City of Highland Park Plan and Design Commission Met July 7.
Here is the minutes provided by the commission:
I. CALL TO ORDER
At 7:30 PM Chair Reinstein called the meeting to order and asked Director Fontane to call the roll.
II. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Glazer, Hainsfurther, Hecht, Kutscheid, Lidawer, Moore, Reinstein
Members Absent: None
Director Fontane took the roll and declared a quorum present.
Staff Present: Cross, Fontane, Kosmatka
Student Rep.: None
Council Liaison: None
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
June 2, 2020 Regular Meeting
Chair Reinstein entertained a motion to approve the minutes of the June 2, 2020 meeting with corrections. Commissioner Lidawer so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Hecht.
Director Fontane called the roll:
Ayes: Glazer, Moore, Lidawer, Hecht, Kutscheid, Hainsfurther, Reinstein
Nays: None
Motion passed 7-0.
Chair Reinstein entertained a motion to approve the minutes of the June 23, 2020 meeting with. Vice Chair Hainsfurther so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Lidawer.
Director Fontane called the roll:
Ayes: Glazer, Moore, Lidawer, Hecht, Kutscheid, Hainsfurther, Reinstein
Nays: None
Motion passed 7-0.
IV. SCHEDULED BUSINESS
1. Design Review – 898 Deerfield Rd. – New Four-Unit Multi-Family Building
Planner Kosmatka made a presentation for the above item including application summary, site plan, context, rendering street view from Deerfield Rd., rendering west façade, elevations, site analysis, landscaping, screening, tree removal, lighting, general design standards and recommendation.
Mr. Steve Goodman, Applicant, stated he had been building in Highland Park for 35 years, current project is on the corner of Windy Hill and Red Oak, in town location, met with staff tried to set building so there are no variances, tried to get corner family to the west to sell and they were not receptive to selling, decided to site building in present position and when owner to west decides to sell they can put another building garage to garage and using the same parking lot, they are hoping to come to terms with owner to west, there is some metal on front and roof not all asphalt, were cognizant of screening in back and all electric meters are in the back, two spaces to the south and one will be handicapped space, in back of building there is a 3’x5’ patio so you are not just walking onto grass, it fits with the neighborhood, excited about project, on the left elevation at top of second floor is a metal seamed roof, over garage at front door and over both utility room doors and sprinkler room are also metal seamed roofs not asphalt, glass in the garage doors, each one of back doors has stoop with a patio for two lawn chairs, AC units are tucked back in one for each unit, they are screened in front bushes and shrubs, total square footage is between 2,213s.f. to 2,278 s.f., 2 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, hired Highland Park designer to help with exterior and looked at other buildings in town, trying to meet the neighborhood they are accustomed to seeing, using Hardie board.
Mr. Derick Goodman, Applicant, stated the front half of each building is brick veneer up to the top of the garage roof line, these are renderings of actual buildings, landscaping is representative and actual landscape plan has not been applied to the rendering, looking at other structures in the neighborhood and this concept could repeat itself and expand beyond the current scope.
Chair Reinstein asked the applicant to walk through the rendering and building materials.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated they are using Certainteed asphalt shingles in black, brick veneer in beige and white, Jeldwen Low-E windows, siding is Hardie plank, Hardie soffit panels, Hardie trim, Clopay garage doors, finished garages, decorative lighting Z-Lite, want to keep residential feel, eight wall sconces to light property at entrance, front elevation is black shingles, soffit fascia below in black, two different colors of siding and texture of siding changes, one is a moderate tone grey and cobblestone in middle, boxed windows with trim to create modern feel, balconies are Trax decking which is maintenance-free, sliding glass door for access, metal roof coverings for main entrance doors to ensure they are sheltered, brick veneer around the garages and entrances and elevation on Deerfield Rd.
Chair Reinstein stated they mentioned other new developments in the neighborhood with this same type of look and asked where they were.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated one is the new retirement community on Deerfield Rd. and they used lighter color beige brick and a Hardie-based trim color. They try to keep to lighter colors and brought in the black but it could be beige and they are flexible in colors. They took the components used on the retirement community and tried to incorporate them into the design.
Commissioner Moore stated on page 29 of the packet there was no solid fence or wall along portions of the vehicular use area within 25’ of the residential district. She asked if the property abuts a slightly differently zoned district.
Planner Kosmatka stated the property is in the RM1 district and there is residential to the east, west and south.
Commissioner Moore asked if a fence was required.
Planner Kosmatka stated yes per code it is within 25’ of a residential zoning district along areas for vehicular use. On the west end of the property the landscape plan depicts a wood fence but no details have been provided regarding the fence. There is no fence depicted for the north or south.
Commissioner Moore mentioned the east side and if there would be any fence there. She was worried it was going to be crowded and if there is only 10.5’ between the building and the property line it seems like to would be crowded. It looked like there would be a bunch of air conditioners along the driveway. She asked if there was a plan to remediate this with a fence. She was concerned about the neighbors to the east.
Planner Kosmatka stated she would defer to the applicant.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated their engineers decided to terminate the fence as the drive curves. They had a conversation with Public Works about relocating the utility pole. They decided to terminate the fence at the end of the building so there would be a line of sight for the traffic from both directions. They are flexible in extending the fence however far staff and the Commission would like it. To the south and adjacent property they were happy to put a fence if required. They did not because it backs up to a driveway.
Planner Cross stated he would show the landscape plan for clarity. He illustrated the fence and where it terminates. As Planner Kosmatka explained, the code requires it be along the entire vehicular use area. There is a utility pole they need to avoid. That is why the fence is terminated where shown.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated in the back area there are a lot of shrubs and bushes and it is a driveway.
Commissioner Kutscheid stated the fence is going to the building setback line. He asked if they had talked to neighbors to east and if they prefer to have a fence.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated they could not contact the owner and everyone in the building are renters. He sent emails but they have not responded. He did not think they lived in Illinois.
Commissioner Kutscheid stated he would prefer a fence on the east side. Mr. Steve Goodman stated they would be happy to do this.
Commissioner Kutscheid asked if there was an existing fence on the south side. He stated there was no reason for a double fence.
Mr. Steve Goodman agreed.
Commissioner Kutscheid asked is the driveway was curved.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated it has a small radius at the entrance. They had a discussion with Mr. Ramesh Kanapareddy at Public Works and he was agreeable to having a little curve to avoid the street light on Deerfield Rd. By law the street light has to be so many feet off the corner or between the next one. They would prefer to move it over. ComEd told them they could keep it where it is and they will install bollards within 3’ of each corner of the pole.
Commissioner Kutscheid asked if there was a curb.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated there is curb around the plant beds between each garage and the main entrance to the building but not along the drive.
Commissioner Kutscheid mentioned the little fingers between the garages and it makes survivability extremely difficult. He was in favor of eliminating the little fingers as bad things will happen and nothing will live.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated it was decorative.
Commissioner Kutscheid stated if they are curved that is another 1’ out of a 3’ wide space so that makes it 2’.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated they can eliminate that.
Commissioner Kutscheid asked if there is irrigation.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated probably not.
Commissioner Kutscheid stated there are better evergreens better than the white pine, either the blue spruce or the Siberia spruce.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated he would talk to Ben Miller and they would be happy to do that.
Commissioner Kutscheid mentioned the hydrangeas at the front entry and during the winter and they do not look like much buy they are fine. He asked if the sconces on the second story are necessary. It seemed like more light than they need.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated because it is a doorway and a balcony and by code they need at least one light and one GFI out there.
Commissioner Kutscheid stated at their last meeting they stated balcony lights were not required in Highland Park.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated they would be happy to take them out. They are on either side of the garage door so that will light up a good portion of the driveway.
Mr. Derick Goodman asked about the code for that.
Planner Cross asked Director Fontane about the building code.
Director Fontane stated he was not sure but would look it up and get back to the Commission.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated he was pretty sure if you have a doorway or balcony there has to be some sort of lighting.
Commissioner Kutscheid stated it was more light into the neighbors’ houses especially on the second floor. He asked if they to do need them, then is there a way to shield the light going to the west.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated they can use a lower watt bulb. Planner Cross stated they can look at shielding options.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated the garage lights and those lights will be on a timer in the electrical room which will go on at dusk and off around 10:30 or 11:00 PM.
Commissioner Kutscheid mentioned the air conditioners in the back and will the sound be an issue putting two air conditioners together. He asked if there was a way to install sound dampening material in the alcove.
Mr. Derick Goodman they are using shrubs to attempt to do that.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated he did not want to install fencing because he thought it looked tacky. They talked to the landscaper and they suggested good screening and the architect set them back in to keep noise toward the building and not project out. He did have an option unless they decide to fence it instead. They will have a fence along that side so the sound will go away anyway.
Commissioner Kutscheid asked if there were sound regulations as it affects adjacent properties and is it related to air conditioners.
Planner Cross stated it is really generators they worry about when it comes to decibels.
Commissioner Kutscheid stated shrubs do not afford much sound attenuation. The east elevation of the building is pretty stark. He asked if there was something they could do to make it less stark and it is all the same. He thought is could be deferred to Vice Chair Hainsfurther on how to address that elevation.
Planner Cross showed the east elevation and the aerial photo. Chair Reinstein asked if the fence would be along the driveway.
Planner Cross stated it would be very close. The driveway the applicant is proposing abuts the adjacent driveway.
Commissioner Kutscheid stated the elevation is stark and needs something to break it up whether it is color or a different material. He asked if the line on the east elevation was a different material.
Chair Reinstein stated the elevations says it is all lap siding Hardie plane.
Mr. Jeff Lester, Aspect Design, stated on the rear elevation they did have a horizontal piece on top of the second floor line window breaking the lap siding.
Commissioner Kutscheid asked if it was all the same color.
Mr. Derick Goodman it all the same color as of right now.
Commissioner Kutscheid stated he would defer this to Vice Chair Hainsfurther.
Commissioner Kutscheid mentioned the red maple in good condition to be removed by the driveway. He asked if there was thought to moving the tree.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated they will talk to the landscape designer.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated regarding their approach with the rear elevation, Hardie is an expensive product and often if they do Hardie on the front, then they will do vinyl on the back. They are trying to keep the rear elevation as simple as possible color- and texture- wise because there is little depth as far as the yard to the rear. They did not want to create obstruction by putting metal roofs in over the doors or adding color that may create more visibility or distraction. They are flexible on color and as far as texture they can incorporate a straight edge shingle on the front to the back. They want to keep it more simple so it is not as visible to the homeowners.
Commissioner Kutscheid thought it was too simple and needs more. He liked the front of the building.
Commissioner Glazer stated he did not see anything in the packet indicating the tree removal which includes a number of protected trees, was reviewed by the Forester.
Planner Kosmatka stated the Forester had reviewed the landscape proposal. She stated she could explain the difference between the heritage, key and protected trees.
Commissioner Glazer stated he knew they were no heritage or key trees being removed. He was concerned when he saw the quantity of protected trees that were being removed.
Planner Kosmatka stated there were nine and there is a tree replacement requirement.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated he walked the property with Ben and he did not know if he had responded.
Commissioner Glazer stated it sounds like this may be coming back and by then maybe they will have heard from the Forester. He asked if these were going to be condos.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated these are row homes and the target audience is starting families with 2 bedrooms and 2.5 baths. All the finishes on the interior are high end quartz countertops and cabinetry. These are not apartments.
Commissioner Glazer stated it has been a long time since the Commission has seen a condo building. Most of the recent developments have been apartments and they have been told that is the market. He asked what was the target audience.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated starting families who are looking for a two-bedroom home at $599,000 near town. They have seen a significant up tick in sales over the last 30-45 days. Their sales are up 23% over the prior year and the market is getting strong. They have had success with this type of property in other markets.
Commissioner Glazer stated he liked the front and was a welcome addition to that area of Highland Park. He mentioned tandem parking but these garages are not tandem.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated there are two garage spaces per unit and there are two guest spaces at the end of the drive one of which will be dedicated handicapped.
Commissioner Glazer asked about the end of the drive.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated there are two garage spaces and then outside the garage when guests come they park outside behind the unit’s garage. There are two guest spaces in the back of the house, one being a handicapped space. Basically there four spaces per unit and two in the back, one being handicapped.
Commissioner Glazer asked to see the spaces in the back.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated each unit has a two-car garage and two spaces for their guests. At the end of the two-car garages there are common spaces one of which is handicapped.
Commissioner Glazer asked if the visitor who parks in that space is visiting Unit 1, that is a considerable distance. He asked if there was a more central location possible.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated if they are visiting they can park in front of Unit 1 in one of their two guest spaces. Within the site plan they do not have the ability to have a handicapped space in any one of the units they are building. They each have their own assigned guest spaces as part of their property.
Commissioner Glazer stated there will be two guest spaces and one will be designated handicapped. He asked if that was compliant.
Planner Cross stated one can be handicapped accessible. The ratio is.1 guest space per dwelling unit.
Planner Kosmatka stated per the calculations, 10 spaces are required for the development. They have exceeded that and 18 are proposed, 16 for the units and 2 at the south end of the site.
Commissioner Glazer stated looking at the front of the building he understood Commissioner Kutscheid to say he wanted to see the sconces not generating light in an unnecessary direction. He liked the look with the sconces and he thought the balconies on the second floor looked attractive. He asked if there was consideration given to including balconies on the third floor.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated the third floor would be a bedroom space and each of the vertical structures is a single unit. As you go in the unit you step up and you have the living, dining and kitchen. The second floor has the bedrooms and baths.
Commissioner Glazer asked about the value of breaking up the east elevation and maybe there was an opportunity to have balconies or design features like that to try and break it up.
Mr. Steve Goodman they tried to put them in the back but because of the setback they will encroach within 10’ of the property line.
Commissioner Glazer stated the landscape looks to have 10 evergreen trees. He asked if Commissioner Kutscheid thought that was sufficient coverage for this building. He did not know if this would provide enough buffering.
Commissioner Kutscheid stated he was not a big fan of evergreens but they are in the code. He thought they are boring and a one-season plant. There are much better plants that provide screening and fall color, flowers and shade.
Vice Chair Hainsfurther stated they are either going to have to make the two spaces in back on the south side wider or have one handicapped space. A handicapped space is 16’ wide and they have 24’ total for the cutout. Code for a normal space is 8’ or 9’. He asked how someone in a wheelchair would get out of their space and down the drive to get to the doors to get in the space.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated there are two spaces for each unit and is there a part of the code that designates the distance from the building to the handicapped space.
Vice Chair Hainsfurther stated the ADA requires it to be as close as possible. He was worried about the surfaces. For example, if someone gets out of their car and there is grass there. For someone with a mobility disability, they are not going to be able to get themselves from a grassy area onto paved area.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated they can make it one space.
Vice Chair Hainsfurther stated he was loathe of design reviews from a standpoint of personal preference, because he did not find this building particularly pleasing. He stated he would concentrate on the requirements. He was concerned because they mentioned they were looking at eventually building on the west property and have the buildings mirrored. He did not have a problem with the elevation, but there were a lot of different materials. There were shingles, lap siding, brick, roof shingles a standing seam metal roof. He thought the standing seam metal roof was out of place and perhaps they should look at look at shingles or a standing seam metal on the roof of the building. Because they are talking about potentially mirroring the building, he did not see a way to approve this elevation facing McDaniels. He thought they could take a look at mimicking the west elevation in terms of breaking it up with the different materials on the west elevation and this would help to some extend. He would like to see brick just like on the west elevation and see some variation on the roof with some gabled ends over some of these areas. He would like to see the three different materials used on the west end brought to this side as well. He thought they could spend time with the architect and it will cost money. He was not sure they could sell them for $599,000 because he has a five-bedroom house and he cannot sell it for that. He was concerned about the notches for air conditioners with the noise. Because there is roof over it this will trap noise and push it out. The noise will bounce off the surfaces and get pushed toward the property to the east. They could run that notch up and break up the monotony of the east elevation. He thought the east elevation needed a lot of work and study particularly if the idea is that it will mirror the building to the west. He wanted to see how the cars parked in the two end spaces will get out of this space if Unit 4 has two cars parked on the driveway. Will they back down the driveway onto a busy street. He thought they should spend some time give thought to what they are doing on the south elevation. In terms of context he thought it was kind of plain. It much bigger and taller than anything around there. He was worried about it overwhelming the neighbors. If it is replicated in other places he thought they could invest a little more to make it more handsome. He thought it was too plain.
Commissioner Hecht stated he had nothing left. He mentioned the balconies and did not recall seeing the square footage.
Mr. Jeff Lester stated they were 33 s.f. and are 11’ x 3’. Commissioner Hecht asked if they were just decorative.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated a grill has to be 10’ from a structure and it is more of a sitting area.
Commissioner Hecht stated he was mindful of the other comments.
Commissioner Lidawer stated she thought where the driveways are was lovely and she liked the side with the brick. She thought it was a bit plain on the other side and she liked Vice Chair Hainsfurther’s suggestion of perhaps using texture. She thought brick would help with that. She asked about building other buildings that would mirror this and would that be to the east or west.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated to the west. There are two other properties on the other side of McDaniels on the market which is RM1. They would like to bring it down the street opposite the senior center.
Commissioner Lidawer agreed and thought it would be a lovely addition. She asked about the 10’ setback on the east and if that would be the 5’ patio and is it 5’ of patio and 5’ of lawn.
Mr. Steve Goodman you have to have a stoop and it is not really a patio.
Commissioner Lidawer thought shrubbery would warm it up and thought the fence coupled with the additional shrubbery was a better way to go and she liked it better. She thought the lighting was attractive and the glass on the garage. Those two sides of the building do have a lot of diversity and are pleasing to the eye. She asked if they could spruce up the other two sides a little more by using the same types of materials they are already using.
Mr. Steve Goodman stated they cannot raise the air conditioning up. Otherwise they would lose the living room on the second floor. They set the air conditioners in to take the noise away and if they want a fence running along the driveway it does buffer the noise of the air conditioners.
Vice Chair Hainsfurther stated they need to study the east elevation and come back with something different than what they are showing. They have heard what they had to say and he was not going to design it for them.
Chair Reinstein stated he thought the applicant should come back and address the east elevation, show how the handicapped space will work, the awning and how it will look, the lumens on the exterior lighting should be determined, the area for the fence and will it run north on the west property line to the end of the building and he agreed with this, the allusion to the Capitol retirement community and there is a different ratio of brick to siding, he was not sure how the Capitol building was an inspiration for this building which is a little brick and a lot of siding, the finger in the drive areas could be nice in the summer if you want to plant but in the winter you have salt and nothing will live, overall he was not sure he saw the building as proposed being so harmonious with the other new developments in the neighborhood, he suggested looking at McGovern and Laurel and the materials being used are much different than what is being proposed here. He would leave it to the applicant if they want to come back and if they do they should have a look at what kind of fence they are proposing and the height.
Planner Cross stated a member of the public raised their hand.
Vice Chair Hainsfurther stated they need to address snow removal and where it would be stored when it is plowed.
Chair Reinstein asked what the applicant wanted to do.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated they would re-group with the design team about the items and recommended they reschedule.
Planner Cross stated Mr. Mike L., Resident, was not joining the conversation.
Chair Reinstein stated if they want to send an email it will be dispersed to the Commission before the next hearing.
Planner Cross stated any member of the public not interested in making a comment here can reach out to staff.
Chair Reinstein asked about a schedule to reconvene.
Commissioner Glazer stated they should give the applicant the benefit of knowing there is a lot to like about the plan. He did not want the applicant to go away discouraged thinking there is no support on the Commission for what they are trying to do. They are taking a piece of property that needs to be redeveloped and they have come up with a serious workable plan overall. He thought the plan was solid and with some tweaking with respect to the appearance on the rear elevation this was not insurmountable. He did not want them to think the Commission is not in favor of seeing this kind of development being built. They want to see it done in a different fashion.
Commissioner Lidawer concurred and wanted to second what Commissioner Glazer said. It would be a good addition to the neighborhood and they wanted to see a few tweaks.
Chair Reinstein asked about rescheduling.
Planner Cross stated the next meeting is July 21st. He thought this is pushing it a little tight. He recommended a continuation to Aug. 4th. If this does not work for the applicant they can request a continuation.
Commissioner Moore stated regarding the landscape plan, it would be nice to see a rendering of the east elevation and how it will look with the landscaping, options for the fence and cars on the east side. She stated she appreciated them relating their plans to expand. If they are doing a back to back they want to make sure it does not appear like an enclosure.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated it is their intent is to have a similar structure in appearance with the same general color palette. They concur with the slight variations and that would be designed separately. He appreciated their constructive criticism.
Vice Chair Hainsfurther motioned to continue the item to Aug 4th, seconded by Commissioner Lidawer.
Director Fontane called the roll:
Ayes: Moore, Lidawer, Hecht, Kutscheid, Glazer, Hainsfurther, Reinstein Nays: None
Motion passed 7-0.
Mr. Derick Goodman stated relative to the fence there were multiple points of view. He wanted to make sure what they design makes sense and how do they better align on which side the Commission wants to see a fence or not.
Director Fontane stated they have continued this item and if they want to continue talking about it they will need to reopen it.
OTHER BUSINESS
1. Administrative Design Review Approvals - None
2. Next Regular Meeting - July 21, 2020. Planner Cross stated there was nothing on the agenda. Planner Cross stated possibly a policy discussion could be placed on the agenda.
Director Fontane stated this would be in regard to downtown zoning in general and the POSO and B5 district. They made a presentation to the COW regarding this item and they were directed to seek feedback from the Business Development Advisory Group as well as the Commission. It is not a public hearing, but rather feedback to provide to City Council.
Commissioner Lidawer asked if they considered this a policy issue, could staff provide a brief history and current status.
Planner Cross stated this was an essential part of the discussion. 3. Case Briefing - None
Planner Cross stated Council approved the preliminary development for Albion at Renaissance Place and they are moving forward with drawings.
Director Fontane stated there will be more conversation regarding zoning at Council with regard to some changes to the code.
VI. BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC
None.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Reinstein entertained a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Hecht so motioned, seconded by Commissioner Lidawer.
Planner Fontane called the roll:
Ayes: Moore, Lidawer, Hecht, Kutscheid, Glazer, Hainsfurther, Reinstein
Nays: None
Motion passed 7-0.
The Plan and Design Commission adjourned at 9:30 PM.
http://highlandparkil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=2392&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up