both signages' to advertise. The Lifestyle signage is not digital but will be created digitally. C. Brzezinski pointed out, as a comparison, the amount of light that come from the Jewel Osco on Chicago Avenue, from inside the store. W. Hallen pointed out, as a comparison, the Currency Exchange lightning at Emerson and Green Bay Road. Both companies have lights flooding outside at probably 120 foot candles or more. C. Brzezinski noted the store is exposed, bright, and not well thought out to how it responds to the street. This is not a good solution. During the day it's fine, but at night it's not a pleasant experience. Covering the window area entirely is not a good idea. An awning would control the spillage from the ceiling lights. W. Hallen stated the Wild Oats windows are not that high. They have a high wall going up, and the lights are very high in the store. C. Brzezinski pointed out that the digital sign information, just said, "size to be determined." J. Wolinski questioned the location of the blade signs and stated they have already signed the building a7th wall signs on three sides. C. Brzezinski stated they are only allowed two signs. One on Greenleaf, because it is a street site, and one on Chicago Avenue. The ordinance state the one facing the parking lot is not allowed. If they did not have the sign facing the parking lot we would not know who the parking lot belongs too. It is facing SPA"C Mming Now - No"mitQ 9, ZM north. She, C. Brzezinski did like the idea that they would put awnings up, and would be willing to give them the words Wild Oats on their awning. Staff stated it already says seafood, organic produce or something to that effect. C. Brzezinski supported each awning having one thing on it. It is not a bad selection at this elevation, on Chicago Avenue. R. Dahal stated people coming out of the driveway will be blocked. W. Hallen stated that is one of the provisions, that you can not have the signs within twenty feet of an active driveway. There is an allowance for that. There is nothing about the sign ordinance, which would prohibit a street sign. They have enough lane space to have a sign there. W. Hallen stated the awnings can be permitted, because there is no variation for the awnings. It just has to do with what they want to put on the awnings. C. Bmazinski stated she would not be opposed to their awnings. However, would not recommend approval of the blade sign. J. Wolinski questioned where the blade sign would be on the building. Stab stated on the corner, number eight. C. Bszezinski stated the only one she would approve is the awning and the signage that they proposed. W. Hallen pointed out the provision in the sign regulation. You cannot provide illumination through the fabric of the awning, only through the text, or the logo. J. Wollnshi motioned to approve the awnings as proposed, motion was 2aw, and approved unanimously. They want to add that lifestyle signage. Adding the word "market" runs the sign area up to 188 sq. ft., and the sign ordinance specifically says you can only have 125 sq. ft. of any one wall sign. J. Wolinski said he does not have a problem with the Wild Oats sign adding the word "market". He motioned to approve adding the word "maritet", motion was tad, and approved unanimously. J. Walinsld moved that everything else be denied. Which is the blade, free standing, and digital "lifestyle" graphic panels. Notion was 2n+, and approved unanimously. This concluded the signage presentation. SPA"C MeetinS Notes - NiovmbQ 9, 2M SPAARC 355 Ridge Avenue Preliminary and Final laterior attar tons and expansion, of roof mechanical equipment room. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: James Pritchett GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Jim Pritchett, architect for Resurrection Healthcare of St. Francis Hospital, stated St. Francis Hospital was built before the war and before air conditioning systems. The hospital built a penthouse to house the air conditioning unit, using aluminum siding. The way it is today. The proposal is for the expansion of the penthouse to locate the mechanical equipment. The penthouse will conceal that equipment from the south elevation where the duct work comes out above the roof, and the west eleva .ion, which is facing the stint. They added a small piece of duct to the penthouse, toward the tracks to be painted to match all of the sheet metal. The same materials, same colour, and same height will be used on the penthouse. There was a motion approved, 2", and approved uaaaimously. Respectfully submitted, qWW Planning Division WAARC Not=-November9,2OOS SITE PLAN and APPEAJW „E REVMW COI[NITTEE November I6, 2005 11 • _•i __ Committee Members: 8tam. APPROVED Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Brian Barnes, Paul D'Agostino, Captain Dale Fochs, Tad Cook, Rajeav Dahal, Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Arlova Jackson, Jim Wolinski, Dennis Marino, Carlos Ruiz, Jeff Corey Frank Aguado, Jill Chambers, Ingrid Eckersberg, Stefanie Levine, Dave Stoneback, Ingrid Eckemberg SPAARC 1700 Central Street Commut Construct a nixed use building consisting ofretedl on groundfloor and dwellings above. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Robert Horne, Co -Developer Mike Ripna, Architect Jack Crocker, Co -Developer John Talty, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: R. Horne stated they are proposing a mix used development that would comprise of approximately 250 sq. ft. of frontage on Central Street, from Eastwood Avenue to the west. The old Evanston Theatre is the property site. They propose to develop ground floor retail parking with four levels of residential above. The property is zoned 132. The project consists of approximately 8200 sq. ft. of ground floor retail. Parking will serve both retail and residential, with 47 residential units under this plan. Of the 47 units, 16 are one bedroom, 32 are two bedrooms, and 1 is a three bedroom. There are 62 residential parking stalls. The 8200 sq. ft. of retail space has 14 parking stalls, 18 are required under the zoning. The total project area is 102,000 sq. ft. The projects architect has developed a plan that adds a fifth story to the project, which fits within the allowable height under a planned development. They discussed at a prior meeting the need to have Eastwood Avenue in a two lane configuration, between Central Street and the alley. Eastwood The ground floor retail will be accessed from Central Street. There will be ground level parking for the residential units and separate ground level parking for retail. All parking will be accessed off the alley. For the residential parldng, SPMAC Menus Notes - November 16, ZM there will be three entrances into a heated parking garage. There will be fourteen (14) spaces behind the retail area. The building will be set back three feet from the property line alone Central Street. The garage portion of the building will be five (5) feet back from the rear property line. They have one outdoor loading berth from the sidewalk to the alley that will support retail and condominium. There will be an indoor trash room located at the elevator to serve the residents. The 250 ft. length of the building is meant to be one building with three separate components. The corner will be angular and set back. The middle portion of the building and the 4th floor units set back to create an outdoor terrace. The set back along Eastwood Avenue will create a garden height. The setback is' ;er than the balcony with a 12 ft. terrace for those units. From the market an:, jdis, there are opportunities for some duplexes, t vo stories, or townhouses. Staff stated they need to demonstrate some public benefits in exchange for the planned developments allowance. Mr. Horne stated there will be an advantage to the neighbors to the South to bring as much of the building away from them. Neighbors will also benefit from the development's parking and from the elimination of a bank as a ground floor use in this location. C. Brzezinski questioned what will be the benefit to the community for those allowances, and stated that part of the negotiations of a development would be something along the lines of public art, housing affordability issues, or energy efficiency. Mr. Horne suggested streetsca.pe; furniture, art landscaping or very attractive vending machines for newspapers, rather than a collection of odd looking ones chained together. He stated they are offering without understanding precisely where the community needs are. D. Marino suggested that a streetscape on Central Street would be significant. J. Wolinski stated that the additional floor raising height of 57 ft. is going to be an issue with the people on Harrison Street. He suggested they think about a neighborhood meeting, and recommended it occur before they get to the planning commission, especially where there is an alley separating RI from Central Street. Mr. Horne stated they have the application for zoning analysis and gave Alderwoman Tisdahl a set of plans this morning. R. Dahal expressed concerns about this street becoming a two way. Half block one way and the other block two-way. People turning on Central Street (south) will have to U-turn to get back to the other end. This will create a traffic problem. He suggested the parking plans be reviewed. SPAAAC Meeting Notes - Nonm6er 16, 2WS No vote taken —concept review does not require a vote. SPAARC 1968 Dempster Street Recommendation to ZBA Type 2 restaurant in Evanston .Plaza shopping Center - Pa nino's Ca{ fti do Bar PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Peter Zelako, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Zelako stated they are moving from Central Street to Dempster and Dodge Avenue. From the outside of Dempster Street, they will remove a couple of trees and put outdoor seating with a wrought iron gate. The hours will be the same; 7 days from 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. They will have a full liquor license. This will be a sit down restaurant in the old Blockbuster building. The goal is outdoor dining. There was discussion whether their sign will be an awning or canopy, or if it will be retractable or a year round canvas. Staff stated they will support a fence of approximately 3.5 ft. to 4 ft. Anything higher has a visual implication that there is some security issues. Mr. Zelako stated garbage pick up will be three times a week. Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. However, if they need to they will increase the number of times. This is a Type 2 restaurant on Central Street, and Mr. Zelako stated there will be a full service, bussing service for the outside area. Staff' stated that 3 feet is their recommended height for the fence, made with wrought iron material. This will allow some visibility back and forth. There will be a landscaping plan submitted. C. Brzezinski stated they are on the agenda to the zoning board of appeals. They will need a design before a recommendation can be made or approved, and they will have to come back with a proposal for the exterior change to get permission from this committee. Motion to approve recommendation to the ZSA with 3 R. fence. It was 2", and approved unanimously. With the stipulation that they need to come up with a design for the awning situation and when done to contact SPAARC 2710 L*Ing Avenue Recommendation to ZHA Ontsttuct two (2) one story additions PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Jeff Harting, Architect S:AALC Mecdm Nota - Noveaba 16, 2= GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Harting is proposing to construct a one story addition onto the back of his house. He has a one story addition off the rear of the house, with three small bedrooms, li%zng, and dining room. Built around 1940, they are proposing to replace the entire structure, and put a new roof on it. They brought photographs of the existing condition. Staff - questioned the separation between the building and the garage. Mr. Harting stated in 1994 they got a permit from the city to replace the garage in the same lot. They have talked to neighbors who are supportive and have endorsed the project. Motion for approval of recommendation to ZBA. It was Zm+, and approved unanimously. SPAARC 2123 Harrison Street Diacnasion Construct five, tuio family dwellings PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Peter Dinneen GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION /DISCUSSION: The owner explained the changes, which were made from staffs previous suggestions. He changed the site to the full height, and moved the door over per suggestions. C. Btuzinski notes that he had widened the windows, to turn the corner in the living room. Because of the width of the fire place box there was no opportunity to locate it in the lower and upper level. They brought them down to floor level and made the dining room window to face the park across the street. They need the okay from the Engineering Department to get a permit. This concluded the general discussion. SPAARC 1300 Ashland Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct a front porch PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Don Beasley, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Beasley came before the committee because the side and front yard set back is not sufficient. They may have too much site coverage. Mr. Beasley brought in a reduced copy and picture of the building. The proposed project is a front porch reconstruction. They want to take the existing porch across the SFAARC Meeting Notn - November 1E, 2MS .o� front of the building, remove it, and pull it back from the part of the building that juts out from the bay. The site plan shows what is happening. The porch will be shortened so it will not intersect the bay, and its entrance will be relocated back to Ashland Avenue. The width of the porch is 6.5 ft., and it extends onto the front yard too far. Motion to approve, 2x�, approved unanimously. SPAARC 1818 Demoster Street Recommeadttion to ZBA Operato aphwtbin0 supply stone at the s ad"t,. .,�. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Victor Mecuko, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Commentary; C. Brzezinski stated the 1818 Dempster Street recommendation to the ZHA is posted with a red tag. The owners are operating their plumbing business out of the location. They have illegally converted its use from a uniform place to a plumbing supply business. They are not operating on good faith, and today the water department shut off the water. The City has tried to get into the location, but they will not answer the door. F. Aguado stated a plumbing supply place would require a special use permit. !t is rioted they continue to occupy despite a red tag and have not been cooperating when the inspectors stop by. Staff stated they could take them to administrative adjudication and fine them. They are also operating without a business license. Proposal: C. Brzezinski stated this is a recommendation to the ZBA. It is on the agenda because they are operating a plumbing supply store at the above address. The business was posted to not operate. It is still operating and when city officials visit, no one will answer the door when it's clear people are inside. Today the water department shut off the water. They are operating without a business license, and the address is not in legal use. Mr. Mecuko stated they tried to apply for the ZBA twice. The first time their architect was told, they had to file the application before October 13th for the October meeting. After they were told, it was too late. Then they were supposed to apply before October 20Eh. They did and were told they should get something in the mail, but did not. After investigation, they were told the city did not have their application. Their proof of an application is their paid receipt. SPA"C Maa Notes - Nov mbar 16, 2W5 C. Brzezinski asked if they were using the property for any business. They stated yes and C. Brzezinski stated they are not allowed to use the property for any business use. C. Brzezinski stated they are not allowed to operate that space without building permits, etc. She stated they can house them (their employees) temporarily in other legal office spaces in the city, or suggested they rent some other office space, but can not use 1818 Dempster Street until it is permitted and inspected. Mr. Mecuko said they were never told that. They have the wrong plan. The plumbing business and the office space are connected. It is an open floc•T plan. They questioned whether they would be able to apply for and set up insp action for that space immediately, so they can be processed during the same time as the application for zoning. C. Brzezinski stated they have to obtain a building permit. Then they can sign up for the inspection. Motion for recommendation to ZRA, 2ad, and apprwmd nnenimonsly. There will be no nmwthW an ngdgyy, Movember 230v, 2005 Respectfully submitted, A4 SO . A1laf Manning Division S:AAAC Wain Nota - No"=ba 16, 2M SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COIWWTTEE ME 77NG !NOTES November 30, 200S Attendee APPROVED Committee Member= Carolyn Brzeziinski (Chair), Brian Barnes, Paul D'Agostino, Captain Dale Fochs, Tad Cook, RaJeev Dahal, Walter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Arlova Jackson, Jim Woli=K Dennis Marino, Carlos Ruiz, Jeff Corey Stab Frank Aguado, Jill Chambers, Ingrid Eckersberg, Stefanie Levine, Dave Stoneback, Ingrid Eckersberg SPAARC 532 Kedzie Street Concept Review. Construct a residential dr commercial mired use buildhW. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Irene Zemenides, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: The property is a residential and commercial nixed use building, located at the southeast corner of Chicago Avenue and Kedzie. The site is from the public alley to the comer, and the sidewalk is up to the property line. Ms. Zemenides stated they are seeking a C1-A, which allows them fifty one units, and stated the building, has been designed that way. There will be three levels of parking; the ix floor, basement, and sub -basement in order to make the parking work, with two levels on ground. The building is designed in an attempt to conform to all of the city requirements. There will be thirty-nine parking spaces in the basement, twenty-nine in the sub -basement and the remaining are on the 1- floor. They will have nine units per floor. There will be eight, two bedrooms per floor and one, one bedroom per floor. The top floor will have seven units. This will be a seven story building and they wish to increase the height so they can have a nine foot ceiling. For the additional height and/or space, they can offer the community paved alleys, affordable housing units, street scapes, contribution to the affordable housing fund, and/or public art, etc. There will be retail on the main floor and none of the existing tenants will move back in. C. Brzezinski stated they need to see a model of the development with the proposed building across the street to determine how it will fit into the overall landscape. SPA"C Marling Nwa - Nore"a 30, 2WS C. Ruiz would like to see a more detailed drawing of what the building is going to look like. W. Halen stated they must conform to the garage guidelines and D. Stoneback asked if their plans include storm water detention and gave them a policy. M vote taken --concept renew does not require ac aoitAL SPAARC 120 Dodge Recommendation to ZBA One story recreation room addition[ to "Dobson Plow cerement Home." PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Chris 'holey, Turley Architects GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Turley stated that currently the retirement home has a limited community space of the interior. They have a TV room for about six or eight tightly parked wheelchairs. They are proposing to create a small one story addition off to the side, in a style that matches the existing building. The location is a grassy area. The front of the building is non complainant. This is a zoning issue. They plan to extend the building since the side does not meet zoning regulations or special use. They have canvassed the neighborhood and spoke to a number of the neighbors. They seem to be very much in favor of it, and feel it will enhance the neighborhood. Mr. Turley said they have a 2 ft. set back, and the patio comes right up to Dodge Avenue. They tried to stay within the 18 inches, but it would be difficult for the wheelchairs to get through and into the sunroom. They need the additional 18 inches for the wheelchairs to pass through into the living area. Their patients are aging and have more of a need for wheelchairs. Transferring patients from wheelchair to living room chairs can become painful for the patients. The extra. 18 inches will provide for wheelchairs that are getting larger and bulkier. Mr. Turley stated they attempted to scale back and have an opening at the end that would face out to the garden. They also tried to spread out the living area to help block noise of traffic from the outside. Staff suggested they reduce the sidewalk along Dodge Avenue and create a parkway or landscaping. They will not require additional parking. They have parking along the back of the building and across the street, and construction material of windows will be compatible with the existing windows. All of the architectural elements will be matched. Motion to approve recommendation to the ZRA with the intention they return to this committee with a detailed landscape plan for the property and parking lot, tad, and motion approved unanimously. srtiutc Wdirs Maus - No.emb" so, zoos SPAARC 939 Chicago Avenue Preliminary and Final Interior and exterior ojftm remodeling. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Scott Crowe, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Crowe stated they will be the tenants after the renovation of the building. They are malting some minor modifications to the existing building. They are repairing the existing storefront because it is not in compliance with building code. They are removing the Techline signage and canopy and replacing the deteriorated cedar siding with a metal siding above, beside, and below the storefront window. All signage will be inside the site. There will be eight (8) spaces for parking off the alley. The parking lot into the building has a ramp and steps up to a landing. The entrance into the building and parldng is off the alley. They are repainting the parking area. They will move the existing air conditioning units which are non compliant, inside due to set back. Mr. Crowe stated there will be automatic devices put on the entrance door (front/back) accessible for the disabled. Both doors will have electric devices and lights along the ramps leading up to the door. Their internal drains are connected to the sewer and one exterior down tunnel is currently not connected to the sewer. That was not their intention. There will be roll down shades and a curtain across the area to add a little colour and provide privacy. The doors are recessed from the opening of the public way, and the recessed lightning will be replaced. The trust sign will remain on the property. Motion for preliminary and final, 2&d, and approved unanimously. SPAARC 1501 Central Street PreUminary and Final h rtall rooftop cellular antennas and equipment Located inside the building. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nolan Ming, Project Manager US Cellular GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION /DISCUSSION: US Cellular is proposing some antennas on the northwest power structure. They provided elevations to show where the antennas are going. The antennas are strips of about 3 ft. to 4 ft. in size with a width of 4 inches. There will be three antennas. All of the equipment is inside the site in a tower room. Motion made for preliminary and fitnal, 2^d, no opposed, I abstained. SPAARC 706 Main Street Prellminary and Final Interior and exterior construct for a new tips I restaurant, Trattoria A a Q SPAARC Me thm liars - Navcmbar 30, 2005 PROJECT TED BY: Jack Gara, Project Manager Robert C. Vagn, Architect Timothy Condos, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: The architects brought in rendering of the site and pictures of the exterior as it is today. They will move the existing entrance, from the center to the side. Their major change is to relocate new doors to the east end of the space. The building will remain in its original form with some alterations, and the back will be used for delivery and a second fire exit. There are existing lights and there will be three new lights for illuminations. The owners intend to use the existing flagpoles on the building. It was noted if they do, anything other than the US flag, will be a side permit requirement. They will use cafe curtains over the windows, and there will be no window signage. B. Barnes pointed out that only service animals are allowed on the premises and staff suggested the introduction to landscaping. Motion to approve for preliminary and final of exterior, 2%,, approved ummimm"ly. Their application is for a Type I, if they go through the process for a Type 2 they will have to come back to this committee and they twill make a recommendation to the council at that time. SRC 624 Davis Street Recommendation to ZBA Chanps qr use to Ara Italian Beef, a type a Restaurant. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Andrew Kolb, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: This is a review of a type II restaurant. The trash pick up will be in the alley. The hours of operation will be eleven hours, from approximately 10:30 a.m. until 9:30 pm, Monday through Thursday and maybe an extra hour on Friday and Saturday. 500/6 of the business is carry -out and 50% will be sit down. There will be no changes made to the storefront other than signage. They should be very conscience of the litter plan they are proposing, and be prepared to answer questions about this plan. Motion for a r�seor unendation to the ZQA, Z^s, and approved unanimou*4p WAARC Mmi,q Note - Nevcx e- 30, IM SPAARC 1968 Demoster Prelim3nam and Floral Proposal for riebvwtabie awning PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: John Ruth, Landlord J. David Diaz, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: J. David Diaz is proposing a retractable awning, and wants the colour to match the already existing teal. They will decide on landscaping in front of the black wrought iron fences. The fences will be eleven feet from the sidewalk with visibility. Motion for preliminary and final with shrubs not exceeding three feast high and be planted outside of the fence, 20a , and approved unanimouaiy. Respectfully submitted, z"adp�axar Planning Division WAA= MMft NOW - Na"Mber 30, no SITE PLAN and APPEARAAIC,E REVIEW COALV TTEE YEETLNG M?TES December 7, 2005 Aitandmm APPROVED Committee Members: Carolyn Brzezinski (Chair), Arlova Jackson, Jim Wolinaki, Paul D'Agostiino, Captain Dale Fochs, Brian Barnes, Tad Cook, Ra`jeev Dahal, Waiter Hallen, Jill Chambers, Dennis Marino, Carlos Ruiz, Jeff Corey Stair: Frank Aguado, Galvin Morgan SPAARC 618 -- 628 Judson Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct exterior stair and porch strucbtre along the svest aide of im"114. PROJECT REPRESENTED I Y: Andrew Heindel, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: A Heindel stated the project is under construction, and they received a permit in June. They were last before the committee in April for final approval. There is one very hazardous fire stair on the building and they want to improve on it. However, it sits on the alley lot line. They came before the committee for approval of a variation. A Heindel stated they, also, want to improve the stairs of the three story building at the corner of Kenney and Judson. They have redesigned the stairs to expand its footprints so they will meet the building codes. The proposed stairs are not covered. C. Brzezinski stated that one of the building code requirements is that exterior stairs be protected and/or covered from the elements. A Heindel is not clear on the type of material being used. He stated this is a conversion project so the building is not occupied right not. This is a code requirement and the permit can be allowed, subject to the future, in which the project can be done in two phases. They can get started with the main aspect of the project, which is the stairs. The covering can be added later. The committee recommends and supports the replacement of the stairs with more solid construction. Motion for recommendation to the Z A, ^ approved unanimmaW SPA"C Meeting Kom - Deanbaf 7, 2W5 J SPAARC 823 Monroe Street Recommendation to ZBA Construct second story addition to a Single Family Dwelling. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Chris Turley, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: C. Turley stated they have a new addition going in the back of the house. They will be replacing a small addition with a taller one. They want to reuse the side wall, because of the revised code, inside the side yard. They want to use the e2dsting foundation wall and keep that side of the building. The developers are 2ft. inside of the side yard. They are trying to maintain the same elevation that is currently there. The neighbors have signed letters that they have approved the work. The opening in that wall area is a bathroom, from the west elevation. The addition goes over the stairs and down into the basement. They will be replacing the stairs because they are non compliant. There are some windows to bring light into the space. In the master bedroom, there are some windows, in that elevation. The distance from the property line is aft. Motion to recommend approval to the Z U, 2^d, approved unanimousig. SPAARC 623 Judson Avenue Recommendation to ZBA rnstaUation of AIC Condensing unit for a Single Family Dwelling. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Earl Newgarden, Owner GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: N. Newgarden stated they have lost a number of trees to Dutch Elm in the last two years, and want to install central air. They are asking for a zoning variance. The density they are asking for would be 2ft. from the property line as opposed to loft. They have secured the approval of neighbors, on the south of them, with whom they share a fence. They will use the quietest unit possible. Staff suggested that photos of the area may be helpful for them with zoning. They are also proposing to get a sound rating of 76. Kotion to recommend approval to the 23A, 2^4, approved unanimously. SPAARC 303 Dodge Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct a new three story Religious tnstitution and private school for the "Jisudsh Reconstructlontst Congregation' PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Alan Saposnik, President Michael Ross, Architect SPA"C UMWS Nota - Dcm=ba 7, 2005 GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION /DISCUSSION[: The existing building is a three story building with a partial basement. A. Saposnik stated they want to demolish the building and build on the existing site. The parking lot across the street from the site is the primary parking. Alderman Ann Rainey supports the project. They are applying for three variances, in addition to special use, because they have to reconfirm their special use for a religious organization. They are asking for height variance for lot coverage and parking. This is an R2 district and the lot coverage is authorized at 40%. The building they are proposing is slightly larger than that. It's 43% of lot coverage. R2 district has a maximum height of 35ft., and they designed the building so the public edge is going to be at 39ft. There is a clear story above the sanctuary part of the building that will be at a maximum of 4711. They picked 4711. to design around because plan development variances have been accepted at that height in Evanston. The site has twenty four spaces in the lot across the street. They have some space behind the building. It is their intention to remove the space behind the building since it is part of the set back and part of the buildings foot print. The property currently does not conform to the set back requirements. The new design does provide them to maintain the building foot prints within the set back requirements. They have asked the park district for an agreement for the Levy Center. It would be imperative because that is required by zoning to have such an agreement. The sanctuary seats about 300 people and they want a potential for 500. They received a memo that most Religious Institutions do not appear to conform to the zoning requirements of site parking. The suggestions were they ask for a major variance rather than trying to work out an agreement with the Levy Center. They have 24 parking spaces. The ordinance states religious institutions must provide one space for every ten sets of space, and one for every three full time employees. They will need 53 spaces instead of 24. They are asking for a variance of 29 spaces. They are proposing to redo the parking lot. The brand name for the project is Gravel Pave and Grass Pave. It's designed for parking situations. Part of the grant will be to develop a public exhibit of materials that can be available to disseminate information within the community about how this became a sustainable building, and how it was accomplished. This educational component will be developed as part of the development. Public Art: Alan Saposnik stated they have a landscape committee that has been looking at the front of the building to possibly install benches making them accessible for people outside to sit. They are considering something creative. Notion for reaornmendation to the ZBA, 2", approved unanimously. SPAASC Mft-dns Nona - Dcc mbar 7, 2W5 SPAARC 2438 Jackson Avenue Recommendation to ZBA Construct a second story addition to a detached Single Fand4l Dwelling. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Paul T urilh GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: P. Turilli stated they have a 1921 brick bungalow. Photos show what the house look like now. The lot floor is built up and the 2nd floor is unfinished attic space. Four or five stairs go up to the attic. P. Turiili stated they will be replacing the stairs. The intent is to use stucco in an attempt to create the bungalow as it would have looked in 1921. Motion for recamrnendation to ZBA, 2", approved unanimously. Respectfully submitted, AwIrefWW Planning Division srA►ac ncccs - Danolm 7. 2W SZ7Z PLAN and APPEARAIVC'.E REVIEW COMWTTEE AW,MNG ARMS December 14, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Carolyn Brzesinsld (Chair), Paul D•AgOstino, Captain Dale Foehs, Tad Cook, Rajeew Dahal, John Burke, Jim Wollaski, Dennis Madno, Jell Cory staff.. Carlos Ruiz, Flank Agundo, Jill Chambers, Brian Barnes, Morris Robinson SPAARC 900 Church Street CTA Viaduct Repkwement Other Sites: 850 Grove Street, 600 Greenleaf Street, 700 Dempster Street, 900 Davis Street PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Bob Wittmann, CTA Deanna Zalas, CTA GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Bob Whitman stated they are here to present their final designs for the five viaducts. The goals of this project are to minimize the visual impact of the structure and supports. They intend to open up and widen street and sidewalk areas below the viaducts, and to create a consistent esthetic for all the replacement viaducts and abutments. Objectives for the viaducts are to develop consistency of the design, consider community priorities, factor in constructability of the viaducts, consider maintenance and sustainability, and consider the safety of the construction. They presented drawings/rendering of all the viaduct locations, the existing structures and the proposed development of each structure. Reconstruction of the viaducts will include replacement and repairing of the abutments and retaining walls. The viaducts will have four (4) foot brick retaining walls on the front. These will wrap around and continue toward the back of the steep concrete abutments. SpAAac Marian row= - December », 2M5 The new bridge will be a 94' span. The vertical elements are the caissons the bridge will sit on. This will be typical of all five viaducts. The clearance of the viaducts will remain the same. C. Brzezinski stated the structure is paramount, if we can gain some opportunity, it would make it much more pleasant year round. There was discussion about public art opportunities. C. Brzezinski stated that Church Street is our downtown area and warrants re - looking at the beam design for a creative approach, or the incorporation of different lighting to distinguish it from Main Street. Bob Wittman stated they are ready to start with Church Street and they are expecting to advertise within the next two to four weeks. No more than four to six weeks. He stated it will be February or the Is' of March before they get a bid back in. As for construction beginning, he stated the end of March at the earliest, or April. With hopes to begin by May 25th at the latest. C. Brzezinski suggested there is a colour opportunity to differentiate this location and make it new and vibrant. Af0tion to approaellna4 22", approved unanimously. SPAARC 900 Chicago Avenue Recommendation to ZZHA Estabttsh a type II restaurant ffr ot:j PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Kevin Magnuson, Warren Johnson Architects GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Kevin Magnuson, one of the architects representing Froots, a type I1 restaurant stated this is a new concept for the Chicago area. Most of the business will comprise of shakes and smoothies. They will also sell salads. It will be similar to a Jamba Juice. The only exterior image to the building is signage and the use of outdoor seating. C. Brzezinski stated that sidewalk cafes are managed through the city managers office, and after approval from that office, they can come back to the site committee. The location is the northwest corner of Chicago Avenue and Main Street. Their frontage will be on Main Street, and they are aware that litter should be picked up within 250ft. in all directions. SIA"C MMing Not=- Dw=ba 14, ZM Service animals are allowed, in the sidewalk cafe and inside the restaurant. They are not, allowed in areas where food is prepared. Parking will be included for the owners of the restaurant only. Motion to approve recommendation to the ZBA, 2nd, and approved unanimously. SPAARC 830-856 Hinman Avenue Preliminary and Final RoftiLd porches and stairs for multi —family use. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Dean Ivkovich, Contractor GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Dean Ivkovich stated they will be replacing three story wooden porches for this multi -family property. The porches will be the same size and layout as c3dsting ones. The porches are on the buildings west elevation, on a public alleyway. They will demolish the existing porches and rebuild them including some masonry repairs. The rusted steel of the lintels and shelf angles are original to the building. There will be no changes in the appearance, with the exception of reinstalling the battleship grey paint. They recommend premium water repellant that preserves wood. Drawings have been submitted. It will be a routine porch replacement project. There will be some set back from the building to the public alleyway, on an angle. During construction, they plan to use dump trucks vs. stationary containers. C. Ruiz explained that this property is a landmark building, and they will need a Certificate of Appropriateness from the preservation commission. He informed Mr. ivkovich that the next meeting is not until January 24th. The deadline for their application would be January 10th. Carlos will email the information to Mr. lvkovich. Staff suggested, paint or stain on the porch, so it will not have an unfinished look. Motion to approve the preliminary and final, 2"d, approved unanimously. SPAARC 546 Michigan Avenue Preliminary and Final Rebuild rear porch and stairs for multi family use. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Nathan IGpnis, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION /DISCUSSION: SPAARC Meedog rlous - December 14, 20H r , Mr. Kipnis stated this will be a porch rebuild. The material will be cedar deck, with a wolmanized structure. They plan to use a stain or paint for the finish. Their zoning analysis was fine. Motion to approve preliminary and final with a. mmended type 4% attain orpaint, 2nd, approved unanimously. SPAARC 1238 Oast Avenue Prelindnary and Final Interior/exterior re"wdeling for proposed eondo"ninium conversion PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Daniel Contreras, Architect GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Consteras stated this is an existing apartment building, which is empty. They are proposing to convert it into condominiums. They are proposing to put in a new garage door, moving it from one location on the garage, to another. They will add a third garage door with an opening or recessed door to house the rubbish container. The exterior changes will be restoration of the brick. There are existing skylights. They will keep the same windows. They will add parking to the building. The roof and gutter system will not be changed, and will be discussed with the engineering department. In terms of restoration, tuck pointing need to be done, brick cleaned, and a wrought iron railing replaced. C. Ruiz recommendation for tuck pointing is to have an analysis done of the current composition. The scoring should match the original if they still have it. They should have a mortar mix when they finish the brick. The garage should match the existing design on the door. Motion to approve preliminary and final, 2", approved unanimously. Respectfully submitted, ZwXe5onw Planning Division SPA"C MoaiM Nrom - Der 14, Zoos 33# T- A SITE PLAN and APPEARANCE REVIEW COADUTZ'EE AM77NG ARMS December 21, 2005 Attendees: APPROVED Committee Members: Jim Wolinski (Chair), Frank Aguado, Brian Barnes, Paul D'Agostino, Captain Dale A. Fochs, Dennis Marino, Sat Nagar, Jeff Cory, Rajeev Dahal, Jill Chambers, Tad Cook, Carlos Ruiz staff- Jill Chambers, Stephanie, Donna Spieuzza SPAARC 1600 Foster Street Concept Consbuct 40 to 50 Attached Single Family Dwellings (7ournhousesJ PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Gary Levitas, Developer Victor 1. Dzieldc%icx, Developer GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Northfield and Regency are proposing a townhouse development in a residential area for 50 individual units. Mr. Dziekiewicz stated they are proposing to have an enclosed courtyard within a gated community, with the intention of the residents having privacy within that enclosed area. They have done work in Oak Park, Wicker Park and Buck town. Evanston is a new development area for them, and they are Iooking for feedback and suggestions. D. Marino stated that Evanston does not have gated communities and he does not believe they are desirable for Evanston. J. Wolinski stated the only gating that is in Evanston is through natural barriers, such as the Canal or embankments, etc. He stressed that the city would not be interested in setting up a community, which would be different and/or isolated. D. Marino questioned the developers about their knowledge of the surrounding residential area and if these town houses developed in the proposed form would be compatible with the area. Staff mentioned there are single family homes and two flats in the surrounding area. However, the developers stated that their development would be compatible to what is already in the area. D. Marino asked if they had SPAAIZC Mftdng Notes - Dcoembff 21, ?M considered a mix of single family, two flats, and townhouses that would be more in scale than 50 or more unified townhouses. Victor I. Dziekiew-icz - stated the townhouses were their first option. They have not made decisions based on feedback from the site committee about what would fit into the neighborhood. They decided on town homes because they did not think condominiums would initially work with the site. The developers indicated that they are also in negotiations with Mr. Robinson to potentially acquire that Robinson site, with hopes of doing a larger development. J. Wolinski stated there is a lot of potential to do something special with a mix of housing types, especially in this area. Maybe single family houses and town houses. B. Barnes - pointed out having inclusion of units for the disabled community with affordable price points. D. Marino suggested they have a chance to develop a neighborhood with characteristics of some of the existing Evanston neighborhoods including housing choices and types, suggesting that is something they should consider. He raised the concept of orienting the proposed development to a typical public right of way rather than only accessing the development through alleys and a small gated entrance. D. Spicuzza informed them of the planning process the neighborhood went through and suggested they consider some of the desires of the community, from reading about it on the City of Evanston website. She pointed out the community is concerned with having prices that would be affordable to people of mixed income levels. Gary Levitas said the price points for the town houses, as it is now would be, 2,400 to 2,800 sq. ft. for $500,000 to $600,000, and the typical town house would be three to four stories, with two car garages. D. Spicuzza also suggested having more green space, private green space, not fenced in (in a gated community) and not part of the courtyard. Captain D. Fochs pointed out, based on the site plan, that they would need more turning radius room for fire engines within the courtyard area. J. Chambers suggested maybe some lower and wider units, as opposed to the narrow tall ones. S. Nagar reminded them that water, sewer and garbage need to be considered and accommodated into the complex, and R. Dahal asked them to keep in mind the primary access to the complex, as it is, will be Foster Street and not Emerson. He also said they already have two curb cuts at that site. SPA"C Uved NOW - Ch OAW 21, ZOOS Y O Mr. Gary Levitas and Mr. Victor 1. Dzieldewicz thanked the committee for its suggestions and stated that they would return. Stall thanked the applicant for sharing their concept. No vote taken —concept review does not require a vote. SPAARC 1745 OrsingWn Avenue Preliminary and Final Pomh r0p1accmwnt jbr muitip[s jbwdty dwelUng. PROJECT REPRESENTED BY: Martin Morel GENERAL PROJECT PRESENTATION / DISCUSSION: Mr. Morel wishes to replace his e�dsting porch with wood and stringers of steel for a multiple family dwelling. This will be a demolition and reconstruction of the porch. He plans to treat the wood first and then paint it after two years. D. Marino motioned to approve preliminary and final, motion 2nd. and approved unanimously. Respectfully submitted, AWS0 0~ Planning Diviaion SPA"C Mcabi Nooes - Dwe"=31, Mft