Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1997 - 1998--" F MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1997 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Stricker-Gay, R. Qually, M. Larson, A. Spaeth MEMBERS ABSENT: C. Thomas STAFF PRESENT: C. Smith OTHERS PRESENT: Thomas Roszak Chairman Stricker-Gay declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:34 p.m.. The meeting minutes of December 12, 1996 were unanimously approved, 4-0. No citizens were present for comment. Mr. Thomas Roszak presented his proposal to install temporary signage upon the existing sidewalk protective shed. Mr. Roszak stated that the project is to construct 62 condominium units, and according to their pro -forma for the project, by this time, they should have sold 15 units, but have only sold 4. This is the reason for the request. Qually questioned the time frame for the sidewalk shed. Mr. Roszak responded that it would be taken down when the construction is complete because they need to remove it in order to complete the sidewalk work. Also at that time, we would have a model to show. Qually asked how long until that time. Mr. Roszak responded 8-12 months maximum. Qually comments that he understands the need. Qually motions to approve the proposal for a maximum of 12 months, or less if construction, is completed. This motion was seconded by Spaeth, and unanimously approved, 4-0. Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - February 13, 1997 Page 2 (At the request of the applicant, this proposal was postponed until the March meeting.) Hearing no other business, Chairman Stricker-Gay motioned adjournment at 7:50 p.m. The next meeting of the S.R.A.B. is for Thursday, March 13, 1997. Carolyn Smith, Assistant Director Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski B. Fahlstrom I MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, MARCH 13, 199-V EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Stricker-Gay, R. Qually, M. Larson, C. Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: A. Spaeth STAFF PRESENT: C. Smith OTHERS PRESENT: Carol Ross Barney, Sallie Schwartzkoff - Ross Barney Jankowski for World Savings George Woock, Robert Ychanan, Howard Kain - First Bank & Trust of Evanston George Dunn - Craig Scott Opticians Chairman Stricker-Gay declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:35 p.m.. The meeting minutes of February 13, 1997 were unanimously approved, 4-0. No citizens were present for comment. Prior to the presentation of this proposal, Chairman Stricker-Gay tells the other Board members that Ms. Judy Fraiden, the President of the Southwest Evanston Area Residents Association, called him to say that after some discussion, the neighbors did feel that the sign proposal, as presented to the neighbors at a meeting on 3/11/97, was acceptable. Ms. Carol Ross Barney presented the proposed signage package for the new building for World Savings and Loan Association. She presented the colored plans and elevations. These were the same drawings that were presented to the neighbors on 3/1 1 /97, which also indicate the non illuminated wall signage. Ms. Ross Barney stated that the Bank, although each design is architecturally different, has a corporate sign program. The Bank always uses the simple, clear helvetica style lettering in either Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes -March 13, 1997 Page 2 white or red. This proposal is utilizing the red lettering. Of the three wall signs proposed, none will face the residential neighborhood to the south. The Bank assumes that most of its traffic will be coming from the west. As the Bank plans to be open during the week only from 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., all of the signage proposed is non illuminated. Ms. Ross Barney indicated that she is familiar with Evanston's Sign Ordinance. The signage on the wall, although technically above the wall on which the sign sits, does not appear to be above the "roof", as a portion of a wall beyond extends up higher to hide the mechanical units and give the building more mass. Qually questions the free standing sign height. Ms. Ross Barney clarifies that although the proposal states 18'-0" of overall height for the freestanding sign, she would prefer 20'-0" so that the top of the sign would align with the top of the wall signs. Qually questions why the free standing sign needs to be that high at all and asks the applicant if 15'-6" would be higher than the "headlight wall". Some discussion ensues, after which Qually motions to approve the proposal as submitted, except that the freestanding sign would be limited to a maximum sign height of 15'-6". Larson seconds, and the motion was unanimously approved, 4-0. Included in the packet was a proposal for a temporary sign announcing the coming Bank. Ms. Ross Barney asked if the Board would consider allowing that signage to be erected for more than the 60 days (30 days with one renewal) that is allowed for temporary signage in the Ordinance. Qually motioned to approve the temporary sign that was indicated for the following time period only: From the time of groundbreaking until the Bank was open or 12/31 /97, whichever came sooner. Larson seconded, and the motion was unanimously approved, 4-0. �A;fF_VflF C. Thomas excludes himself from discussion and voting on this proposal, as he has a conflict of interest with this bank. George Woock of White Way Sign Company presented the proposal for the First Bank and Trust of Evanston. First, Mr. Woock presented the freestanding sign proposal. After several questions, Mr. Woock clarified that the proposal is for a new freestanding sign in the existing "Glidden" freestanding sign location. Qually questions the off -set of the sign to the base. Mr. Woock explains that the off -set helps with visibility for vehicular traffic. Mr. Woock states that the parking area lot earns 62.5 SF of signage. With the proposed sign and the existing Cyrus sign, the total sign area is 60 SF. Qually questions the reason for the signage over the drive-thru canopy. He states that Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - March 13, 1997 Page 3 with the two south facing signs, it is too much signage. Chairman Stricker-Gay states that he thinks that signage in that location might be appropriate; similar to a doorway or gateway sign. Chairman Stricker-Gay suggests that possibly the drive thru sign could be smaller. Mr. Woock stated that this sign is only 20 SF.; any smaller and it would not do its job. Qually comments that this depends on the job that it is supposed to do. Chairman Stricker-Gay states that this sign is the difference between function and identification. Qually responds that they already have identification via the main signage on Central Street. This (the canopy) signage is unnecessary. Mr. Yohanan questions Mr. Woock about placing the letters directly on the facia of the canopy. Mr. Woock responds that he does not think that this would solve the problem. Qually questions that if the Cash Station sign needs to be there, maybe it should be centered. Mr. Yohanan clarifies that the Cash Station is only available in the lane next to the building at this point. There is space in the planning of the drive thru lanes for an additional machine in the future. With regard to the west facing signage, Larson suggests that the proposed west facing signage below the current west facing signage, would have a billboard portion. The traffic on Central Street is not going that quickly, and there is plenty of time to read a much smaller sign. Mr. Yohanan states that this sign is necessary for east bound traffic. Mr. Yohanan continued by saying that he has driven by the site many times, and understands why Cyrus asked for the sign originally. (Mr. Woock stated that the existing sign was approved in 1989.) C. Smith questions if the existing west facing sign box overhangs the property line. If so, does the applicant know if there is an existing easement agreement with the adjoining property? Mr. Yohanan responded that he did not know, but he would inquire. Qually comments that he is in agreement with Larson, that the proposal for the west facing signage creates a billboard. Qually suggests that the applicant look at sharing the existing sign face with the adjacent tenant that currently has a west facing sign, Cyrus Realty. Larson states the reduced proportions of the word 'Cyrus' would improve the graphics of the Cyrus sign by balancing the copy. Qually added that the side Cyrus sign should be no bigger that the sign Cyrus has on the front, along Central Street. Qually motions to approve the submitted freestanding sign, the south facing sign on Central Street, and the Cash Station sign on the drive thru canopy. The other signage in the proposal would be denied. Larson seconds and the motion is approved, 3-0. Mr. George Dunn presents the proposal, commenting that this new store is the third one that Craig Scott has opened. There is one in Wilmette, and one in Chicago. Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - March 13, 1997 Page 4 Qually comments that it is interesting that an optician would have such an illegible sign. One must do optical gymnastics to be able to read the proposed graphic. Mr. Dunn responded that this Image was created specifically. It makes the signage memorable, as one must study it to read it. Larson comments that since it doesn't need to say 'Emergency Entrance', he liked the graphic. Chairman Stricker-Gay commented that this is their signage. This size wall sign would be allowed. The fact that it is on an awning is what is in question. The Sign Ordinance does not address this fact, but it should. Thomas motions approval of the proposal, and Larson seconds. The motion is passed with a 3-1 vote, with Qually voting against. Hearing no other business, Chairman Stricker-Gay motioned adjournment at 9:15 p.m. The next meeting of the S.R.A.B. is for Thursday. April 10. 1997. Carolyn Smith, sistant Direct r Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski B. Fahistrom MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY APRIL 10, I997 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: M1N11TF,a J. Stricker-Gay, R. Qually, M. Larson, C. Thomas A. Spaeth R. Fahlstrom George Woock, Robert Yohnnan - First Bank and Trust of Evanston. Chairman Stricker-Gay declared a quorum and called the meeting to order at 7:35 P.M.. Chris Thomas requested that the meeting minutes of March 13, 1997 be amended to state that lie excluded himself from the discussion because he has a relationship with a Board member of ofthe bank. The Board voted to amend the minutes as requested and the meeting rninutes of Nlarch 13, 1997 were unanimously approved. CITIZEN CON'IMENT No citizens were present for comment. NEW BUSINESS 5.12.t\.li. 97-03: First hank & Trust n Evanston. 2925 Central Street C'. Thomas again excluded himself from the discussion and voting on this proposal. Because Ile has a relationship %vith a Board Member of the Bank. George \Woock offhe White Way Sign Company stated that the Bank feels strongly that they need the canopy signage and the additional sign on the %%est wall for identilication ol'lheir tie\\, branch banking facility. that is \\h\ tlie\ are asking the Board to reconsider their previous request. R. Qually outlined his position. Quall\ Icels that the canopy suns on the east end should be for traffic direction and identification ol'the teller lanes ot11\,. Quall\ feels that having the banks logo on the canopy is too much. Qually also states that he is opposed to allowing the wall sign liar the nest facade ol'the bank. Qually notes that the previous 'Cilidden' Store lied dill\ ; signs and they did business at that cortier for 20 years. Qually states that this big proposed sign is out of character \\ith the aesthetic intent of the sign ordinance and that Evanston has one kind ofa look in regards to signage and Chicago has another. Qually states that this wall sign \\ould make the building lock like it \%as located on south I -coward Street. r • - W Sign review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - April 10,1997 Page 2. Chairman Stricker Gay notes that from Central Park Street it would be very difficult to see the proposed western sign as it is blocked by the Brown's Chicken Sign. He notes that the present Cyrus sign is not easy to see for the same reasons. R. Yohanan states that the bank needs more identification for eastbound cars. Stricker-Gay asks if the bank could cut down the size of the proposed sign by one half. R. Yohanan replies that this would not be possible. Qually notes the proposed western sign is bigger than the sign on Central street. and in his opinion. that is a real problem. Stricker-Gay notes that in any event this western sign will have to be removed in 2003 when it looses it grand fathered status. R. Faltlstrom adds that the sign will also loose its grandfather status if it is re -faced. Qually states that he still has a problem with the amount and size of the proposed signage. In his opinion. the bank will have 3 signs and this will be enough. M. Larson adds that cars proceeding east or west on Central street will often times be stopped at the Lincolnwood or Central Park lights which will give them more opportunity to see the bank facility and signs. Qually motions to deny the logo signs on the canopy but to allow directional signs stating `teller' or `teller lane'. Qually motions to deny the proposed west facing wall sign which would be mounted on the west side of the building. Stricker-tray seconds, and the motion passes unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no ether business. Chairman Stricker-Gay motions adjournment at 7:50. �Ii EXT NICi:T1Y_�. The next meeting of the S.R.A.B. is scheduled for Thursdav Nlav 8. 1997 Robert Fahtstrotn - Coordinating Inspector Communih- Development Department - Building Division Is MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, MAY 8, 1997 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Stricker-Gay, C. Thomas, M. Larson, A. Spaeth MEMBERS ABSENT: R. Qually STAFF PRESENT: C. Smith OTHERS PRESENT: Sherwood Blitstein, Thomas Morabito - Centrum Equities Chairman Stricker-Gay declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:35 p.m.. Larson motioned to approved the minutes, seconded by Spaeth. The meeting minutes of March 13, 1997 were approved, 3-0. C. Thomas joined the meeting at 7:45 p.m.. No citizens were present for comment. Centrum Equities, Inc. explains the reason for the request for the 17'-6" height. The interior of the store has 12'-0" high ceilings. The overall building height includes this, the interstitial space, and high parapet walls that hide the rooftop HVAC equipment. The major factor in the location of the signage is to have it centered in the stucco facia. Also, Centrum continued, it would improve visibility. Although, the difference in two feet as far as visibility goes is minor. Mr. Blitstein stated that the two largest profit centers for Walgreens are the pharmacy and the photo center. Centrum comments that they have tried to be cooperative with the requirements of Evanston's Sign Ordinance, for example the "Drive Thru" sign is at 15'-6", and the freestanding sign is within the requirements of the ordinance. Chairman Stricker-Gay comments that he thinks that the signage would in fact look M Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - May 8, 1997 Page 2 odd if made to comply with the 15'-6" height. He questions how this store compares in size to other stores. Centrum responds that this store is proposed to have 12,125 SF of sales area, and 6,000 SF of storage. The average store is approximately 14,000 SF. Spaeth motions approval of the proposal, sign is mounted no higher than 15'-6", a unanimously, 4-0. with the stipulation that the "Drive Thru" id Larson seconds. The motion is passed Hearing no other business, Chairman Stricker-Gay motioned adjournment at 7:50 p.m. The next meeting of the S.R.A.B. is for Thursday, June 12, 1997*. *This meeting was subsequently cancelled, and the next meeting is set for Thursday• Julys Q. 1997, Carolyn Smith�,-Xssistant Director Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski B. Fahlstrom MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, JULY 10, 1997 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Stricker-Gay, R. Qually, M. Larson MEMBERS ABSENT: C. Thomas, A. Spaeth STAFF PRESENT: C. Smith OTHERS PRESENT: Ed Pyter - Whole Foods Market, Jim Fraser/ Kevin Lewis - Shell Oil Co., Larry Bowman - Domicile Furniture, John O'Malley - Napa Auto Parts Chairman Stricker-Gay declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:35 p.m.. Qually motioned to approved the minutes, seconded by Larson. The meeting minutes of May 8, 1997 were approved, 3-0. No citizens were present for comment. Mr. Pyter of Olympic Signs presented his request for variation for his client, Whole Foods. He states that if Whole Foods were to follow the ordinance required height, the signage would be off center in the existing brick facia. He also indicated, since this is a multi -tenant building, others may have the same problem. Qually stated that this seems like a reasonable proposal, and Qually motions approval of the proposal as submitted, and Larson seconds. The motion Is passed unanimously, 3-0. The representatives from the Shell Oil Company presented their proposal for replacing Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - July 10, 1997 Page 2 the existing free standing signage at the corner of Ridge and Howard. Qually stated that the submittal indicates a new "ETD" sign on the wall and asked if this is included in the request. Mr. Fraser clarified that the only signage being requested at this time is the freestanding sign, at the corner of Howard and Ridge, to replace the existing free standing sign. Qually comments that the Shelf logo and the price are the key items of information that should be on the signage. The other information ("ETD" and "Self Serve/ Cash or Credit") is optional. The bottom of the signage should be raised to allow visibility under the signage for pedestrians and cars. C. Smith read the minutes from the Sign Review and Appeals meeting of 10/94, where this signage was previously before the Board. Those minutes stated that the bottom of the signage should be raised to a minimum of 6'-0". Qually commented that eliminating the optional information stated above, the 6'-0" clearance beneath the signage could be obtained, and still allow the signage not to exceed the maximum height of 15'-6". Qually motioned approval of the free standing signage, with the provision that the distance beneath the signage be maintained at W-0" for visibility, the maximum sign height be maintained at 15'-6", and the suggested way to achieve this is to eliminate the signage stating "ETD" and "Self Serve/Cash". This was seconded by Larson, and unanimously approved, 3-0. Mr. Larry Bowman, owner of Domicile Furniture, explained the reason for his request. Mr. Bowman stated that since the parking has been removed along Greenbay, his business has been suffering. Traffic moves too quickly to find his location. Also, the neighboring building to the north, currently housing the Pizza Hut, blocks visibility of his business, which is set back from Greenbay Road. In addition, customers from both the north businesses and the south business (Stuart Rodgers Photographers) use his parking lot. Mr. Bowman states that with this signage, he hopes to solve these problems. Qually asked how long has his business been there. Mr. Bowman responded that he has been at that location selling furniture for 23 years. Most of those years as "Phoenix Design", but has recently changed his name to "Domicile" to overcome the perception that they style of the furniture is only southwestern. He carries a wide range of designs and styles. Qually continues that the problem he has with the request is that there is too much signage in the area of Central Street, which has a village like setting. Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - July 10, 1997 Page 3 Mr. Bowman responds that he gets many calls from people who drive by and "ask where is the store?". The building is set back from the street and nobody can find it. Qually states that although it is set back, it is also broad. Chairman Stricker-Gay adds that as a fellow retailer, he understands Mr. Bowman's frustration, but the signage may not be the answer. Nobody will see your freestanding sign until they could also see your building, which has wall signage. Mr. Bowman responds that he spends a lot of money on advertising, and still not getting the message across. Business is getting extremely difficult. Private Lives had the same problem, and left. It is a difficult location for any business. Larson questions why the proposal includes two different size signs. Mr. Bowman responds that a friend has the sign boxes, and he plans to reface them. Larson asks about the style of lettering and colors that are proposed. Mr. Bowman stated that he will use black helvetica lettering on a white background. Qually states that he still has a problem with too much signage in this pedestrian area. This location has the advantage of all the people waiting at the Matra train station or people riding on the train everyday. Qually continues by stating that in his opinion, Mr. Bowman's business is suffering from the change of the store name from "Phoenix Design" to "Domicile". At this point, Qually moved to deny the request, but there was no second to his motion. Some discussion ensued regarding the possibility of installing a single freestanding sign, as opposed to the two that were proposed. Based on the continuous access across the entry to the parking lot, this idea appeared to be potentially hazardous, as Mr. Bowman mentioned the vulnerability of the street light that is centered on the lot and has been repeatedly dented. It was discussed that Mr. Bowman would have to lose parking to accommodate a single freestanding sign. Mr. Bowman expressed that he would not be willing to do that. The Board suggested that Mr. Bowman might consider increasing his visibility by illuminating the current wall sign until midnight. Mr. Bowman responded that although that is a good suggestion, without the freestanding signage that is being proposed, people will continue to be unable to find his store, whether or not he leaves his wall sign on until midnight. He continued that he does not see Evanston being friendly to small businesses. As there was neither a motion to approve or deny, the proposal was rejected for lack of approval. The Board suggested that Mr. Bowman consider the issues that were Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - July 10, 1997 Page 4 discussed, and revisit the Board with a new proposal. Mr. John O'Malley, owner of the new NAPA Auto Parts store presented a proposal for signage. Mr. O'Malley explained that his proposal cannot conform to the Sign Ordinance because he is planning to open up the existing window area, that is currently hidden with wooden siding, and then he will not have any wall area to locate a wall sign. What he is proposing, he feels is the appropriate size and location of signage, from the NAPA franchise options, for his location and building. Some discussion took place regarding the wall sign mounted on the brick pier of the existing building. As long as it could be placed such as not to exceed 15'-6", the Board agreed that it was an acceptable location for signage, and even agreed that both sides could be utilized, if the adjacent store owner was in agreement. Qually motions to approve the proposal and extend the proposal to cover a wall sign on both sides of the brick pier, if agreeable with the adjacent store owner. This motion was seconded by Larson, and unanimously approved 3.0. AiJ011FilyMMI Hearing no other business, Chairman Stricker-Gay motioned adjournment at 8:50 p.m. The next meeting of the S.R.A.B. is for Thursday, August 10, 1997'. 'This meeting was subsequently cancelled, and the next meeting is set for Thursday. August 28. 1997, C----i- Carolyn Smith, Assistant Director Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski B. Fahistrom MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, AUGUST 28, 1997 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Stricker-Gay, R. Qually, M. Larson MEMBERS ABSENT: C. Thomas, A. Spaeth STAFF PRESENT: J. Wolinski OTHERS PRESENT: Jeremy Wilson, James Koollsh, Ron Naylor - Northwestern University; Craig Smith - Griskelis & Smith, Architects; Silvia Kuscka, Judy Berg, Morleska Johnson, Adam Dean Chairman Stricker-Gay declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. Qually motioned to approve the minutes, seconded by Larson. The meeting minutes of July 10, 1997, were approved, 3-0. CITIZEN COMMEII Chairman Stricker-Gay asked citizens to hold their comments until after the presentation by Northwestern. S.R.A.B. #97-10: Ryan. Field. 1501 Central Street Mr. Jeremy Wilson, Associate Provost at Northwestern University, presented the University proposal to place a sign on the newly -rebuilt Ryan Field press box. (A transcript of his presentation is attached.) Mr. Wilson explained the sign would be approximately sixty feet above ground level, or about half way up the press box facade. In order to comply with the Sign Ordinance for Tall Buildings, the sign would have to be placed within a story of the roof of the building. He felt this would be unattractive to the neighborhood. The sign would be non -illuminated, 4' in height, and 26'-4" in length. The letters would be aluminum, stating "RYAN FIELD". There were no questions from the Board. The Chair then opened up citizen comment. Silvia Kuscka, representing the NOW Neighbors, stated that the sign would be It Sign Review and Appear Board Meeting Minutes - August 28,1997 Paste 2 appropriately placed with the variance request. Judy Berg questioned whether there would be any. illumination of the sign from the ground or other source. Mr. Wilson replied that there was to be no illumination of any kind. With no further comment, Qually motioned to approve the variation, seconded by Thomas, and unanimously approved, 3-0. ADJOURNMENT_ Having no other business, Chairman Stricker-Gay motioned adjournment at 7:50 p.m. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the S.R.A.B. Is scheduled for Thursday, September 11, 1997. ames Wolinski, Director Community Development Department cc: C. Smith B. Fahlstrom srab.min ' •% MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1997 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 J. Stricker-Gay, R. Qually, M. Larson, A. Spaeth C. Thomas C. Smith Abe Dababneh - Bill's Finer Foods, Kevin Lewis - Shell Oil Co. Chairman Stricker-Gay declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:32 p.m.. Larson motioned to approved the minutes, seconded by Spaeth. The meeting minutes of August 28, 1997 were approved, 4-0. No citizens were present for comment. Chairman Stricker-Gay commented that the proposal seems somewhat straight forward and queried the Board for any questions. Larson asked Mr. Dababneh what the proposed color was of the awning material. Mr. Dababneh responded that the awnings will be red with white, silk screened lettering. Chairman Stricker-Gay asked if the awnings will be illuminated. The response confirmed that the proposal is for exterior illumination (gooseneck light fixtures) of the awnings. Spaeth comments that even though the proposal is larger than allowable, it does not seem objectionable. Chairman Stricker-Gay added that that is especially true, as these awnings will be in lieu of wall signage. Spaeth motions approval of the proposal as submitted, and Larson seconds. The motion is passed unanimously, 4-0. Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - October 9, 1997 Page 2 Mr. Lewis, representing the Shell Oil Company presented their proposal for replacing the existing free standing signage at the corner of Dodge and Oakton. C. Smith clarifies that this is a similar proposal as was presented to the Board in July for the freestanding sign at the corner of Ridge and Howard Street. C. Smith that this proposal reflects the changes that were made for approval of that sign. With little discussion by the Board, Qually motioned approval of the free standing signage as submitted. This was seconded by Larson, and unanimously approved, 4-0. Hearing no other business, Chairman Stricker-Gay motioned adjournment at 7:40 p.m. The next meeting of the S.R.A.B. is for Thursday, November 13, 1997 Carolyn Smith, Assistant Director Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski B. Fahlstrom kr-11 a a* ' A MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1997 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Stricker-Gay, C. Thomas, M. Larson, A. Spaeth MEMBERS ABSENT: R. Qually STAFF PRESENT: C. Smith OTHERS PRESENT: Ed Grate - Grate Signs for Las Palmar Restaurant, Shelly Spielman, William Joyner of 1862 Sherman, and Doraine Anderson of 1860 Sherman - Neighbors of Las Palmer Restaurant, Ron Nunziato - Oakwood Terrace, Stuart Sikes - Oakwood Terrace, Jeremy Males and Nancy Baker - Neighbors of Oakwood Terrace. Chairman Stricker-Gay declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:30 p.m.. Thomas motioned to approved the minutes, seconded by Larson. The meeting minutes of October 9, 1997 were approved, 4-0. As several citizens were present for comment, Chairman Stricker-Gay explained that the Board will first hear from the petitioners, and then give any speaker a chance to comment regarding that case. Mr. Ed Grate of Grate Signs requested permission from the Board allow his client, Las Palmar, to install wall signage where the previous restaurant (Coyote Joe's) had signage, along the high west facing wall. The reason, explained Mr. Grate, is for identification on this side. This is a strange intersection, he continued, as Benson, Emerson, University Place and Elgin all come together. The restaurant needs identification from that side. Chairman Stricker-Gay questions Mr. Grate about the signage that is currently in that location. Mr. Grate responds that the signage is temporary. C. Smith stated that any temporary signage would need permits. Mr. Grate indicated that he was not responsible for the temporary signage. Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - November 13, 1997 Page 2 Larson questions the proposed west signage by asking if the sign will occupy the entire area. Mr. Grate responded that the signage will be set in from the edge somewhat. Larson comments that in order for the signage to conform to the Ordinance, 2' would have to be removed from the top, so that it may be lowered to a maximum of 15'-6" total height. Chairman Stricker-Gay questioned if the signage extended above the roof? Also, Thomas asked how the signage comes down on the roof? The applicant responded that it doesn't sit on the roof at all. The proposed sign, like the sign before it, is attached to a portion of wall that extends through the roof,, like a cupola, and does not extend higher than that roof. The second sign along the south face was then discussed. Mr. Grate explained that they did obtain a permit for the sign, but through a computer error, the sign that was made and installed exceeded size of the permitted signage. The installed signage is 89 SF. C. Smith confirmed that a permit was obtained for a smaller version of the installed signage. The Board then discussed the dimensions and drawing of the signage. Several Board members remembered seeing the installed signage extending into the window area, and yet the drawing did not represent that situation. The Board expressed concern, as the previous sign that was discussed had a drawing that did not accurately portray the conditions. In addition, the City staff had indicated that the allowable area of the signage to be 68 square feet, although there is a 20 percent bonus for channel letters, which would bring the allowable area up to 82 SF. C. Smith agreed that with the 20% bonus, the applicant would be allowed 81.1 SF. The Board stated that any discussion of the west facing signage must be based on accurate information with regard to the actual confirmed size of the installed signage, and with photos of the installation. At this point, Chairman Stricker-Gay inquired if any citizens would like to sign in and comment about the signage at Las Palmar? Several responded yes, and proceeded to sign in. Ms. Shelly Spielman commented that she and her husband, neighbors of the property, both have concerns regarding the Las Palmer signage, particularly the south facing signage. She stated that it is way too large. Also, she continued, It is not proportionate to the size of the building and the appearance detracts from the recent improvements that the City has installed in the area. Chairman Stricker-Gay stated that the Board appreciates your comments, although if the dimensions are accurate, the south facing signage is only about 5% out of conformance with the ordinance. Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - November 13, 1997 Page 3 The next speaker was Mr. Bill Joiner, a trustee for Sherman Gardens. Mr. Joiner stated that he is opposed to the signage for the following reasons: 1. This is not their first venture in Evanston, and they should know the requirements. Other businesses, even new businesses in town, find out the rules prior to erecting signage. 2. The erecting of the signage, knowingly without approval (south facing sign), was an act that was contrary to good citizenship. As neighbors to the property, we would like to recommend to the Board that they require the restaurant to adhere to the rules that all others must comply with. The last speaker was Doraine Anderson, of the 1860 Sherman. Ms. Anderson stated that she has been a resident of 1860 Sherman for 30 years, during which time this property has always been a restaurant. Nobody had any trouble with the previous property occupant, Coyote Joe's. Coyote Joe's operated just fine without a large neon sign. You can't miss the building with the large expanse of turquoise roof. I am strongly opposed to any variation of the ordinance. When someone has made a mistake, they are creating their own hardship. The Board preceded with their discussion of the proposal, beginning with the west facing signage. Several Board members commented that if the west sign was to conform with the ordinance, it would look odd. A. Spaeth stated that any signage in this location is very visible, as Elgin Street acts as a gateway to the downtown area, and is concerned about the overall size of the signage. Also, the copy is red on a white background. C. Thomas stated that the size does not bother him, as long as it is centered on the wall space behind it. A long discussion ensued regarding the exact representation of the sign relative to the available wall space. There was a general agreement by the Board that some wall area should show all around the sign and that the sign area should be reduced from the submitted size. Also, it was discussed that the illuminated white background is not permitted under the Ordinance. Spaeth motions to approve the west facing sign, with the following changes: The sign shall be reduced in size by 25% from what had been submitted, centered on the wall behind it and the copy shall only have a 1 " white outline around the copy on a dark (opaque) background. Larson seconds and the motion is passed unanimously, 4-0. As far as the south facing wall sign, Chairman Stricker-Gay stated that we potentially have a sign that is approximately 9% over the allowable size. There was much discussion regarding the accuracy of the submitted drawing of the signage relative to Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - November 13, 1997 Page 4 the building. Thomas motions to table the decision on the south facing sign until accurate dimensions and photos can be obtained. Larson seconds and the motion is passed unanimously, 4-0. Spaeth motions that the south facing signage should be turned off (non -illuminated) until the Board's decision on the variation is made. Thomas commented that this would create a hardship, as some potential customers may not think that the restaurant is open if the sign is there, but off. Spaeth's motion does not get seconded. (Subsequent to the meeting, Las Palmar and their sign company agreed to bring the south facing wall signage into conformance with the Ordinance.) Mr. Stuart Sikes began by submitting a copy of revisions to the previously submitted standards for the variation request. He offered sincere apologies on behalf of his clients, having installed the signage without permits. He stated that there was no intent to deceive. Mr. Ron Nunziato continued at this point. He stated that when they took over the facility, about a year and a half ago, we realized that the signage was very poor. They contacted a Franklin Park sign company who recommended that they should use an Evanston company, as they would be more familiar with the ordinance requirements. We went on to choose Mike Signs, an Evanston company, and assumed that all permits would be taken care of. Obviously, that was the wrong assumption. Mr. Sikes stated that he hopes the Board will understand that they are here'in good faith and had no intent of wrong doing. Mr. Sikes stated that Oakwood Care is a licensed business, even though it is in a residential neighborhood. Their location is the primary reason that people choose their facility. Many people in fact think that it is a condo building. Their capacity is for 57 residents, but they currently only have 30 residents. They would obviously like to increase that number. They chose the type of signage (painted wood signs) they did because they thought that they were tastefully done, and were in keeping with the neighborhood. They stated that they would gladly forgo any illumination, but hope to keep the signage because they need the identity in order to operate their business. Mr. Sikes passes around photos of the signs and neighborhood to demonstrate that Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - November 13,1997 Page 5 the signage is compatible and unobtrusive. Larson questions if the previous owners had any signage? Mr. Nunziato responded that they had one small sign along the Dempster Street elevation and a small sign on the door. At this point, Chairman Stricker-Gay asked if any citizens were present that would like to comment on the proposed appeal. The following are the comments of the people present who wished to comment. Mr. Jeremy Males, a neighbor across the street, stated that he has both worked for a company located in a residential neighborhood and has owned his own business in a residential neighborhood, and neither has had any signage. He wished to remind the Board that this business is surrounded by residences. He continued by stating that he looks out his window directly at this building and this signage is a great change to the residential character of the neighborhood. The next comments were made by Ms. Nancy Baker, of 1306 Oak Avenue. Ms. Baker commented that she lives in an 1870's home and has invested over $100,000 in her property. She stated that one might assume that a nursing home would not be an obtrusive neighbor, but they would be wrong in this case. The shift changes and truck traffic are noisy and disruptive. At this point, Ms. Louise Bergthold, of the Oakwood Terrace, invited Ms. Baker to visit the facility and said that she would welcome input from the neighbors. This use may be a business use according to the City of Evanston Ordinance, but it is in fact residential. It is home for the people that live there. At this point, Chairman Stricker-Gay interrupted the dialogue to say that this meeting is not a forum for this sort of discussion. Larson questioned if there had been any freestanding signage in previous ownerships? Mr. Nunziato stated no, just the two small signs. Thomas commented that he thinks that the corner sign is in keeping with the character of a residential neighborhood, but the wall sign is incompatible. Larson agrees. Spaeth adds that he has less concern with the freestanding sign as well. He also stated that sensitivity to the neighbors concerns is very important. Mr. Sikes responded that since Oakwood Terrace is on a corner, two signs are very important. He continued that many other similar uses throughout the City have many more signs, such a Alden Estates on Grosspoint Road, and the Mather and the Sigrr Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes • November 13,1997 Page 6 Georgian Homes, which are also both on a corner. Thomas at this point suggests that possibly another freestanding sign, like the current freestanding sign, be erected along the Dempster Street side of the property. In response to a question from one of the neighbors regarding illumination of such a sign, Chairman Stricker-Gay responded that he personally would not like to see any illuminated signage. Thomas agrees, stating that the non -illuminated freestanding signage creates a more campus -like setting for the surrounding residential neighborhood. At the suggestion of using the same sign, only mounting it on the south facing wall, Spaeth responded that he would not think this to be a good idea. He also likes the character of the freestanding sign. Thomas motioned approval of the free standing signage as submitted, and to allow another sign, of the same character and at the same height, non4lluminated, to be placed along the Dempster Street side of the property at 1/3 the distance from the alley. Also to disallow the wall sign entirely. This was seconded by Spaeth, and unanimously approved, 4-0. Hearing no other business, Chairman Stricker-Gay motioned adjournment at 9:30 p.m. The next meeting of the S.R.A.B. is for Thursday, December 11, 1997 (This meeting was su quently cancelled, and the next meeting will be 1 /8/98) Carolyn Smith, AMtant Director Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski B. Fahlstrom MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, JANUARY 8, 1998 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Stricker-Gay, C. Thomas, M. Larson, A. Spaeth MEMBERS ABSENT: R. Qually STAFF PRESENT: C. Smith OTHERS PRESENT: Frank Spica - Roycemore School, Don Bally - Northshore Security, Joseph A. Brady - Hollywood Entertainment C. Smith distributed the recommendations from the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee which recommended approval of the Roycemore Sign (640 Lincoln), recommended denial of the freestanding sign for Northshore Security (2940 Central Street), and to request its complete removal, and recommended denial of the west facing sign of the proposed Hollywood Video (1968 Dempster Street). MINUTES Chairman Stricker-Gay declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:30 p.m.. Spaeth motioned to approved the minutes, seconded by Thomas. The meeting minutes of November 13, 1997 were approved, 4-0. CITIZEN COMMENT No citizens were present for comment. NEW BUSINK5 S.R.A.B. #98-01: Roycemore Sc Mr. Spica explained that Mr. Joseph Becker had intended on being present, but due to an emergency, he had asked Mr. Spica to attend. Larson commented that although there are many more items of information than the Ordinance allows, it is safe to say that this sign relates more to the pedestrian traffic rather than vehicular traffic. Mr. Spica agreed. Larson continued by saying that he doesn't have any problems with the sign. Spaeth agreed, saying that it was a nice looking sign. Thomas motions approval of the proposal as submitted, and Larson seconds. The motion Is passed unanimously, 4-0. SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - Thursday, January 8, 1998 Ejae 2 S.R.A.B. #98-02: Northshore Security. 29.42 CentrAl Street Thomas excused himself, as Cyrus, the owner of the property, is a client. Mr. Bally then presented that they replaced (refaced) an existing freestanding sign, previously identifying Cyrus Property Management. Chairman Stricker-Gay began by saying that although the sign was already there, the fact that it was refaced, requires a permit. With all of the variations required, it was not likely that a permit would have been granted, if the appeal were before the Board prior to being erected. Larson added that when he first saw the sign, it struck him immediately as having the impact of a billboard. He continued by saying that it seems out of place, in consideration of the nearby residential area. Mr. Bally stated that with the sign already there, it did not occur to him that a permit would be required, as all he did was change the sign face. He added that in his opinion, the sign is very well designed. Mr. Bally then presented several photos of nearby properties with similar sized freestanding signage, including the Mobil station on Central Street. Spaeth commented that many existing signs would not be allowed by right, and if changed, would not be permitted. Larson continued by saying that the type of business that a gas station is, is a needs driven business, and is not the same as Northshore Security, which is not a drive up business. Mr. Bally agreed. Thomas then stated that it was inappropriate to argue your need based on other non conforming signage. Mr. Bally stated that they have a 3 year lease, with only 2 years left. Their lease is not renewable, and seeing what development is happening across the street, he would suspect that this little building will be torn down and a multistory condo building built in its place. This is why he suspects that Cyrus would not give a renewable lease. He does not advertise on the radio and in the newspaper, so he is depending on this sign for his business recognition. He and his wife are adamant Evanstonians and hope to continue to have their business remain in Evanston. Larson stated that his concern is the continual upping the ante further and further away from the Ordinance. If this is allowed, Larson wonders about the strength of our Ordinance. When you do a job in a residential neighborhood, Larson questioned Mr. Bally, sometimes do you place a placard on the property advertising that your system is installed there? Mr. Bally agreed that sometime they do that. Larson continued that this serves as good name recognition. Mr. Bally responded that the more you see the name, the more recognition there is. The Board discussed how any business would come to know that the refacing of an existing sign would require a permit? C. Smith responded that typically sign companies, who design and install signage know that most communities have sign ordinances. We get telephone inquiries in the Building Division frequently. Mr. Bally stated that he had bartered the sign SiGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - Thursday, January 8, 1998 Paqe 3 design with Michael Standard, an Evanston graphic designer, and paid $2500 to have the sign fabricated and installed. Chairman Stricker-Gay stated that at this point, the issue becomes one of money. As all existing non -conforming signage must be brought into conformance by January 1, 2003. That would only give this sign a maximum life of 48 months. Can we live with this sign for another 48 months? if not, we could always specify a shorter time frame. As his lease is up in another 2 years, we could require that the sign be removed in 2 years. Spaeth commented that he believes that 2 years would be reasonable return on his investment, and still will uphold the Ordinance. Spaeth motioned approval of the free standing signage as submitted for a period of two years (until January of the year 2000). This was seconded by Larson, and unanimously approved, 3-0, with Thomas abstaining. A.B. #98-03: Hnllvwond Video. 1968 Dempster Street Mr. Joe Brady, Director of Real Estate for Hollywood Entertainment, presented the proposal. Mr. Brady commented that the good news is that Hollywood Entertainment has "toned down" their signage and paint programs from earlier image programs (such as found on Chicago Ave. in Evanston). Mr. Brady pointed out that the reason they would like to request the west facing signage is due to trees on the north face (along Dempster Street), the north facing sign would not be visible for east bound traffic to the store, for many months of the year. The Board discussed the submitted drawings, noting a conflict within the submittal regarding the use of an E.I.F.S. (Dryvit-type material). C. Smith noted that there is currently no material of this type at that end of the center. Mr. Brady clarified that the intent of Hollywood Video is not to add this material, Chairman Stricker-Gay began the discussion of the appeal by stating that when he first saw the proposal for signage on the back of the center, he thought "no way". But his opinion changed when he drove by the site, as saw the difficulty with visibility from the west. Larson questioned why the sign package includes any signage on the north wall if it is blocked by trees? Mr. Brady responded that they need to make the maximum impact with their signage, as they are underfunded for other types of advertising. Spaeth stated that he is concerned that if the west facing signage is allowed, other stores would continue the trend, and he would be bothered if this were to continue for 10 stores. Mr. Brady responded that this would not be a possibility, as the site lines are cut off by the adjacent building. The Board then discussed the adjacent property to the west, and its set back. Spaeth continued by saying that the proposed rear sign is gigantic. It is literally a SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - Thursday, January 8, 1998 Page 4 billboard, and that businesses that this sign would face should be notified before any approvals. Mr. Brady responded that the building next door (a law firm and day care center) would be mostly unaffected, as 90% of their business is between 3:00 pm. on Friday and 9:00 pm. on Sunday night. Chairman Stricker-Gay questioned the Board about the possibility of reducing the size of the west facing sign. Spaeth responded that he doesn't think that it could be made small enough, and asks the applicant about the possibility of using the Center's existing freestanding sign. Larson comments that he has a big problem with such freestanding signage for that purpose - nobody is able to read signs like that. The Board then discussed the east bound traffic flow, regarding the stop light at the entrance to the Center. Chairman Stricker-Gay asked Mr. Brady if they have other smaller sign sizes in their sign packages. Mr. Brady responded that the smallest of this type is the same as the north sign, Z 3'-5" x 2%0". Thomas motions to approve the proposed signage, provided that no E.I.F.S. is added to the building, the letters are individual channel type (not located on a raceway), and that the rear (west facing) sign size be limited to the 13'-5" x 2'-0" size. This motion was seconded by Larson, and approved 3-1, with Spaeth voting against. ADJOURNMII Hearing no other business, Chairman Stricker-Gay motioned adjournment at 8:40 p.m. The next meeting of the S.R.A.B. is for Thursday, February 12, 1998 Cs Carolyn Smit . As is stant Director Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski K. Mims .01" N MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY , APRIL 9,1998 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: C. THOMAS, A. SPAETH, R. QUALLY MEMBERS ABSENT: J. STRICKER-GAY, M. LARSON STAFF PRESENT: R. FAHLSTROM OTHERS PRESENT: T. ROSZAK AND JUSTYNA KAROUOUSKA OF ROSZAK ADC. CARL FRONTERA AND JIM PETER OF PETSMART INC. MARTIN SCHAMER OF SURELIGHT SIGN. Chairman Qually declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:35 p.m. and requested a motion for the approval of the minutes from the meeting of January 1998. C. Thomas motioned approval which was seconded by A. Spaeth. The minutes were unanimously approved (3-0). CITIZEN COMMENT No citizens were present. NX- W BUSINESS S.R.A.B. # 98-04: TWPartners - 1415 Sherman Avenue Mr. Tom Roszak of Roszak A.D.0 presented the proposal. There were 2 different signs discussed. I for a temporary banner to be mounted on the west elevation of the 2nd floor of an existing; building on the site, and the other to be mounted along the chain link fence at the west side of the site. Torn Rozak outlined the variations requested for the time frames of the 2 proposed signs. The banner will be in place for a duration of 2-1/2 months and the freestanding sign will be in place i'or 12 months. R.Qually requests that the variation request be broken up into 2 components l for each sign. C. Thomas asks Mr. Roszak when he will break ground for the project ? Mr. Roszak replies sometime in June. C. Thomas notes that in his opinion the banner is handsome and straightforward but that the sign is too cluttered. Mr. Roszak replies that the background for the rendering will be the sank background for the sign. C. Thomas comments that the axonometric quality of the rendering shows too much roof and that in his experience, a perspective of the building will be more appealing to potential buyers. ,oh. Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - 4/9/98 Page 2 In addition, C. Thomas feels that the boxes of information don't line up giving the sign a cluttered, messy appearance. R. Qually agrees with C. Thomas that the design of the sign is cluttered and a general discussion follows as to how to redesign the layout of the sign. T. Roszak states that the reason he's come before the Board is to discuss the size and time duration for these signs. R. QuaIly states that although the banner is graphically acceptable, that the banner and the sign are pushing the size barriers and that the sign is just too cluttered with items of information. A. Spaeth states that perhaps a 20% reduction in size for the banner and the sign might be appropriate. R. Qually notes that he would accept either a reduction in the time frame or a reduction in the size of the signs. C. Thomas states that he agrees with A. Spaeth. A. Spaeth reminds the Board that these signs will face the el tracks, so there should be little objection from the neighborhood. Mr. Roszak says that the signs are meant to be seen by riders on the elevated train. R.Qually motions to accept the temporary banner if it is reduced in size 20% and to accept the time frame. C. Thomas seconds and the motion passes unanimously. Mr. Roszak tells the board that in regard to the fixed sign, he's willing to eliminate the Coldwell Banker and Roszak ADC elements from the sign. A general discussion follows concerning how to rearrange the items of information on the sign. C. Thomas motions to reduce 1415 information clement by 20% and to relocate Coldwell Banker and Roszak ADC to the bottom of the sign. The overall size of the sign and its proposed time frame will be acceptable. Mr. Roszack states the rendering will be a perspective. A. Spaeth seconds and the motion passes unanimously . S.R.A.B. 4 98-05 - Petsmart. 2201 Oakton Street. Mr. Carl Frontera of Petsmart and Mr. Martin Schamer of Surelight Sign present the proposal for the south and west facing signs for the new Petsmart Store. They believe that the proposed signage is scaled to the size of the entry clement and they feel that Petsmart has cooperated with the City in reducing the size of that element. R. Qually notes that the building entry element is in itself a large sign. C. Thomas states that although the entry element is large, the building is pushed towards the rear of the site. Mr. Frontera states that the Home Depot Store on the site has a sign height of almost 40'-0" above grade, and that the Petsmart sign will be considerably lower than Home Depot's sign. A general discussion t'ollows on the height and size of the sign. / r• Sign Review and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes - 4/9/98 Page 3 C. Thomas reads the S.P.A.R.0 recommendation ( which was to reject the Petsmart sign proposal) out loud to the Board. R. Fahistrom clarifies the S.P.A.R.C.. These objections were to : (1) the size of the sign, (2) the mounting height of the sign, and (3) the curved quality of the sign graphics. The S.P.A.R.C. wanted Petsmart to modify their proposed sign design for a linear graphic. Mr.Frontera states that he believes that Petsmart has done its best to cooperate with the Site Appearance Committee's recommendations and that he feels that the method used by the City to tabulate the area of the sign differs from Petsmart's tabulation methods and that Petsmart is being somewhat unfairly penalized. C. Thomas and R. Qually both state that the size of the south facing sign needs to be reduced by 20% - 25%. Mr.Schamer of Surelight Sign states that if a reduction is required, could the sign letter size be reduced from 6'-0" to Y-0" as the company has standard channel letter s in the 5'-0" size? C. Thomas notes that the mounting height of the sign doesn't bother him as it is proportionally correct to the facade, only the letter size is a real issue. R. Qually notes that the curved quality of the graphics don't bother him because they are true to Petsmart's Corporate Lobo. Qually motions to approve the west elevation sign as submitted and to approve the south facing sign-milh a reduction in the si7,C_Qf the letters ftom 6'-0" high to 5'-0" in height. (The Board would accept the mounting height of the sign and the curved graphics.) C. Thomas seconds and the motion passes unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no other business, Chairman Qually motioned adjournment at 8:07 p.m. NEXT MEETI�Lg The next meeting of the S.R.A.B. is scheduled for Thursday, May 14 ,1998. ,EPD -&--i Robert Fahlstrom, Plans Examiner Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski, Carolyn Smith M .+ MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, MAY 14, 1998 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: R. Qually, M. Larson, A. Spaeth MEMBERS ABSENT: J. Stricker-Gay, C. Thomas STAFF PRESENT: C. Smith OTHERS PRESENT: Brad Flecke - Reba Place Fellowship, Dave Monahan - All American Sign, Dave Thometz - White Way Sign, Steve Georgouiles - Doc Ables Auto Clinic, Helmut H. Langer - The Loreii, Susan Ramaker - Davis Street Fishmarket C. Smith distributed the recommendations from the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee, a copy of which is attached. MINUTES Acting Chairman Qually declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:30 p.m.. Spaeth motioned to approved the minutes, seconded by Larson. The meeting minutes of April 9, 1998 were approved, 3-0. QI ZEN COM MU Mr. Helmut Langer stated that he was here for the Davis Street Fishmarket appeal. Acting Chairman Qually requested that he wait until the subject variation is presented. NEW BUSINESS Brad Flecke presented the proposal for a Unified Business Center sign plan. The current tenants include a bookstore, a law practice, and an office for a psychologist. Qually stated that the proposal is tasteful and motions approval of the plan as submitted. Larson seconds and the motion is passed unanimously, 3-0. ru SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - Thursday, May 14, 1998 Page 2 C. Smith distributed a letter from R.T. Pierrehumbert to the members of the Board (see copy attached). C. Smith stated that this letter had been faxed to the Building Division just that day, and consequently did not make it into the packets that the Board members had received earlier. Mr. Dave Monahan, of All American Sign, presented the proposed freestanding illuminated sign age. Mr. Monahan explained that the Autobarn is building a new showroom, and during the process, had removed a large, freestanding sign from the center of the lot. Richard Fisher, the owner of the Autobam, had worked with the City to develop a tasteful image, even agreeing to remove an existing fence that surrounded the site previously. Qually questioned if this is the only sign. Mr. Monahan stated that this is the only sign, other than the possibility of window type signage. The Board then questioned the color of the background of the part of the sign that states "Audi/Pre-Driven", as it was shown in the proposal in both a light and dark background. Mr. Monahan responded that it could be either way that the Board would like. Qually stated that he had a problem with the wording of that portion of the signage. It is confusing, he continued, and suggested just "Audis" or "New & Predriven Audis". At this point, Qually motions to approve the dark background submittal, with the condition that this be the only sign, and that the wording be changed for clarification. Larson seconds. Spaeth has a problem with the height, and questions if they should allow the height of 25' just because that is the dimension in the ordinance, evan tho this location is actually vary residential. He comments that due to a bend in Chicago Avenue further north, even at 25', you would not be able to see the sign until approximately 2 blocks away. Mr. Monahan questions if the Board would consider a height of 20', as Mr. Fisher, the owner of the dealership has made a considerable investment, and has reduced the visible clutter previously on that site. Mr. Fisher would like that sign to give him presence on Chicago Avenue. Qually responds that if you can't see the sign anyway until you are 2 blocks away, the height will not do him any good, and in addition, the dealership will have "presence" by the lighting and the cars themselves. Frankly, he adds, the whole lot is a sign. Qually then asks if Spaeth would consider scaling down height of the sign by one third? Spaeth agrees, and states that he is willing to consider a maximum sign height of 18'. Qually then restates the motion, adding that the height of the sign be set at a maximum of 18'. Larson seconds this addition, and the motion Is approved unanimously, 3-0. Mr. Dave Thometz of White Way Sign and Steve Georgouiles, owner of Doc Ables Auto Clinic, SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - Thursday, May 14, 1998 Page 3 presented the proposal. There is some discussion by the Board regarding the proposed white background on the "Doc Ables Auto Clinic" portion of the sign. Mr. George Walk, also of White Way suggests that they put shading on the back to reduce the glare. This is discussed, and it is decided that a blue background, with the graphic portions outlined in white is acceptable to the owner. Qually questioned the need to have the "Goodyear" on the signage and asked if they are underwriting the cast of the sign. Mr. Georgouiles responded that he is paying for the entire cost of the sign, and that he would like to put "Goodyear" on it because he sells tires. Qually asked what other products and services are provided at Doc Ables? Mr. Georgoulles stated that in addition to routine auto repair, they also towing and tire alignments. Qually questioned why is it so important for you to just advertise that you sell tires, when you also do these other things? Mr. Georgouiles responded that tire sales accounts for a large portion of his business, and that the words "Auto Clinic" covers the rest of the services adequately. In addition, using the "Goodyear" name indicates that we sell quality. Mr. Georgouiles states that he has been there 7 years and that he needs help. He can't be seen from the street because the building is set back so far. Spaeth comments that the lot is filled with cars, and that there is no room for a free standing sign. Spaeth continues that the existing sign to wall sign) is faded. Qually states that he understands Mr. Georgouiles need, but is bothered by the 2 signs an the pole. It appears that there are 2 businesses there. Spaeth suggests that the "Goodyear" could be a window sign. Mr. Georgouiles comments that this would be ineffective, and not give him a competitive edge with others who are known tire dealers on Chicago Avenue, such as Duxler up the street, and with 40% of his business being tire sales, it is of critical importance. Larson remarks that he doesn't have a problem with the "Goodyear" sign age. He is in the vehicle business, and this seems appropriate. Spaeth comments that he still cannot support this. Qually summarizes the issues. Spaeth suggests that they could reduce the size of the sign age to make it less objectionable and a discussion follows. Feeling that he has reached a consensus, Qually motions to approve the proposed sign age, provided that the Doc Ables sign be limited to a size of 4'-6" diameter, with a blue background, and the Goodyear sign be 3'-2" x 12" (approximately) mounted as close as possible to the round sign. The overall height of the entire freestanding sign shall be a 12'-6" maximum. in addition, the existing wall sign must be removed. This motion was seconded by Larson, and approved 3-0. Acting Chairman Qually requested that Mr. Helmut Langer express his concerns for this case. Mr. Langer questioned if the proposal included any outdoor seating, as several of the residents in this building, which is all residential above the first floor, have had concerns about the noise from the restaurant. Qually responded that this is a hearing strictly for signage, and that any other issues, such as an outdoor cafe, is not governed by this Board. Ms. Susan Ramaker, of SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - Thursday, May 14, 1998 Page 4 the Davis Street Fishmarket commented that the proposal is only to replace what has been there for the last 11 years, and extend the awnings to the new, adjacent storefronts that they have acquired. They are only proposing to change the color from a grey to green, and use fabric instead of the vinyl that is there now. Mr. Langer inquired about lights. Ms. Ramaker responded that the awnings will be illuminated, just as they are now, with goose neck lighting fixtures that shine down onto the wording only of the awnings. Qually clarifies that the proposal is only for the south elevation of the building, and nothing is proposed for the east side. Ms. Ramaker concurs. Qually motions approval, seconded by Larson, and Is approved as submitted, 3-0. Mr. Dave Monahan, of All American Sign, presented the proposal. He explained that this refacing is due to the purchase of Cyrus Realty by Coldwell Banker last year. Qually comments that this buildings' sign age seems to come before the Board frequently. He questions if the Coldwell Banker wall sign could be reduced in size to match the size of the sign age of the bank. He states that it looks out of place to have 2 different size signs on the same small building of slightly different sizes. Mr. Monahan responds that to change the cabinet size would cost his client another $6,000 - $7,000. It was also discussed at this time that the existing west facing wall sign would need to be removed, as it overhung the property line, and was not allowed to be there. The Board then began discussing the freestanding sign. The need for 2 freestanding signs in such close proximity to each other seems excessive. After much discussion, including the possibility of adding on to the existing bank sign on the east wall for customer parking, the Board could not allow that the free standing sign be refaced, and recommended that Mr. Monahan go back to his clients and rethink the entire situation with the freestanding sign age, including the possibility of working with their neighbors on consolidating the freestanding sign age. At this point, Qually motioned to approve the refacing of the existing south facing wail sign, subject to the removal of the west facing sign, and to table the appeal for the freestanding sign. This motion was seconded by Spaeth, and unanimously approved 3-0. Hearing no other business, Chairman Stricker-Gay motioned adjournment at 9:35 p.m. SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - Thursday, May 14, 1998 Page 5 The next meeting of the S.R.A.S. is for Thursday, July 9, 1998 a---" Carolyn Smith, ssistant Director Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski K. Mims MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, JULY 9, 1998 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 J. Stricker-Gay, R. Qually, A. Spaeth, M. Larson C. Thomas C. Smith Steve Brown and Victoria Storm, Music Center of the North Shore C. Smith distributed the recommendation from the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee, a copy of which is attached. Chairman Stricker-Gay declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:31 p.m.. Qually motioned to approved the minutes, seconded by Larson. The meeting minutes of May 14, 1998 were approved, 4-0. No citizens were present for comment. Mr. Steve Brown presented the proposal, stating that this is the first time that the Music Center of the North Shore has had a facility in Evanston. They have a 2 year lease at 617 A & C Grove, a one story area in the back of 617 Grove. They give music lessons at this location and need the requested sign age to assist their customers in locating their business. Larson questions what the "Institute for Therapy" portion of the business is about. Ms. Storm responds that it is art, music and dance. She is the manager of that portion of the business. Chairman Stricker-Gay comments that the public perception would be that there are 2 businesses at this location, based on the proposal. SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - July 9, 1998 Pape 2 Qually questioned why they chose this "out of the way" location; for their business. Mr. Brown responded that they had been renting space at Emmuel Luthern Church and for over a year had been looking for a place to buy. It is difficult to find an affordable place, where the music would not disturb others in the building. Qually asked if they rely on scheduled or "walk in" customers? Mr. Brown responded that their primary business is scheduled lessons. Mr. Brown continued that although they are scheduled, the people, many of them children, still need to locate the place. We just would like identity. Qually stated that this is a strange area to have a business. You have inherent difficulty in your location, and you are looking for extraordinary sign age to overcome your location. I like the quaint aspect of Evanston, Qually continues, and because some landlord is trying to maximize their rentable space, extraneous sign age would appear. I believe that it is a case of a business in a bad location. Mr. Brown stated himself that most of his customers are scheduled. Then, why the need? Just send a map out with your literature. Mr. Brown responded to this by stating that even with that, he would just like some identification for the parents that are driving around looking for this location, like any business needs. In the afternoon, school children may be dropped off at the corner, or may come on public transportation. Mr. Brown then questions the Board if it is a consideration of the design of the signs proposed? Qually suggests that there is more information proposed than is needed. The 2 wall signs are confusing, as they say different things. It promotes visual clutter. If approved, we would be setting a precedent with this procedure. Chairman Stricker-Gay responds to this comment by stating that each variation must come before this board, so each case can be reviewed to address its unique situation and not "set a precedent". Also, he does not agree that this is a "quaint" location. This proposal is in an alley. This is a more urban location than some others in Evanston. Larson states that he agrees with the need for sign age. Spaeth adds that they are proposing a lot of sign age. He continues by saying that he couldn't consider the alley sign. Qually states that the sign facing Grove is confusing, as it might be for a business in the 617 Grove building. Spaeth questions if there is a building directory inside? Ms. Storm responds no, it is a residential building. At this point, Qualiy motions to deny either wall sign, and the motion is seconded by Spaeth. Chairman Stricker-Gay states that with this motion, you would deny them the right to have walk-in traffic. Qually responds that if they wanted walk-in traffic, they would not have located here. Chairman Stricker-Gay calls the question, and the motion Is not approved with only 2 members voting in favor. (A majority of the Board, or 3 votes, are needed for any mot/on to pass.) At this point a discussion ensues regarding the size and location of the signs. Most Board SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - July 9, 1998 Ejae 3 members comment on the confusion of the sign wording. The Board generally agrees that the alley sign (Wall Sign #2) is more confusing than helpful. Also, that the wording which includes the "Institute for Art Therapy" is confusing as well. Spaeth asks the applicant if there is any sign age there now? Mr. Brown responds that there appears to have been a previous sign in the location on Grove, as there are bolt holes in the facade. That is why they sized their sign as they did, to align with the existing holes. At this point, Qualty motions to deny the wall sign #2, along the alley. This motion is seconded by Spaeth, and is passed unanimously, 4-0. Larson comments that he still thinks that they need some identity on Grove. Chairman Sticker -Gay suggests a smaller sign that just identifies the "Logo" and the wording "The Music Center of the North Shore". Larson agrees that the words "Evanston Campus" and "ITA, etc" is unnecessary. This would reduce the size of the sign by half. Larson adds that he thinks that the directional arrow though is important. The size of a potential Grove Street sign, and arrow location are discussed at length. Spaeth agrees with Qually that any sign on Grove becomes an advertisement. Larson responds that he still agrees with their need for identity on Grove. As the Board cannot approve of any option for Grove, it is suggested by the Board to the applicants that they reconsider their proposal, and possibly return with another option, or at a time when a full Board (5 members) may be in attendance. C. Smith comments that a 1 foot square sign would be allowed under the "Exempt Signs" section of the Ordinance, Section 4- 12-6 (D?, that would allow them a "business nameplate" denoting the business name. Nearing no other business, Chairman Stricker-Gay motioned adjournment at 8:45 p.m. The next meeting of S.R.A.B. is for Thursday, August 13, 1998. Carolyn Smith, ssistant Director Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski K. Mims MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 1998 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: R. Qually, A. Spaeth, M. Larson MEMBERS ABSENT: J. Stricker-Gay, C. Thomas STAFF PRESENT: C. Smith OTHERS PRESENT: Nathan Kipnis - Nathan Kipnis Architects, Tom Rose - Peoples Market, Judy Newton - Hamilton Club, Nell Dietz - Liberty Sign Cod Loews. C. Smith distributed the recommendation for the August, 1998 agenda from the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee, a copy of which is attached. MINUTES Acting Chairman Qually declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:31 p.m.. Qually motioned to approved the minutes, seconded by Larson. The meeting minutes of July 9, 1998 were approved, 4-0. CITIZEN COMMENT Many citizens were present for comment for the People's Market proposal and the Hamilton Club proposal, although nobody wished to sign in. Mr. Kipnis presented the plan, which includes the potential for 4 businesses. The plan is for neon window sign age. The signs would be done in a consistent arc (+ /- 5' radius) or in a rectangular space with the top of the graphic aligning. The neon colors would be limited to two colors per storefront, with a maximum of 4 for the building. Letters to be max of 6 A" high with a legible font, such as Helvetica, Times, etc.. Qually questioned why the use of neon, instead of another type of illuminated sign? Mr. Kipnis responded that Noyes Street has other examples of neon, and it eliminates the need of an SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes -August 13, 1998 Lage 2 external source of light. The concept of their facade renovation would be to not have any lights overhanging the sidewalk. Spaeth then questioned the mural shown in the proposal on the east elevation. C. Smith added that this is not included for consideration by the Board. Mr. Kipnis adds that the maximum sign area would be limited by the allowable area in the Ordinance. At this point, dually motions to approve the plan as submitted, Including that the area of the window signs is limited to the window area allowed In the Ordinance. This motion is seconded by Larson, and Is passed unanimously, 3-0. I Mr. Neil Dietz of Liberty Sign Company presented the proposed refacing project. He stated that it is necessary due to a crack in the existing sign face. Qually commented that this sign is extraneous, and that it is completely unnecessary. Furthermore, Qually stated that it is confusing to have 2 names on one business. The marquee states what most people know as the name "Evanston" theaters. Not "Loews Theaters". If the owner would like to make a change to satisfy their corporate vanity, they should do it on the marquee, and combine it, such as "Loews Evanston" theaters. Spaeth agrees, stating that the sign is ineffective. Qually motions to deny the proposed refacing, and as per the Sign Ordinance, remove the broken wall sign entirely. Larson seconds, and the motion is approved, 3-0. S.R.A.B. #98-14: The Peoples Market. 1111 Ghicaao Avenue Mr. Tom Rose presented the proposal for the sign age for the new grocery store at the location of the former auto dealership building. Mr. Rose stated that The People's Market is a store similar to Whole Foods, only 20-25% less costly. This is the first store of this type in the area. Mr. Rose stated that they are not proposing a freestanding sign, but are interested in the north wall sign as their main sign for identity of the store. Also, they are removing an existing roof sign, as a part of their construction. The proposed sign age is red, and would be on a timer. Qually asked if the "logo" is a worker? Mr. Rose responded yes. Qually suggested that the logo could be incorporated into the wording of the name. For example, including the logo into the "0" of the word "people's" would reduce the overall size of the sign. Qually commented that he doesn't like to see any sign age exceed the allowable size. This is a village environment. Spaeth added that the height is also a problem for him, as there isn't anything else this high in the area. Much discussion ensued over the difference in configuration of the west facing and north facing signs. Spaeth suggested that they lower the west facing sign to the "lower band" of SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - August 13, 1998 Paje 3 EIFS material, and make it smaller. Qually commented that the sign structure is variable, being shown in one location on the west, and another on the north. On the west, the sign Is in line, on the north it is proposed to be more stacked. This gives a mixed message. Mr. Rose stated that they prefer the arrangement of the signs to be as shown on the north, but were trying to work within the limitations of the existing banding of the EIFS. Mr. Rose adds that the sign is higher than allowed to work with the existing trees along Chicago Ave., which would block the visibility of the sign for half of the year. Larson commented that in fact the store may get more exposure in a lower arrangement, as it would be more visible. Several neighbors of the property were present, although did not wish to "sign -in'. They expressed concern about lights. Mr. Rose stated that the only exterior lights on the building are under the canopy, and the parking lot fights. The signs are proposed to be internally illuminated. Qually questioned if the sign age is proposed to be shut off at a certain time? Mr. Rose responded that he would agree to have the signs illuminated only when the store is open. Qually asked about the proposed hours. Mr. Rose stated that the proposed hours of operation are 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Qually motions to deny the variation the west facing sign, and only allow what is within code (lower and smaller). Spaeth seconds, and the motion Is approved 3-0. Regarding the north facing sign, Qually comments that he agrees that they need a sign over their door. Spaeth commented that he would agree with a sign in that location only if it is as small as possible. Spaeth suggested it should be smaller, and centered over the center doors. Qually motions to allow a north facing sign provided that 1) it Is the same typographic format as the west sign, 21 Is centered above the doors, 3) is a maximum height of 15.5' to the top, 4) that the end of the sign align with the outside edges of the doors, not to exceed 20"-0" with or without the logo. The above Is subject to the removal of the existing roof sign in its entirety, and that this sign be turned off at 10:00 p.m.. Larson seconds and the motion is approved 3-0. S.R.A.B. #98-15: The Mgmilton Club. 1141- 1143 Hinman Avenue Ms. Judy Newton of Cyrus Development, presented the proposal for a temporary freestanding sign. Ms. Newton withdrew the banners portion of the proposal. With regard to the freestanding sign, Qually commented that there is definitely too much information. It reads like an ad not a sign. Any interested party should be able to get this information from a sales brochure. Ms. Newton explains that their goal is to sell quickly, at which point they could remove the sign. Much discussion ensued regarding proposed dates of when the proposed sign could be removed. SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes -August 13,1998 Pale 4 The Board commented that billboard type sign age Is not appropriate in residential neighborhoods. Qually motioned to approve a freestanding sign, non4liuminated, 6 SF, 41-0" high, with a maximum of 9 items of Information, and no "handouts" or leaflets describing the property. This motion was seconded by Spaeth, and approved 3-0. Hearing no other business, Acting Chairman nually motioned adjournment at 9:25 p.m. The next meeting of the S.R.A.B. is for Thursday, September 10, 1998. (This meeting was subseauent[y canceled, and the next meeting is scheduled for October 8. 1998.) C_ Carolyn ith, Assistant Direct Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski K. Mims MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY. OCTOBER 22, 1998 (RESCHEDULED OCTOBER 8, 1998 MEETING) EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: R. dually, A. Spaeth, M. Larson, C. Thomas �- MEMBERS ABSENT: None Wim Stricker•Gay resigned In August. The SRAB, is currently 4 members) STAFF PRESENT: C. Smith OTHERS PRESENT: Guy Dragisuc - Olympic Sign for Clark Oil, Marta Santiago - Art & Letter Signs for Dollar Day, Chuck Zenn - Olympic Sign for Panera Bread, Tim Cooke of Coldwell Banker and Dave Monahan of All American Sign for Coldwell Banker. C. Smith distributed the recommendation for the October, 1998 agenda from the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee, a copy of which is attached. Acting Chairman Qually declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:33 p.m.. Spaeth motioned to approved the minutes, seconded by Larson. The meeting minutes of August 13, 1998 were approved, 4-0. None present &&A.8. # 98-16: Clark Oil Co.. 2401 Dempster Mr. Guy Dragisuc of Olympic Sign Co. presented the proposal for the Clark Oil gas station. Mr. Dragisuc stated that Clark Oil is planning to remove considerable numbers of existing signs, including the elimination of an existing free standing sign towards the west side of the site. The existing canopies will be refaced in the blue and red Clark Oil color scheme. Only the word "Clark" will be illuminated on the canopy, the rest of the canopy will be non - illuminated. On the building, the only illuminated sign will be the "Clark" logo and the sign that will replace the "Road Pantry" and will say "On the Go". The existing free standing sign at the corner of Dempster and Fowler is proposed to be modified as follows: 1)The pole will remain, and everything else will be removed. 2) A new illuminated sign box will be placed on the existing pole, with only the Clark logo, and the gas prices, as indicated in the submittal. SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS HOAR!? Meeting Minutes -October 22, 1998 Page 2 The overall height of the free standing sign is clarified to be 15'-6" to the top. Larson questions if there will be any illuminated signs facing Fowler Avenue? Mr. Dragisuc responds no; only the free standing sign at the corner, which is illuminated, will face east and west. At this point, Spaeth motions to approve the plan as submitted, noting that the free standing sign at the corner be a maximum of 15'-6". This motion is seconded by Thomas, and is passed unanimously, 4-0. Ms. Santiago presented the proposal for a non -illuminated south facing sign. She stated the reason for the request is to increase business for her client, Dollar Day. She stated that this new sign will attract customers that are parked in the adjacent "Sam's Club" parking lot. Larson asks Ms. Santiago if there is any other way to go to Sam's Club, other that by the front of the Dollar Day store, where there is already an illuminated Dollar Day sign? She responds no. Spaeth indicates that he agrees with Larson; customers will have already passed the illuminated sign. Ms. Santiago responds that when you are driving, you might not notice, but when you are parked, that is the time people may notice the location of the Dollar Day store. Qually comments that he thinks that the sign is graphically pleasing, and that it is visually compatible with the illuminated sign. Thomas motions to approve the variation. Qually seconds, and the motion is approved 3.1, with Larson voting against the motion. S.R.A.B.# 98-18LPanera Bread. 17QO Sherman AvenUe Mr. Chuck Zenn of Olympic Sign Co. presented the proposal for the St. Louis Bread Company to change it's signs to be consistent with its corporate name change, Panera Bread. Smith commented that this building is an Historic Landmark, and even if the Sign Review and Appeals Board were to approve anything other than what is allowed in the previously approved plan, it would need to be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission. Both Spaeth and Qually commented that the proposed awning, not being consistent with the previously approved unified plan is bothersome. The Board generally agreed that anything other than the "standard green" is problematic. Mr. Zenn then produced a drawing indicating the solid green awning and wall sign age that is consistent with the unified plan, with the minor exception of the word "bread" which would be black letters on a white painted background. Qually suggested that the black letters be changed to the same green as the awning, to lessen SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - October 22, 1998 Page 3 the number of colors, and be closer to the original approval. This was agreed to by the Board, at which time Qually motioned approval of the proposal that matches the previously approved unified business center plan, with the word "Bread" allowed to be green lettering on an oval shaped white background. This motion was seconded by Thomas, and approved, 4-0. S.R.A.B. # 98-10.1: Caldwell_ Banker, 2929 Central Street At the onset of the presentation of this case, Mark Larson recused himself, as a potential conflict of interest. (This now necessitated that any action of the Board be approved by all three of the remaining members.) Mr. Tim Cooke of Coldwell Banker presented the situation. He gave a brief history of the property. He reiterated their position of the May 14, 1998 appeal, which Dave Monahan of the sign company stated that they wanted some identity for their parking area. The hardship is that the parking for their business in not adjacent to their property. They are merely asking to reface an existing sign. Qually responded that as this property has been the subject of several appeals over the last couple of years, he is quite familiar with the subject property. The problem all along is that there is too much sign age. The proposed sign is more of an advertisement than a parking sign. In an effort to minimize the proliferation of sign age, it was suggested that you work with your neighbor (First Bank and Trust of Evanston) to combine your sign with their's. Mr. Cooke responded that the sign in question is not their sign, and the they do not believe that the Bank would be amenable to working with them on a shared sign. Qually then stated his opinion that the existing sign is entirely too big for parking lot identification. Thomas commented that he does not feel that the Sign Review and Appeals Board has the right to suggest that a party collaborate with a third party which is not in attendance. Thomas continues by stating that he thinks that Coldwell Banker is being penalized by not allowing the refacing of the existing sign, due to their remote location of their parking lot. Mr. Cooke states that they have looked into the possibility of a smaller pylon sign for the corner. This sign location gives us identity from traffic in the east -west direction. Qually questions how people might be coming to their location. He asks Mr. Cooke if they are walk in, or do they typically have appointments? Mr. Cooke stated typically, people come by appointment. Qually suggests that at the time that the appointment is made, directions for to the parking could be added. He continues by stating that he does not see a big enough hardship to grant a variation. Thomas motions to approve the proposal as submitted. The motion is not seconded. Qually motions to deny the proposal. The motion is not seconded. ____;_-�SiG N-RFMEW AND•APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - October 22, 1998 PEja e4 Thomas motions to table the appeal. This motion Is seconded by Spaeth, but not approved by a minimum of 3 members (Rules of Procedure of the Sign Review and Appeals Board). Without any further action, this appeal cannot be approved. C. Smith commented that this sign cannot remain much longer without action. The previous sign face has been removed, bringing it out of compliance with the Evanston Sign Ordinance. Hearing no other business, Acting Chairman Qually motioned adjournment at 8:50 p.m. T=Smith, ,S.R.A.B. is for Thursday, November 12, 1998. Ct Directo Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski K. Mims SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - November 12,1998 Page 2 Mr. Bowman continues to question why other businesses in the neighborhood get large signs while he can't get new signs. Qually points out that Gino's sign met the Sign Ordinance and explains to Mr. Bowman why street frontage rather than the square footage of the building is used to determine issues regarding sign size and placement. Qually also states that the size of Gino's sign isn't the issue, but rather the issue is Mr. Bowman's request for new signs. Mr. Bowman disagrees with Qually and states that the City appears to give preferential treatment to large chain or corporate stores while making it difficult for the small independent business owner. Mr. Bowman states that he has bought a building in another suburb and that he will have to consider his options including moving his business if he is unable to get what he needs from the City. M. Larson asks Mr. Bowman to clarify why traffic is going so much faster on Greenbay Road when the posted speed limits have not increased. Mr. Bowman states that people are driving at speeds of 45 M.P.H. and that the Police sometimes use his parking area to pull people over. Mr. Bowman states that the increased speeds coupled with his store being set back are creating a problem for customers trying to find his store. Mr. Bowman states that the Board should read the comments that he brought with him. Larson points to a photograph of the north side of the site and asks Bowman what is the nature of the existing Phoenix Design wall sign affixed to the side of the building at the north end of the site. Mr. Bowman states that the sign has been removed. Qually, states that the sign was still in place when he drove by the store on the way to the this meeting. Mr. Bowman states that he was unaware that the sign was still there. Larson point out that the sign pertains to the former name of the store and is of no use to Mr. Bowman. Qually reviewed the outstanding unresolved issues outlined by City Staff pertaining to Mr. Bowman's property. These include the lack of proper striping and wheel stops in the parking area, an outstanding Building permit that was never obtained, and Mr. Bowman's failure to respond to the City's request for a resolution of these issues. Qually states that although Mr. Bowman takes issue with the City, that the City of Evanston appears to have many un-finished issues with Mr. Bowman Mr. Bowman responds that these issues occurred a while ago and maybe he could stripe the parking lot. Mr. Bowman then questions why the City of Evanston doesn't crack down on some of his neighbors but only crack down on him. SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - November 12, 1998 Page 3 A general discussion follows as to why Gino's was allowed to get an illuminated wall sign. Mr. Bowman again questions why he is unable to get a sign. Qually sums up his position by stating that his philosophy about these extra signs is unchanged since the last review in 1997. In his opinion, Evanston is a village that is why the Sign Ordinance is written to restrict too much signage. Qually also stated that in a City like Evanston people will find many ways to find the location of Mr. Bowman's store and he questions whether these signs are critical for Mr. Bowman's business. Mr. Bowman again urges the Sign Board to read the comments from customers who have had difficulty locating his store. M. Larson States his objections to Mr. Bowman's sign proposal by reviewing the 4 ordinance variations that would be required in order for the Sign Board to allow the proposed signs. A discussion follows with Mr. Bowman concerning the bright white background of the sign. Mr. Larson feels that this would be much too bright and could be a traffic hazard. Mr. Bowman states that he would be willing to change the background if required. L. Berkun states that the store where she is employed (Goods) has very good signs but people can still have problems with finding the store. Mr. Bowman states that his store needs the signs more than other stores on Greenbay because of the setback. At this point Mr. Bowman reads several comments from his list to the Board. Mr. Bowman states that he will take this issue before the City Council if he is turned down by the Sign Board. A general discussion follows with concerning what other avenues of appeal are open to Mr. Bowman. M. Larson sums up his problem with Mr. Bowman's proposal including the backlog of S.P.A.R.0 Issues that must be resolved and the graphics. M. Larson feels that one freestanding sign may be possible, if the other issues are resolved, but he is opposed to 2 freestanding signs for this store. L. Berkun asks Mr. Bowman if he has truly considered all the possible alternatives in lieu of needing 2 signs . Mr. Bowman responds that he'll make sure that the signs are tasteful. SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD Meeting Minutes - November 12, 1998 Page 4. Qually motions to deny the request stating that Mr. Bowman has enough signs and that this proposal is excessive. L. Berkun seconds the motion and the motion passes unanimously by 3-0. Before leaving Mr. Bowman states that he feels the Sign Board is killing small business in Evanston and that he would get a much better reception if he were a large corporate business. He states that he may leave Evanston, and that he hopes whoever the successor business is that follows him at his current location, that they will get a fairer standard of treatment from the City and the Sign board than Mr. Bowman has received. R. Qually states that he is sorry to hear Mr. Bowman feels this way. ADJOURNMENJ There being no other business R. Qually motions to adjourn the meeting at 8:00. The motion passes unanimously. NEXT MEETING The Next meeting of the S.R.A.B. is for Thursday December 10,1998. MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1998 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: R. Qually, M. Larson, L. Berkun MEMBERS ABSENT: A. Spaeth, C. Thomas STAFF PRESENT: C. Smith OTHERS PRESENT: Charles Sheehan - Ahern Sign Co. for Shell Oil, George Roman- Spex Hand Car Wash. C. Smith distributed the recommendation for the December, 1998 agenda from the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee, a copy of which is attached. C. Smith announced the appointment of Robert Qually by Mayor Lorraine Morton as the new Chairman of the Sign Review and Appeals Board. The Board then nominated and approved Mark Larson as Vice Chairman. Chairman Qually declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:33 p.m.. Berkun motioned to approved the minutes, seconded by Larson. The meeting minutes of November 12. 1998 were approved, 3.0. CITIZEN COMMENT None present Mr. Sheehan presented the proposal for the Shell Oil gas station. Mr. Sheehan stated that the proposal is to replace the existing sign, in the same location even using the same foundation, if found suitable. They had looked into other locations, but due to the existing light pole, there was no other location for the freestanding sign. The new sign will be smaller, as the current sign is 6'-0" wide. The overall height of the sign is to be 15'-6" to the top. Chairman Qually expressed some concern regarding the visibility beneath the sign. Currently, the area beneath the sign allows for greater visibility. It was further discussed, and agreed by the Board that the 6'6" dimension would allow adequate sight lines for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Meeting Minutes - Sign Review and Appeals Board December 10, 1998 Pape 2 Larson questioned the "Auto Care" portion of the sign and asked if this is a service garage. Mr. Sheehan responded yes. Mr. Sheehan continued that Shell feels that this an important component of the sign, as relatively few gas stations are service stations these days. Larson added that he thought the new sign is an improvement over the existing. Mr. Roman presented the proposal to replace an existing nonconforming wall sign. He stated that after 10 years, his sign is now hidden behind a new building at the corner of Dempster and Dodge. He said that his customers need to know his location. Chairman Qually clarified the proposal by inquiring if it was the intent to remove not only the existing sign, but the non conforming awning as well. Mr. Roman confirmed that this was his intent. Chairman Qually stated that he is concerned with both the size of the proposed sign and the fact that it extends above the roof. After some discussion, Mr. Roman offered that he would match the sign type (individual channel letters) that is on the front of the building, facing Dodge. He proposed using the same sign size, as he said that he has a big building, and that a smaller sign would not look as good. Berkun suggests a smaller, rectangular sign in the upper right comer of the north elevation. He stated that his goal is to be able to be seen from the traffic light at the corner of Dempster and Dodge. Berkun commented that she perceives that Mr. Roman's business caters to more upscale clients, and that his signs should reflect that aspect. Larson suggested that Mr. Roman will have to make some choices. Chairman Qually motioned to table the proposal until the next Sign Review and Appeals Boars! meeting on_January 14, 1999. at which time Mr. Roman should Present a revision to his pr000sal. This motion was seconded. and was approved 3-0. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no other business, Acting Chairman Qually motioned adjournment at 8:25 p.m. (NEXT MEETING Thnext rqeetingA the S.R.A.B. is for Thursday, January 14, 1999. e 3P. e Carolyn Smith,Wsslstant Direotoi Community Development - Building Division cc: J. Wolinski K. Mims _ . � � � __ _ ti .....5,. �..-_. • � - - �_ w!i aiC� � _•ter �l 1 Y LJ� MINUTES SIGN REVIEW AND APPEALS BOARD THURSDAY NOVEMBER 12,1998 EVANSTON CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 2404 MEMBERS PRESENT: R. QUALLY, M. LARSON, L. BERKUN MEMBERS ABSENT: A. SPAETH, C. THOMAS STAFF PRESENT: R. FAHLSTROM OTHERS PRESENT: LARRY BOWMAN - Owner of the Domicile Furniture Store R. Fahlstrom distributed the recommendations for the November 11th agenda from the Site Appearance and review Committee, a copy of which is attached. MINUTES Acting Chairman Qually declared a quorum and opened the meeting at 7:28. M. Larson moved approval of the minutes, this motion was seconded by Qually. The meeting minutes of October 22,1998 were approved by a unanimous vote of 3 - 0. �tizen Comment None Present New Business S $.A.B. #98-19: Domicile Furniture. 2510 Greenbav Roa_d Mr. Larry Bowman of Domicile Furniture presented his proposal for 2 freestanding illuminated signs in front of his store. He stated that with the increase in traffic speed on Greenbay Road it has become harder for customers to find his store as the building is indented in from the line of existing store buildings. Qually questions why are the 2 signs different. Mr. Bowman states that the signs are intended for different visual conditions. The lower 48" sign will be placed at the south and the higher 72" sign will be placed at the north end of the property. Mr. Bowman produced a list which he claims has over 100 written comments with signatures from customers who have had a difficult time finding his store. Mr. Bowman question why did Gino's get large illuminated wall signs when they only have 1000 square feet of space while his store has over 23,000 feet of space.