Appearance Review Commission (ARC)

APPROVED COPY Appearance Review Commission Meeting Minutes February 8, 2016 A meeting of the Appearance Review Commission was held on Monday, February 8, 2016 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 7:35 p.m. Present were Dick Coen, Chairman Beth Chaitman Lisa Dunn Jason Golub Elizabeth Low Absent was: Sherry Flores Also Present: Barabara Rosborough, Consultant Jean Spagnoli, Village Planner Jeri Cotton, Secretary Public Comment: There was no Public Comment. Document Approval Ms. Low moved to approve the minutes from the January 25, 2016 Appearance Review Commission meeting. Ms. Dunn seconded the motion. The motion passed by the following vote: AYES: Coen, Chaitman, Dunn, Golub, Low (5) NAYS: None (0) Business: 1. Appearance Code Update Ch. Coen noted both Ms. Rosborough and Mr. Milani provided a list of resources for the Commission to use. Ch. Coen explained the petitioner’s submittals are frequently not complete. He questioned whether these links would be appropriate for petitioners. Ms. Dunn indicated the Commission was going to include the link rather than a printout. Ms. Appearance Review Commission February 8, 2016 Page 2 of 4 Spagnoli wanted the Commission to see what was included in each link, therefore the printout was included in the ARC distribution. Ch. Coen questioned whether sending petitioners to the websites, meant the Village was endorsing what is listed on the site. Ms. Rosborough believes it is a reasonable list. The commissioners discussed the link provided by Mr. Milani, which show species that are currently appropriate to plant. Ms. Rosborough believes there are some plantings on the list that are questionable, but overall, it is a good list. Ms. Dunn liked that this list showed where the specific plantings would thrive. Ch. Coen noted the Commission encourages people to plant species that are native. Ms. Rosborough believes the Conserve Lake County list for Link 1.d. is an appropriate list. Ch. Coen suggested contacting Dave Neu, executive director of Conserve Lake County and asking him to add a tab for Deerfield, which would include all the lists. The commissioners like the invasive species list and the trees and shrubs native to Northeastern Illinois list. Ms. Rosborough indicated the tree and shrubs native to Northeastern Illinois would not change. Ch. Coen noted the intention of the exhibits is to make recommendations on both diverse yet appropriate and undesirable plantings. Ms. Rosborough questioned whether this is a tool for the Commission or if it should be used by developers. Ms. Low indicated the list for Link 1.f. is approximately nine years old. She questioned whether Conserve Lake County has a tree diversity list for urban landscaping in Northern Illinois. The commissioners believe it would be nice to have all the information in one place. Ms. Spagnoli will speak with Conserve Lake County. a. Site Design, highlighted text and revised exhibits Ch. Coen read the Site Design section of the Appearance code. In section 1. a. landscaping, the diameter breast height recommendation is eight inches (8”) or greater. Ch. Coen noted the Commission changed the recommendation to six inches (6”) or greater. Ms. Spagnoli explained the Deerfield Tree Preservation Ordinance states eight inches (8”) or greater and the Commission suggested keeping the diameter for commercial zoning the same as for residential. The commissioners discussed section 1. h. Landscaping and suggested the second sentence should read, “Lawnmowers and other equipment repeatedly disturb shallow root systems resulting in sick and dead trees.” The commissioners discussed section 3. Alternate Landscape Materials, and changed it to read, “In areas where plantings will not thrive, other structures such as fences, walls and paving materials including wood, brick, stone, gravel and cobbles should be used. Carefully selected plants shall be combined with such materials where possible.” The commissioners discussed section 4. b. Parking Areas. They suggested the section should read, “Individual parking stall wheel stops are discouraged. Wheel stops can be a tripping hazard, collect garbage, and make snow plowing difficult. However, there Appearance Review Commission February 8, 2016 Page 3 of 4 may be a situation where wheel stops, bollards or other low barriers would be appropriate and necessary for safety reasons.” The commissioners discussed section 5. (screening) b. (parking areas), (1). Ms. Rosborough suggested changing the section to read, “This screening may consist of planted earth berm, densely planted native plantings or a combination of both.” The commissioners noted the sentence leading to that states, “The perimeter of a parking lot shall be permanently screened; at least four (4) feet high in the front yard and at least five (5) feet high in the side and rear yards.” Ms. Spagnoli suggested making some changes to section 2.04.I Landscaped Screening portion of the Deerfield Zoning Ordinance so the language better reflects current times. Ch. Coen recommended not including section 5. b. (1) in the Appearance Code and modifying the Deerfield Zoning Ordinance. The commissioners decided to remove section 5. b. 1 Parking Areas from the Appearance Code. The commissioners recommend making the existing 5. b. 2 as 5 b. 1. “The perimeter of a parking lot shall have a landscaped area which shall be a minimum of five foot wide without any vehicle overhang into the landscape area.” The commissioners discussed section 5. d. 2. The commissioners suggested changing the section to read, “Trash enclosures should have wall surfaces which match the material of the principal building along with metal gates. Wherever possible, the gate opening should be oriented away from public rights-of-way and public views.” The commissioners discussed the Trash Containers exhibits. They suggested the verbiage should state, “Multi-tenant buildings should have uniformly designed trash enclosures, with materials and design that match the building architecture.” The commissioners discussed the site considerations exhibit. Ch. Coen suggested adding dimensions to the walkways. b. Maintenance and Upkeep, highlighted text The commissioners discussed the Maintenance and Upkeep section of the Appearance Code. Ms. Low suggested adding an “s” to the word result in the first paragraph. Residential Tree Preservation Ordinance Ms. Dunn read the Deerfield Tree Preservation Ordinance. The commissioners suggested updating section 21.4.3, Scope and Enforcement A. to read, “The provisions of this Ordinance shall apply generally and uniformly to all residential and commercial areas within the Village of Deerfield except as specifically provided herein.” Ms. Dunn suggested updating section 21.4-5, Applicability to read, “The provisions of this Ordinance shall apply generally and uniformly to all Sites in residential and commercial zoned districts and to all Public Trees as defined herein, except as provide below.” Appearance Review Commission February 8, 2016 Page 4 of 4 The commissioners discussed section 21.4-16 the tree replacement plans. Ms. Rosborough questioned whether the mitigated trees would count toward the required number of trees required in a development. The commissioners believe the mitigated trees would count toward the total tree requirement. The commissioners believe existing trees with an eight caliper inch or greater should be protected. Items from Staff Ms. Spagnoli noted the Commission is meeting in two weeks. The petitioner for 636 Deerfield Road will return with a request for new variations. The next scheduled code review meeting may have a petitioner. Adjournment There being no further business or discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 pm. Respectfully submitted, Jeri Cotton Secretary