Appearance Review Commission (ARC)

APPROVED COPY Appearance Review Commission Meeting Minutes June 8, 2015 A meeting of the Appearance Review Commission was held on Monday, June 8, 2015 at 7:30 p.m. at the Village Hall Conference Room, 850 Waukegan Road, Deerfield, Illinois. Ch. Dick Coen called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. Present were: Beth Chaitman Dick Coen, Chairman Lisa Dunn Sean Ehlke Sherry Flores Elizabeth Low Absent were: Jim Hollis Also Present: Jean Spagnoli, Village Planner Jeri Cotton, Secretary Public Comment: There was no Public Comment. Document Approval Ms. Dunn moved to approve the minutes from the May 11, 2015 Appearance Review Commission meeting. Ms. Flores seconded the motion. Mr. Ehlke had a minor correction. The motion passed as amended by the following vote: AYES: Coen, Chaitman, Dunn, Ehlke, Flores, Low (6) NAYS: None (0) Business: 1. Appearance Code Update a. Building Design (highlighted text only) The commissioners discussed the roof section of the building design in the Appearance Code. The commissioners did not have any changes to this section. b. Lighting (highlighted text) The commissioners discussed the lighting section of the Appearance Code. They did not have any changes to the short introduction. Appearance Review Commission June 8, 2015 Page 2 of 4 The commissioners discussed the illumination levels section within the lighting section. Ch. Coen questioned allowing a 30’ pole height. Ms. Spagnoli indicated previous approvals were given to Cadwell’s Corners for 30’ pole heights and Deerfield Square for 39’ pole heights in their centers. Deerbrook Mall was granted 25’ pole heights in the front and 40’ pole heights in the rear. Ms. Low believes 30’ seems high. Ch. Coen asked if the Commission wants to look at 30’ pole heights to determine whether 25’ or 30’ would be appropriate. Ms. Low asked if there is a ratio between the size of the parking lot and the height of the poles, to ensure the scale is appropriate. Ms. Spagnoli noted the pole heights are not to exceed numbers. The pole heights need to be in scale with the development. Ms. Flores would like to see an example of the various pole heights. Ch. Coen noted the uniformity ratio is important as well. The light needs to be well distributed. Ch. Coen believes the Village will get a lot of push back with 1.5 average foot candles for commercial parking lots. He noted some retailers will express concern about safety. Ms. Spagnoli noted this is the same foot candles Highland Park has specified. Ms. Dunn believes the Commission should leave the average foot candles at 1.5 and consider variation requests on a case-by-case basis. Ms. Low questioned the use of the phrase ‘public activity’. The commissioners believe ‘public activity’ should be included in the definition section. Ch. Coen suggested looking at the developments in Deerfield to determine the average foot candles. The commissioners discussed the walkway minimum foot candle. Ch. Coen believes 0.6 could be too restrictive. The commissioners are okay with 0.6. Ch. Coen asked about the I.E.S. standards. Ms. Low questioned how the Village can enforce the I.E.S. standards if they do not have the standards available. Ch. Coen does not believe the Village can hold petitioners to those standards. Ms. Low noted the Village is asking petitioners to hire a lighting engineer when they may not be considering hiring a lighting engineer, just to ensure the standards are followed. Ch. Coen believes it is very important and if in-house expertise is not available, the Village should have an outsourced person available. If this is not going to be the case, Ch. Coen believes the statement about I.E.S. standards should be removed. The commissioners discussed the gasoline fuel stations section of the lighting section. They believe the average foot candles in pump areas shall not exceed 30. The commissioners asked Ms. Spagnoli to check with Highland Park about the Thornton’s lighting photometrics. Ch. Coen noted the pump area typically has a canopy. He suggested removing the pole height statement from the pump area section. Ch. Coen questioned the average foot candles in the parking and approach area. He noted it is 10 times the light level allowed elsewhere in the Village. Ms. Low suggested removing the statement about I.E.S. standards in this section as well. The commissioners discussed the multi-family residential section within the lighting section. Ms. Spagnoli indicated the Village Center has some multi-family developments in South Commons that are within the Commission’s purview. Ch. Coen noted the Appearance Review Commission June 8, 2015 Page 3 of 4 restrictions are similar to the commercial restrictions. He suggested making a provision stating the minimum foot candles adjacent to single-family residential needs to be 0.0 at the lot line. The commissioners want the pole height to be changed from 18’ to 14’. Ch. Coen suggested the last statement should state, “Light levels shall be measured in the horizontal plane, at ground level.” Ms. Low suggested adding this as “c” and changing the existing “c” to “d”. The commissioners discussed the design plan section within the lighting section. The commissioners did not recommend any changes in this section. The commissioners discussed the canopy lighting section within the lighting section. Ms. Spagnoli suggested adding “The sides of a canopy should be non-illuminated.” The commissioners agreed. The commissioners discussed the interior lighting section within the lighting section. Ms. Dunn believes the phrase “close of business” and “during non-operational hours” is redundant. She suggested removing the phrase “close of business.” Ms. Flores expressed concern about internal light sources being directed to an exterior window. Mr. Ehlke believes there is something in the I.E.S. standards regarding a definition of glare. Ms. Dunn is not happy about interior lighting spilling out to the exterior. Ms. Low suggested making a statement that glare can be caused by interior lighting as well. Ch. Coen suggested adding something to the Zoning Ordinance stating the interior design needs to comply with this intent. Mr. Ehlke suggested adding a diagram showing what is acceptable versus what is not acceptable. c. Site Design, Landscaping – discussion The commissioners discussed the landscaping section of the Appearance Code. Ms. Spagnoli indicated the commissioners discussed hiring a landscape architect on an as- needed basis. Ms. Low suggested defining what the Commission wants the landscape architect consultant to do. Ch. Coen suggested getting a planting list. Ms. Spagnoli provided a planting list from Lake County. Ms. Dunn suggested getting someone from Lake County to speak to the Commission. Items from the Staff Ms. Spagnoli reported Charles Ifergan Salon, American Mattress, Shell, Pet People and recycling containers will be at the next meeting. Adjournment There being no further business or discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 9:06 pm. Respectfully submitted, Jeri Cotton