HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2001-2005MINUTES
SiGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
THURSDAYJANUARY 11, 2001
EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER — ROOM 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. LARSEN, J. WEISS, L. BERKUN, J. MACSAI , C. THOMAS
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: B. FAHLSTROM
OTHERS PRESENT: David Zimmerman — KFC 1 Pizza Hut
Tim Andersen — Focus Development
CITIZEN COMMENT
None
OTHER BUSINESS
None
MINUTES
Chairman Larson declared a quorum at 7:30. J. Weiss stated that he wanted the Meeting
Minutes for December 14, 2000 to be revised. The minutes would need to show that he had told
the Board that he would recuse himself from voting on S.R.A B. #00-29 (the re-covering of the
existing awnings at 42 Davis) although he would be available to answer technical questions
concerning the design. Bob Fahlstrom stated that in the future, that any time a board member
Removed themselves from voting on a case, that this would be noted in the minutes in bolded
letters for leg:bihty L Berkun motioned to approve the revised minutes. Chairman Larsen
seconded and the Meeting Minutes of December 14. 2000 were approved unanimously.
S.R.A.B. #01-01: 1901 Dempster— Kentucky Fried Chicken / Pizza Hut
Mr. David Zimmerman of Kentucky Fried Chicken / Tocon presented his case to the Board.
KFC would like to reface the existing non -conforming pale sign with existing reader
board with new sign panels showing the revised KFC Logo combined with a Pizza Hut Express
sign. Mr. Zimmerman noted that this new sign panel would be part of a general remodeling of he
building facade that is scheduled to start soon. Mr. Zimmerman also noted when asked by M.
Larsen that all existing directional signs around the site would be removed as part of the
planned renovation.
B. Fahlstrom explained to Mr. Zimmerman that the proposed changes to the facade of the
restaurant building will need to be reviewed by the City of Evanston Site Plan and Appearance
Review Committee. Mr. Zimmerman stated he would make sure that the fagade renovation plans
for the building would be reviewed with the S P A.R.0 Cornminee
M. Larsen noted that there are some real problems with the existing sign the foremost problem
being the existing height of nineteen foot six inches (19'-6') which exceeds the allowable sign
height of nine foot six based on the sign's distance to the property line. Mr. Zimmerman replied
that his company had looked at trying to lower the sign height but that the position of the reader
board made this very difficult. M. Larsen stated that the existing reader board is the second
major problem for the existing pole sign. M. Larsen noted that under the current Sign Ordinance,
the attached reader board is not allowed.
Meeting Minutes
Sign review and Appeals Board
January 19, 2001
Page 2
IA. Larsen continued the discussion by noting that the Burger King Sign across from KFC had a
low sign. M. Larsen produced a sketch he had made which showed the sign mounted at a nine
foot six inch (9' - 6') mounting height. This allowed only a four foot (4'-0') gap between the bottom
of the sign panel and the ground. M. Larsen noted that this gap seemed to be too small and that
A ten foot six inch (10' — 6') mounting height might be preferable.
J. Macsai asked if it was fair for the Board to ask for the total removal of the sign. J. Weiss
responded that it would be unfair to require the total removal of the sign but that it would not be
unfair to require that the existing sign be modified to bring it closer to conformance with the Sign
Ordinance, J. Weiss then stated his own proposal for the existing pole sign
1. The reader board would be removed.
2. The height of the pole sign would be reduced from nineteen and one half feet (19.51)
down to fifteen and one half feet (15.5') which is the maximum allowed under the
Ordinance.
3. All directional signage around the building will be removed as previously stated
By Mr. Zimmerman.
Mr. Zimmerman stated that KFC would be happy to cooperate with this compromise solution.
C. Thomas motioned to approve the solution proposed by J. Weiss as the Board's final decisions.
L. Berkun seconded and the motion for approval passed unanimously.
S.R.A.B. 01-02 —1642 Maple Street - Real Estate Signs for the Church Street Development
Chris Thomas and Jack Weiss recused themselves from voting on this case because they
have or have had professional business relationships with Focus Development.
Mr. Tim Andersen of Focus Development introduced himself to the Board and made his
presentation. Mr. Andersen noted that the proposed site for the Church Street Development
has unique difficulties as a location for the project real estate sign.
These difficulties include:
Traffic on Church Street is one way eastbound.
Maple Street will be closed due to sewer work and work on the Metra accessibility ramps.
The train tracks and viaducts block visibility to the site from the east.
Mr. Andersen noted that the temporary signs were placed for maximum visibility from the Metra
Station.
L. Berkun queried IA. Andersen if the building with the temporary banner would be torn down as
part of the tatter phase of this project. Mr. Andersen said that this budding would not be torn
down. A general discussion followed on the time duration for these signs. Mr. Andersen stated
that the most important time frame for theses sign would be 4-5 months.
J. Macsai reviewed the difficulties with site in terms of sign placement and suggested that
perhaps the free-standing wood sign should be placed parallel to Church Street for better
visibility. A general discussion followed concerning placing the sign parallel to Church Street.
M. Larsen noted that the proposed signs were much larger at one hundred and sixteen square
feet (116S.F.) than the twenty four (24) square feet allowed under the Sign ordinance.
Meeting Minutes
Sign review and Appeals Board
January 19, 2001
Page 3
M. Larsen asked the Board if they had problems with the excessive size of the signs and the
many items of information which the signs contained. C. Thomas noted theses proposed signs
were not any more excessive than many of the other real estate signs the board had approved for
other construction projects
A general discussion followed concerning placing the signs on top of the construction barricades
and sidewalk sheds which will be required for the project Mr Andersen stated that when the
construction reaches a point v.nere the sidewalk shed is erected then the temporary wood sign
could be placed on top of the shed facing north vrest B Fahlstrom noted that doing this would
impose a Lfe duration on the signs When the canopy comes down then the sign must be
permanently removed. The Board appeared to concur that this would be an acceptable location
for the sign.
A general discussion followed on the life duration and placement of the temporary wall mounted
banner. At the end of this discussion M. Larsen asked if anyone had a motion concerning these
signs. L. Berkun motioned to approve the following
1. The banner which will be mounted on the east facing building wall shall be
approved as submitted and can be mounted at a twenty foot mounting height. The
banner will be removed when the new high rise tower obscures it from view as it is
being constructed.
2. The wording for the free standing wood sign shall be changed to read "Condos for
Sale" not Building for sale.
3. The free standing sign shall be placed Initially (before there Is a sidewalk shed) so
that it is at the corner of Church and Maple parallel to Church Street. After the
sidewalk shed is erected around the perimeter of the project then this sign may be
placed on top of the Church Street shed slanted to face north-west. This sign shall
be dismantled when the construction canopy comes down.
M. Larsen seconded and the motion was approved by 3 votes to 0.
ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no other business. Chairman Larsen motioned for adjournment at 8:30p.m.
NEXT MEETING
The next Sign Board Meeting is scheduled for Thursday February 8, 2001 at 7:30 in room 2404.
Robert Fahlstrom / Plans Examiner
MINUTES
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
THURSDAY FEBRUARY S, 2001
EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai, C. Thomas
None
B. Fahlstrom
Joe Pataki — Thatcher Oaks Awnings
Christine Shields — B&A Associates
Patrick Broderick — B&A Asociates
None
None
S.R.A.B. #01-04: B&A Associates 500.512 Main Street
Joe Pataki from Thatcher Oaks Awnings presented his proposal to the Board. B & A Associates
wanted to change some of the existing awnings at 500 —12 Main Street and at 860 Hinman. Mr.
Pataki noted that B&A Management was told by Karlton Mims (the City of Evanston Sign
Inspector) that the 500-12 Main Street Building contained more than 4 businesses. Because the
building contained more than 4 businesses that a Unified Sign Plan would incorporating a unified
awning plan for all of the businesses, would need to be submitted to the City for the review and
approval of the Sign Board.
Bob Fahlstrom explained to the Board that the submitted plan dea�t only with the proposed
changes to the awnings B&A Management had not prepared a Unified plan for proposed
window signage. The window signs would constitute the 2`Jcomponent of signage that could be
used by tenants in the future. B. Fahlstrom also noted that B&A's proposed Unified Business
Center Plan did not call for the removal of existing non conforming window signs or the removal
of the wall sign for the 'Lucky Platter Restaurant'_
At this time, Mr. Pataki was joined by Christine Shields and Patrick Broderick of B&A
Management, who had arrived late for the hearing, C. Shields basically re -staked the proposal [aid
out by Mr. Pataki of Thatcher Oaks Awnings. C. Shields told the Board that She was confused
because Karlton Mims hadn't completely explained the full requirements of the Unified Business
Center Plan. C. Shields noted that no window sign plans had been prepared for the meeting
because B&A did not know window signs needed to be included as part of the plan. C. Shields
stated that that the existing window signs such as 'Carolyn Cleaners' were older than the Sign
Ordinance and would probably be grand fathered. J. Weiss stated that he doubted if all of the
existing window signs such as 'Planet Hair were older than the Sign Ordinance and that the
Hoard would reed to consider if these signs should be removed as part of the implementation of
this plan.
Sign review and Appeals Board
Meeting — Feb. 8, 2001
Page 2
A brief discussion fotiowed between Board members on the age of the window signs.
C. Shields ncted Viat B&A would like to implement the Unified Business Center Plan
incrementally so Vnat the non -conforming window signs would be removed when new tenants
moved into a tenant space. A discussion followed led by M. Larson and J. Weiss ending with the
general opinion that a shorter time more defined and controlled time frame should be stipulated
stating when the existing window signs would new to be removed.
J. Weiss quened the Hoard if they were concerned that the proposed awnings were covering
important arch„ertural features. After a brief discussion, both J. Macsai and L. Berkun stated that
no important features were being covered. C. Shields again re -stated that B&A Management
only wanted to conform to the Sign Ordinance and also noted that wall sign would not be allowed
under the proposed plan. Awnings would replace all wall signs. J. Weiss queried C. Shields as to
why the "Lucky Platter wasn't removing their wall sign? C Shields stated that the 'Lucky Platter
wanted to keep their own unique identity and that when a new tenant replaces them, that
The existing wall sign would be removed and an awning would be used for signage.
J. Macsai stated that he fell the applicants should be commended for trying to do the right thing in
beginning to bring their building into conformance by implementing a Unified Sign Plan. J.
fAacsai noted that allowing B&A Management to implement the Unified Sign Plan over a
controlled perod of time seemed like a realistic strategy.
A brief discussion followed between M Larsen and J. Weiss concerning the appropriate time
frame the Board should allow for the removal of the non -conforming existing signage.
M. Larson motioned to approve the submitted proposal for the new awnings subject to the
following:
1. B&A Management would prepare a Unified Sign Plan for the window Signs which
would be allowed to future tenants.
2. All non -conforming existing window and wall signage (including the "Lucky
Platter") would be removed within a four (4) year time period.
L. Berkun seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
S.R.A.B. 01-05: 1210-36 Chicago Avenue — Roszak A.D.C.
Jack Weiss recused himself from votinq on this case because Tom Roszak is a business
client. J. Weiss noted that none the signs in Question were desiqned by his office.,
Tom Roszak of Roszak A.D.C. introduced himself to the board and began his presentation to the
Board by apologizing that the construction canopy signs were installed prior to the hearing. Mr.
Roszak explained that his real estate marketing group acted without his knowledge or permission
when they put the signs up. T. Roszak stated that he immediately contacted Carolyn Smith and
site told him to come for a Sign Board Hearing.
C. Thomas noted that in rimy ways T. Roszak's request was very similar to requests made by
other deveiopers for addrtional construction signage and the Board had been very flexible in
allowing additional construction signage due to its temporary nature.
Sign Review and Appeals Board
Meeting — March 2 , 2001
Page 3
J. Weiss noted that he didn t Lke the vertical alignment of the sign panels and stated that a
horizontal alignment cf the panels might be preferable. M. Larsen did not agree with J. Weiss
And stated that he favored tl*:e vertical arrangement of panels as they were more easily visible
from Chicago Avenue for north and southbound traffic. A brief discussion followed among Board
members concerning the vis:bdrty of the signs from Chicago Avenue,
L. Berkun noted that the color of some of the sign panels and the canopy seemed to be too
intense as shown in the colored xeroxes. T. Roszak stated that this could be do to the ink color in
the copier. L. Berkun also noted that she objected to the end panels of the canopy. The end
panels appeared to have signage perpendicular to the street. L. Berkun also noted that additional
signage had been added around the construction trailer. T. Roszak stated that he didn't really
consider the additional signs to be advertising signage in the true sense as they only contained
the name of Roszak ADC.
A brief discussion was held twetoveen B. t=ahlstrom and the Board concerning the duration of the
construction canopy signs T Roszak briefly outlined how he envisioned the phasing of the
Project_ The Board rrsembers and City Staff both agreed: the construction canopy signs for
the 1222-1224 project must be removed when the construction canopy is either taken
down or moved for the next phase of the project Roszak ADC will need to obtain Board
approval for any future construction signage for the 1210 and 1236 Chicago Avenue phases of
the project.
L. Berkun motioned to approve the construction canopy signs as submitted and installed
subject to the time duration constraints noted above. C. Thomas and J, Macsai seconded
and the motion passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no other business, Chairman Larsen motioned for adjournment at 8:25 P.M.
NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Sign Review and Appeals Board is scheduled for 7:30 P.M.
March 9. 2001 in room 2404.
C.C.
C. Smith
K Mims
MINUTES
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
THURSDAY... MARCH 9, abol
EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsal,
MEMBERS ABSENT: C. Thomas
STAFF PRESENT: B. Fahlstrom
OTHERS PRESENT: Bill Smith — Great Bank
Klaus A. Koch — Sheckerrnan Koch Assoc.
Dave Thometz - White Way Signs
Christine Brakas - Minasian Rug Co.
Chairman Larsen called the Meeting to order at 7:33 P.M. M. Larsen motioned for approval of the
Meeting Minutes of February 8. 2001. J. Weiss and J. Macsai seconded and the Meeting
minutes were approved unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS None
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
S.R.A.B. #01-06: 1244 Chicago Avenue — Minasian Rugs.
Christine Brakas of the Office Manager for Minasian Rug Company presented her case to the
Board. Minasian Rugs is seeking permission to display temporary signs longer than allowed by
the Sign Ordinance (2 --30 day temporary signs are now allowed for each commercial
/mercantileaddress.) C, Brakas explained that Minasian has showings of rug collections from
various parts of the world. These rugs are works of art and are shown in their rug gallery for
several months. Several times a year they would like to post temporary signs similar to the signs
shown in the variance application (one sign says-Gal'ery Open' and the second sign says
Belluchi Heaven —'Rugs from the Heartland") to adver'use the showing off these special
collections This temporary signage would remain up for several months and then be removed
when the showing is over.
J. Macsai queried C. Brakas as to why Minasian didn't obtain a permit for the signs prior to
putting up the signs? A general discussion followed pertaining to the Sign Ordinance
requirements for temporary signs. C. Brakas stated that in the future Minasian would obtain
proper permits.
Meeting Minutes
Sign Review and Appeals Board
March 8, 2001
Page2
C. Brakas went on to explain that Minasian Rugs would be looking to put up these temporary
signs 2 or 3 times a year for speaal showings.
J. Macsai stated that Minasian Rugs needs to have a permanent sign stating that they are a
gallery or that they have a "rug gallery' and then they could advertise for the special showings
by using window signs that are conforming to the Sign Ordinance instead of constantly using
temporary signs attached to the outside of the building.
C. Brakas stated that these special showings wouldn't be constantly on going and they are
planned for only 2 or 3 times a year. C. Brakas noted that the duration of the showings would be
approximately 2-3 months each Bob Fahlstrom noted that the dates of the shovemg displayed on
the current temporary signs are already a month out of date. C Brakas responded that Minasian
had extended the time the sign was up for a cocktail party. J. Macsai said that this proposed
system could become a mess w�tn overlapping dates and a confusion of signage J. Macsai
noted that in Chicago, the gallery name is placed on the building but the work being shown is
advertised on a window sign or window poster. C. Brakas disagreed and noted that fAinasian
isn't just a `gallery" but a store as well.
M. Larsen queried if there were 2 entrances and if the gallery was a separate space. C. Brakas
Stated no there was only one entry J.. Macsai stated that this proposed sign arrangement that
would allow advertising for a -gallery showings` of a store's merchandise totally negates the Sign
Ordinance. J. Macsai noted that if the Board accepted the logic put forward by Minasian Carpels
for their gallery showings then this would begin a precedent which would enable almost any store
to call itself a'gallery' and then be free to put up temporary signs without following the Sign
Ordinance.
J. Weiss noted that other gallenes in the neighborhood do not use temporary signage to advertise
special displays. L. Berkun added that the current temporary signs are confusing because you
are looking for the entry to the gallery. M. Larsen proposed adding the words 'and Gallery' in the
same typestyle as the existing wall sign
over the entry door. The Board agreed with M. Larsen's proposed solution.
J. Weiss asked C. Brakas as to why Minasian didn't use the Pioneer Press or list their display in
the gallery sections of local papers. J. Weiss stated that Minasian wanted to use signage instead
of using other advertising outlets would be more appropriate. C. Brakas stated that Minasian
advertised in higher end magazines in England and other parts of the globe. J. Weiss asked C.
Brakas if the carpets in these sp-ecial displays are for sale? C. Brakas stated that usually, most
carpets in a display are for safe J Macsai note that there is a very fine line between advertising
for art exhibited and advertising for the sale of the art exhibited..
M. Larson motioned to have the temporary signs removed immediately J. Macsai
seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
A discussion was held between the Board and C. Brakas after the formal vote in which the Board
advised her of how to arrange for a permanent gallery sign.
Meeting Minutes
Sign review and Appeals Board
March 8, 2001
Page 3
S.R.A.8#01-07: 2538 Greenbav — Koeniq and Strev
Mr. David Thon-etz of White Way Sign introduced himself to the Board and made his
presentation Koenig & Strey has merged with G.M.A.0 (General Mortgage Acceptance
Corporation) Consequently, they have a new logo and new colors (blue letters with a white
background and orange logo) and they need to re -face all of their existing signs. Mr. Thometz
continued that 2 variances would be required to re -face the existing pole sign. 1. The existing
sign is seventeen foot eight inches ( 17' — 8') high and the Sign ordinance only allows a fifteen
foot six inch high sign (15' — 6"). 2. The existing sign is only tyro (2'-0") feet from the property line
and cannot exceed three (3'-0') in height. Mr. Thometz stated that for Koenig & Strey to move
the sign back from the property line so that it could obtain a fifteen foot six inch (15' — 6-) height
would cause an undue financial hardship for the owner. At this time J. Macsai stated that all
owners consider any expense they incur meeting the Sign Ordinance to be an "undue expense'.
Mr. Thometz explained that moving the s.gn back would also make it less visible. A brief
discussion followed between J. Weiss, J Macsai and D. Thometz on visibility issues related to
the pole sign fAr Thometz noted that scuthbound drivers obtain a partial view of the sign that
is helpful in locating Koenig & Strey
S. 1=ahlstrom noted that the proposed sign must also meet the opacity requirements for the
proposed white background. Mr. Thometz pointed to a sample of a sign he had brought with him
to illustrate that the white background will be a 20 Gauge sheet of aluminum painted white. This
sheet will have a cutout that is sized one inch (1") larger than the letters to provide the allowable
V white border around the blue letters. The Board accepted this method of meeting the opacity
requirements
M. Larson noted that he had driven by Koenig and Strey going southbound in the right hand lane
and that he felt the sign did help to clue motorists that they were coming up on the Koenig & Strey
Building. He would not advocate moving the pole sign back in tnis particular instance. M.
Larson also stated that he was concerned about the existing white plastic individual letter wall
sign currently affixed to the Greenbay Road side of the building facade which faces west. Larson
questioned what was to be done with this existing signage given that a new illuminated wall sign
was proposed for this same fagade. Mr. Thometz explained that the white plastic letters will be
removed as part of this proposal and the draftsman had failed to note their removal on the
submitted elevations.
J. Weiss disagreed with M Larson and stated that if the pole sign were lowered that it wouldn't be
so obstructed by the mansard roof and it would be more visible to automobiles. A general
discussion took place between the Board and Mr. Thometz conceming cutting down the height of
the pole sign to twelve foot eight (12' — 8') to the top of the sign. J. Weiss also noted that the
existing pole sign has an electrical weather head connection at the top west corner. J. Weiss
noted that this made the pale sign unattractive and gave it a somErwhat cluttered appearance
because this type of electrical connection was almost never seen. Mr. Thometz noted that it
would be costly to have to remove he service head connection in order to provide an
underground electrical connection through the pole.
Meeting Minutes
Sign Review and Appeals Board
March 8, 2001
Page 4
The discussion about how to IcNer the pole sign continued and Mr. Thometz pointed out that the
wires for the extenor electrical service head connection of the sign must be at least eighteen feet
Above the ground and that cutting down the sign and providing an underground electrical
connection for the sign would be an undue expense to the owner. J. Weiss noted that the
proposed illuminated wall sign over the south facing entry door would constitute a 2ntl south facing
sign. J. Weiss noted that Koenig could have the new wall sign but should remove the pole sign
which will have to be removed :n 2003. Mr. Thometz countered that Koenig and Strey would
want to keep the pole sign until 2003.
J. Weiss stated that he would propose allow;ng the new south facing wall sign and the new east
signs but deny the re -facing of the pole sign Mr Thometz disagreed. J Ma:sai proposed
moving the new south facing wall sign to the Greenbay Road corner and removing the pole sign
L. Berkun supported this concept. A lengthy general discussion foVowed ccrcerning various
options on how to eliminate the pole sign. J Macsai also disagreed with Mr. Thometz that
Koenig & Strey would be sublett to an undue expense if they have to re-wo."►c their existing
signage.
M. Larson and J. Weiss proposed a new solution for a ground sign to be three feet high (3' — 0')
High (including a base) by eight feet (8'— 0') tong to be located one foot of the Greenbay Road
property line. This sign would meet the current Sign Ordinance and would a°so meet the intent of
the future Sign Ordinance In addition, Koenig & Strey would be allowed to have a new
illuminated wall sign located over the entry docr to the south facing facade. The signage
proposed for the eastern fa;a,e of the building would also be approved
A brief general discussion fclloNed concerning this proposal. Mr. Thometz acknowledged that
he would need to discuss this proposal with his client Koenig and Strey and that he wasn't
authorized to approve acceptance of the proposal
J. Weiss motioned the following:
1. Removal of the existing Pole sign and it's replacement with a monument sign
which would be three feet high by 8 feet long (including the base)
( T - 0" H x 8'— 0" L) . This monument sign would be located 1' -- 0" west of the
Greenbay Road Property Line.
2. Approval for the proposed illuminated wall sign (as submitted and subject to
meeting the opacity requirements of the Sign Ordinance) to be located above the
entry door of the south facing facade.
Approval of the proposed east facade wail sign and address placard as submitted
and subject To meeting any opacity requirements for the white background.
M. Larson Seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
Meeting Minutes
Sign Review and Appeals Board
March 8, 2001
Page 5
S.R.A.B #01-08: 515 Main Street -The Great Bank
Mr. Bill Smith of the Great Bank and Mr. Klaus Koch of Sheckerman Koch introduced themselves
to the Board and presented their case Mr. Koch noted that there were 2 variations required by
the signage contained in their proposal ,
1. The mounting height of the Great Bank Logo over the
Comer entry at Main Street and Chicago Avenue.
2. The directional sign posted at the southeast corner of the building is within 20' — 0' of the
Public Right of Way. Mr. Koch noted that he had submitted the directional sign to the traffic
Engineering Department for their review. And Raleev Dalhal had no problems with the signage or
its placement.
Mr. Koch also made the following clarifications for items that were not shown correctly on the
submitted plans;
The awnings will all be a dark green color.
The awnings will not have any logos on them.
B. Fahlstrom clarified for the Board that the proposed wall signage met the area requirements of
the Sign Ordinance. Klaus Koch clarified that awnings would be 4' — 0' deep.
M. Larsen briefly reviewed the typestyle of the signs with Mr. Koch.
J. Weiss noted that the submitted blackline prints and the color xerox renderings didn't quite
agree dimensionally. J. Weiss also noted that the description of the individual sign lettering
description called for both an individually illuminated channel letter and a silhouette type of
Sign. Mr. Koch clarified that the letters will not be a silhouette type of letter.
J. Weiss queried Mr. Smith if Starbucks might become a tenant in the project.
J. Macsal motioned for approval of the sign package as submitted. J. Weiss seconded and
the motion was approved unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no other business, Chairman Larsen motioned for adjournment at 8:45 P.M.
NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Sign Board will be April 12, 2001 at 7:30 P.M in Room 2404.
C.C.
MINUTES
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
THURSDAY APRIL 12,2p9 I
EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun,
MEMBERS ABSENT: J. Maesai, C. Thomas
STAFF PRESENT: B. Fahistrom
OTHERS PRESENT:
Chairman Larsen called the meeting to order at 7:40 P.M. L. Berkun motioned to approve the
Meeting Minutes of March 14, 2001. J. Weiss seconded and the Meeting Minutes were
approved unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS NONE
CITIZEN COMMENT NONE
NEW BUSINESS
S.R.A.B. #01-09: 1325 Howard Street — The Charter Bank
There was no one present from either the Charter Bank or from their designated agent (Global
Graphics). The formal hearing for this case will be carried forward to the May le meeting of the
S.R.A.B. Board if so desired by the applicants.
An informal discussion conceming this project was held after cases #01-10 and 901-11 had been
heard. The members of the Sign Board unanimously stated the following as their
recommendations for how the re -facing of the existing signs should be implemented. -
Move the east facing time and temperature sign and the existing Bank wall sign down
from the top of the building to a height (as close as physically possible) to fifteen foot six
inches (155) from the ground. These two signs should be positioned in horizontal
alignment.
2. Provide and install a new west facing wall sign to be mounted at the same height as the
re -positioned east and the existing south facing wall signs. This new wall sign would be
the same size and dimensions as the existino south facino wall sign.
3. Demolish and remove the existing non -conforming freestanding sign_
These recommendations were faxed to Global Graphics on Friday April 13, 2001.
Meeting Minutes
S.R-A.B. Meeting
April 12, 2001
Page 2
S.R.A.B. #01-10: 1511 Monroe Street — Coda Developers — Monroe Court Townhomes
Mr. Scott Krone cf Coda Development presented his sign proposal to the Board. Mr. Krone
stated that Coda is asking fcr the standard size variation for the proposed construction 1 real
estate sign. The proposed si;n is 32 square feet in a residential zone that would only allow a six
square foot sign Mr Krone noted that the proposed sign along with a construction trailer will be
positioned at the southwest comer of the site to take advantage of the one way traffic on Monroe
Street. A genera) discussion followed concerning the exact location of the sign. Mr. Krone noted
that the sign will to installed at the southwest corner of the lot not the southwest street corner
which has a house and lot awned by a separate party.
Mr. Krone went on to state that the sign graph;ss are attempting to reflect the clean modern look
of the proposed tc-omhouse architecture . the Coda corporate graphic will also be used for the
graphic bullet pants of the s;cn. M Larsen noted that in addition to the size variation
the number of items of graphic information for this proposed sign are also an issue. J. Weiss
stated that the proposed sign appears to have double the number over the 7 items allowed by the
Sign Ordinance. A general discussion followed with Mr. Krone to explain what constitutes an item
of information, M Larsen continued the discussion with Mr. Krone by outlining the Sign Board's
usual parameters for similar construction or real estate signs. IN Krone stated that Coda would
be willing to remove some of the graphic information on the sign to bring it closer to conformance
with the Sign Ordinance. J. Weiss proposed the elimination of the bullet points on the sign which
would clean up the items of information issue. L Berkun also proposed increasing the size of the
phone number of the sales agent.
J. Weiss motioned to approve the sign subject to the removal of the bullet points and
Increasing the size of the phone number. M Larson seconded and the motion was
unanimously approved
S.R.A.B. #01-11: 909 Davis Street —Construction Sinn for the McDougal Littell Office
Buildings.
Mr. Dan Aboutur from Mesirow Stein made his proposal to the Sign Board. J. Weiss asked Mr.
Abouter if they had any pictures of what the site looked like previously with the old signage.
Mr. Abouter replied that Mesirow Stein had removed the previous signage and no photographs
were available. B Fahlstrom noted that Alice Rebachini from Mesirow Stein wanted the new
Jersey barrier sign because the previous sign was too small and when mounted on the chain link
fence it was lost in the clutter of other signage (including signs for the Chefs Station Restaurant)
Alice felt that the 9J9 Davis sign did not look professional either in execution or its placement.
L. Berkun observed that the signs as presented by Mesirow Stein are very cluttered and seem to
have way too many peoples names associated with the project. J. Weiss added that the
Assistant City Manager appears to be going out of her way to assuage the desires of the
proprietors of the Chefs Station Restaurant for identification signage during the construction of
909 Davis. J. Weiss noted that the clutter of extra signs for the Chefs Station made it hard for
the former construction signs to be seen.
Meeting Minutes
S.R.A.B. Meeting
April 12, 2001
Page 3
L. Berkun asked Mr. Aboutur. that given the large surface area of the proposed sign, if the
freestanding Jersey barrier sign base would be capable of resisting the kind of wind loads that
were occurring that evening L. Berkun noted that planes were not being allowed to land at
O'hare Airport because of severe wind gusts and that the proposed Jersey barrier sign could
topple over. A general discussion folforied concerning this issue and how the Jersey barrier sign
might be stabilized. The Board concurred that this was an important issue. Mr. Abountur said
that he would check carefuPy into this issue
M. Larson asked what the leasable Square footage was for this project? Mr. Aboutur replied
About forty thousand (40,000) square feet of space J. Weiss stated that he did not like the
cluttered appearance of the sign and the over abundance of items of information.
A general discussion followed on how the appearance of the sign could be cleaned up and less
cluttered in appearance. Mr. Aboutur noted that the proposed signs combined a construction sign
with a real estate sign. B. Fahlstrom reviewed the Sign Ordinance regarding Construction Signs
and noted that the Sign ord:Hance does not appear to t;mit items of information in regard to
Construction Signs, J. Weiss discussed several strategies for removing some names and items
of information from the sign with Mr. Aboutur.
Based on this discussion J. Weiss motioned to approve the submitted sign subject to the
following:
1. The names of the 2 leasing agents (Berger and Cummings) would be removed
from the sign.
2. The words " a Houghton Mifflin Company" would be reduced to match the size of
The McDougal Littell name.
3. The phone number will be made larger.
4. The S.P.A.R.C. Committee stipulated that the City Traffic Engineer
must approve the final placement of the signs as a condition of the Permit.
S. The sign must be braced, tied off, or otherwise made secure to avoid structural
overturning because of wind.
M.Larson seconded and the motion was approved unanimously
ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no other business Chairman Larson motioned for adjournment at 8:40.
NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Sign review and Appeals Board is scheduled for May 10, 2001 at 7:30
P.M.
C.C.
Kadlon Mims, Carolyn Smith
MINUTES
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
THURSDAY July 12, 2001
EVANSTON CiViC CENTER, ROOM 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss,, C. Thomas
MEMBERS ABSENT: J. Macsai, L. Berkun
STAFF PRESENT: B. Fahlstrom
OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Tim Butvilas — Charter One Bank
Mr. Ralph Cilia — MK Signs
Mr. James Sutphen- The Joseph freed
Company
OTHER BUSINESS None
CITIZEN COMMENT None
OLD BUSINESS
S.R.A.B. #01-13 1325 Howard Street — The Charter Bank — Continuation
from S.R.A.B. Meetina on April 12. 2001.
Mr. Ralph Cilia and Mr. Tim Butvilas made their presentation to the Board.
A brief discussion took place concerning the existing free standing pylon sign on
Howard Street, J. Weiss explained to Mr. Butvilas that this sign was approved in
1988 and that the Sign Board had granted 2 previous variations to allow the non-
conforming sign to remain. J. Weiss noted that the Evanston Sign Ordinance
did not allow such a tall sign so close to the property line.
Mr. Cilia reviewed the proposed channel letter signs for the east and west
facades of the building. Mr. Cilia noted that the existing time and temperature
signs would be removed and that the new channel letter signs would be mounted
at 1 v' — 6" above grade in conformance with the Sign Ordinance, The existing
sign box at the south side of the building would be re -faced with a new
translucent sign face for Charter One Bank.
Meeting Minutes
Sign Review and Appeals Board
July 12, 2001 Meeting
Page 2
S.R.A.B. ##01-13 1325 Howard Street— The Charter Bank — Continuation
from S.R.A.B. Meetinq on April 12. 2001.
Mr. Cillia also reviewed the proposed signage for the drive in facility. The
Existing cash machine station signs would be re -faced with translucent white
plastic signs with blue letters stating -ATM". Small Charter One box signs would
be added to the south and east facades of the drive in facility.
Board members noted that the proposed translucent white background for the
Charter One letters did not meet the Sign Ordinance requirements that internally
illuminated signs allow the light to shine fully only through the graphic portions of
the sign. Mr. Cilia responded that the standard blue letters of the Charter One
Bank sign are too dark to be illuminated effectively. Therefore, a white
background is required for graphic clarity. Mr. Cilia proposed installing a
translucent white vinyl scrim on the back face of the plexiglass which would cut
down the brightness of the white background by fifty percent. Mr. Cilia stated
that he would provide a sample piece of plexiglass for the board to review.
J. Weiss stated that he would like to see the ATM sign faces changed so that the
background color was blue and the color of the letters was white. Mr. Cilia and
Mr. Butvilas agreed to this change.
J. Weiss asked Mr. Cillia and Mr. Butvilas if they would agree to reduce the area
of the east facing channel sign so that it matched the size of the west facing
channel letter sign. Mr. Butvilas stated that if the east facing sign was made
smaller then it would need to be mounted higher. C. Thomas and M. Larson
noted treat proposed larger channel letter sign was appropriately scaled to the
scale of the blank end wall of the building.
M. Larson motioned to approve the submitted sign plan subject to the
following:
1. The ATM letters shall have a blue background with white letters.
2. All box siqns shall be provided with the translucent white vinyl
backing to achieve a uniform reduction in the light transmission of
the white sign backgrounds.
3. The existing free standing sign will be removed.
This Motion to approve passed unanimously.
Meeting Minutes
Sign Review and Appeals Board
July 12, 2001 Meeting
Page 3
NEW BUSINESS
S.R.A.B #01-19 Dempster Dodge Shoppinq Center— Former Silo
Buildina — Revision to a Unified Siqn Plan.
Mr. Jim Sutphen of the Joseph Freed Company made his presentation to the
Board. Mr. Sutphen reviewed renderings of the newly renovated portion of the
center that had belonged to the former Silo store. Seven new tenant spaces have
been created. Three stores face east onto Dodge Avenue, the remaining four
spaces face north onto the parking lot of the shopping center. The east facing
elevations feature steel canopies and masonry parapet walls. The north facing
elevation features a Dryvit sign band at the top of the one story building with a
masonry arcade with masonry columns.
Mr. Sutphen proposed extending the requirements for wall signs for outlined in
the existing unified business center sign plan to the new tenant spaces.
The sizes, colors and graphic typestyle for all wall signs would be identical to the
the existing center
A brief discussion was held concerning the possibility that the City of Evanston
might rent this portion of the building for use as a branch library.
Mr. Sutphen reviewed the proposed wall sign for "Evanston Nails" a new tenant
for the stores facing Dodge Avenue. J. Weiss stated that given the lower height
of the parapet wall sign band on Dodge Avenue that the wall signs for the east
facade should be limited to one line of graphics and not used stacked graphics.
Mr. Sutphen said that he would comply with this requirement and that he
prefered the appearance of a single line of signage as opposed to stacked
graphics. Mr. Sutphen also stated that that the current Unified sign plan did not
allow for a double line of graphics.
Meeting Minutes
Sign Review and Appeals Board
July 12, 2001 Meeting
Page 4
M. Larsen proposed that given the grade changes at the north side of the
building, that the top of the signs should have a uniform alignment. Mr. Sutphen
agreed and proposed that the upper line of the three foot sign band
(3' — 0") sign band at the north side should be set down three feet (3' — 0")
from the top of the coping . The east side the three foot (3' -- 0") sign band
would be set one foot (V — 0") below the coping. And six inches above the
metal support 1 tension hangers for the metal canopies .
Mr. Sutphen noted that GNC had installed their sign at the north side on the
masonry wall and not on the proposed Dryvit sign band. Mr. Sutphen stated that
both the Joseph Freed Company and GNC would preffer to locate the sign on
the Dryvit sign band The Board agreed that the GNC sign would need to be re-
installed as required on the Dryvit sign band. B. Fahlstrom stated that he would
provide a letter permitting the relocation of the GNC Sign to the Dryvit sign band.
A brief discussion was held concerning potential signage for the tower element.
Mr. Sutphen stated that at the present time no signage is contemplated for the
northeast corner tower. If a larger tenant was to rent the whole block of space
and want tower signage then Mr. Sutphen would bring the proposed signage to
the Sign Board for their review and approval.
J. Weiss motioned to approve the revisions to the existing Unified Sign
Plan as submitted . C. Thomas seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT Hearing no other business Chairman Larsen motioned
adjournment at 8:35 P.M.
NEXT MEETING Thursday August 9, 2001 at 7:30 P.M.
C.C.
MINUTES
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
THURSDAy August 9, 2001
EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OnIERS PRESENT:
CnUEN COMMENT
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun,
J. Macsai, C. Thomas
B. Fahlstrom
David Forte t Forte Architecture
Coleman J. Joyce
Delia Joyce
Paul Tran
Kimberley Cao
No Citizen Comment was made.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The meeting minutes from the July 12, 2001 meeting of The Sign Review and
Appeals Board was were approved unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
S.R.A.B.#01-20: 2320 Main Street! Ward Manufacturinq
Mr. David Forte, of Forte Architecture, presented his proposal for a new
monument sign for his client Ward Manufacturing to the Board.
The proposed monument sign would be seven feet high by three and one half
feet wide. The sign would feature stainless steel cutout letters mounted to a
bronze anodized aluminum sign box. This monument sign would be placed
within two fet of the property line.
Mr. Forte passed out site photos to the members of the Sign Board. Mr. Forte
noted that there was a temporary plywood mock-up in place at the site that would
give Board members a sense of the scale of the proposed sign. Mr. Forte stated
that the sign will be situated at the best viewing angle for truck traffic coming east
on Main Street.
S.R.A.B. Minutes
August 9, 2001
Page 2
Chairman Larsen noted that the lot line appears to be far off the curb line.
Mr. Forte agreed that the lot line was situated further back then is usual and then
went on to explain that this portion of the site contains a depressed swale
detention basin in the grass lawn. The proximity of the swale allows only a small
flat area in which to locate the sign.
M. Larsen observed that the area of the sign was a problem because the
frontage of the site is less than one hundred linear feet and that only twelve
square feet of sign area is allowed in such cases. Also the height of he sign is a
problem because of the sign's proposed distance to the property line.
M. Larsen asked if the sign size could be reduced by fifty percent?
J. Weiss produced to sketches that showed the sign at its proposed height and at
a reduced height of six feet. Both sketches included a human figure for scale.
J. Weiss noted that the lower sign was very readable but the lower height was a
more appropriate scale and was better proportioned. Mr. Forte stated that his
client would accept a sign that was six feet in height.
A brief discussion followed concerning the location of the address numerals and
the need to keep the letters above piled up snow in the winter for visibility.
J. Weiss motioned to approve the sign subject to the following:
1. The sign height shall be six feet (6' — 0").
2. The sign width shall be three feet (3' — 0").
This motion to approve passed unanimously.
S.R.A.B.01-21 — 129-31 Elmwood -Parkside Condominiums
Coleman and Delia Joyce presented their proposed real estate sign to the Board.
and noted that the presentation drawing for the proposed real estate sign was
drawn incorrectly.
J. Weiss observed that the dimensions for the sign were called out as eight feet
of width by three feet of height. However, the sign was actually drawn in scale at
eight feet of width by six and one half feet in height or fifty two square feet in
area. J. Weiss produced a sketch of their sign drawn with an area of four feet in
height by eight feet in width at thirty two square feet of area which has become
the Sign Board's accepted maximum size for real estate signs in a residential
zoning district.
S.R.A.B. Minutes
August 9, 2001
Page 3
J. Weiss further explained that his proposed revisions to the sign would eliminate
all but two of the bullet points from the proposed sign. Delia Joyce stated that the
proposed revisions were acceptable.
J. Weiss motioned to approve the revised sign size of eight feet (8' — 011) in
width by four feet (4' — 0") in height. Only two bullet points items of
information would be allowed on the sign.
The motion to approve passed unanimously.
S.R.A.B. ##01-22: 1235 Dodge Avenue / Nails Dimensions
Mr. Paul Tran and Kimberley Cao presented their proposed window signs to the
board. Mr. Tran stated that his client needed signs in both windows because the
store is very hard to see in traffic. Mr. Tran noted that the parkway sidewalk tree
blocks visibility of the store from northbound vehicles.
J. Weiss and M. Larsen questioned the need for the sign facing the alley.
Mr. Tran stated that the north facing sign is needed because the large Spex car
wash sign was very distracting and competes for the viewer`s attention.
Mr. Tran also noted that the landlord often parks his large SLIV out in front of
their store and that this also blocks visibility of the nail salon to potential
customers.
A discussion followed between the board members and the presenters
concerning the north facing sign. J. Weiss noted that in retrospect he believes
that the Board made a mistake in allowing Spex to have such a large sign. J,
Weiss noted however that the a directional sign is required to guide motorists
through the alley to the car wash at the rear of the building which necessitates a
sign that is clearly visible even if it is placed at right angles to the public way.
Nails Dimensions, on the other hand, does not need a large directional sign at
right angles to the street because their entry is directly on the Dodge Avenue and
not placed at the rear of the building.
Mr. Tran disagreed with J. Weiss and stated that the window sign facing the alley
was still needed. Mr. Tran promised the Board that the window sign would be
professionally made and attractive.
S.R.A.B. Minutes
August 9, 2001
Page a
L. Bekun suggested that the neon border with the fingers be allowed to wrap the
building corner with a neon sign for the phone number only facing the alley.
J. Weiss notes that the neon border with the finger motive is visually very clever
and that allowing this border to wrap around the building corner and be placed in
the alley window would be an effective compromise.
Mr. Tran returned to his theme that his client needs window signs both facing
Dodge Avenue and facing the alley. M. Larsen told the Board that he agrees
with J. Weiss that the Board was in error when it granted such a large sign to
Spex. M. Larsen noted that the Board must be careful not to punish these
applicants because of previous signage errors that may have been made in
regards to the Spex site.
Mr. Tran noted that his client has only four hundred square feet of space but the
beauty salon on at the other end of the building has a thousand square feet of
space and more window space for its signs.
A long discussion followed on whether to allow or disallow the north facing
window sign. J. Weiss stated that he is against allowing the full window sign to
be placed facing the alley.
J. Weiss motions the following:
9. Allow the window sign and border facing Dodge Avenue as
submitted.
2. Allow only the neon border with the finger design to be placed in the
north 1 alley facing windows. The full window sign with the name of
the busines and the telephone number shall not be placed facing the
a!!ey-
This motion passed unanimously
ADJOURNMENT
There being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
NEXT MEETING
September 13, 2001.
Minutes
Sign Review and Appeals Board
Thursday September 13, 2001
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
Members Present: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai, C. Thomas
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: B. Fahistrom
Others Present: Dare Hirsch / Cingular Wireless
Steve Hirsch / Cingular Wireless
Patti Hirsch
Michael Bernod / Prairie Shore Properties
Carolyn N. Smith 1 Prairie Shore properties
Kelly Alcock - Sure Light Signs
Carolyn Houck Unity Church
George Vytalic - North Shore Sign
Henry Funkenbusch 1 Sign One
Michael Gintor 1 Hilton garden Inn
Citizen Comment
No Citizen Comment was made.
Annroval of Minutes
The meeting minutes from the August 9, 2001 Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting
were approved unanimously.
New Business
S.R.A.B.01-23: 1975 Greenbav Road - Cinaular
Mr. Dan Hirsch and Mr. Steve Hirsch of Cingular Wireless reviewed the proposed
refacing of signs with the Board. Mr. D. Hirsch noted that the new channel letter sign
above the arched front entrywill be smaller than the previous North Shore Cellular
sign. The banner currently over the south facing box sign is only temporary and will be
removed once the new signs are installed.
J. Weiss and M. Larsen questioned if the white sign face for the south facing sign will
be translucent or opaque? D. Hirsh stated that the white background for the sign can
be made opaque if the Board requires an opaque background. J. Macsai noted that the
presentation packet provided by the sign'company was very confusing and could be
improved.
S.R.A.B. Minutes
September 13, 2001
Page 2
S.R.A.B.01-23: 1975 Greenbav Road - Cinqular-Continued
M. Larsen reviewed the variations to the Sign Ordinance which would be required to
approve the proposed signs. A general discussion followed concerning the west facing
channel letter sign over the arched entry element and the south facing box sign which
will be refaced. C. Thomas noted that the channel letter sign would be an improvement
to the existing arched facade facing Greenbay Road. The Board concurred that the
placement of these two signs was appropriate.
J. Weiss noted that the proposal also called for the re -facing of an existing box sign
facing east towards the Metra tracks. J. Weiss stated that this sign was not allowed by
the Sign Ordinance and should be removed. Board members noted that the back face
of the building (the east face) needed to have the graffiti removed.
J. Weiss motioned to approve the submitted sign proposal subject to the
following:
1. The south facing box sign shall have an opaque background.
2. The east facing sign (facing the Metra tracks) shall be removed. ;
The motion to approve passed unanimously.
S.R.A.B. #01-24: 319 - 321 Custer - Stoneridge Condominiums
Chairman Larsen Recused himself from voting on this case.
Carolyn Smith of Prairie Shore properties presented the proposed real estate sign to
the Board. Carolyn S. explained that Prairie Shore properties is aware that the
proposed sign exceeds the requirements of the Sign Ordinance. A general discussion
followed between the Board and the applicants conceming the Ordinance limitations of
seven items of information. C. Thomas, M. Larsen, and J. Weiss noted that the
proposed sign contained way too many items of information.
C. Thomas noted that most of the lettering is the same size and that graphically the
sign is difficult to read. A general discussion followed on the graphic style of the
lettering.
The applicants stated that they will re -schedule another hearing with the Sign
Board and return with a revised sign design for the Board to review.
S.R.A.B. Minutes
September 13, 2001
Page 3
S.R.A.B. ##01-25: 443 Asbury - B.P. Amaco Station
Kelly Alcock from Sure Lite Signs presented the sign package for the BP/Amoco station
at 433 Asbury. The major signage issue to be presented and reviewed by the Board
concerned the replacement of the existing freestanding sign at the southeast corner of
Oakton and Asbury Streets. M. Larsen and J. Weiss noted that because of the location
of the existing sign which is less than three feet from the property line, the height of the
new sign (the existing sign is fifteen feet and nine inches tally is an important issue. J.
Weiss passed out photographs of the recently remodeled BP/Amaco station located on
McCormick boulevard in Skokie. This station was provided with a lower monument sign
in a landscaped planter.
K Alcock noted that the new proposed freestanding sign will have a height of eleven
feet above grade and be similar in appearance and height to the SP /Amato sign
shown in J. Weiss's photographs. K. Alcock also noted that the Evanston Eire
Department had stipulated that the sign be placed at least five feet above grade to
provide clear comer visibility for motorists at a busy intersection where many school
children cross the street on a daily basis.
J. Macsai noted that the proposed design which featured a smaller corporate sign
placed asymmetrically over a larger pricing panel was unattractive and needed to be
re -designed. A long discussion followed in which Board members suggested several
design alternatives to the proposed sign design. A second discussion followed
concerning the possibility of orienting the sign at a forty five degree angle as a
monument sign without a pole.
C. Thomas proposed centering the upper smaller white sign over the lower pricing
panel and having the sign company add blank metal panels to the sides of the
corporate sign so that the final sign had a square shape. K. Alcock rejected this
proposed re -design and she stated that BP/Amato would not go along with the
proposed sign changes and that they would leave the existing pole sign in place.
M. Larson stated that he felt the Board was pushing too hard for a re -design of the sign.
The Board should allow BP/Amaco to utilize existing sign components. M. Larson also
noted that a smaller and lower sign was a more desirable end result as opposed to
forcing BP/Amato to redesign their sign.
A separate discussion followe_ ;,nceming the design of the canopy fascias.
Minutes
Sign Review and Appeals Board
Thursday September 13, 2001
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
Members Present: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai, C. Thomas
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: B. Fahistrom
Others Present: Dan Hirsch 1 Cingular Wireless
Steve Hirsch I Cingular Wireless
Patti Hirsch
Michael Bernod I Prairie Shore Properties
Carolyn N. Smith I Prairie Shore properties
Kelly Alcock - Sure Light Signs
Carolyn Houck Unity Church
George Vytalic - North Shore Sign f
Henry Funkenbusch 1 Sign One
Michael Gintor I Hilton garden Inn
Citizen Comment
No Citizen Comment was made.
.Approval of Minutes
The meeting minutes from the August 9, 2001 Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting
were approved unanimously.
New Business
S.R.A.B.#01-23: 1975 Greenbav Road - Cingular
Mr. Dan Hirsch and Mr. Steve Hirsch of Cingular Wireless reviewed the proposed
refacing of signs with the Board. Mr. D. Hirsch noted that the new channel letter sign
above the arched front entry will be smaller than the previous North Shore Cellular
sign. The banner currently over the south facing box sign is only temporary and will be
removed once the new signs are installed.
J. Weiss and M. Larsen questioned if the white sign face for the south facing sign will
be translucent or opaque? D. Hirsh stated that the white background for the sign can
be made opaque if the Board requires an opaque background. J. Macsai noted that the
presentation packet provided by the sign'company was very confusing and could be
improved.
S.R.A.B. Minutes
September 13, 2001
Page 4
S.R.A.B. ##01-25: 443 Asbury - B.P. Amaco Station - continued
J. Weiss motioned to approve the BP/Amaco sign package with the following
conditions:
1. The Freestanding sign would consist of a four foot by four and one half
foot (4' - 0" x 4' - 6") corporate identity sign mounted on to the smallest
size pricing panel ( sixty six inches (66") wide. This combined sign would
be mounted five feet (5' - 0") above grade at a total height of twelve feet
nine inches (12' - 9") to the top of the sign.
2. The canopy fascias would not have any graphic lettering but one flat vinyl
hellos logo could be applied centered on each canopy facia face.
3 All other signage was approved.
This motion to approve passed with a vote of 3 to 2 with C. Thomas and J. Macsai
voting in opposition.
S.R.A.B. #01-26: Central Street - Unity Church on the North Shore.
Cara Houck of the Unity Church of the North Shore presented the proposed
freestanding monument identity sign to the Board. Mr. George Vytalcil from North
Shore Signs noted that the existing free-standing sign on Gross Point Road will be
removed to conform with The Sign Ordinance's requirement that only one freestanding
sign is allowed per street frontage.
J. Weiss noted that the proposed background for the changeable copy portion of the
sign was white and would not conform to the Sign ordinance requirement for .
background illumination . J. Weiss suggested that the background be a darker color.
The applicants stated that they would conform with this requirement.
A discussion followed concerning the size of the portion of the sign allowed for
changeable copy. B. Fahlstrom noted that although this portion of the sign met the
ordinance requirements for a church bulletin board sign that this approvable area of
changeable copy was also combined with an identity sign component making it
necessary for the Board to review and approve this sign.
S.R.A.B. Minutes
September 13, 2001
Page 3
S.R.A.B. 9#01-25: 443 Asbury - B.P. Amaco Station
Kelly Alcock from Sure Lite Signs presented the sign package for the BP/Amoco station
at 433 Asbury. The major signage issue to be presented and reviewed by the Board
concerned the replacement of the existing freestanding sign at the southeast comer of
4akton and Asbury Streets. M. Larsen and J. Weiss noted that because of the location
of the existing sign which is less than three feet from the property line, the height of the
new sign (the existing sign is fifteen feet and nine inches tall) is an important issue. J.
Weiss passed out photographs -of the recently remodeled BP/Amaco station located on
McCormick boulevard in Skokie. This station was provided with a lower monument sign
in a landscaped planter.
K Alcock noted that the new proposed freestanding sign will have a height of eleven
feet above grade and be similar in appearance and height to the BP !Amato sign
shown in J. Weiss's photographs. K. Alcock also noted that the Evanston Fire
Department had stipulated that the sign be placed at least five feet above grade to
provide clear comer visibility for motorists at a busy intersection where many school
children cross the street on a daily basis.
J. Macsai noted that the proposed design which featured a smaller corporate sign
placed asymmetrically over a larger pricing panel was unattractive and needed to be
re -designed. A long discussion followed in which Board members suggested several
design alternatives to the proposed sign design. A second discussion followed
concerning the possibility of orienting the sign at a forty five degree angle as a
monument sign without a pole.
C. Thomas proposed centering the upper smaller white sign over the lower pricing
panel and having the sign company add blank metal panels to the sides of the
corporate sign so that the final sign had a square shape. K. Alcock rejected this
proposed re -design and she stated that BPIAmaco would not go along with the
proposed sign changes and that they would leave the existing pole sign in place.
M. Larson stated that he felt the Board was pushing too hard for a re -design of the sign.
The Board should allow BP1Amaco to utilize existing sign components. M. Larson also
noted that a smaller and lower sign was a more desirable end result as opposed to
forcing BP/Amato to redesign their sign.
A separate discussion followe- ;nceming the design of the canopy fascias.
,�!F11 III► III
S.R.A.B. Minutes
September 13, 2001
Page 5
S.R.A.B. #01-26: Central Street - Unity Church on the North Shore.
M. Larsen motioned approval of the sign subject to the following conditions:
1. The background for the changeable copy portion of the sign shall be a
darker color.
The motion to approve passed unanimously.
S.R.A.B. #01-27: 1818 Maple Street - Hilton Gardens Hotel
Mr. Henry Funkenbush of Sign one and Mr. Michael Gintor of the Hilton Garden Inn
made their presentation to the Board. Mr. Funkenbusch noted that Hilton was
requesting the canopy signs for the hotel because the existing hotel identity signs were
mounted close to the top of the building and could not be seen by motorists driving on
Maple Street. Mr. Funkenbusch observed that the canopy signs would be helpful to
many guests driving rental cars in from the airport or guests coming to functions at the
hotel who were unfamilliar with the hotel's location. Mr. Funkenbusch ended his
presentation by noting that Sign One and the Hilton Hotel understood that this canopy
sign must be approved as an amendment to the Church Street Plaza Special Sign
District. Mr. Funkenbusch also noted that for it's size, the Hilton Hotel had very little
signage.
J. Macsai stated that the proposed canopy channel letter signs were reasonable, but
that the flagploles should be removed. L. Berkun stated her agreement with the
removal of the flagpoles.
J. Weiss expressed his concern that the Board would be setting a precedent by
allowing signs on top of a canopy. This precent could unbalance the sign plan for the
ciniplex retail stores or stores at 909 Davis Street. C. Thomas disagreed and pointed
out that the no precedent was being set. C. Thomas noted that all signage proposed
for any buildings in the Church Street Plaza Special Sign District must first be reviewed
by the Board and then the approved by the City Council. This would prevent the
erosion of the Special Sign District Sign Plan. J. Macsa recalled that the Board had
already approved a variation to the overall Sign plan for the Ciniplex building when they
approved the larger illuminated blade sign for Wolfgang Puck. J. Macsai noted that the
earlier approval of this sign merely reinforced the point that all signage in the Special
Sign District is approved on a case by case basis.
S.R.A.B. Minutes
September 13, 2001
Page 6
S.R.A.B. #01-27: 1t318 Maple Street - Hilton Gardens Hotel,
C. Thomas motioned to approve the Channel letter signs as submitted
subject to the removal of the flagpoles from the canopy.
This motion to approve passed in a vote of 4 to 1 with J. Weiss voting in opposition.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Sign review and Appeals Board is scheduled for =
October 11, 2001 in room 2404 at 7:30 p.m-
1 — -i: — Ea• -. -c1 J!
Jk � �• t�_ C` �iR �. ��.�t.e �.i )I Cry e� _it..: --L ,i_3.���� ; :�J�,•
7-7[
w ,N 15
City of'Evanston
Draft not Approved
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
October 11, 2001 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, C. Thomas
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
I. (, I,I ..t Fl
'{7
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approved the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1128 Chicago — Jewell Osco Store
Presented by: Mr. Vincent Campione —Vincent Signs/ Consolidated Signs
The new signs proposed are sized and positioned like the existing signs. Major signs are 5" deep,
interior illuminated in red/ orange color. Existing corporate color is less red than the new standard
color. The only variation requested is the height to the top of the major signs.
The Board discussed minor re -alignment of some of the signage, but finally agreed that the
proposed locations were sufficiently thoughtful.
A motion was made to approve the signage as proposed and passed by unanimous vote.
Page 1 of 3
-' [_.i tv of -Evanston
�ru, .
NEW BUSINESS (Continued)
2511-15 Prairie —New Condominium Project
Presented by: Mr. Thomas Gourguechon — Prairie Avenue L.L.C. — Developer
This existing, temporary sign was installed by the real estate company representing the developer
without a sign permit. It is too tall for its location from the property line and has many more items
of text than permitted. The extent of the long listing of amenities was to differentiate this project
from others of its genre to drive -by viewers, according to the developer.
After some discussion the developer agreed that the text on the sign was way too much to digest
in a drive -by presentation. A sketch of the original sign without the rendering overlay was shown
and had even more text. The general view evolved that the sign should be viewed as only the first
point of contact for the development and not a 'deal sealer". Significant reduction in the text on the
sign was suggested by the Board.
A motion was made to approve the sign with the condition that the rendering overlay size
be increased and moved to show the sub -heading now covered at the top of the sign and
cover the block of small text directly under the existing overlay and passed by unanimous
vote.
Evanston Senior Center -- 300 Dodge
Presented by: Mssr. Douglas Gaynor and Robert Dorneker — Parks, Recreation, and Forestry
An RFP has been issued by the City for design/ build qualfcabons of sign firms to provide a
two faced, free standing sign in the parkway on Dodge by the new Senior Center, currently under
construction. A sketch of the proposed 3'-4'H X 8'-O"L sign layout shows the Center name at the
top and a two line, LED display in the bottom area. Text on the LED display would be non-
commercial and limited to information on park programs. The impetus for this sign came from the
Center Board and a low sign is desired that would relate to the architectural design of the Center.
A sign with LED displays at the Weber Center in Skokie was given by the presenter as an excellent
example on many things to avoid in the design of this sign. With the sign perpendicular to the
street its vision from the synagogue across Dodge will be very limited, if at all.
Page 2 of 3
'I' 'to Viet L:,' A%q q„1,.
1 27-1�
City
of Ev-c-lnston
1i111-1� •-iu•u
Board member Jack Weiss is designing the signage in and on the Center and will probably have
input into the design process of this Dodge Avenue sign. Board members had the following
comments/ suggestions on the sign data presented:
-City institutions may have latitude in the application of Sign Regulations
-the sign should strongly relate to the unusual design of the Center.
-a base will be needed on the sign to make the LED text lines visible
over snow drifts and parked cars.
-speed and scrolling patterns should be carefully determined to limit a flashy appearance
and use of "dissolve" should be considered.
-length of effective message must be small in the drive -by presentation desired.
-LED panel should be integrated with the top sign panel or cut off by reveals, etc.
-the sign has been positioned at a dead tree location, but a location closer to the comer of
Mulford may make the sign message more visible-
-maybe an Evanston High School class could help in the sign design.
The Board looks forward to seeing the final design for this sign for an important facility.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at S:OOPM.
NEXT MEETING November 8, 2001?
Page 3 of 3
Levv Sign Diagram
(Not drawn to scale)
The City of Evanston is looking for a turnkey approach to a new outdoor sign for the Le%i• Senior Center, The face
of the sign should be AO" x 96" and should be made of building materials utilized in new Levy Senior Center. All
City sign ordinances must be followed in the design of the sign. The sign should include the name of the facility,
"City of Evanston Levy Senior Center**. In addition, the sign should include a 16" x 96" (two-line) outdoor LED
display. The following components should be included:
1. High resolution.
2. Brightness dimming (customer adjustable)
3. Pixel (LED) Color red or amber
a. Ability to be operated locally through a direct connection or remotely %ia serial modems.
6. Auto -sequence program to permit unattended starting and stopping of displays. The message capacity should
hold a minimum of 81 different messages.
6. Multi -language capabilit}+.
7. Auto restoration capability in the event of a power failure.
8. Variable speed controls for scrolling messages.
96"
A
4091
A
IV
LeIv► Senior Center
Aerial Vies,'
City of Evanston
Draft not Approved
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
November 11, 2001 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, J. Macsai
W. Hallen
None
Cnic Cenlrr
Ylldr 11p1;;r.11rrrral-
f.+�re•I,m. 111im,1.
rrltrrt.`s;,l,
Trlrphutlr•
•i.- .���•'�tllll
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
None
2626 Gross Point Road -- Citgo Gas Station
(A later presenter took the sign-up sheet with them by mistake and all entries were lost.)
New signage is proposed on the new vertical surfaces of the existing pump area shelter and in
re -facing of an existing freestanding sign to agree with the revised corporate standards for Citgo.
The pump shelter signage is higher than permitted by the Sign Regulations to create proper
truck clearance under the pump shelter and has a light backround at the lettering to conform to
Citgo sign criteria. The existing freestanding sign is closer to a circulation lane than currently
permitted and is closer to the lot line than its 7' height would allow.
Page 1 of 4
Cmt CrnlrT
J /l•
't
t`Inll kuic�� itrmu•
li�rl. 1ii1n��1+
1�11_111 •��'1A
'-►�1 Wit:'
C Evanston
lrlrtlhe�nr
i tv of
, I T :1./_21111,
1
ti111 h1- .t v..lu),lr
2628 Gross Point Road — Citgo Gas Station (Continued)
When questioned, the sign manufacturer indicated that the illumination of the background at
lettering was not very intense and was actually a very"soft" white panel.
Possible raising of the freestanding sign to increase vision from the driveways was discussed.
It was decided that the increased visual impact of a higher sign was not worth the small change
in view from the drives. Possible rotation of the freestanding sign was also discussed, but the
owner is very pleased with the visibility of the sign in its current orientation.
A motion was made to approve the signage as proposed and passed by unanimous vote.
1720 Maple — OPTIMA VIEWS CONDO
Presented by: Mr. Matt Cison — Optima
Addition of a relatively small signage panel to existing condo sales signs is proposed. The
existing signs were granted variations by the Board on 6/14/01. The new panels would inform
viewers of the location and open hours of the sales office; and would give the projects web site.
The project address "1720 Maple" is also added to the existing sign text and "COMING SOON"
is changed to "NOW SELLING" and the number of units is increased to "205".
The Board questioned the need for some of the added text and the presenter agreed.
A motion was made to approve the signage with the conditions that:
- the sales office hours be removed from the added panel
"1720 Maple" not be added to the existing sign
the added panel major text be raised to 6" high
and passed by unanimous vote.
Page 2 of 4
(an[ ('tract
'IIHI Rrl¢t Awflur
L%-.tunas. 111moi%
City of Evanston
'Irlrphnri
ID .1,17 : rra
1111? h i � :S:n-irrS0
1508 Elmwood — New 7 Unit Condo
Presented by: Ms. Sheryl Larson and Ginny Holbert
A banner wall sign on a new condominium development is proposed. The sign area and the
number of "items of information" are both larger than the Sign Regulation permits and the time of
duration for the sign's existence is not specified. as required.
Discussion between the presenters and the Board revealed that some of the text could be easily
removed withoui altering the sign's sales usefulness.
A motion was made to approve the signage with the conditions that:
- the word "CONDOMIMUM" be removed at the top area of the sign
- the word "UNITS" be changed to "CONDOMINIUM"
- the two telephone numbers for WPA be removed
the word "call" be removed
- the sign height be decreased to 8 feet
a horizontal line may be added to separate text items at the sign bottom
the sign can only be up for one year, or until the last unit is sold,
whichever comes first
and passed by unanimous vote.
Page 3 of 4
Cltir 1'rrttrr
ti.
:i � r
2100 Ridgr 1}rrtur
1 5.171�[��1t, 111111��1•
rdl_111•�ell�
�
to%0
City
Evanston
of
4 i. 1�'�• ']IHi
J DD r1i ,i_•-110.41)
Discussion of "THE EAST WALL ISSUE"
Presented by: Mr. Ben Ranney — Arthur Hill & Co.
A graphic 20 ft. square "panel" is proposed to be installed for a six month review period in one of
the five 30 ft. square, blank, masonry outlined shapes on the east wall of Church Street Plaza
project. This revised layout for the panel is less "commercial" and has less text than an earlier
iteration, while still providing information to pedestrian and train riding viewers. It has a design
that incorporates a montage of images relating to motion pictures and has a "CENTURY
THEATRES" text line at its bottom. The panel frame cost is about $12K and the graphic design +
production cost is around $8K, for a total price of S20K per panel installed.
The Board discussed the need for a content criteria for the panels. It was agreed that they
should not contain product information of company logos and should be as "un-billboard-like" as
possible. A maximum limit of 10% of the panel devoted to text and the choice from only three
type fonts has been suggested. They should convey the notion of a "sponsorship of a graphic
design" rather than of an advertisement. Possible sponsors include ENH, NWU, EVMARK, and
The Mather Home. Sponsors would be welcome from any organization or business, including
tenants of the complex.
Panel life was discussed and it was established that the panels could probably last years in good
repair, but a panel change cycle in the 1 to 2 year range was thought suitable by the Board.
The question of what body should review and approve the panel designs was raised and
remains unanswered at this time.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 8:40 PM
NEXT MEETING Decermber 13, 2001
Page 4 of 4
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
December 13, 2001 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, L. Berkun, C. Thomas
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
None
101 Ridge Avenue — Shetl Oil Gas Station
Presented by: Mr. Peter Balmes — Architect with Warren Johnson Architects Inc.
New signage and lighting is proposed on the vertical surfaces of the existing pump area shelters
to agree with revised corporate standards for the Shell Oil Company. The pump shelter signage
is higher than permitted by the Sign Regulations to create proper truck clearance under the
existing pump shelter. It was explained that the new red band would be on four sides of both
pump shelters, but would only be illuminated on three sides. The sides facing the station
building are not illuminated.
A question was raised concerning any planned increase in lighting level under the pump shelters
and no increase is included in this proposal. A Committee member relayed that they had heard
that 53 calls to police had come from this address in a 30 day period. The presenter had no
knowledge of this situation.
It was noted that the zoning Ordinance requires zero foot-candle lighting level be maintained at
the property lines and the presenter indicated that the new lighting will meet this criteria.
No increase in illumination will occur on the residential property directly to the north.
A motion was made to approve the signage as proposed and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 7:45 PM.
NEXT MEETING January 10, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
January 10, 2002 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai, C. Thomas
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
None
1016 Church Street — Thai Sookdee
Presented by: Jallpop and Ifada Ratana - Owners
New awnings over the front fagade and rear entry door are proposed with signage on the
them. The Board was concerned at the inclusion of commercial messages on the "skirt" of the
front awning and number of text items. The owners claimed that the food items listed are
"specialties" of this restaurant and are needed to attract customers, but the use of the words
"NOODLES", "CURRY", "SEAFOOD", and "STIR -FRY" didn't seem to be very specialized to
the Board. The use of the words "BEER" and -WINE" to indicate existence of a liquor license
also seemed unnecessary to the Board.
The location of text on the west face of the front awning is not permitted by the Sign Regulation
and the Board felt that this restriction should be applied in this proposal.
A motion was made to approve the front and rear awning signage
with the conditions that:
-all the text proposed on the awning "skirt" be omitted.
-the text on the west face of the front awning be omitted.
and passed by unanimous vote.
2528 Greenbay — Koenig and Strey
Presented by: David Thometz
The one wall sign proposed is substantially less signage for the site than the plan previously
approved by the Board. This reduction was well received by the Board.
A motion was made to approve the signage as proposed
and passed by unanimous vote,
909 Davis — Mesirow Stein Real Estate
Presented by: Dan Aboutar — Developer Rep
A raising of the top of the Church Street Storefront Sign Zone to a height of 18'-9 1/2" is
proposed. The Board noted that the signage directly north, across Church Street, of this
proposal is not at this high elevation and no scale relationship would exist with the existing
signage. Even the signage farther to the north on Maple only has its tops at 16'-0" or 16'-8",
at the its highest. Thus, the argument of relating the proposed signage height to the existing
signage height is not a valid one. It was also noted that the building design does not create a
band for signage at the proposed elevation, but has spandrel panels interrupted by mullions at
bay third points. The location proposed for signage is not visible from the south Church Street
sidewalk. unlike the original sign zone that was previously approved.
A motion was made to not approve the signage as proposed
and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 8:15 PM.
NEXT MEETING February 14, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT
OTHERS PRESENT
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
February 14, 2002 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
None
900/950 Church Street — Retail Store Signage
Presented by: Greg Hakanen, Tom White, and Art Roman.
The presenters noted that the strip designated for signage in the Sign District proposal had
been been obscured by the steel canopy construction. They also noted that many existing
signs on Church street (east) and at other downtown locations were higher than the 15.5'
permitted by the Sign Regulations. A lack of coordination between the building architect and
the ultimate retail developer with respect the signage location was acknowledged.
Major retail tenants for the spaces are requesting more noticeable signage positioning.
Members of the Board noted that the existing signage examples shown were all located with
respect to building elements and well integrated with them. They also indicated that the
Church Street Plaza signs are at a lower position than this proposal. The major concern of the
Board was established as the use of continuous lettering across a panelized, discontinuous
spandrel array and not the height proposed for the signage. Suggestions were made to:
-place signage on the steel canopy structures
-hang signage from the canopy supports
-cut off a portion of the canopy to reveal the signage location
and were not acceptable to the developer.
An excellent design modification to introduce raised. perforated sheets in front of the spandrel
panels was suggested by a Board member. This sheets would stand out, say 8 from the
building surface and have any raceways behind it. The sheets would stop at the centerline of
the end spandrel panels in each bay and have indr.ridual channel sign letters mounted on
them. One business' name of two business' names with a break between would be permitted
centered in any building bay.
A motion was made to approve the higher sign zone proposed with the use of the
perforated sheet mounting method as described in these 2/14 meeting notes and
passed by unanimous vote.
1640 Maple — Church Street Station; Unified Business Center signage
Presented by: .tack Weiss
Mr. Weiss recluses himself from this proposal as he is the designer/ presenter of the signage.
Major signage would be located on a spandrel panel strip with gridded frosted glass panels in
light gray frames. The panels are backed by a gray surface and would give a uniform
appearance to the strip. Lettering would be channel letters with internal LED lighting creating a
back -lit" look to the signage. A sample of the illuminated lettering was shown over a piece of
the spandrel glass panel. Types styles and color would be tenant selected and all lettering
would have a satin finish. The signage perpendicular to the building face was removed from
the proposal by the presenter, as the drive-thru bank will not be a tenant.
Board members suggested cutting back the signage mounting bar to the centerline of the end
spandrel panels in each bay and this modification was acceptable to the presenter.
A motion was made to approve the Unified Business Center signage proposal with:
-no signs perpendicular to the building faces
-the mounting bar ending at the centerline of the end spandrel panels in each bay
and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 8:30 PM.
NEXT MEETING March 14, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT
OTHERS PRESENT
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
February 14, 2002 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
None
900/950 Church Street — Retail Store Signage
Presented by: Greg Hakanen, Tom White, and Art Roman.
The presenters noted that the strip designated for signage in the Sign District proposal had
been been obscured by the steel canopy construction. They also noted that many existing
signs on Church street (east) and at other downtown locations were higher than the 1 5.5'
permitted by the Sign Regulations. A lack of coordination between the building architect and
the ultimate retail developer with respect the signage location was acknowledged.
Major retail tenants for the spaces are requesting more noticeable signage positioning.
Members of the Board noted that the existing signage examples shown were all located with
respect to building elements and well integrated with them. They also indicated that the
Church Street Plaza signs are at a lower position than this proposal. The major concern of the
Board was established as the use of continuous lettering across a panelized, discontinuous
spandrel array and not the height proposed for the signage. Suggestions were made to:
-place signage on the steel canopy structures
-hang signage from the canopy supports
-cut off a portion of the canopy to reveal the signage location
and were not acceptable to the developer.
An excellent design modification to introduce raised, perforated sheets in front of the spandrel
panels was suggested by a Board member. This sheets would stand out, say 8", from the
building surface and have any raceways behind it. The sheets would stop at the centerline of
the end spandrel panels in each bay and have individual channel sign letters mounted on
them. One business' name of two business' names with a break between would be permitted
centered in any building bay.
A motion was made to approve the higher sign zone proposed with the use of the
perforated sheet mounting method as described in these 2/14 meeting notes and
passed by unanimous vote.
1640 Maple — Church Street Station; Unified Business Center signage
Presented by: Jack Weiss
Mr. Weiss recluses himself from this proposal as he is the designer/ presenter of the signage.
Major signage would be located on a spandrel panel strip with gridded frosted glass panels in
light gray frames. The panels are backed by a gray surface and would give a uniform
appearance to the strip. Lettering would be channel letters with internal LED lighting creating a
back -lit" look to the signage. A sample of the illuminated lettering was shown over a piece of
the spandrel glass panel. Types styles and color would be tenant selected and all lettering
would have a satin finish. The signage perpendicular to the building face was removed from
the proposal by the presenter, as the drive-thru bank will not be a tenant.
Board members suggested cutting back the signage mounting bar to the centerline of the end
spandrel panels in each bay and this modification was acceptable to the presenter.
A motion was made to approve the Unified Business Center signage proposal with:
-no signs perpendicular to the building faces
-the mounting bar ending at the centerline of the and spandrel panels in each bay
and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 8:30 PM.
NEXT MEETING March 14, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
March 14, 2002.Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai, C. Thomas
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
None
1012 Chicago — Autobam Mazda of Evanston
Presented by: William Holley
The Board noted that the required photographs of the adjacent properties were not included in
the variation application. Without these photos it is difficult to relate the proposal to its
surroundings. It was also noted that the lack of a one foot setback for the freestanding sign for
each foot of its height was not included in the variations requested. When questioned the
presented thought that Mazada would not accept its sign on one side of a two-sided sign.
Considerable discussion/ questioning occurred regarding the businesses requiring signage on
the site. It seems that both a new car dealership (Mazada) and a used car lot may be present,
but it is not clear from the proposal. The presenter was the sign manufacturer and did not know
the types of business activities the owners wanted to display in the signage.
A motion was made to table this proposal until it could be presented by the business
owner and passed by unanimous vote.
1916 Dempster — A.J.Wright sign at Evanston Plaza
Presented by: Guy Dragisic — Olympic Sign
A survey of existing signs at this shopping center, made by the presenter, shows many vary from
the "Sign Criteria" established by the center. Variations in both increased letter height and
signage color selection have occurred in numerous locations. The presenter indicated that
purple was part of A.J.Wright's corporate logo. Some board member thought that the two menu
signs at the centers entries would remove the need for increased letter height. Board views
varied from 'holding the line on more variations at the site" to "it is not time to stop variations
when so many are existing". One member noted that a sign that conformed to the center -Sign
Criteria" might get lost in the existing signage array.
A motion was made to approve the purple color and the 48" letter height, but to deny the
advertising text on the bar under the text and passed with Jack Weiss voting no.
1501 Sherman — Best Western (Previous Holiday Inn)
Presented by: Tracy Chen
Presenter indicated an almost one -for -one replacement of existing signage is proposed, except
only one penthouse sign will be replaced and the canvas canopy will be removed and two signs
added in the metal siding canopy "eyebrow". The Board could not accept the freestanding pole
sign looming over Sherman from the parking deck second level. Otherwise the proposal was
generally acceptable to the Board.
A motion was made to approve the proposed signage with the following conditioned:
-the free standing sign on the parking deck be removed completely.
-the owner consider adding a sign on the north wall of the penthouse.
-signs on the metal canopy be flush with the canopy surface.
-exposed conduit will be removed at the future restaurant sign location.
-the other wall signage proposed is approved.
and passed by unanimous vote.
1580 Sherman — Optima Center
Presented by: Tod Desmarais
After a discussion of the details of the rod mountings of the signage revealed secure methods
are planned and the clearance needed at the parking entry was verified, the Board had no
further questions of the Unified Business Center signage proposal.
A motion was made to approve the Unified Business Center signage proposal and passed
by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 8:40 PM.
NEXT MEETING April 11, 2002
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
April 11, 200-IMeeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1501 Maple —Apartment Building
Presented by: Pamela Needham
The current owners purchased the building last summer and is in the process of renovating the
units as they become available. It seems that the building was a bit run down and occupancy
rates had fallen. With the number of condo developments in the downtown area, the presenter
thinks that giving the "FOR RENT" message is very important for the building rental.
The Board expressed concem because this sign was installed without a sign permit. The
presenter indicated she did not know that Evanston required permits for signs.
A Board member noted that the sign did not do a good job of giving the RENTAL status of the
property. The Board agreed that allowing variations for non -conforming signs erected without a
permit would set a very bad precedent.
A motion was made require removal of the sign by 4/15/02 and to encourage the presenter
to apply for a sign conforming to the Sign Regulations to display her message.
1630 Chicago -- The Park Evanston
Presented by: David Kump
The presenter indicated that cab light is removed from the proposed freestanding sign. When
questioned he noted that the sign color would be charcoal = deep gray, matching the adjacent
signage on the retail flower shop. With the only variation required being a 27 ft., rather that
a 30 ft. fagade setback the Board agreed that this was a very minor issue.
A motion was made to approve this freestanding sign and was passed by unanimous
vote.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 8:10 PM
NEXT MEETING May 9, 2002
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
May 9, 2001 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
741 Brummel -- Condominium Conversion
Presented -by: Jacqueline Verrilli
The Board noted that many 4'X8' temporary real estate signs have been approved in the past, as
the 6 SF in the Sign Regulations is not adequate for most project needs. The 62 items of
information proposed for this sign is another matter, in the Board's view. An edited version of the
text suggested by a Board member was developed, but the owner was reluctant to accept this
change. After some delay, it was agreed that a new variation could be submitted if the Board
edited text was not used.
A motion was made to approve a 4'X8' sign size and to remove the words:
"Fully rehabilitated and restored", "Huge", "Pre -construction pricing", plus all the
2 %" high text lines and passed by unanimous vote.
1901 Greenbay Road — Strip Shopping Site
Presented by: Kevin Wiley and Jeff Sadiq
The presenters suggested that the freestanding sign was needed to show the existence of the
muffler shop to northbound Greenbay road traffic. It is hidden by both building geometry and
grade elevations when approached from the south. Business is lower at both the muffler shop
and currency exchange compared to similar locations and the owners feel that additional
signage will help increase sales.
The Board could not see the need for including the currency exchange on the text of the south
facing sign as this business is very well marked by prominent existing signage. They also could
not agree with the need for the proposed sign height.
Considerable discussion occurred on the proposed sign text and the existing signage's lack of
conformance to the Sign Regulation.
A motion was made to approve a freestanding sign at the location shown on the drawing
with a maximum height of 8'-9" and with "MUFFLER SHOP" text on the south face and
"CURRENCY EXCHANGE" text on the north face and passed by unanimous vote.
1560 Sherman -- Rotary international
Presented by: Dawn Ruth and Dave Thometz
The presenters indicated that the existing freestanding sign on the north end of the Sherman
Avenue portion of the site will be removed as part of this signage change for the building.
The Board was concerned about the dangers generated by the use of text like "ONE ROTARY
CENTER" which implies an address, but gives no good location directions to emergency
personnel. Only a street address can give proper location direction to police and fire services.
A discussion was held on the use of 'tenant panels" proposed on the freestanding signs as they
had not been approved before in a downtown location. The presenters noted that tenants of a
building dominated by its owner, as in this case, have a problem being noticed and found.
A motion was made to approve the signage as submitted with the following changes:
-revise "ONE ROTARY CENTER" to "ROTARY CENTER" on the two freestanding signs.
-revise bottom line of text on east facing wall sign from "WORLD HEADQUARTERS"
to "1560 SHERMAN"
-lower the height of tenant names on the "tenant panels" from 2 1/2" to 2".
and passed by unanimous vote.
101 Asbury — CVS Pharmacy
Presented by: Michele Dodd. John Wojtila, and Doug Merritt.
A revised proposal was presented at the meeting with lower wall sign areas and a much lower
freestanding sign on Howard Street. The text size on the freestanding signs has been tailored to
the passing traffic speed and the text content has been developed using marketing principles.
In the revise scheme the signage on the bus shelter was removed. A small plaque may be
installed inside the shelter to show that is has been provided by CVS.
A discussion of the wall signage occurred and a Board member displayed a paste-up that
showed the scale generated by dropping the "CVS" text on the walls to 36" high.
Lengthy discussion centered on the text of the Howard Street freestanding sign.
Strong marketing arguments were voiced by the presenters and strong graphic design issues
were raised by the Board. This sign also created Board comments regarding the relation of the
sign cornice to the building design and a need for widening the brick base to agree with the
upper signage panel width.
A motion was made to approve the revised signage proposal presented at the meeting
with the following alterations:
-wail sign text height will be reduced to 36"
(this makes the wall sign area agree with the Sign Regulations)
-on the Howard Street freestanding sign the "Food Shoppe" text will be removed;
the remaining lower text blocks will be lowered such that they are surrounded by brick
the brick base width will be increased to equal the top signage block;
and the "topping" cornice will be removed.
-on the Asbury Avenue freestanding sign and on all the directional site sign the "topping"
cornice will be removed.
-wall signage will be limited to the north, south, and west walls.
-the signage on the fascia of the bus shelter will be removed
and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 9:40 PM.
NEXT MEETING June 14, 200L
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
June 14, 2003.Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, L. Berkun, J. Macsai, C. Thomas
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed with M. Larsen abstaining.
None
2510 Greenbay Roar! — Domicile: Furniture Store
Presented by: David Fischer
The owners feel that the wall sign on the set -back store site does not show the business location
to the general public. At least once a day a new customer says they have passed the store
when looking for it for the first time. A building to the north extends to the Greenbay property line
and the building to the south is set -back less than Domicile and has a brick site wall + pier on
Greenbay. When asked why the font proposed does not agree with the wall sign the presented
indicated that this was a logo change for the business and that the wall sign would be changed in
the future.
Lack of stripes on, and the poor appearance of the parking area off Greenbay was discussed in
1997 with the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee. A commitment to stripping was
made at that time and not yet realized. The owner currently has a landscape up -grade under
construction and will stripe the lot as part of this process.
Many alternate sign locations were discussed by the Board. A central location using a double
faced sign would restrict an already tight auto maneuvering path.
Is was agreed that the view of the business is most restricted when approached from the north.
Moving the proposed southern sign north would only make it apparent at the same time as the
building wall sign.
A motion was made to approve the installation of the free standing sign in the proposed
southern location only in a single or double -face mode and was passed with M. Larsen
voting no.
1016 Chicago — Autobam Mazda of Evanston
Presented by: No presenter came to the meeting
and no cancellation message was received.
This was the second consideration of the same sign proposal by the Board. It was agreed that
any further review would require a completely new variation request process be started.
A motion was made to soundly reject the proposed addition of a free standing sign to the
site and was passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 8:10PM.
NEXT MEETING July 11, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINES
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
July 11, 2002.Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
None
1513 Sherman —Salon Lamia #02SVF- -00016
Presented by: Salon owner.
The owner wold like to install two banner "blade" signs on the storefront. The shop has an
upper clear glazed pane above the display window which provides much needed natural light
into the store, according to the business owner. An awning over or signage in the upper pane
would block this light path. Not stopping this natural light and providing an elegant, unusual
solution to signage is the owner's desire. Existing temporary signage in the display window is
not sufficient to identify the location to enough to increase the 20% walk-in customer value,
according to the owner.
Board members noted that:
-a blade sign proposed is not consistent with other signage on the building
-one proposed sign location will be blocked from street view by an existing awning
-the text size proposed will not be legible at a reasonable distance
Use of temporary die -cut vinyl logo + text on the upper window pane was suggested by the
Board members as a good non -light blocking solution, but we rejected by the business owner.
The Board noted that since the building has more than 4 non-residential occupancies it must
have a comprehensive sign plan required by the Sign Regulations, The plan must be in place
before any sign variations can be considered for the facility. Existing awnings do not respect
building elements and obstruct "framed" masonry openings on the building facade.
The Board also noted that the building has historic status and any comprehensive sign plan must
be reviewed by the Preservation Commission.
A motion was made to deny the variation proposed and to ask staff to contact the building
owner with comprehensive sign plan application information and to contact the
Preservation Commission regarding signage on this historic building.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 8:45 PM.
NEXT MEETING August 9, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
August 8, 200:,Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, L. Berkun, J. Macsai, C. Thomas
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
None
3108I 14 Central —New Townhouse Site #02SVF- -00017
Presented by: Richard Lettvin
A existing 8'H X 121 sign has been removed and the developer feels it is needed to
advertise the project at this location. He assumes that people will see it and stop to write
down the information displayed.
C. Thomas and M. Larson recused themselves from this case due to conflicts.
The Board maintained that this sign was way too big, as it is even over the 4' X 8' size being
considered as a new allowable sign area for this kind of project. The current limit is 6 SF.
The need for the quantity of text used was questioned by the Board.
Suggestions were made to cut down the existing sign and to reduce the text quantity and
size. These were rejected by the developer.
A motion was made to limit the temporary sign size for this project to W X 8' and to
keep the "items of information" to the Regulation criteria of seven items and passed
by unanimous vote.
OFF AGENDA DISCUSSION:
Mr. Macsai reacted to the signage installed on the 910-950 Church Street stores
(909 Davis Street building) versus the intent of the Board in their approval motion.
A policy was established by the Board to identify some Unified Business Center (UBC)
signage plans (or other signage on an as needed basis) as special projects that require
Board review of the actual signage proposed in the UBC as it comes in for sign permits.
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 8:15 PM.
NEXT MEETING September 13, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
September 12, 2003, Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, L. Berkun, J. Macsal
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
None
1012 Chicago — Autobam Mazda of Evanston
Presented by: William Holley
The presenter noted that AUTOBARN is an "umbrella" dealership, selling VVV's, Mazdas, and used
cars and that each manufacturer requires individual identity from their dealers. The manufacturers
have nation-wide corporate signage programs which are mandatory and combination signs are not
accepted. When questioned, the presenter indicated that the limited size of the site would remove
the possibility of adding additional automobile manufacturers at this location.
A Board member noted that Section 4.12.10 (K)1. of the Sign Regulations allows two freestanding
signs per vehicular dealership parcel and the case memo note that only one sign is permitted on
this site is an oversight. Paragraph 3. of this Section requires a minimum of a 50 ft. separation
between signs while the proposed signs would be around 40 ft, apart.
A lengthy discussion of possible compromises occurred with proposals from the Board and the
presenter reviewed. The motion reflects the result of this process.
A motion was made to permit the second freestanding sign with the following conditions:
-the new sign would match the existing sign height and set -back from the Chicago
Avenue property line, but not necessarily match the width of the existing sign.
A width for the new sign of around 8'-3" was noted by the presenter.
-the new sign would be the same distance from the centerline of the existing drive
(curb -cut) as the existing sign, i.e. the signs would be symmetrical about the drive
centerline.
940 Church — Window Sign
Board Discussion
An illuminated window sign has been permitted and installed in the Marble Slab Creamery store
window facing Church Street. After installation, it was noted that the Special Sign District for this
location does not include window signs in its description.
The Sign District provides adequate opportunities for signage and the Board agreed that window
signs in this Sign District are not necessary. The installation of one window sign may tempt other
stores in the Sign District to use this location.
A motion was made to require removal of this non -conforming window sign and return of
the sign permit fee to the applicant
ADJOURNMENT of the Board was at 8:30PM
NEXT MEETING October 11, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
October 10, 2001.Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, L. Berkun, C. Thomas
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
None
1570(72?) Maple — New Condominium Project #02SVF-00020
Presented by_ Tom Roszah, Liana Leach
The Board commented that the proposed sign was in scale with the site and its surroundings;
and that the sign was an excellent design.
A motion was made to approve the sign as proposed and passed by unanimous vote.
2416 Dempster -- Evanston Car Wash #02SVF-00021
Presented by: Wayne Rapp
The presenter indicated that the proposed sign was smaller and lower than the existing
monument sign. Also the blue backround color is off on the print-out and will actually match the
color of the building mansard surface. The sign design and use of the 50's car logo was well
received by the Board.
A motion was made to approve the sign as proposed and passed by unanimous vote.
Attached hereto is a memo from Board member Jack Weiss, dated 10/02102, which is made part
of these minutes as requested by the Mr. Weiss.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:OOPM
NEXT MEETING November 14, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
November 14, 2002.Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai,
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
None
820 Church — First Bank and Trust ##02SVF- -00023
Presented by: Mssr. Joseph Levy, Robert Yohanan, and David Thonick.
The presenter indicated that they have found that the bank location is hard to find for some new
customers and they expect the problem to become worse during the Sherman Plaza project
construction activity. With the high sign position it can barely be seen from sidewalk eye level
and it is basically intended to mark the bank from the Metra and CNN tracks.
The Board agreed that the silhouette lettering and overall sign design are very good.
With the bank occuping four of the building's five floors it almost qualifies for a high rise sign by
the Sign Regulations.
A motion was made to approve the wall sign as submitted and passed by unanimous
vote.
327 Howard — Subway #02SVF- -00024
Presented by: Mr. Nizarali Ladhani
The presenter noted that he had cleaned/ replaced the upper panes of the storefront glass to
remove the paint on them and the store was much brighter with the clear glazing.
He also noted that one store in the building already has a sign in the architectural limestone
"band" proposed for this sign location. The Board agreed that previous errors should not be
copied. Many alternate locations were suggested by Board members such as:
-inside the store on the soffit in back of the glass
-inside the store on a panel on the soffit
-on a panel placed over the top glass panes
and all were rejected by the presenter.
it was noted by the Board that this building requires a Unified Business Center signage plan
which has never been prepared.
A motion was made to approve the sign proposed, but with its location moved to a
opaque panel covering the top glass panes in the storefront; and with the requirement
that no additional sign permits would be issued for the building until a Unified Business
Center signage plan has been approved for the building and the motion passed by
unanimous vote.
1900 Dempster— Dunkin Donuts/ Baskin Robbins #02SVF- - 00025
Presenter by:Ms. Janel Mallek and Mr. Ray Panjwani
The presenters indicated that:
-the cup logo, the text, and the letter colors are all the new corporate trademark
-font used and two lines of text have been approved by the center owner
-raceway color will match the color of the surface on which they are mounted
-only 2 bays are available for the north facing sign and the one used has the entry door in it
-the west facing sign is needed to give store location to customers entering off Dodge
A major concern of Board members was the west facing sign's size and prominence.
After discussion, a Board member suggested moving the west facing signs south to two Dryvit
surfaced bays and using one line of text in each bay.
A motion was made to approve the north facing sign as proposed, but to lower the west
facing signs to the Dryvit surfaces in two more southern bays, using text in one line, and
passed by unanimous vote.
Church Street Plaza — Discussion of Additions) Revision
to the Special Sign District Criteria
Presented by: Mr. Greg Hakanen
The purpose of this discussion was to form a basis for a future proposal of additions/ revisions
to the existing Sign District criteria for the Church Street Plaza project area.
Not all the discussion is included herein, basically just the results of the discussion and should
be considered as acceptable signage directions to peruse, rather than firm decisions by the
Board.
Borders Store: It was assumed by the Board that all signage proposed is for individual lighted
letters without raceway mounting. For the east facade the uppermost sign was rejected; the
lower sign on the brick surface was accepted; the text on awnings was rejected; and the number
of banners should be reduced to only two. For the west facade it was suggested that the letter
height be reduced to 24".
17061 1710 Maple Signage: Signs will be sized to conform to the existing Sign District criteria
with vertical blade signs as added on the south side of Church Street. A perforated panel
mounting will be considered for these stores and the developer will come back with firm
proposals.
Illuminated Window Signs: It is true that many illuminated window signs exist "by right" in
Evanston and the Sign Regulation allows them to be 20% of the window area.
The Board suggested that this creates a very large area for illuminated signs and the Regulation
should be changed. A lower percentage, say around 10%, was recommended for proposed
addition to this Sign District criteria.
Banner Signage: This topic generated a lengthy discussion. Highlights of this include:
-stronger architectural design of the entire building would have removed the idea that banner
"decorations" were needed to improve its appearance
-the banners could create a negative "circus -like" atmosphere if not handled properly
-banners without text on them using graphics only were suggested (maybe 10% text?)
-the south facade is the best on the building and should not have banners applied to it
-large masonry areas on the north and west faces on the structure could be enhanced by the
addition of the banner elements (existing up -lights will illuminate them)
-maybe the banners should be extended onto the east facade of the complex?
-when and for what reasons banners will be changed should be included in any proposal
(Will they be seasonal? They must be changed when worn.)
-no banners should be located by the major cinema sign
Monument Signs: The monument sign concept and proposed locations were well received by
the Board. Further design development is required for these signs and material selections must
be made and reviewed.
Technical Amendments to existing Sign District criteria: The color red may be added to the
text colors permitted on signs in the District. Exposed raceways can be handled well and not
handled well so a blanket approval of their use is not suggested. Maybe more use of LED sign
lighting should be considered which removes may raceway problems.
ADJOURNMENT was 9:45 PM
NEXT MEETING December 12, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
December 12, 2002 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai, C. Thomas
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
and passed by unanimous vote.
None
635 Chicago — Unit #1 Kamala Perfumes #02SVF- -00028
Presented by: Nana Haefner
The presenter explained that the type face and color used in the proposed wall sign is her
company logo. The Board wondered if the other non -conforming signs at the plaza had been in
for the variation process. Color, type face, and position seemed alright to the Board, but they
could see no reason for the 1" increase in text height requested over the Unified Business
Center plan criteria.
A motion was made to approve the wall sign presented, but with the maximum letter
height reduced from the 19" proposed to 18" and passed with L.Berkun abstaining.
Church Street Plaza—1700-16 Maple and 1701-65 Maple
Special Sign District Changes #02SVF- -00027
Presented By: Borders Portion- Cheryl Levin Church Street Plaza Portion: Tom White
Tim Place Greg Hakanen
Matthew Coyne
Gideon Berger
Borders Portion of Discussion:
The presenters indicated that Borders is a long term Evanston business whose current location
is not generating the sales needed for its existence. The new location is the result of a long
process of working with the City to develop improved business conditions in this location.
Signage is critical to their identity and national branding efforts. Signage proposed agrees with
the latest corporate "logo signage array. The BORDERS name and the underlying "tag line" is
now the consistent standard for all Borders stores.
A long and vigorous discussion was held between the presenter and Board members.
The main thrust of the Board's concern is the number of signage locations proposed and the
variety of media used on them. From the presenter's point of view all the signage is required as
proposed to conform to current corporate standards. The Board agreed that each individual
signage element taken by itself is good (even -elegant" with "excellent typography"), but that the
combination of so much signage reduced the overall design when seen as a whole.
A revised proposal for awning signage was presented at the meeting and viewed as moving in
the right direction of sign reduction. Use of banners was discussed and generally accepted by
the Board. Some reduction of the cafe window sign was also discussed.
Border's Highland Park location is overwhelmed by signage and the officials there think that the
signage is too much, in retrospect. Wilmette has no awning signage and no banners, but is 8
years old and was not designed to current corporate criteria. The Board agreed that the
building is a excellent design and should not be compromised by a less the excellent signage
layout. All welcomed the fact that Borders is staying in Evanston and wanted to help them to
resolve the signage issues. At the same time the Board is aware of it responsibility to regulate
signs in Evanston ands agreed to the compromises in the following motion.
A motion was made to:
-allow a west wall, wall sign with 36" main text and 11.5" "tag line" text
-allow a west wall cafe window sign limited to 10% of the glass pane size
-accept the new awning signage layout of text on the west awning and text on four
awnings on the east elevation with no text on the middle awning
-remove the low wall sign on the east elevation and allow the high wall sign to have 36"
main text and 11.5" "tag line" text
-remove the middle position 2' X 16' banner on the east elevation and add one banner to
the south elevation, western area
The motion passed by unanimous vote.
Church Street Plaza Portion of Discussion:
Considerable discussion was held on the five Special Sign District issue areas presented.
For the 1706 and 1710-16 Maple ground floor retail signage the Board agreed that the only
change proposed was the vertical blade signs on the columns which was approved for the south
side of Church Street in a previous variation.
Use of illuminated window signs generated a discussion of ho-N the 20% limit in the current
Regulation should be computed. is the intent to use 20% of the glass pane containing the sign
or is it 20% of the entire glass area of the fagade to the 15.5 ft. height? Some reduction below
the 20% level is suggested by the Board and the this value may actually be lowered in the Sign
Regulations in the future.
Banner signage was well received and final text/ graphics layout was deferred for future
presentation/ Board review.
The monument signs proposed are non -illuminated with stainless steel finish matching the
building column covers and area planters. Text design is in -process at this time.
Locations proposed for the three monument signs for a "gateway" on Maple and mark a little
known plaza entry at Benson/ Clark.
Red color has been used on many signs in the District already and good use of exposed
raceways has been demonstrated. Continuation of this good use of exposed raceways in every
future application in a concern of the Board.
A motion was made to:
-allow vertical blade sign at 1706 and 1710-16 Maple in the Special Sign District
-allow illuminated window signs in the Special Sign District with a maximum area of 15%
of the glass pane on which the sign occurs with an upper limit for all signs for one tenant
of 10% of the tenant's glass area up to a height of 15.5 feet.
-allow 2' X 16' banner signs on the Main Pavilion Building in the Church Street Plaza Sign
District (2 on north elevation and 7 on the west elevation) with final graphic/ text layout to
be reviewed and approved by the Sign Review and Appeals Board.
-approve the installation of three monument signs in the Church Street Plaza Sign
District (one at NW corner of Maple Avenue and Church Street, one at the NE corner of
Maple Ave and Church Street and one at SW corner of Clark Street and Benson Avenue)
with final graphic/ text layout to be presented and approved by the Sign Review and
Appeals Board.
-allow the use of the color red for the text of signs in the Church Street Plaza Sign
District.
- allow exposed raceways to be used on signs only with the Approval of the Sign Review
and Appeals Board for each sign design.
The motion passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 9:30 PM
NEXT MEETING will be on January 9, 2003� .
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
January 9, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, C. Thomas
W. Hallen
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous meeting and
passed by unanimous vote.
None
1480 Chicago -- Music Institute of Chicago #02SVF- -00028
Presented by: Andrew Ottini
The Case Memo notes only three freestanding signs in the proposal, but four are actually being
proposed. The Music Institute believes that the number signs reflects the major nature of the facility
and the fact that this is a new location for an existing association. They feel a need for a strong
identification of the site and think that the signs proposed are all required. The reader boards will be
black wit white lettering and illuminated. The main entry monument signs will be lit with site lights at a
low level,
A Board member strongly objected to the southern reader board sign. Other Board members felt that
it was needed to conform to the rigid symmetry of the building and entry stairway.
The majority of the Board complemented the integration of the signage design with the building and
landscape design. All seem to tie together and work very well together.
A motion was made to approve the signage as proposed and passed with J.WeIss voting no.
2201 Main — Xcell Supply and Care Centers Inc. #02SVF- -00029
Presented by: Steven Miretzky
The presenter explained the need for two signs to identify the two separate businesses in the large
building and to indicate the rear entry for one of them. Shipping and visitor entry for the Xcel portion
of the building will be on the north, facing Lee Street. For Care Centers the company logo is the text
and the Xcel signage is all company logo.
A four foot setback from the property line was verified for both signs.
The Board questioned why the signs were not similar in some ways. They appear to be as different
from each other as possible. The presenter didn't know why they were designed in this fashion.
Twelve "items of information" were noted on the Xcel sign by a Board member which is 5 above the 7
permitted.
A motion was made to accept two freestanding signs in the locations shown with:
-an adjustment so that the signs agree in form and base mounting detail.
(i.e. both will have rounded corners and base, not pole, mounting)
-removal of the telephone number and the word "ENTRANCE" from the Xcel sign.
-all text will be a minimum of 2" copy height on both signs
and passed by unanimous vote.
Administrative Changes to Sign Regulations
The Board discussed at length making some administrative adjustments to the Sign Regulations.
A motion was made to propose the following changes to the Sign Regulation ordinance and
passed by unanimous vote.
JThe copy in bold is added text. Text to be eliminated is shown as a st#ke#1woU9h.)
In Section 4-12-6: EXEMPT SIGNS: change paragraph (T) as follows:
(T) Real Estate Sign: One real estate sign per street frontage of a premises, advertising the
availability of a sale or lease of that premises. Such signs may not be located in the public right
of way, nor be directly illuminated. They shall not excee six (6) square feet for residential
districts, twenty-four (24) square feet for commercial districts, or forty-eight (48) square feet
for industrial districts. Display of real estate signs shall be limited to one hundred eighty
(180) days. For non-exempt real estate signs see Section 4-12.10 (t_) Temporary Real Estate
Signs.
In Section 4-12-10; PERMITTED SIGN TYPES: add the following paragraph:
(L) Temporary Real Estate Signs:
For temporary, non -illuminated real estate signs for multi -family, residential projects,
the permitted regulations are as follows:
5 to 36 Dwelling Units = 32 SF maximum, 10'-0" maximum sign height
All Temporary Real Estate Signs shall be limited to a maximum of 12 months total
duration, or until all the units are sold.
In Section 4-12-10: PERMITTED SIGN TYPES: omit the last sentence in paragraph (F) 3.
and insert the following in lieu thereof:
Awnings shall project a minimum of thirty six inches (36") out from the building upon
which they are attached, and a maximum of twenty four inches (24") from the vertical
surface of the street curb line.
In Section 4-12-10: PERMITTED SIGNB TYPES change paragraph (A) 2. as follows:
2. Area: The total permitted sign surface area of all wall signs on a fagade shall not exceed
fifteen -percent-(15°6) ten percent (10%) of eligible fagade area. No individual wall sign shall
exceed two-hundrn�, one hundred and twenty five (125) square feet in area.
ADJOURNMENT was at 9:00 PM
NEXT MEETING February93, 2003
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
February 14, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
None
800 Elgin Road -- OPTIMA - #03SVF- -00001
Presented by: David Rizzi
The presenter indicated that:
-site has 7' to 8' high hedges at its perimeter which would block view of recessed signs
-placing the signs inside the site would remove parking spaces
-drivers trying to view the signs through the hedges might cause traffic problems.
A Board member noted that the variation required for the distance from the property line was
not listed in the Case Memo. The positions and size of the signs seemed reasonable to the
Board and some discussion occurred on the layout of the text. All agreed that the sign text
was too crammed and various solutions were proposed.
A motion was made to approve the signs with the two 8" high text lines lowered to 6"
high text and both dropped to create a space in the sign text block(s) and was
approved by unanimous vote.
1729-1745 Sherman -- Jack R. Kaplan Declaration of Trust
Presented by: Gordon Magill
The presenter noted that this Unified Business Center signage plan does not restrict text
color or font, as most stores have strong preferences for both. The plan does limit sign
locations to a natural band on the building and limits the text + logo sizes.
Only back lit lettering will be permitted under the plan. When questioned, the presenter
indicated that all awnings, even at the northwest corner, would be removed as tenants
changed. lie also noted that awnings need maintenance, cleaning, and replacement to
preserve a good appearance. Ice sliding off awnings has created slippage problems on the
sidewalk.
The Board agreed that the sign band was in an excellent location in relation to the building
elements. They liked the existing awnings, but realized that the overall signage design was
the owner's choice. The uniform use of the back lit lettering will form a "higher class" image
for retail stores in the Board's opinion. While the plan asks that raceways be painted to
match the limestone band, this could result in different colors for each sign.
A motion was made to approve the Unified Business center signage plan with the
requirement that the owner specify a paint color for raceways to assure uniformity and
was approved by unanimous vote.
The sign proposed for 1 737 Sherman — U.S.Cellular conforms to the signage plan approved
above and therefor does not require any variations and was not discussed by the Board.
ADJOURNMENT 8:20 PM
NEXT MEETING March 13, 2003
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT
OTHER BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
March 13, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
2123 Harrison — Covenant United Methodist Church #03SVF- -00004
Presented by: Steven Wilcox and Rev. Nick Mitrovich
Presentation:
The presenter related the long process used in the sign selection process, started by
contacting a sign manufacturer recommended by the church area administration.
Meetings with church members were held and the final choice was the smallest sign. with the
smallest lettering, in the least bright color in the manufacturer's catalog of "church signs-.
Total cost of around $8,000 was raised mainly through donations from church members,
which is a big dollar value for the congregation. They were very surprised by its intensity
when the sign was turned on for the first time as they try to be good neighbors and do not
want to offend the area. The church has restored woodwork and windows to keep up the
building's appearance. They feel that they have operated in good faith with respect to the
permitting process and meeting City standards.
Citizen Comment Comments from: Jane McCarthy John McCarthy
Susan Rundle Al Hatcher
The comments on the sign centered on the bright lighting level of the sign and its
'commercial" design in a residential setting. Photographs were presented that demonstrated
high illumination in the living/ dining rooms of a house and in an outdoor yard area.
A photo of the sign at night showed a brightly glowing face standing out from the surrounding
site area and clearly not complementary to the church design and subtle building lighting.
The neighbors noted that the surrounding residential area has homes in the 70-120 year old
range which are renovated and well maintained, with improvements designed to integrate
with the existing structures.
A contractor who donated his services to install the sign noted that he had contacted City
staff and was told that no permit was required for the sign. He also said that he consulted
with City staff regarding foundation and electrical worts associated with the installation.
He noted that the sign's fluorescent tubes had been partially wrapped with tape to
significantly reduce the light level generated by the sign.
One person asked if the City could help with a donation to fix the sign problem.
(After the meeting it was determined that the correct path for this request, if desired,
would be a letter from the Church to Mr. James Wolinski — Director of Community
Development.)
Discussion:
Many compromises for this sign problem were discussed ranging from complete removal to
major modifications. The citizen group had some who leaned towards compromise and some
who opposed any concessions. Many comments were heard from the Board members, the
neighbor's group, and the church representatives.
A motion was made to require that:
-the internal illuminated of the sign be turned off immediately
-the changing of the white text background to a darker color
(maroon?) be studied
-low level external illumination sources be designed for the sign faces
-the church representatives come back to the Board with the proposed
alterations for final review before they are implemented
and passed by unanimous vote.
1813 Lyons — Econ Housing Group #03SVF- -00005
Presented by: Neil Davidson
The 4' X 8' "FOR SALE" sign size agrees vMh recent Board approvals of similar signs.
A special need to announce the project directly to the area's residents with signage was
suggested by the presenter. It is intended for the pedestrian passing by and those coming
out of the church across the street, more like newspaper ad. When viewed in this context
the quantity and type size of the text is justified, according to the presenter.
General agreement was voiced by the Board with some small changes to the text suggested
and establishment of the sign colors required.
A motion was made to:
-remove the 2 '/2" high building features text under the illustration
on the sign and
Inserting a 6" high text line of the developer's telephone number in its place.
-adding the "City of Evanston" and housing information contact
telephone number in a single line of 1 '/Z" text on the bottom area of the sign
-using blue for text 4" high or larger and black for the remainder of the text all on
a white background
and passed by unanimous vote.
801 Davis — Focus Development #03SVF- -00006
Presented by: Mark Edwards
The presenter indicated that the seeming large sign areas were justified by the current
cleared site area of 52,500 SF and a final construction site area close to three times this size.
A four section signage display is proposed for a three month period, after which two sections
will be added and relocated into two, three section groupings (confused yet?)
over the two truck entry canopies to the final construction site.
It was note that the two sign sections at the southeast corner are on shown City property and
will require the City's permission for their location before installation.
The Board considered recent approvals on similar projects from a sign vs. site area ratio
perspective and agreed that this proposal, though large, was in a reasonable range for this
very generous site. Reusing the signs over the truck entry canopies was viewed as good
idea. It was noted that the people pictured on the signs did not reflect the multi -racial
makeup of the Evanston community and that the text listing the condominium features was
excessive.
A motion was made to approve the proposal with:
-at least a 50% reduction in text in the left-hand area of the signs
listing condo features
-a more inclusive racial makeup of the people pictured on the signs
and passed by unanimous vote.
1805 Howard — Quick Stop Food Mart #03SVF- -00007
Presented by: Aslam Sundrani
The presenter indicated that this unusual site has a building deeply recessed from Howard
Street with adjoining buildings built to the sidewalk, obstructing a good view on any signage
mounted on the building. He believes that his business volume is being reduced by lack of
adequate signage presenting his store location to the public.
A copy of the Ordinance granting Type-2 restaurant use of the site was given to the
presenter. It required that an existing pole sign be removed and that all future signs be
mounted on the building.
The Board agreed that the building siting presented an unusual challenge to signage design
and required some special consideration. Possible changes to the proposal were discussed,
but use of a "pole sign" was completely rejected from the set of acceptable solutions.
A motion was made to allow a 4' X 8' internally illuminated sign:
-mounted on the wall of the building east of the store property
(this will require that permission from the adjacent building owner
be submitted with the sign application.)
-using a red background with white letters, to match an existing sign
-that is set back from Howard Street property line a dimension equal to the
distance to the top of the sign from grade
and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT 9:30 PM
NEXT MEETING April 10, 2003
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
April 10, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, J. Macsai
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT BY: Philip Castillo, Dieter Schmitz, Neal Vogel, David Rutherford,
Erika Grunee, Steve Brown, Sally Rutherford, Alan Saleski, Pat
Saldana Natke
Neighbors want the sign removed for various reasons:
-all agreed that the sign size, design, and illumination were inappropriate for the site
-the area is a quiet, residential neighborhood with many historic buildings
-the sign is designed as an "attention getter" more suited to a high speed traffic location
-the sign was installed without a permit and it does not comply with the Sign Regulations
-many church signs have been installed recently that are well designed, using natural
materials that fit well into their residential settings
-the sign reminds some residents of a hot dog stand or a food mart type
-the sign illumination outshines the historic church building it serves
-the sign was deemed "ugly", "tacky", and "garish" by various area residents
-changing the movable text background color or changing to external illumination of the sign
is not acceptable to most residents present. They want the sign taken down.
NEW BUSINESS (carried over from last meeting)
2123 Harrison — Covenant Methodist Church #03SVF- -00004
Presented by: Rev. Nicholas Mitrovich and Steven Wilcox
A copy of the letter Rev, Mitrovich read at the meeting is attached. The presenters indicated
that they had pursued the directions suggested by the Board at the previous meeting.
Namely:
-a background color for the text panel is not available in maroon to match the sign area
but black is available with white letters. This change would cost around S1,400
-flood light external illumination for the sign would cost from $850 to $2,000.
They tested revising the illumination of the sign using two methods and showed photographs
of the sign at night as tested. The first test was with lowered internal illumination and the
second used external temporary flood lights mounted on the ground. Photos are attached for
each test, but is was agreed that photographs cannot be trusted to truly display the
illumination with respect to the surroundings and to show any reflections created.
The presenters noted that the church needs the sign for its function and they believe they
acted properly in the sign installation process. They maintain the City of Evanston staff was
asked and shown drawings for the sign and were told that no sign permit was required.
(It is not dear if the sign was presented as an illuminated sign.) In "good faith" they have
spend over 58,000 to obtain the sign. The church wants to be a good neighbor and regrets
the turmoil created by the new sign.
Some Board members indicated that they had toured recent church signs in Evanston and
Wilmette and found many well designed installations that fit into their residential setting and
serve the church's needs. They also mentioned that the sign would probably have been
rejected or significantly altered if it was taken through the variation process to the Board.
The idea of temporarily covering the sign was rejected as less attractive than the sign itself.
Board members suggested that the sign manufacturer be contacted to determine if the sign
had any rebate value.
A motion was made to require that the sign be removed; the electrical connection to
the location be safely terminated; and the sign be stored for future disposition.
(When asked for removal timing, the Board responded that the sign should be
removed as soon as possible, but no later than April 18, 2003.)
ADJOURNMENT was at 9:00 PM
NEXT MEETING Mav 8. 2003
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
May 8, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Maesal, C. Thomas
W. Hallen
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
None
636 Church — Unified Business Center signage plan #03SVF- -00008
No presenter appeared. (Case held until end of meeting.)
With varying radii on the existing building arch forms, matching them generates a
corresponding array of arched awning shapes which does little to unify the fagade.
The location of the building arched forms does not relate visually to the awning positions and
the circular awning forms are awkward, even if the radii match building forms.
The Board members all suggest that if awnings are used that they relate to the rectilinear
geometry of the storefronts at the street level and not to the arches above.
A motion was made to deny the Unified Business Center signage plan proposed and
passed by unanimous vote.
1001 Chicago— Enterprise Rent-A-Car #03SVF- -00009
No presenter appeared as the variation request was withdrawn by the tenant.
1642 Maple— Focus Development and Harris Bank #03SVF- -00010
Presenter by: Timothy Anderson, Jeff Harwood, and Don Courington
The presenters indicated that the plate proposed for the signage mounting would conceal the
sign raceway and would serve to unify the various graphics required by the tenants.
A reduction in the LED internally lit letter depth to 2" is proposed. This was 4" in the original
proposal. The blade signs relate to the streetscape paths.
The Board agreed that the plate produced a cleaner mounting and would help to unify the
signage arrays. They noted that blade signs are approved for the adjacent special sign
district on north on Maple and that blade signs are being considered for inclusion in the Sign
Regulations in the near future.
A motion was made to approve the general changes to the Unified Business Center
signage plan proposed and passed with four yea votes. (Jack Weiss recused himself
from this case because of his contact with the signage design.)
The presenter showed that the Harris Bank specific change requested was created by the
building facade configuration. Namely, at the Harris Bank "corner" the areas assigned to the
building sign zone are recessed and are not available for signage in agreement with the plan.
Signage off the corner in the sign zones would not relate to the facility entry location.
The Board asked if the proposed sign location could be lowered. A concrete beam blocks
electrical conduit paths in a lower sign position and the sign could only be dropped if exposed
conduit was used. The Board agreed after some discussion that the sign locations proposed
made sense with respect to the bank entry.
A motion was made to approve the specific changes for the Harris Bank space to the
Unified Business Center signage plan and passed with four yea votes. (Jack Weiss
recused himself from this case because of his contact with the signage design.)
1710 Maple — Fifth Third Bank #03SVF- -00011
Presented by: Greg Hakanen, Ted Carson, Jeremy Heabedin, and Bill Van Bruggen.
The presenters noted that the bank facade is at an angle to the street and will this improves
the view from the north, it greatly restricts the view the view from the south. The sign zone
coverage criteria was created in the Special Sign District where the building bays are 30 feet
and was continued in the 909 Davis inclusion in the District, again applied to 30 ft. bays
The bank location has 16'-9' between columns in its bays and this severely limits signage
designs. To compare the bay size implication the presented noted that EB Games with
1,800 SF rental area can have 42 SF of signage, while the 5,000 SF bank can only have
24 SF of signage.
The Board agreed that the strict application of the bay generated sign area did not make
sense in this situation. The Board discussed the sign size, design, and mounting at length,
Possible alterations with respect to building elements and awning locations were examined.
The motion reflects the result of this discussion.
A motion was made to approve the specific variation to the Special Sign District
criteria with the following conditions:
-the sign have 6" to 8" open space above it to the concrete beam
-the sign have 6" to 8" recesses at each end at the concrete columns
and the recesses be only 60% filled with mounting brackets
-the bottom of the sign be at the same elevation as top of the awnings on the
store to the south of the bank location
= the range is given to allow the sign width -to -height ratio to agree with the
Harris Bank corporate signage standards
and passed by unanimous vote.
1825 Dodge —1 ` S.D.A. Church of Evanston #03SVF- -00012
Presented by: Rev. Michael Horton and Mr. Paul Jwaby
The presenters indicated that the sign would help provide security lighting to the area and
also present the church's messages. Included in the proposal is an calculation that
demonstrates that the sign can be lamped to conform to the 50 footcandles maximum at 4 ft,
from the sign criteria from the Sign Regulations for illuminated signs in residential areas.
Board members noted that a similar sign had created an illumination problem at another
church location and the exemption in the Sign Regulations for institutional signs did not apply
to illuminated signs. They suggested that the security lighting needs could be better handled
by site or building lighting and not by light from signage. It was noted that the illuminated
sign requirements from the Sign Regulations should be strictly applied to this sign proposal.
A motion was made approve the sign as proposed with the condition that the sign's
Illumination conform to all requirements of the Sign Regulations (including one
footcandle maximum at adjoining property lines) and was passed with Jack Weiss
voting no.
2416 Dempster — Evanston Car Wash #03SVF- -000013
Presented by: Wayne Rapp
A variation for a sign 20% smaller and slightly lower at this location was previously approved
by the Board. The new proposal is still smaller than the existing sign that will be replaced.
The new top of sign proposed aligns with the top of the existing building mansard wall.
The Board agreed that the changes were relatively minor and the new alignment with
architectural elements was an improvement.
A motion was made to approve signage as proposed and passed with four yea votes.
(Jack Weiss recused himself from this case because of his contact with the signage
design.)
ADJOURNMENT was at 9:OOPM
NEXT MEETING will be on June 12.2003
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
June 12, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsal
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
636 Church —The Carlson Building
— Unified Business Center signage plan #03SVF- -00008
Presented by: Mr. Justin Heinz
The presenter indicated that the revised plan proposes awnings that agree with the geometry
of the street level window openings in the building as motioned by the Board at its previous
meeting. Rectilinear -in -rectilinear and arched -in -arched. All the signage on the awnings will
agree with the Sign Regulations.
It was noted to the presenter that window signs are not included in the proposal and would be
excluded from the building signage. He understood this and does not want window signs.
The Library Plaza portion of the property is very different architecturally from the Carlson
Building proper, Not only is this portion mainly brick masonry rather than all limestone, but is
has arched openings at the street level rather than rectilinear ones. This difference prompted
the SPAARC group to suggest that a color change occur on the awnings on the Library Plaza
portion of the property. The Board agreed that this would be a good idea, but questianed
how the color selection would be made.
A motion was made to approve the Unified Business Center signage plan as proposed
with the condition that color swatches of the additional color to be used on the Library
Plaza portion of the property be submitted to the Sign Board members for review and
approval and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:00 PM
NEXT MEETING on Julv 10, 2003
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
July 10, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, L. Berkun, J. Macsai, C. Thomas
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1312 Chicago — LOLLIE #03SVF- -00014
Presented by: Kimberly Cohen
A Committee member noted that the proposed sign location is not shown on the submittal
and the presenter indicated that this was because she was open to the position suggestions
from the Board. After some discussion a location was agreed upon.
Staff noted that the Special Sign District recently formed permits blade signs and the Board is
actively considering blade signs to the Sign Regulations.
A motion was made to approve the sign variation with the conditions that the sign be
located:
-projecting from the storefront corner mullion by the entry door
-centered vertically on the awning on the store to the south of LOLLIES
and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at B:OOPM
NEXT MEETING on Auaust 14, 2003
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
August 14, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, C. Thomas
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote. (J. Weiss noted that his
minutes approval vote should not be taken as approval of the
actions taken at the meeting in his absence.)
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1910 Dempster— Evanston Plaza #03SVF- -00015
Applicant called on 8/13 to request change to 9111 meeting for this case.
1930 Ridge — The Reserve at Evanston #03SVF- -00016
Presented by Greg Ratas — Atlantic Realty
The presenter indicated that the Type -A freestanding sign was requested to identify the
building and located to give a good view of it from both north and southbound Ridge Avenue
traffic. Signs Type-B+C are simple NO TRESSPASSING signs located on masonry piers at
the drive entries to the complex. Signs Type D+E+F are movable signs that are used during
intensive leasing periods in the loading berths north of the building.
Type G+H signs are located in the Ridge Avenue right-of-way. Private signage is not
permitted in this location and signage will be provided by the City of Evanston (contact Rajev
Dahal 847-866-2922).
Sign Type 1+J (and more) are building address signs and must be reviewed by Chief Alan
Berkowski of the Fire Prevention Bureau (847-866-5926). We understand that input has
been given by him but it does not seem to have been included in the signs proposed.
An additional sign identifying the leasing will be required that is not included in the proposal
submitted for this meeting.
The Board suggested that small distance for sign Type -A from the property line is a self-
created problem and that adequate, well positioned wall space is available all along the
Ridge Avenue facade for building identity signage. Sign Types B through F, inclusive, appear
acceptable to the Board members. Sign Types G+H are removed from the proposal.
Sign Type I+J (and more) are address signs and must be approved by the Evanston Fire
Department for text content + size, colors, and locations. The Board agreed that these signs
must have "1930 RIDGE" and Building "A" in large text and can have "The Reserve at
Evanston" + logo in smaller size, not :he reverse sizing relationship proposed.
All things considered, the Board agreed that the proposal must be revised and re -submitted
for review.
A motion was made to Table this proposal and passed by unanimous vote.
705 Main — Evanston Lumber DESIGN CENTER #03SVF- -00017
Presented by Bob Fisher, Katie Conroy, and Dave Thombel.
The presenters noted that the signage proposed was part of a process to identify the fact that
the DESIGN CENTER is going to have products that differ from the long established
Evanston Lumber Company stock. They feel that it is very important to make this distinction
for the success of the Center. The graphic elements intend to give an idea of what is sold at
this location. A desire to cover a dreary material strip on the existing storefront may have
something to do with the size of the signage/ awning array.
At the meeting it was noted that the use of aluminum for the awning would require an
additional variation as awnings are defined in the Sign Regulations as being covered
"... by nonrigid material, such as fabric or vinyl."
The Board all agreed that the signage proposed was too large in area and suggested that
there are other ways to cover dreary materials than with large signs. A Board member
presented a sketch of a possible revision to the proposal. Various other suggestions by the
Board and presenters were discussed at length with the only result being that the Board will
require that the signage area be reduced in future proposals.
A motion was made to Table this proposal and passed by unanimous vote.
624 Grove — MCL Home Decor
Presented by Mary'? (cannot read attendance sheet entry for last name)
The presenter noted that the relatively flat building fagade would be improved by the small
banner signs perpendicular to i; and would produce good visibility for her store.
Small "blade sign- banners in this location seemed acceptable to the Board, but they noted
that since the building housed more than 4 individual non-residential occupancies it required
a Unified Business Center signage plan for permanent signs. Since this building is a historic
structure the signage plan mus: be reviewed by both the Preservation Committee and the
Sign Board. The building owner will be contacted regarding this requirement.
It seemed unfair to some Board members that, in a sense, the tenant was being held
"hostage" in the process while the building owner prepared and obtained approval for the
signage plan. Naturally, the tenant is interested in opening with good signage as soon as
possible. The motion contains a solution to this dilemma.
A motion was made to approve "blade sign" banners as proposed as temporary sign
with the following conditions:
-the sings will be removed if they do not agree with the ultimate Unified
Business Center signage plan approved for the building.
-and the signs will be removed six months after installation if a Unified Business
Center signage plan with which the agree does not exist at that time.
ADJOURNMENT was at 9:00PM
NEXT MEETING on September 11, 2003
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
September 11, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, L. Berkun, J. Macsai
W. Hallen
None
None
1633 Central —Manufacturer's News Inc. #03SVF- -00019
Presented by: Walter Hallen
This owner inadvertently replaced two wall signs without realizing that new sign permits were
required. One of the new (and existing) signs is on a wall perpendicular to a public
thoroughfare, which is not permitted by the Sign Regulations. The sign locations and sizes
agree with all criteria in the Sign Regulations. The Board took into consideration that these
are non -illuminated, replacement signs.
A motion was made to approve this proposal and passed by unanimous vote.
2201 Oakton — Home Depot #03SVF- -00020
Presented by: Scott Edandson, Mike Bjorklund, Paul Machalek
This proposal replaces all the wall signage at this store. In general, the fact that the signage
becomes simpler and clearer was noted by the presenters.
The Board recognized the proposal as an improvement in the overall signage at the site, but
questioned the use of entrance and exit signs at the pedestrian vestibules. These signs are
not obeyed by most shoppers and seem unnecessary. They tend to only clutter the building
with no real useful purpose. The presenters indicated that they would take this discussion
back to Home Depot for possible revisions.
A Board member asked if the TOOL RENTAL CENTER sign could be changed to one line.
The response was that the sign was on a standard size illuminated sign box that provided
uniform illumination with normal size sources.
A motion was made to approve this proposal and passed by unanimous vote.
2737 Central — Schermerhorn Co. Inc.
Presented by: Dan Schermerhom
This proposal is a simple re -facing on an existing fabric awning, conforming to all Sign
REGULATIONS except the newly changed minimum awning projection. The existing awning
projects 2 feet, rather than the new 3 feet criteria.
The Board felt that existing awnings projecting less than 3 feet, but not used as "wall signs"
should be permitted to be refaced as long as all other provisions of the Sign Regulations are
met.
A motion was made to approve this proposal and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:00 PM
NEXT MEETING October 9.2003
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
V=L,FiTl1f]�IkTI*&
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
October 9, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the 09/22/03 meeting notes and
passed by unanimous vote.
None
1910 Dempster— Evanston Plaza #03SVF- -00016
Presented by: Laurie Marston, Dick Peach, and others (who did not sign in).
The presenter are proposing three 51- X 72", doubled faced, non -illuminated pole signs in
exchange for two "bike lids". The advertising will be limited to merchandise for sale in the
shopping center and one face of one sign will be available for 3 months each year for City
use. Bike lids accommodate two bicycles each and are made of graffiti resistance, re -cycled
material.
They form theft, vandal, and weather resistant units. This sign/ bike lid exchange has been
accepted in Park Ridge and Oak Park, communities noted as similar to Evanston by the
presenter. Their use agrees with the Comprehensive Plan and Bike Plan for Evanston, again
according to the presenter. An additional bike lid will be furnished remote from the center at
a location selected by the City (EL station, rec center, park, etc.)
The Board wondered why not just provide more bike racks to serve the proposed need.
A decrease in theft and vandalism opportunities by use of bike lids, in addition to weather
protection, was the response of the presenter. A minimum of three faces of sign advertising
was needed to obtain one bike lid, according to a presenter. Text on the bike lid was
explained as limited to the identification as a bike lid and to giving the method of use.
Dick Peach gave his opinion that this would be a good idea for the center. The Board
expressed concern over the visual clutter created by the three pole signs.
A motion was made to deny the proposal and passed by unanimous vote.
1503 Chicago — Bloom 3 Flowers #03SVF- -00022
Presented by: Brenda ? (cannot read writing), Linda Johnson, and Kim Lesher?
The presenters have been told by new customers that they had a hard time finding the store,
even though it has been in existence for 3 years. They are proposing a relatively small
(2'X3' oval) blade sign to help in finding the store location.
A Board member thought that it set a bad precedent to approve blade sign variations before
the currently under consideration change to the Sign Regulations is enacted. It was noted
that the Board has approved blade sign variations recently, both on an individual sign basis
and as part of a signage plan.
The building needs a Unified Business Center signage plan and does not have one. It is also
a historic building and signage requires preservation review.
A motion was made to table the proposal for a permanent blade sign until a Unified
Business Center signage plan has been approved for the building by the Sign Board
and the Preservation Commission and passed with L. Berrkun abstaining.
A second motion was made to approve a temporary blade sign as proposed for a six
month period after installation or until a Unified Business Center signage plan is
approved, whichever comes first and passed with J. Weiss voting no.
2400 Main Street — Main Street Marketplace #03SVF• -00023
Presented by: Jeff Neterval
A Board member questioned why the rental phone number was not larger and it was
explained that text sizes were limited to improve the sign design. Considering the scale of
this site and project, the Board agreed that the sign size was appropriate.
It was noted that the Sign Regulations allow construction signs to remain in place until the
construction is finished or the building permit expires.
A motion was made to approve the sign and passed with J. Weiss removing himself
from the voting.
1700 Maple — Additional Review of a "Kiosk" sign at the Church/ Maple plaza
Presented by. Tom White
Very informative photos of a full size mock-up of the proposed kiosk sign were presented.
They completely displayed the sign design and relationship to the site, It was explained that
the lower red text will be cut out and through lit and the upper black text will be raised back fit
letters. All members of the Board were impressed with the elegant design of this sign.
A motion was made to approve the design of the kiosk signs for installation at the
three previously approved locations in the complex and passed by unanimous vote.
1930 Ridge —The Reserve at Evanston A portion of #03SVF- -00046
Presented by. W. Hallen
Only the building address signs are included in this proposal. The owner would like to get
them on order soon. A proposal for the remainder of the project signage will be presented at
the November sign board meeting. All the revisions suggested by the Board have been
incorporated into the revised address signs.
A motion was made to approve the address signs with the condition that they be
reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and passed by unanimous vote.
Proposed Viaduct Banners — Discussion only
THE ENTIRE BOARD COMPLETELY REJECTS THE PROPOSAL
FOR ANY BANNERS ON THE VIADUCTS!
(Emphasis reflects the tone of the Board discussion
and is not a liberty takers by the writer)
There was general agreement that not covering the decrepit viaducts maintained a
reminder to the community of their condition that may actually help hasten their
reconstruction.
The Board requests that both Design Evanston and the Sign Board be included in any
discussions on the viaduct banner proposal.
ADJOURNMENT 9:00pm
NEXT MEETING November 13.2003
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
November 13, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center • Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai, C. Thomas
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Rath, Lance Schart, Ald. Rainey
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the 10/09103 meeting notes
and passed by unanimous vote.
After some discussion a motion was made to withdraw the
sign variation approved for temporary real estate signs at the
Sherman Plaza site. Total lack of construction activity on the
project was given as the basis for this withdrawal action. The
motion passed by unanimous vote and W. Hallen was
directed to tell the developer to remove the signs.
A Board member presented a draft of a letter to Doug Gaynor
regarding the Board's dislike for the Levy Center message
signs and enumerating the Sign Regulations violations of the
installation. After discussion the Board agreed to have the
letter sent to Mr. Gaynor under Mark Larson's signature, as
chairman of the Board.
CITIZEN COMMENT will be included under the relevant
NEW BUSINESS discussion, below.
NEW BUSINESS
1711 Sherman — CVS Pharmacy #03SVF- -00024
Presented by: John Wastila, Doug Merritt, Joe Bolgas
The presenters indicated that the sign was carefully placed on the fagade to agree with
building design. Its location is integrated with the awning locations and the entry is marked
by a longer canopy section. When questioned it was established that "t HR/ PHOTO" is the
text intended from the array included in the proposal drawing.
After some discussion the Board's only concern was the small overage in the sign area,
A motion was made to approve the proposal with the condition that the sign area be
reduced to the one sign limit in the Sign Regulations of 125 SF and passed by
unanimous vote.
101 Asbury — CVS Pharmacy #03SVF- -00025
Presented by: as above
Citizen Comment: Lance Schart
The presenters noted that Sign "B" (freestanding sign on Asbury Avenue side of the site)
is obstructed by a brick/ wrought iron fence and cannot be seen when approached from the
south. They propose to raise the sign on a brick fence -like wall to allow it to be seen. A
marking of the actual auto entry drive location for the site is needed, from their point of view.
A 24 hour operation is planned for the for this store and the added "consumer draw" created
by the sign is required.
The presenters indicated that Sign "A" (freestanding sign on Howard Street side of the site)
would have a message section added to it under the proposal and the messages would
include: -time + temperature
-community notices
-sale item advertising
and that the sign would be similar to the existing message signs at ETHS and at the Levy
Center site. The addition of this message section is part of a corporate movement to make
CVS more competitive in the pharmacy business.
The citizen representative commented that the project in its final form was the result of
lengthy interaction between CVS, the neighbors, and the City and that the building, site
elements, and signage was enough for the location. Compromises had been made in this
development process and they should not be changed at this time.
He also mentioned that flashing sign would be distracting to drivers at this already accident
prone intersection and that the existing illuminated signage is visible from 2000 feet north of
south of the store on Asbury.
The Board noted that OSCO at Asbury/ Oakton does not mark its driveway entrances and
seems to be functioning well. They also indicated that Sign "B" is not needed as a very large
wall sign is mounted on the building facing south for northbound traffic viewing.
The Board also noted that commercial moving message signs are specifically denied by the
Sign Regulations. A Board member discovered that the existing Howard Street sign did not
agree with the variation given by the Board for its existence. Namely, its top sign section was
to be equal in width to the bottom brick base and the words "FOOD SHOPPE" were to be
completely removed. A question concerning compliance of the illumination level from the
lower text panel to the Sign Regulations criteria was also raised.
A motion was made to deny the proposal with the added requirement that the Howard
Street sign be revised to conform to conditions placed on the approval of its variation
and the motion passed with C. Thomas removed from the voting.
500 Dodge — Shell Station #03SVF- -00026
Presented by: Peter Balmes
The presenter indicated that the signage proposed for this station would up -grade to the new
Shell Oil standards that were recently installed at the Ridge/ Howard station after approval by
this Board. The Board suggested that the freestanding sign as proposed would obstruct the
view of the sidewalk from a driveway and that this was on a heavily used school child route.
A motion was made to approve proposal with the condition that the five lower panels
be removed from the freestanding sign base, opening to a height of 6'-8", and passed
by unanimous vote.
1901 Greenbay — Currency Exchange #03SVF- -00027
Presented by: Sarah Glenn, Kevin Williey
An ownership change requires that the sign texts be altered and the color changes reflect the
corporate hues of Western Union. The presenters noted that they were open to suggestions
from the Board and came to the meeting with a spirit of compromise.
A Board member indicated that the signage did not agree with the architectural elements of
the building, but most members felt that the building design did not strongly demand that it be
followed. A long discussion of possible changes to sign text, sign size, and sign color
occurred covering both the wall and freestanding signs in the proposal.
It was mentioned that this "Evanston entry point" was marked by signage that went to the full
limits of the Sign Regulations for wall signs; temporary window signs; illuminated window
signs; and freestanding signs.
A Board member noted that the yellow/ black color scheme proposed would increase the
illumination level on the site from the level generated by the existing red/ black color scheme
and suggested that revisions be made to decrease this effect. Another Board member had
the clever idea to reverse some of the signage from black text on yellow to yellow text on
black which was acceptable to the presenters.
A motion was made to approve the proposal with the following revisions:
-the north sign box of the west wall sign would be changed to yellow text
on black backround
-the sign box over the door would be changed to yellow text on black backround
-the sign box of the south wall sign would have the "WESTERN UNION" text
moved to the west end of the sign
-the freestanding sign would have the "MONEY ORDERS" and "LICENSE
SERVICE" texts completely removed
-all temporary window signs would be removed and no temporary window signs
would ever be installed in the building
and passed by unanimous vote.
900 Chicago — Condo Sales Signs #03SVF- -00028
Presented by: Jennie Honda, Mary Summerville
The presenters indicated that they had a sign position problem, which was the reason no
actual sign locations were given in the proposal. The sidewalk protection shed will be
removed when demolition is started and replaced with a construction fence.
The only element that will last through the demolition phase is the fence itself.
Thus, 4' X 16' printed fabric signs are proposed for the site. These would be originally
mounted on the construction fences facing Main Street and Chicago Avenue.
Later in the construction the signs would be mounted on plywood backing and moved to post
mounted or building mounted locations. Top of signs would never be more than 14 feet
above the ground, as originally proposed.
The Board thought that the signs had too much text on them to be effective and the mix of
many different type fonts and sizes was undesirable.
A motion was made to approve the proposal for fence and remounted locations of the
signs with the following revisions to the text:
-advertising text in the lower left portion of the sign will be removed and "SALES
CENTER 504 Main" inserted in lieu thereof
("VISIT OUR" and "Just east of Chicago Ave." will be deleted)
-all text areas will be re -spaced and type sizes and fonts will be uniform
and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was 9:15
NEXT MEETING December 11. 2003
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
December 11, 2003 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
J. Weiss, L. Berkun, C. Thomas
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the November 13,
2003 meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
None
1590 Sherman — The Tint Shop #03SVF- -00029
Presented by: Alex Bond
The presenter indicated that he needed the number of signs to make his future customers
aware of the services he offers and to increase his business volume. He has recently added
cleaning and tailoring to the services he offers and may add additional services next year.
He said he did not receive a copy of the Unified Business Center signage plan for the building
when he purchased the store as a condominium. (W.Hallen called Tod Desmarais of
OPTIMA on 12/12 and was told that the signage plan was given to all stores with their condo
declaration documents.)
A general consensus of the Board agreed that their was simply too much signage on the
store and that it presented a very offensive, cluttered appearance. Various improvements
that decreased the signage were discussed and a common solution was found.
A motion was made to approved the variation from the Unified Business Center
signage plan for the window signs with the following changes:
-remove all non -illuminated, opaque window signs
-remove neon "OPEN" sign
-move both "LARISA TAILOR" and "MINNETOKA" sign downs to lower panes and
align with illuminated shirt+tie graphic (to remain)
-"TINT SHOPPE" and "1590 SHERMAN" can remain in the pane above the door
and passed by unanimous vote.
1801 Dempster - ABC Choice Phone Store #03SVF- -00030
Presenter by: Saeed A. Dababneh
The presenter indicated that he needed to tell the public what brands he offers and that the
store name itself, ABC CHOICE", did not relate what was being sold. When questioned he
said that he would have illuminated window signs giving brand names. He also indicated
that the awnings were to be 2 feet deep and was informed that current revisions to the Sign
Regulations required that they be a minimum of 3 feet deep and he agreed to comply.
The Board members could not accept this amount of signage and the use of brand name
advertising, which is prohibited by the Sign Regulations. For instance, giving the address
three times on the awnings seemed very excessive. A Board/ Presenter discussion took
place which tried to find an acceptable way to reduce the items of information on the awnings
and to make they less gaudy.
A motion was made to approved the variation for the awning signage with the
following changes:
-remove all brand name signage and logos from the awnings
-maintain the three semi -circular arched sections with only the comer position having
the building address on it
-using only a blue color on the two sections between the arched sections and using
white text on their tower portion giving a generic description of the store offerings
(like "WIRELESS PHONE SERVICE" or just "PHONE SERVICE") in a font size equal to
that used for the address.
-remove all existing sign boxes + conduit above the awning locations and patch the
masonry wall to match existing
and passed by unanimous vote.
1930 Ridge — The Reserve at Evanston #03SVF- -00016 (Continued)
Presented by: no presenter
The Board decided to review this proposal without a presenter from the building since the
signage had been discussed in general at a previous meeting. Board members agreed that
the complex identification signage was too large and at too many locations.
They indicated that they would consider adding a modest freestanding "monument" sign in
the landscape area at the extreme south end of the site.
A motion was made to approve only one complex identification wall sign for the site.
The sign could have the text and logo as proposed, but in a small format and located
under the open "canopy" at the sales office entrance on Building "D".
The motion passed by unanimous vote.
801 Davis — The Residences of Sherman Plaza #03SVF- -00006 (Extended)
Presented by: Mark Edwards
The developer still intends to refresh these signs in the future and incorporate them into
locations above truck entries in the construction canopy array. They will come to the Board
with this revised site signage arrangement before it is made.
A significant number of buyers give the site signage as the source of their first knowledge of
the condominium project's existence and this makes it an important part of the sales efforts.
February 2004 is the current start of garage demolition timing.
With condominium sales on -going and with a schedule for project progress in place, the
Board agreed to grant an extension to the variation given for the existing site signage.
A motion was made to extend the site signage variation to April —1, 2004 (approx. one
year from the date of erection of the signs) and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:45PM
NEXT MEETING January 8. 2004 HAPPY NEW YEARI
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
January 8, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, C. Thomas
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS -A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
-Staff was asked to check the following sign sites:
1. The Tint Shop - 1590 Sherman for compliance with variation
condition that all opaque window sign be removed.
2. If a permit has been issued for the tax prep service banner
for currency exchange operation on the north wall of the
building (at the muffler shop).
3. If a permit had been issued for the recently installed sign at
the Nissan dealership on Chicago Avenue.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1910 Dempster— Shopping Center #03SVF- -00031
Presented by: Laurie Marston and Chris Lupo
The presenter indicated that the freestanding sign locations had been revised from the
previous request in accordance with t6he Board's comments, namely:
-they have been reduced from 3 to 2 locations
-they have been moved farther away from the street right-of-ways and from the
Dunkin Donuts auto staging line
-they are located at existing light pole locations
(the signs still require their own poles as the light standards could not accept the
additional wind loading generated by the signs)
The Board agreed the revised locations were an improvement, but questioned the usefulness
of the locked, two bike pods to the general public. Open bike racks seemed better to the
Board.
A motion was made to approve the freestanding signs as proposed with the following
conditions:
-two bike racks with a 5 bike capacity each shall be provided in lieu of the bike
pods and the racks shall be located in a roofed walkway area of the shopping
center
-the City of Evanston would have use of the sign panels for up to 10% of the
total yearly display time
-a normal yearly sign fee would be charged for the signs
-the signs would generally conform to the Sign Regulations 7 items of
information limit
and passed by unanimous vote.
1901 Greenbay — Muffler Shop #03SVF- -00032
Presented by: M.M. Islam
The presenter noted that the location proposed did have a pole sign at one time.
He indicated that many customers have said the location is difficult to find and miss
it driving by. The fact that this is the south end beginning of Greenbay Road contributes to
this problem for first time users. He feels that a pole sign would significantly improve his
business volume.
The Board displayed photographs of the shop that showed a cluttered array of wall signs on
the north and west building walls. They felt that too much signage already existing at the site
and that reduction of wall signage should be considered with any other signage increase.
The tenant indicated they would agree with this exchange of signage.
Considerable discussion occurred on how the wall signs could be modified and reduced.
A motion was made to approve the pole sign with the following conditions-
-the optional changeable copy board would not use at this location
-all wall signs will be removed from the north wall
-on the west wall the signage over the 3 south auto service bays would be
removed and replaced with sign similar to those existing over 3 north service
bays, i.e. yellow text with yellow underline. The OIL CHANGE sign will be
removed from the from the middle door of the 3 south auto service bays
and passed by unanimous vote.
3434 Central — Unity Church #03SVF- -00033
Presented by: David Bromley
The presenter indicated that the church wanted to replace a deteriorated freestanding sign
and add a wall sign to increase their visibility and grow their congregation.
As a "new" church relative to some other Evanston churches, they feel they need additional
signage to establish their existence and gain membership.
Staff noted that Ald. Moran had contacted the Zoning department and indicated that he
thought that the sign proposal should be rejected by the Sign Board.
The Board viewed the freestanding sign as basically "overkill" for this residential location.
A very long discussion was held on ways to temper the visual impact of this freestanding
sign. The wall sign proposed was deemed appropriate by the Board, considering the large
setback of the wall from the street.
The presenter asked if the suggested revisions to the freestanding sign could be firmly
established to allow timely revisions to the proposal.
A motion was made to allow the applicant to revise and re -submit the freestanding
sign design before the next Sign Board meeting for distribution to the Board members
for review and, hopefully, approval. The revision will Incorporate the following
changes:
-text boxes will have white backrounds for both ends of the sign
-text box letters will be 4" high and use a common font with cap + lower case
letters
and the text boxes will be reduced in size
-the header text and logo will be correspondingly increased in size
-text boxes will be down washed with lighting inside the sign box
-the work "CHURCH" will be removed from the telephone number text line
The motion approved the wall sign as proposed but requires the sign to be located
with its center in the center of the top half of the masonry wall.
This motion passed by unanimous vote.
1801 Dempster —Phone Store #03SVF- -00030 (Clarification)
The Board agreed that the intent of the variation approved for this awning signage was that
the three arched portions be not illuminated.
ADJOURNMENT was at 9:15 PM
NEXT MEETING February 12, 2004
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
February 12, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, J. Macsai, A. Perry
STAFF PRESENT: W. Haller
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
As part of this vote a question was raised concerning the three
issues raised in "OTHER BUSINESS" in the 1l8104 meeting notes.
W. Hallen checked the next day with K. Mims and:
-The Tint Shop and currency change sites now comply with the
the conditions attached to the variations given.
-The Nissan dealership sign obtained a permit for the recent sign.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1700 Sherman — Panera Bread #04SVF- -00001
Presented by: Chuck Zenn
The presenter indicated that proposed signage has been approved by the Preservation
Commission and agrees with the Uniform Business Center signage plan for building, with the
exception of banners (flags) on the flagpoles. The Board understands that the Preservation
Commission only approved the flag with the company logo on it, not the one with the
company name in text on it.
A motion was made approve proposal with the same restriction on the flag as
approved by the Preservation Commission and passed by unanimous vote.
1100 Clark — SIENNA Condo Project #04SVF- -00002
Presented by: Linda Leach and Thomas Roszak
The Board was concerned about:
-the large number of text and graphic elements on the signs
and the resultant lack of readability
-the time the signs will be up
-the references to other projects on the signs
(the Sign Regulations limit real estate signs to 'sale or lease of the premises...")
These issues were discussed at length together with changing sales office locations over the
job life, and sign timing. It was noted that most condo real estate signs are permitted to stay
up from the start of construction until the last unit is sold. A delayed start, like the Sherman
Plaza project, is not anticipated by this developer and construction activity will follow the sign
installations closely.
A motion was made to approve the three signs with the following conditions:
-removal of the top three small text items (..downtown location.., ..terraces/
balconies, and luxury finishes) and the two graphic elements relating to off -site
projects from the signs
-rearrangement in the position and size of the remaining graphic and text
elements at the sign designer's option
-a maximum sign area of 144 SF for each sign
and passed by unanimous vote.
3434 Central — Unity Church #03SVF- -00033
Presented by; Rev. Festus Umeojeigo and David Bromley
(Five members of the church also attended the meting)
The Board agreed that the revised freestanding sign incorporated all the recommendations
given at the last Board meeting. The use of a brick base slightly larger than the sign box was
explained as giving more relation for the sign to the existing building style. An alignment of
the brick and box would be in keeping with a more modem building.
The Board noted that the church name and logo at the top of the sign seemed crowded and
needed more "air" around it.
A motion was made to approve the freestanding sign as proposed with some reduction
in the size of the church name and logo at the designer's discretion and passed by
unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:30 PM
NEXT MEETING March 11, 2004
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
April 8. 2004 Meetina
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen. J. Weiss. L. Berkun. A. Perry
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS None
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
860 Hinman -- Apartment Building #04SVF- -00003
Presented by: Sign -in sheet entries are not legible.
The presenters noted that the sign has existing for a long time and is dearly in
need of re -painting. A Board member indicated that the sign did not fit "tall
building identification" criteria in the Sign Regulations as it is more than 120 SF
and contains more than the building identification. As proposed the sign seems
more like a "billboard" to the Board. A change in text could remove the ad -like
quality of the sign.
A motion was made to approve a sign matching the existing size and
location with the text changed to only the name "Evanshire Apartments"
and the business telephone number related to it and passed with J. Weiss
voting no.
2400 Main — Main Street Marketplace #04SVF- -00004
Presented by: Jeff Neterval
The presenter noted that the existing "pylon" sign is about 26 feet square and the
proposed west sign reduces this to 12' X 26'. The Board agreed that the size of
the wall signs related to the size of the site and viewing distances.
A long discussion was held on the "Secondary Signs" issue and attempts at
describing limits to them proved difficult to quantify. Finally it was agreed to
leave them as proposed. The nine center `logo" elements on the three towers
seemed appropriate to the Board.
A motion was made to approve the Unified Business Center sign plan as
submitted and passed with J. Weiss abstaining.
1818 Maple — Hilton Hotel #04SVF- -00005
Presented by: Scott Toth
The presenter noted that this was a one -for -one signage change to the new
corporate name "Hilton Garden Inn". The canopy now has signage on three
sides and will only have it on one side in the proposed change.
A logo shown high on the building east face on the drawing is not truly intended
and is not part of this signage proposal.
A motion was made to approve the signage change as submitted and
passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 9:00 PM
NEXT MEETING is scheduled for Mav 14.2004
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
June 10, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, L. Berkun, J. Macsai, A. Perry
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote. One correction was note
to the Main Street Marketplace case notes. The motion passed
and J. Weiss abstained from the voting. The notes will be revised.
CITIZEN COMMENT -Tom Rash, of the Evanston Chamber of Commerce, suggested
that the Sign Regulations be revised to include blade signs as
they relate well to pedestrian and street traffic, without being too
intrusive. They have been included in a Special Sign District,
a Unified Business Center signage plan, and in some specific
variations recently approved by the Sign Board.
Board members indicated that a draft of text for blade sign
Inclusion has been drawn up and would be submitted in a
proposed revision to the Sign Regulations in the near future.
-Jason Pollack, a downtown Evanston resident, suggested that
blade signs are safer than wall signs as they are more easily seen
from an automobile in the street. The Gary Poppins sidewalk
area has significant pedestrian traffic and this blocks window
signge. A parking garage sign and the Unicorn coffee shop
awning have existing signage text perpendicular to the street,
which is similar to a blade sign.
-"Citizen comment" by Carmen's general manager will be included
in the case discussion hereinafter.
NEW BUSINESS
616 Lake — Immanuel Lutheran Church #04SVF- -00006
Presented by: Pastor Senn, Ralph Cilia, and many members of the congregation.
The presenters noted that this is a replacement freestanding sign for one that needs to be
retired after 50 years of good service. The sign location will remain the same as it is a very
good position on the church site. A small (+6") size increase is included in the proposal and
the sign will have internal lighting in a down4it mode.
A motion was made to approve the sign as proposed and passed by unanimous vote.
1739 Sherman — Gary Poppins #04SVF- -00007
Presented by: Gary Seltzer
The blade sign proposed would improve the shops visibility from the street traffic, according
to the presenter and is needed to help identity the shop. Board members noted that the
existing wall sign is difficult to read and could be improved. Members disagreed on the sign
location on a building stone pier, but finally settled for a position on the centerline of the pier.
This blade sign has a small 1.5' X 3' area in keeping with other recently approved blade
signs.
A motion was made to approve the sign as proposed and passed with A. Perry
abstaining.
1012/ 1014 Church — Asado and Carmen's #04SVF- -00008 + -00009
(These cases will be considered together as they are for two signs on one building
with identical variation requirements.)
Presented by: Michael Callus, Jose Venzer, et al.
The presenters indicated that the building location was easily missing by automobile traffic on
Church Street and needs the proposed signage array. Ease of viewing from a car on Church
Street is a primary criteria for the signage design. Carmen's is an `Evanston institution" and
has been in business for 26 years generating significant tax input to the City.
With the addition of the Asado restaurant operation the owner needs increased visibility to
justify the recent capital expenditures. A sign similar to those proposed is on the Wolfgang
Puck location nearby on Maple Avenue.
Board members noted that the Wolfgang Puck sign is part of a Special Sign District and has
that has no application to the Church Street site. It was also noted that blade signs are
generally considered very small in area with limited projection over the public walk and that
the signs proposed do not fit this definition. The signs proposed are considered projected,
not blade, signs because of their size and position.
The presenters suggested extension of the existing Special Sign District to the Church Street
area. It was noted that the signage in this District is closely tied to the theater building design
and would have no reasonable application to the buildings in the 1000 block of Church Street.
Use of an awing similar to a adjacent business was suggested by a Board member.
The owner indicated that he has had bad experiences with damage to awnings from
pedestrian traffic, but might consider limited awnings used as entry canopies.
Board members thought that the existing sign is very small and poorly located. Wall signage
complying with upper limit of the Sign Regulations has not been tried on the site.
A long discussion of the various signage possibilities for the site was held between the Board
and the presenters.
A motion was made to approve, in addition to two wall signs and awnings conforming
to the Sign Regulations, four blade signs for the building with blade signs limited to:
-six square feet for each sign
-a bottom of sign no lower than 7'-6" above the sidewalk level
-a maximum projection from the building of four feet for the sign
and passed with A. Perry abstaining.
1710 Orrington — Hotel Orrington #04SVF- -00010
Presented by; Henry Funkenausch and Scott Lovell
Canopy and tall building identification signs were presented that display the new Hotel
Orrington graphic logo. The signage size on the canopy was based on "impact" distance
criteria and technical neon lighting restraints. Use of LED lighting was dismissed based on
increased cost and decreased white light life guarantee.
A Board member noted that arched windows on the penthouse area directly above the main
entrance canopy were not shown in the foram approved during the planned development
process. (After the meeting staff reviewed the building permit drawings for this worts.
They show a semi -circular arched section above the center window flanked by two rectilinear
windows with full circle decorative elements above each side window.)
The presenters agreed to integrate the tall building identification sign with the approved
central window array on the penthouse.
The canopy signage seemed "cramped" in the vertical dimension by both the Board and the
presenters. Increasing the canopy side depth was dismissed for building design reasons.
The Board could not understand why the tall building identification sign had to be so large.
A motion was made to approve the signage with the condition that all signs would be
reduced to 75% of the area originally proposed and passed by unanimous vote.
Board Discussion Items:
The Sign Ordinance amortization extension proposed could only be accepted by the Board
considering the limits of the current City sign staff.
A Board member suggested that the intent of items in Variation Standards form in the
variation application is difficult understand by many applicants. Staff agreed that many
questions have been raised by applicants on how these issues should be properly
addressed. (After the meeting staff determined that the current application form is derived
from a simple re -stating of Section 4-12-17 (E) of the Sign Regulations.)
A. Perry volunteered to draft a revision to the document for consideration by the Board.
Staff will assemble existing drafts of suggested revisions to the Sign Regulations, including
the one covering blade signs, for discussion by the Board in future meetings.
Board members think that the window signs at The Tint Shop 1590 Sherman and the
temporary paper window signs at the Currency Exchange at 1901 Greenbay Road do not
agree with the conditions associated with the variations granted and would like to have City
staff review these locations. The violations are so flagrant and have been in place so long
that the Board asks if administrative adjudication can be used and tines imposed on these
owners?
Staff regrets the leaving of Lindsey Berkun from the Board and thanks her for good and long
service to the Evanston community. Cleveland's gain is our loss.
ADJOURNMENT was at 9:30 PM
NEXT MEETING Julv 8. 2004
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
July 8, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, A. Perry
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: Three residents of the adjacent Sherman Gardens co-op.
OTHER BUSINESS: None
CITIZEN COMMENT The Sherman Garden residents attended to determine what kind
of signage and lighting thereof was being proposed for the site.
They were interested in any impact he signage might have on the
co-op building.
NEW BUSINESS
824 Emerson — First Bank and Trust #04SVF- -00011
Presenters: Bob Yohanan, Howard Kain, and Dave Thometz
The two pylon signs and wall signage proposed is needed to make the site visible and
"brand" it into the bank system. The three sided signs match the form of an existing sign at
the Church Street location of the bank. The small wall sign shown on the north face of the
building is now being proposed an the south face to agree with the moved pedestrian entry to
the facility. A Board member asked it the large freestanding sign at the Elgin Road/ Benson
comer might make drivers want to enter at this out -only side of the site. A presenter noted
that the "porkchop" configuration of the exit drive was designed to deter this traffic path.
The lack of signage on the north wall of the building was questioned. Signs not requiring a
variation, such as "OPEN/ CLOSED" and "ENTRY ONLY" will be located on this side of the
site.
The Board agreed with the design of the signage proposed on the building canopy, but
questioned the need for two, three -faced freestanding signs. The presenters responded that
the south pylon was needed to 'mark the site" and was a top priority location to them: and
that the north pylon was needed because the bridge structure blocked view of the facility
when driving to the east on Emerson. A suggestion by a Board member to reduce the south
pylon to the same size as proposed for the north pylon was deemed not acceptable to the
presenters after some discussion. The presenters suggested reducing the south pylon by
33% and this was not acceptable to the Board.
A motion was made to approve the signage as proposed with the complete removal of
the south freestanding "pylon" sign and passed by unanimous vote.
Discussion Item: Changes to the Sign Regulations
The proposed changes to the Sign Regulations originally drafted 812101 and up -dated 6/18/04
were carefully reviewed by the Board. Minor corrections were agreed upon and will be
incorporated into a revised draft by W. Hallen. It was agreed to hold the revision proposed
for Section 4-12-10: (K): Vehicular Dealership Signs for further discussion.
The proposed revisions to Section 4-12-10: (B) 4. Height: and Section 4-12-12: (H)
Inspections: will be discussed with Carolyn Brzezinski for insights into the back -
round of their origination.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:50 PM
NEXT MEETING August 12, 2004
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
August 12, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
J. Weiss, J. Macsai, A. Peary, and G.Summers
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the previous
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
None
2020 Green Bay Road — New Age Gallery #04SVF- -00012
Presented by: Could not read script sign -in signature.
The presenter noted that the sign was only 3 feet high X 2 feet wide and would be 6 feet back
from the front property line. A site photograph showed that this signage would be very
conservative when compared to the Windy City Garden supply installation abutting the
property to the south. This residential site is embedded in a long stretch of commercial
zoning along Green Bay Road It was acknowledged by the Board that this was a very
unusual `residential" setting. When asked the presenter said that the gallery will sell crystals,
minerals, and other spiritual materials.
A motion was made to approve the sign as proposed and passed by unanimous vote.
800 Elgin Road — Optima Horizons
Presented by: M. Carver
#04SVF- -00013
When asked the presenter said that the sign will be made of powder coated steel to match
the existing steel canopies currently installed on the building. A Board member questioned if
the sign was too high at 13'-6" in relation to the pedestrian walkway. It was noted that the
sign served to mark the curb -cut visitor drop-off for he building and the height was needed for
viewing from the roadway by an automobile driver.
A motion was made to approve the sign as proposed and passed by unanimous vote,
with Jack Weiss abstaining.
Discussion Item: Changes to Sign Regulations
The Board verified that the revisions discussed at the last meeting were incorporated into the
changes proposed to the Sign Regulations.
A motion was made to ask staff to forward the proposed changes to the Sign
Regulations to the City Council via the proper committee process and passed by
unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:00PM
NEXT MEETING
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
September 9, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, J. Macsai, G. Summers
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: J. Aiello (Part time)
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the August 12,
meeting with the correction of indicating that J. Weiss abstained
on the Optima project variation action and passed by unanimous
vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1620 Sherman — Sherman Plaza — Unified Business Center Signage Plan
#04SVF- -00014
Presented by:Jim Klutznick, Mark Edwards, Aubrey Swift, Laura McCanna, and Jeff Harwood
A Board member questioned why the project Architect, Daniel P. Coffey and Associates, was
not represented at the sign variation meeting as the integration of signage elements into the
building design should be important to them. It was explained that while the Coffey firm
retains overall design responsibility for the complex, the "production" and some design
development was being done by Otis, Koglin, and Wilson who are represented at the meeting
by Mr. Aubrey Swift.
The Board questioned why the Unified Business Center (UBC) signage plan did not strive to
create more uniformity in some elements, say color of awnings for instance. A presenter
noted that large, corporate, national retailers have a very set image that they believe is vital
to maintain in all locations. Their view is not like a group of local retailers sharing a building
with the building owner creating strict, uniform signage guidelines. A rigorous UBC would
not be acceptable to most national retailers, which form the target market for this complex.
A wide ranging and detailed discussion of the signage proposal ensued. We will not attempt
to record the full text of the discussion, but rather summarize the results.
As back -round it was noted by the presenters that the building would incorporate brick and
precast concrete into its facades and that varying brick colors will be utilized on sections of
the building. It was agreed that the UBC would be revised to include the following concems
and resubmitted for review:
-Use of window signs will be not be permitted in the second floor windows.
-All references to "blade" signs will be removed and the maximum size, location, and number
of banners permitted would be established in the proposal.
-Moving the second floor "RED DOOR SPA" sign one bay to the east (to a corner location)
will be discussed with the tenant.
-Window sign locations on the first floor will have their maximum mounting height and width
established in the proposal.
-Clearly establish that the only awning positions in the UBC are as shown on the drawings
and provide dimensions for geometry of all awning locations.
-Show all locations proposed for top edge mounted signage on canopies (add on the south
east comer canopy) and note their existence in the text.
A motion was made to request that the suggested revisions be reflected in the UBC
proposal and that revised copies be distributed to the Sign Board for their review in a
one week period from the time of their arrival and passed by a unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 9:00 PM
NEXT MEETING October 14, 2004
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
October 14, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Macsai, G. Summers
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes or the September 9,
2004 meeting and passed by a unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
821 Davis — New City Parking Garage 904SVE- -00015
Presented by: Roxanne Henry, Ame Weingart
The presenters indicated that the two proposed blade signs are like the one currently
installed on the Maple Avenue garage. They also noted that the mounting height was
selected based on viewing from a distance and a logical position with respect to facade
elements. One of the elements used in positioning the signs was the possible future
banners, which may or may not be included in the design according to the presenters.
The Board members thought that the signs were mounted too high on the building and noted
that the position was related to the future possibility of banners.
A motion was made to approve the two blade signs proposed, but to reserve review
and approval of the mounting height for future consideration when it is firmly known
and was approved by a unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:15 PM
NEXT MEETING November 11. 2004
Draft not Approved
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
November 11, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Macsai, G. Summers
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the
October 14.2004 meeting and passed by a unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
1834 Sherman -- Lou Malnatis #04SVF- -00016
Presented by: Marc Malnati, Vincent Campione, Dennis D'Angero
The presenter explained that the drawings were not exactly clear regarding the sign
position proposed. The sign would be located on the 45 degree angled wall at the
southeast comer of the building, just northeast of the existing window. This location would
allow the sign to be read from both the west and the north. The fact that an opaque sign
body was proposed with cut-out illuminated letters was confirmed. When questioned the
presenters indicated that the sign would be illuminated only when the restaurant was open.
The Board questioned the sign position with respect to existing architectural elements on
the building. They thought that the top of the sign should be slightly lowered to align with
the bottom of the brick corbelling near the top of the wall and that the bottom should align
with the existing limestone window sills.
A Board member noted that the difference in the width of the letters in 'LOU MALNATIS"
(ranging from a narrow "I" to a fat "M") made the sign visually unsightly and rotating the
LOU MALNATIS text 90 degrees could improve the sign. It this position the text could
remain block text as shown or be changed to the script logo used on the awnings.
No large, illuminated blade sign exists in Evanston and the Board seemed to want to
consider this installation very carefully.
A motion was made to ask the Owner to come rack the next Sign Board meeting on
December 9, 2004 with a revised proposal that considered the sign placement with
respect to building elements and the text rotation and passed by a unanimous vote.
3330 Central - Starbucks
Presented by: Terry Doyle
#04SVF- -00017
The presenter noted that the clearance sign was needed to protect the canopy over the
drive -up window on the east wall. When asked, the presenter indicated that the speaker
volume at the order entry location would be adjustable and that a six ft. fence was on the
south property line, helping to block sound transmission in that direction.
Menu board area was given as 29 SF which is only 4 SF over the exempt sign area of
25 SF permitted by the Sign Regulations.
A motion was made to approve the proposal as submitted and passed by a
unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:10 PM
NEXT MEETING is on December 9, 2004
Draft not Aooroved
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
December 9, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, A. Perry, G. Summers
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the November 11,
2004 meeting and was approved by unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1834 Sherman — Lou Malnatis #04SVF- - 00016
Presented by: Vincent Camplone and Dennis D'Angelo
The Board had a long discussion on the size and exact positioning of the proposed sign.
A Board member was concerned that this large "blade" sign would set a precedent for future
variation proposals. The presenter had another drawing that seemed to show a position for
the sign that differed from the sketches submitted. After discussion, it was agreed that the
bottom of the sign should align with the bottom of the existing second floor window limestone
sills and that the top of the sign should align with the top of the first corbelled brick band
above the window. It was noted that the sign is being proposed closer to the building than in
the first proposal, (8" rather than 12-) which is an improvement.
For the two text arrangements proposed, the owner and the Board agree that the use of the
script for the words "Lou Malnatis" is better and it conforms with the business logo.
The sign position perpendicular to the Sherman Ave. facade is preferred by the Board as it
relates better to the building mass than the 45 degree wall position.
A motion was made to approve Sketch #2204c-1 dated 12101/04 with the top and
bottom of the sign in the locations noted hereinabove and passed
with J. Weiss voting no.
2400 Main — Starbucks
Presented by: Shellie Gazlay
#04SVF- -00018
The proposal is for very small variations from the Unified Business Center signage plan for
the center and is really a technical variations. The top of the sign proposed centers the sign
in a brick band on the building and the text block height is only 2" over the 30" allowance.
A motion was made to approve the variation as proposed and passed with J. Weiss
reclusing himself as he is the designer of the Unified Business Center signage plan
for the center.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:15
NEXT MEETING January 13.2004
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
January 13, 2005 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Weiss, J. Macsai, A. Perry, G. Summers
STAFF PRESENT: W. Halien
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the 12/09104
meeting and passed by a unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1950 Greenbay — Mobil Gas Station
Presented by: Irwin Walzer
#04SVF- -00020
Changing of the canopy signage is required by the Mobil Corporation to continue this
franchise location. This addition of signage band around the existing gas pump canopy will
be "softly" lit according to the presenter and the existing under -canopy lighting will not be
changed.
The Board asked the orientation of the signage and sides with the word "MOBIL" on them are
shown as facing west and south. The presenter may want to move the south facing text to
the north face, which is probably a better location. Either location is acceptable to the Board.
A motion was made to approve signage as proposed and passed by a unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 7:50 PM
NEXT MEETING February 10, 2005
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
February 10, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
J. Weiss, J. Macsai, G. Summers
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the January 13,
2005 meeting and passed by a unanimous vote.
None
807 Davis -- Sherman Plaza Complex
Presented by J. Klotznick, G. Collins, W. Giomo
#05SVF- -00001
A detailed walk through of the proposed signage was made by the presenters including all
the thinking behind the sign wordings and placements. It was noted that this proposal does
not include any signage for the public garage portion of the Sherman Plaza site and
additional proposals are anticipated for this portion of the project.
Placement of the signs relates to the two major elements of the complex, condo tower and
retail section, and to the garage entry location off Sherman Avenue.
The horizontal dimensions of the public art sections indicated will be determined by the needs
of the public art produced. A commitment by the developer was made to provide the plywood
for the public art areas and to install these sections.
It was agreed that creation of the public art was the City's sole responsibility.
The signage includes project identification; contractor/ financing/ renting/ and tenant
information; and safety warnings. The Board agreed that this large amount of signage was
justified considering the site's size and prominence. They also agreed that the signage was
arranged in a logical manner fully relating to the project and site.
A motion was made to approve the signage as proposed with the condition that the
developer would provide the plywood and installation thereof for the public art
sections and passed by unanimous vote.
140 Chicago — Mobil Gas Station #05SVF- -00002
Presented by Manta Santia
The presenter indicated that this replacement sign has:
-less text than the existing sign
-exactly the same size as the existing sign
-a smaller "MOBIL" logo area than the existing sign
-more clearance under the sign giving better visibility to drivers
The Board welcomes these kind of improvements.
A motion was made to approve the signage as proposed and passed by unanimous
vote.
2518 Green Bay — Kinko's
Presented by Kelley Alcock
#OSSVF- -00003
The presenter noted that the proposal was for one-to-one signage replacements for the
existing freestanding, wall, and window signs and that the illumination level of the signs would
conform to Sign Regulations criteria. In response to questions from the Board it was
indicated that the east and north wall signs would not have raceways but have individually
mounted letters and that the east wall signage would be centered on the east wall.
The Board's concern centered on the use of a white background on two of the signs and
control of the illumination level from these signs.
A motion was made to approve signs with the condition that the south wall and
freestanding signs have a dark background and passed by unanimous vote.
(In a telcon with the presenter on 2/11105 W. Hallen relayed the opinion of J. Weiss that
a white opaque background would meet the intent of this motion.)
1560 Sherman — Rotary International
Presented by Dawn Ruth
#05SVF- -00004
The presenter noted that the two banners would remain up until July — 2005 and will mark the
site for the hundredth birthday of Rotary International. Many hundreds of visitors are
expected to come this year to help Rotary celebrate this occasion.
The Board questioned the need for saying "ROTARY" four times on one banner and the color
choice on the other banner which reduces legibility of the message.
A Board member questioned the need for two banners.
A motion was made to approve the signage as proposed and passed with J. Weiss
voting no.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:35 PM
NEXT MEETING will be on March 10.2005.
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
March 10, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Larsen, J. Macsai, G. Summers
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the February 10,
2005 meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
821 Davis -- City Parking Garage: Sherman Plaza Complex #05SVF- -00005
Presented by Roxanne Henry
The proposed wall signs to be mounted on the construction fence area are a simple
extension of the signage variation previously approved for the condo tower/ retail building
sections of the project work. In fact, two of the three signs proposed are identical to the signs
on the other project sections.
A motion was made to approve the signage as presented
and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 7:45 PM
NEXT MEETING April 14, 2005
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
April 14, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
J. Weiss, J. Macsai, G. Summers
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the March 10, 2005
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
None
739 Howard -- Clothes Pin Coin Laundry
Presented by: Kwang H. Yi
#05SVF- -00006
The presenter noted that the south wall sign is smaller than the existing sign and felt that the
text would not look good on a smaller sign. He feels that a larger sign is needed to be readily
seen from the street and that a laundry one block west has extensive signage.
(Kariton Mims, sign inspector, will be directed to review the location mentioned.)
A Board member noted that it was not our policy to justify sign variations on the basis of
matching non -conforming existing signage. The Board did not see why a larger sign was
needed and indicated that the wall sign proposed perpendicular to the street was an
advertising sign and not simply a -NO PARKING" informational sign. Howard street is "over
signed' from the Board's point of view and is an area where the Sign Regulations should be
strictly enforced.
A motion was made to approve only signs in agreement basic with the Sign
Regulations, namely:
• a W X 20' (or 80 sq. ft.) wall sign on the south wall
• a limit to signs on the east wall to no parking site information signs at the
parking stall height level
• a requirement to paint out the two existing wall signs in the parking lot in a
color to match the existing brick walls
and passed by unanimous vote.
2129 Ridge — Apartment Building
Presented by :Michael Purcell
#05SVF- -00007
The presenter noted that the building rented to mostly undergraduate students.
As the facility is undergoing significant upgrades high vacancy rates are anticipated in this
year. The company operates many buildings and finds that some need on -site signage and
some do not. This site does from the presenter's perspective.
Board members speculated that the Sign Regulations may be a bit too restrictive in the
residential "FOR RENT" sign allowances, but did not want to establish a precedent.
One member noted that the recent change to the Sign Regulations included 4' X 8' temporary
"FOR SALE" signs for condominium developments, but did not extent this to rental units.
A motion was made to approve the temporary signage for use for 60 days in 2005 only
and passed by unanimous vote.
2736 Central — Multiple Retail Stores #05SVF- -00009
Presented by: Ann Hunzinger and Joe DiFrancesco
The presenters reinforced the text in the variation request that indicated that the SCHWINN
sign will remain, but agreed that it would be removed if the business ever left the building.
A simple canopy system contains the Uniform Business Center signage with addresses on
the canopy aprons and business names/ logos on the inclined face of the canopy.
The Board agreed that this was a well designed signage scheme that would enhance the
property and unify its appearance. A member questioned why the breaks in the canopy
system only occurred at some architectural pier elements and not others. The presenters
agreed that it would improve the design to make these breaks at all piers.
A motion was made to approve the Unified Business Center signage plan as submitted
with the following modifications:
• no business names will be on the awning aprons, only addresses.
• breaks in the awning system would be located at every architectural pier
• the existing Ed .cones wall sign would be removed
• windows signs that agree with the Sign Regulations would be permitted
and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:30
NEXT MEETING will be on Mav 12. 2005
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
May 12, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
J. Weiss, J. Macsai, G. Summers
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the April 14, 2005
meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
1l�
1800 Maple — City Garage: Enterprise Rent -a -Car
Presented by: Sandy Sassano, Greg Toste, David Cook
#05SVF- -00008
The presenters explained that the blade sign was reduced and lowered as a result of
discussions with the City and the wall sign was in agreement with the Special Sign District.
A question of possible removal of the telephone number from the blade sign (raised by the
SPAARC committee) was answered by a document indicating this was part of the Enterprise
logo covered by a copyright.
The Board suggested extending the wall sign to the north to fill the masonry opening and the
presenters noted that this could be easily done. A better position for the blade sign was
proposed by the Board, aligning the top of the sign with the top of the masonry opening.
This would raise the blade sign 2-3 feet from the position shown in the proposal and is
acceptable to Enterprise.
(Even though interior signage is not covered by the Sign Regulations a Board member
wondered how the 2' X X -ENTERPRISE PARKING ONLY" signs related to the restrictions
on site information signs in the Sign Regulations. After the meeting staff determined that the
site information signs are limited to four square feet. in the Sign Regulations.
The Board asks if these PARKING ONLY signs, even if they are interior to the structure, can
be viewed as site information signs by the City committees and limited to the four square feet
area value?)
A motion was made to approve the variations requested to the Special Sign District
with the following conditions:
-the wall sign black and white bands shall be extended to the north to fill the
masonry opening completely.
-the blade sign location shall be raised so the top of the sign aligns with the top
of the masonry opening at the level of this sign.
and passed by unanimous vote.
1235 Dodge — SPEX Car Wash
Presented by: Judith Lomas, Shadid Pervaiz
The presenters indicated that while they have sign facing north and west, they lack any facing
to the south which would improve their business. Car washing is many times an impulse
decision and they feel that the south facing sign would help bring in customers.
They have talked to the property owner to the south, who has no objection to this sign.
This is a new owner who has just recently purchased the business. An alternative proposal
for a large blade sign on the west wall was shown to the Board for the first time at the
meeting and was rejected.
A Board member questioned the effectiveness of the text used on the major sign on the west
wall which reads HAND SPEX WASH. "Are hands washed here? he asked. Maybe a text
change to something like -CAR WASH" might be better communication and bring in more
customers. The lack of contrast between the sign letters and the wall color also make the
existing west wall sign difficult to read. The Board agreed that the existing signage should be
sufficient to mark this location and did not think that any additional signage should be
permitted. (It was noted by the Board that the existing window signs for the NAILS STORE
seem to exceed the 20% of window area limit in the Sign Regulations. Sign inspection will
check this.)
A motion was made to deny the proposed variation to add one wall sign with the
recommendation that the text of the west wall sign be changed for better
communication and passed by unanimous vote.
807 Howard — Clean Wash Laundry
Presented by: Byongmoo Sohn, Mark Collins
#05SVF- -00019
The presenters want to keep the existing signage which does not comply with the Sign
Regulations in numerous ways. A Board member questioned if the existing south wall sign,
which does not require a variation, has diffusing material on the white back -round to assure
that the light is transmitted through the lettering at a substantially higher level than the back -
round, as required by the Sign Regulations. The Board thinks that the Sign Regulation is of
particular importance in the Howard Street area to help the area prosper. The need for a
variation for this site was determined from the comments by a presenter in a variation request
for a coin laundry in the 700 block of Howard Street at the last meeting of the Board.
A motion was made to deny the proposed variations and includes:
-a request to verify that the south wall sign has
a diffuser on its white back -round
-a requirement that the existing pole sign and east wall sign be removed
and passed by unanimous vote.
822 Dempster — Multiple retail Stores
Presented by: Darib Tran
#05SVF- -00012
This Unified Business Center signage proposal did not contain the information required by
Sections 4-12-188 (C) and 4-12-12 (C) 1, 2, t7 of the Sign Regulations and could not be
reviewed by the Board.
A motion was made to deny this proposal and passed by unanimous vote.
2300 Main — Multiple retail Stores #05SVF- -00013
Presented by: Guy Dragisic
This Unified Business Center signage proposal did not contain the complete information
required by Sections 4-12-188 (C) and 4-12-12 (C) 1, 2, +7 of the Sign Regulations and could
only be reviewed by the Board as a concept not a full sign plan. The submission lacked the
lettering size limits, colors, and fonts proposed and did not indicate if window sign are
included in the sign plan.
A motion was made to deny this proposal but approve it in concept, with the condition
that the blank non -conforming billboard on the building be removed, and passed by
unanimous vote.
1100 Davis — Multiple retail Stores #05SVF- -00014
Presented by: Nicholas Murphy
This Unified Business Center signage proposal did not contain all the information required by
Sections 4-12-188 (C) and 4-12-12 (C) 1, 2, +7 of the Sign Regulations and could not be
reviewed by the Board. Not all storefronts are shown in the proposal and it is not clear if
window signs are to be included or not. The Board recognized that delaying signage for this
new business would be a hardship on the tenant created by the building owner and approved
a temporary solution for this store only.
A motion was made to deny this overall proposal with the following conditions:
-to temporarily permit the installation of the proposed store sign for a period of 3
months to allow time for a more detailed Unified Business Center to be
reviewed.
-the temporary sign must comply with the Sign Regulations and do no damage
to the existing black marble surface.
and passed by unanimous vote.
(It was noted by the Board that the existing window signs for the PASSPORT STORE in this
building seers to exceed the 20% of window area limit in the Sign Regulations.
Sign inspection will check this.)
ADJOURNMENT was at 9:00 PM
NEXT MEETING June 9.2005
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
June 9, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Weiss, J. Macsai, G. Summers
STAFF
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve to approve the minutes of the May
12, 2005 meeting and passed by unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
2300 Main — Multiple Stores
Presented by: Guy Dragic
#05SVF- -00013
The revised Unified Business Center signage plan was presented and deemed complete by
the Board. A letter giving the owner's commitment to remove the billboard on the west side
of the building during the week of June 6, 2005 was given to the Board's staff for inclusion in
the case file. The Board discussed the SPAARC motion to limit the logo heights to 24", like
the lettering height limit. The Board thought that many logos may have small scale graphics
that need the additional dimension. It was noticed that the window sign limit in the proposal
was 25%, which is only 201,6 in the Sign Regulations. The presenter agreed to change this
immediately.
The Board asked that Kariton Mims determine if the existing 4'X8' crude sign on the mansard
roof area for the mattress shop has a legal sign permit and
A motion was made to approve the Uniform Business Center signage plan with the
window sign limit reduced to 20% and passed by unanimous vote.
614 Davis — The Things We Love #05SVF- -00015
Presented by: Travis Marlatte
The wall signs and banner proposed are needed to mark the location of this new store,
according to the presenter. The sign's design is taken from the business card design which
has become the company logo. Installation of the signage was done due to a
misunderstanding by the business owner. Use of window signage was suggested by the
Board and rejected by the business owner as he thinks that it is very important to display his
goods to the street view and any window signage would obstruct this sight line.
The Board noted that these type of cases, where a tenant is penalized by the action of the
building owner are difficult to resolve and pose real dilemmas. In this case the building owner
has more than used up the wall signage allowance in the Sign Regulations. The tenant felt
that the building owner will probably resist any reduction in the dance school signage.
A long discussion of possible alternatives included:
-changing the signs to white letters on a black back -round which would not agree with
the "logo" design of the sign and which would cost an additional $600-$800.
-as the business owner may install an awning in the future, setting a one year time
limit on the proposed wall signs and banner.
-masking off some of the white back -round on the wall signs
(it was discovered at the meeting that the sign proportions on the computer generated
layout were not the same as those on the actual sign photographs, which are much
better from the Board's point of view.)
-removing the center banner sign and replacing it with black fabric to conceal the
existing AC unit.
A motion was made to approve the signage with the conditions that:
-the center sign banner be removed now
-both walls signs be removed within 9 months from this meeting date
and passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:30 PM
NEXT MEETING on Julv 14.2005
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
July 14, 2005 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Weiss, G. Summers
STAFF: C. Brzezinski
OTHERS PRESENT: None
Since there was no quorum present, it was determined that the 2 members present would
listen to the applicants appeals, they would then state their "vote" and the meeting, and the
third member of the Board would be emailed the minutes and respond with his vote via email.
The results will be conveyed to the other members and to the applicants.
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made and seconded to approve to approve the
minutes of the June 9, 2005 .
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1318 Chicago — Back to Basics
Presented by: Tammy Bialek & Heather Mantey
#05SVF- -00017
The applicants stated that their business has limited visibility due to a large tree. Also,
another business 'a couple of doors down' has such a projecting sign. They stated that they
believe that the requested sign would enhance their clients ability to locate them along the
street.
The Board confirmed that the proposed sign is a thin (about 1" material), white, opaque sign
with black letters. The board then responded to the applicants expressed concems that they
need this sign to help clients locate their business. The Board stated that their concern is not
a unique problem in Evanston, and that they should enhance their current window signage,
without a variation, to achieve that goal.
The applicants responded that they in fact have submitted for a new and improved window
sign, and have obtained a permit for such a sign. They hoped to have it in place within the
next week or so. The same sign designer that did this proposal also designed their new
Sign Review and Appeals Board
July 14, 2005
Page 2 of 4
window signage. The Board noted that they should utilize the same colors and type face for
both signs (if approved) so that they could better establish their identity.
Additional discussion occurred regarding the proposed placement of the sign. J. Weiss
stated that the intended purpose of any "blade' type of signs previously approved in Evanston
is to attract the attention of pedestrians, not vehicles. So, he is concerned that the size
requested is too large. He also expressed concern over the placement of the proposed sign,
which would bisect the architectural detail of the building. Further discussion took place.
The following motion was made and seconded:
A motion was made to approve the requested non4fluminated blade sign, but it shall
be limited in size to 12" wide, and 36" tail, and project no more than 18" from the face
of the building. The bottom of the sign must be no lower than 7'- 0"'
Subsequently, via email, Mark Larsen voted in favor of the motion, and the motion passes
(see full comments below).
309 Howard — Unified Business Center Signage Plan #05SVF- -00018
Presented by: Andrew Patras
The representative for the owner of the property, Mr. Andrew Patras, presented the proposed
sign program. He began by stating that he has been working with the City of Evanston
Planning Division on a proposal to -redo" the facade of the building to try to bring back some
of the original character of the building, and that he vrill be appearing in front of the Site Plan
and Appearance Review Committee the following Wednesday to review the latest proposal,
which is in front of you tonight. Mr. Patras stated that the project to change the facade will be
done in 2 phases. The purpose of the appearance in front of the Sign Review and Appeals
Board is to try to get a sign program approved so that a new tenant can get signage for his
business. That tenant is "J. Bees Athlete's Foot'.
G. Summers stated that this situation puts the Sign Board into a bind. if they approve a plan
for the current facade and the facade changes, it will change the plan. If they wait for the
facade design, the current tenant will be without signage. The Board agreed that they would
try to work on the sign plan to address the immediate concem of looking at the current
elevations. if there are changes, the City, in their review of the revised elevations, can
redirect the owner back to the Sign Review and Appeals Board for any required changes.
After a long discussion a motion was made to approve a Unified Business Center Plan with
the following conditions:
A motion was made and seconded to approve the signage with the conditions that:
1. The current white colored vacant panel must be immediately painted to match
the adjacent (bronze) color of the modified facade treatment.
Sign Review and Appeals Board
July 14, 2005
Page 3 of 4
2. The length of any sign area shall not exceed the bay, or in any way overlap the
architectural detail of the building.
3. All proposed signs are to have LED illumination sources that would allow for a
recessed transformer (located on the inside of the building) and a thin profile
raceway (approximately 2").
4. That the raceways be painted to match the color of the surface to which it is
mounted.
5. That the type style and color of the face and retums of all channel letters and
logos would be a color and style as desired by the tenant.
6. That the letters and logos be individual letters and shall not exceed 18" in
height. The logos can exceed the'18" height by a maximum of 15%, provided
that the logos are centered on the horizontal line running through the word(s).
7. Permanent window signs are limited to 10% of the window area.
8. Address lettering must be above the tenant door, and must be of a consistent
size, color, location above the door and typeface.
Subsequently, via email, Mark Larsen voted in favor of the motion, and the motion passes
(see full comments below).
The following is a copy of the action that came in via email from Mark Larsen, subsequent to
the meeting:
Re: #05SVF- -0017 1318 Chicaqo - Back to Basics
Discussion and comment: I agree with Board motion regarding blade sign size, projection and
mounting height. I'm assuming the style presented matches the style (color and type face) of
the new window sign -- though it's somewhat bland
Vote: Yes on the motion.
Re: #05SVF- -0018 309 Howard. Multiple Stores
Discussion and comment: ... on the items in the motion -- as follows:
1. Agree
2. Agree. 1 would assume that 'bay" will be defined as the space between pilasters, though
currently three pilasters have been (visually) cut off at the street level. I think it would look
nicer if, in the renovation, the pilasters would reappear. This would help to architecturally limit
the length of signs as they will be linked to a smaller bay.
3. 1 agree with the look of LEDs but question the cost burden to the owner/tenant. Is it as
expensive as 1 think I remember hearing? No recorded objections from owner's
representative — so I'll assume it's OK regarding the cost.
4. Agree, strongly.
5. Agree. A more tenant -friendly solution.
Sign Review and Appeals Board
July 14, 2005
Page 4 of 4
6. Agree.
7. Agree.
8. Agree.
Vote: Yes on the motion.
ADJOURNMENT was at 9:00 PM
NEXT MEETING will be on August 11. 2005
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
August 11, 2004 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Weiss, J. Macsai, G. Summers
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approve the minutes of the July 14, 2005
meeting with a change in the last paragraph on page 2 of *J.
Weiss" to "G. Summers" and passed by a unanimous vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1755-1765 Maple — Church Street Plaza
Presented by: Tom Zabor
#05SVF- -00019
It was noted that the banners proposed are 2'X18' and the banners approved in the original
change to the Special Sign District were 2'X16". Also, the identifying area at the bottom of
the banner was 2'X2' in the original change and is now 2'X4' in the proposal The increase
the size of the identifying area seemed reasonable to the Board, as 2'X2' would restrict text to
an almost illegible size.
The Board questioned the use of images that appear to be "clip art" and not originally
generated for the banners. They also felt that the images were redundant as the tenant
name and text "logo" are also on each banner. Why the text size increased on the "Church
Street Plaza" banner was questioned.
The presenter asked that he be given time to contact his team to determine what changes
would be acceptable to them.
A motion was made to table the proposal and passed by unanimous vote.
Later in the meeting the presenter returned with a revised layout. These revised banners
contained text only with no images; a mottled red background; and the identifying text reading
horizontally, rather than vertically. The Board questioned this arrangement of the text in the
lower box as it requires using very small letter sizes and is very difficult to read.
A motion was made to approve the revised banners with the height being reduced to
16'-0" and the identifying text being oriented vertically, as in the original proposal, and
passed by unanimous vote.
708 Church — Multiple Stores #05SVF- -00020
Presented by: Peter Hanig and Dana Terp
Staff noted that this building has been well preserved over time and most storefront
alterations have respected the original building elements. This is unusual in a commercial
structure of this age and the building owners are to be commended for continuing this
process with a Unified Business Center signage plan that respects and reinforces the building
architectural design. This plan displays the one of the real intents of the Sign Regulations.
Staff indicated that the building was not designated as a historic structure, but it may deserve
this kind recognition in the future.
The Board agreed that the plan was generally an excellent match to the building elements
but wondered why the plan covered three piers with signage.
The presenters indicated that the building elements under these pier areas had been
damaged when the existing signs were installed. The Board thought that the plan was so
good that it should not be compromised by these conditions and restorations could be done
in the damaged areas.
A motion was made to approve the Unified Business Center signage plan with the
condition that it be revised to remove any crossing of building piers by signage and
passed by unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:10 PM
NEXT MEETING will be on September 8, 2005.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
September 8, 2005 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
J. Weiss, J. Macsai, G. Summers
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the August 11,
2005 meeting and passed by a unanimous vote.
None
741 Howard — Multiple Stores
Presented by: Stanley VonMedvey
#05SVF- -000021
The presenter indicated that the existing awning location and shape are included in the
Unified Business Center (UBC) signage plan and noted that the small text on the awnings
was not readily visible from automobile traffic. The wall signs proposed are to solve this store
identification problem.
Board members questioned the need for wall signs and signage on the awning's skirt.
They also suggested the use of uniform type font on the skirts would make the overall design
more cohesive.
The presenter noted that the awning signs were very good for pedestrian sidewalk viewing
but the higher wail signs were needed for viewing by automobile traffic.
Lighting fixture selection and location for wall sign illumination were questioned by the Board
and they asked if the lights would shine into the second floor apartment windows.
The presenter said he has researched the lighting fixtures and viewed actual installations of
the type proposed. They are 50 watts with a wide distribution that will provide uniform
illumination on the signs without shining into the upper floor windows
The exposed conduit and "colonial" lighting fixtures existing at the proposed sign locations
will be removed and all the lighting fixtures will be served by individual stores using
concealed conduit running into the back of the sign.
A Board member suggested that the awning color choice could be better and the change in
color on the skirt area was not good. The presenter indicated that he was thinking of
changing the awning fabric in the near future and was open to color change suggestions.
A motion was made to approve the Uniform Business Center signage plan as
proposed with the following changes:
-when the awning fabric is changed it will be done into one neutral color with no
change in color on the awning skirts.
-signage on the awning skirts will all be in one type face in a color contrasting
with the awning color.
and passed by a unanimous vote.
ADJOURNMENT was at 7:45 PM
NEXT MEETING will be on October 13.2005
MEMBERS PRESENT:
STAFF PRESENT:
OTHERS PRESENT:
OTHER BUSINESS
CITIZEN COMMENT
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
October 19, 2005 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
J. Macsai, G. Summers, M. Tendam
W. Hallen
None
A motion was made to approve the minutes of the 918105 meeting
with the date corrected from 2004 to 2005.
None
1925.29 Central — Multiple Stores
Presented by Raymond Pesavento
#05SVF- -00022
The presenter indicated that he had a difficult time understanding what, at a minimum, was
required for a Unified Business Center signage plan even after consulting with city staff.
Board members agreed that the proposal reflected some confusion and it was difficult to
determine what was existing signage to remain and what new signage was actually being
proposed. Temporary window signs that exceed the areas permitted in the Sign Regulations
only added to the confusion.
The Board explained that elevation drawings or photo montage of the building facades
showing the proposed signage locations and types was the least required and this was not
provided.
A motion was made to table this proposal and passed by a unanimous vote.
i
521-25 Dempster — Multiple #05SVF- -00023
Presented by Ann Hunzinger
The presenter noted that the need this signage plan was generated by one store changing its
awning from a lift to stationary type. The entire Unified Business Center signage plan
consists of the fixed awnings with only address numbers on them and wall signs above the
awnings. The wall signs will completely conform to the Sign Regulation.
When asked the presenter responded that the new awning color will be a teal blue.
The Board thought that some additional unification for the wall signs would be useful and
various options were discussed.
A motion was made to approve this proposal with the condition that the wall signs are
placed between the existing architectural piers, not over them, and are at the same
height as Blind Faith Cafe sign and passed by a unanimous vote.
920 Chicago — Junior League of Evanston•Northshore
Presented by Rebecca Garcis and Maria Doughty
The presenters indicated that the signs position was intended as a reminder to the
community of their continuing existence. A new sign is required as the existing sign is well
worn and needs replacement.
A Board member suggested that the sign location is difficult to see with the new 900 Chicago
Avenue building and asked if a position on the street facing facade had been considered.
The presenters noted the existing trees that partially obscure the sign band above the
storefront windows and make sign hard to see on this east wall.
Awnings are being considered in the future but they are not part of this proposal.
A motion was made to approve this proposal and passed by a unanimous vote.
Staff suggested and the Board agreed to place on the next meeting agenda an item for
discussion of the minimum requirements for a Unified Business Center signage plan.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:10 PM
NEXT MEETING will be on November 10.2005
MINUTES of the
SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD
December 8, 2005 Meeting
Evanston Civic Center - Room 2404
MEMBERS PRESENT: G. Summers, M. Tendam, J. Weiss
STAFF PRESENT: W. Hallen
OTHERS PRESENT: None
OTHER BUSINESS A motion was made to approved to minutes of the October 19,
2005 meeting with the correction of removing J. Weiss from the
members present list and was approved unanimously.
CITIZEN COMMENT None
NEW BUSINESS
1111 Chicago — Wild Oats
Presented by Armana DiCianni, Kelley Alcock
#05SVF- -00025
The presenter noted that the store has undergone a million dollar upgrade to the facility and
also they want'he signage to be improved. Basically the intent of the signage program is to
raise the visibility of the store since it is the only Wild Oats market in the area.
In particular, the freestanding sign proposed at the north end of the parking lot is located to
improve notice to southbound traffic and the blade sign is intended to serve this notice
function for northbound traffic.
The Board maintained that the large wall sign on the north wall provided good visibility for
southbound traffic and that the large wall sign on the west wall served traffic coming
northbound. A detailed discussion was held between the Board and the presenters of each
sign proposed with the following results (sign numbers refer to those in the proposal)
-Wall signs #1 and #3 on the north and south walls, respectively, conform to the Sign
Regulations and do not require a variation.
-Wall sign #2A expansion with #213 on the west wall seems reasonable to the Board
considering the length and relative blandness for the west facade.
The presenter noted that the corporate name is 'Wild Oats Market".
-Awnings #4 along the west wail, over the Chicago Avenue sidewalk, were deemed an
improvement to the building by the Board and the illumination within the awnings provides
low-level down -lighting for the walkway. The use of translucent text on the awning aprons is
not acceptable to the Board, but opaque text could be considered.
-Wall signage #5 and #6 on the north and south walls consisting of "illuminated product
panels" above the windows, at the awning positions flat to the walls seemed unnecessary to
the Board and did not add to the overall signage design.
The Board suggested that the awnings proposed for the west wall be also used on the south
wall to create continuity and add interest to the south facade.
-Window signs P. called "digital graphic panels" in the proposal, do not require a variation if
they agree with the Sign Regulation limit of 24% of the glazed area of the window.
It was noted that only the transparent portion of the window can be used in this sign area
calculation.
-Blade sign #8 on the northwest corner of the building seemed too small (1' X 4')
to be noticed and did not fit with the other signage elements proposed in the Board's view.
-Freestanding sign by the north drive to the parking area #9 could obstruct a good view of the
pedestrian sidewalk from an automobile leaving the parking lot. The north wall sign provides
good location visibility from the north, in the Board's opinion, and the freestanding sign is not
needed.
Finally it was agreed that Wall signs #1 and #3, and window signs #7 do not require
variations as proposed.
A motion was made to approve:
-the expansion of the west wall sign by adding #213 (the word "MARKET") and re -
centering the sign on the west wall area.
-internally illuminated awnings #4 along the west and south facades, but with only
opaque text on the awning aprons, not illuminated
-wall signage #5 and #6 on the north and south facades be removed from the proposal
Made sign #8 and freestanding sign #9 be removed from the proposal
and was approved unanimously.
2942 Central — Robert Gold Salon and Spa
Presented by Ann and Robert Gold
#05SVF- -00026
The presenters noted that the building is set back 15 feet from the north property line and that
buildings to the west extend to the property line or have 6 ft. high fences to this line.
These conditions block viewing of wall signage on the north building wall when approaching
from the west and have caused many customers to miss the salon location.
A freestanding sign is proposed to solve this problem. It will be set back from the property
line a distance equal to its height, as required by the sign regulations.
The only existing signage is the name and logo on the dark brown north wall awning.
The Board agreed that a hardship existed for this site and suggested that bolder text be
considered to improve the signs visibility. It was clarified by the presenters that the sign
would be double-faced and be perpendicular to Central Street.
A motion was made to approve the freestanding sign as proposed and passed by a
unanimous vote.
Discussion of minimum requirements for a "Unified Business Center" signage plan.
Staff requested this discussion because of the limited content of some recent proposals for
Unified Business Center signage plans to the Board. Completeness of proposals will
continue to be checked before acceptance and relatively limited content was deemed
acceptable. The Board noted that any proposal must have some "unified" characteristic and
it must be a -plan", not simply a collection of unrelated signs. Proposals that do not provide
a unified plan will not be accepted for review by the Board.
ADJOURNMENT was at 8:45 PM
NEXT MEETING will be on January 12, 2006.