Architectural Appearance Commission

Agenda Village of Glen Ellyn Architectural Appearance Commission Meeting Wednesday, February 11, 2026 7:00 PM Glen Ellyn Civic Center, Galligan Board Room Visitors are most welcome to attend all public meetings and can find copies of the Agenda online at www.glenellyn.org prior to the meeting. Any individual with a disability requiring reasonable accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should contact the Village of Glen Ellyn ADA Coordinator, 630-469-5000, at least five (5) business days in advance of the next scheduled meeting. A. Call to Order B. Approval of the Minutes 1) Review and Approval of the January 14, 2026, Minutes of the Architectural Apperance Commission Meeting. C. New Business 1) Exterior Appearance Review — 750 Roosevelt Road — Dutch Bros Drive- Through Restaurant D. Chairman's Report E. Trustee Liaison's Report F. Staff Report Civility Pledge - In the interest of civility, I pledge to promote civility by listening, being respectful of others, acknowledging that we are striving to support and improve our community, and understanding that we each may have different ideas for achieving that objective. Page 1 of 24  Glen Ellyn Meeting 2/11/2026 7:00 PM 535 Duane Street Department: Community Development Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Department Head: Jennifer Henaghan Category: Minutes Prepared By: Daniel Harper AGENDA ITEM DOC ID: 2026-93 (ID # 2026-93) Review and Approval of the January 14, 2026, Minutes of the Architectural Apperance Commission Meeting. Statement of the Issue: Review and Approval of the January 14, 2026, Minutes of the Architectural Apperance Commission Meeting. Analysis: Review and Approval of the January 14, 2026, Minutes of the Architectural Apperance Commission Meeting. Budget Impact: Contribution to Strategic Plan Action Requested: Review and Approval of the January 14, 2026, Minutes of the Architectural Apperance Commission Meeting. Attachments: 1. DRAFT January 14. 2026 Architectural Commission Page 2 of 24  DRAFT MINUTES Glen Ellyn Architectural Appearance Commission Wednesday, January 14, 2026 at 7:00 PM Glen Ellyn Civic Center Galligan Board Room 535 Duane Street A. Call to Order and Roll Call Acting Chairperson Albrecht called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM and explained the Architectural Appearance Commission’s function and procedures as an advisory body. Roll was called. Present: Commissioners Albrecht, Mees, Schlembach, and Smith Absent: Chairperson Jacobson, Commissioner Goranov, and Commissioner Rahn Also in attendance: Jordan Frahm, Associate Planner, Trustee Sonia Desai Bhagwakar and Adriana Ohl Zamora, Recording Secretary. B. Approval of the Minutes Commissioner Mees made a motion to approve the draft minutes of the December 10, 2025 meeting. Commissioner Schlembach seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote. C. Old Business None to report D. New Business 1. Discussion regarding the Intent and Purpose and Duties of the Commission Staff Presentation Jordan Presented to the Commissioners the Intent and Purpose and Duties of the Commission which includes the History of Architectural Review. ARC dissolved in 2017, AAC was started in 2022; main difference between the both is that the ARC looked at all Village owned properties on public grounds, new construction; ARC reviews all re modeling and additions where AAC reviews C5A and C5B zoned area. ARC dissolved in 2017 was to “provide transparency and clarity to business, developers, contractors and residents” and to also limit review time. In 2022, Village Board established the AAC and the duties within the code similar to the intent and purpose of the ARC but with a focus on the character and architecture in buildings in downtown area. Commissioner Questions Commissioner Mees- Stated that there should be more of a say on the remodels and additions of the community since at times the remodels do not include an architect. Concerned with some stuff that might sneak through without having an architect. Commissioner Albrecht- Would like to have the commission to have a say so with every new commercial building and remodel that is done within Glen Ellyn. Commitment to city should be to all city not just the historic section of town. Commissioner Mees- Other areas in Glen Ellyn, not just the historic side are also worthy of being overseen by this commission. Commissioner Schlembach- Noted that under intent and purpose, section 2-8-2, chapter 8 would like to see last 11 words deleted and delete paragraph B in its entirety. Mr. Frahm - This is definitely something that can be requested; you can start the conversation. Commissioner Schlembach- No reference to significant facade renovation, this should be included. It can be defined in different ways, in monetary or in percentage of building. Terminology needs to be defined. What is significant facade renovation, as is what is a principal building. Page 3 of 24 Mr. Frahm – You can suggest the inclusion of significant facade renovation, and you can define what significant facade is and have a clear scope of project. Mr. Frahm - Any building in Glen Ellyn that has a shed should have a main building. Commissioner Schlembach- If ARC was removed due to slow process, we need to have good representation for petitioner, this should be required in all cases. We should allow petitions via Zoom, I don’t know why we couldn’t go back to using Zoom. Petitioner is slowing process by not paying for architect’s time. Commissioner Mees- This would be so that the architect could speak with us at the meeting and answer our questions. Mr. Frahm - If people are coming into meetings unprepared and petitioners are not being prepared, that is a good point and I do agree as that being something that can help in improving the process. Commissioner Smith- I agree with how the code is currently written; the landscape between Roosevelt Road and downtown Glen Ellyn are two different types of areas, and length of time, I have been on the other side and we came before the board twice and presented, both times was approved. That process added months, for a small business owner in Glen Ellyn, that is significant. That is a factor in looking at where our reach should be. Commission should not be here to provide free advice, that should not be our intent and purpose. Commissioner Schlembach- There are items that could be administratively approved, and report back to Commissioner what was approved. That would mean Mr. Harper, Planning Manager, speaking with Susan and getting that approved through the Administrative Process. Commissioner Smith- I don’t think we are allowed to have Administrative approved changes on the side; I think we have to follow the open meetings act. Mr. Frahm - We would have to come up with parameters of what you are discussing in the various zones of Glen Ellyn first. Commissioner Albrecht- The guidelines and stipulation that we can use have not been looked at or upgraded since 2006, it’s an entire can of worms; there are some nice tweaks and things we can do to make it Glen Ellyn, workshops would be great. Commissioner Mees- If we have an opportunity to update guidelines, maybe that would streamline the process? Mr. Frahm - Having a staff review, from a policy-making standpoint that is not the best practice, just something to think about. Commissioner Albrecht- iI was mainly materials that were frowned upon, maybe just take a look at guidelines. Public Comment Anne Gould- Points to consider and discuss; geographically expand the prevue without completely slowing it down. The sign code at some points were moved to Plan Commission, I think it should come back to AAC. Update guidelines; we have 3 architects on the board, consider amending it to 4 architects. Include buildings over 50 years old for review criteria. We saw a little breakdown, perhaps because it was a historic building and I think that the process for how historic buildings are reviewed should be modified. Commissioner Schlembach- Would it be possible to consolidate Historic preservation and AAC since there is overlap? Mr. Frahm- Consolidating may not be the solution. Mees-Perhaps consolidating if the case involves two commissions Jordan- We have had special joint meetings like that in the past, it has been done and we would be amendable. Trustee Bhagwakar- We have pressing items before us at the moment but, I have brought this up with staff a couple of times. Mr. Frahm - The top items to follow up on are: expanding geographic scope, defining significant facade, changing review process, allowing architect or professional to attend via Zoom, upgrading review guidelines. Commissioner Albrecht- Do we need to have support from Village board, to put some of these ideas together to be presented to Board. Trustee Bhagwakar - I will take this back and we will talk about it. Page 4 of 24 Commissioner Albrecht- Very common for us to go a few months without having an item to review; we are open and available to work on this while we are not reviewing projects on agenda. E. Chairman’s Report Nothing to report F. Trustee Liaison Report No updates with regards to train project; given the climate with the federal government we want to ensure we have the funding before moving forward. Taft- the demolition was done which was held up by government shut down. Downtown Park is moving forward. Strategic Planning has been started, a consultant and brainstorming sessions to forecast what we want to see the Village do and look like in the future. Approved consultant for updating the Zoning code. Looking at E-bikes. G. Staff Report I will be leading these meetings now and we are starting the Zoning code re-write. H. Adjournment Member Schlembach made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Member Smith seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote at 8:00pm Respectfully submitted, Adriana Ohl-Zamora Page 5 of 24  Glen Ellyn Meeting 2/11/2026 7:00 PM 535 Duane Street Department: Community Development Glen Ellyn, IL Department Head: Jennifer Henaghan 60137 Category: Commission Recommendation Prepared By: Daniel Harper AGENDA ITEM DOC ID: 2026-104 (ID # 2026-104) Exterior Appearance Review — 750 Roosevelt Road — Dutch Bros Drive-Through Restaurant Statement of the Issue: The petitioner, Core Acquisitions, is requesting an exterior appearance review for a proposed drive- through restaurant to be located at 750 Roosevelt Road. Analysis: LOCATION: The subject site is located on the northwest corner of Roosevelt Road and Taylor Avenue, approximately 145 feet east of Roosevelt Road’s intersection with Nicoll Avenue. ZONING: The subject site is currently zoned C4 Office District. The surrounding zoning and land use are as follows: Land Use Zoning North: Pond C4 Office District South: Commercial C3 Service Commercial District West: Bank C4 Office District East: Office C4 Office District COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The 2023 Comprehensive Plan recognizes this location as a Potential Redevelopment Site and states "Danby's Station Café is in fair to poor condition and the site could use façade and site improvements" (pg. 35). REVIEW PROCESS: In order to proceed with the project, the petitioner will need to receive approval of a Special Use Permit to allow a drive-through, Zoning Variations, Sign Variations, and Exterior Appearance. The petitioner has had a pre-application conference with the Plan Commission and plans to proceed with a public hearing. PROJECT SUMMARY: The proposed project consists of the demolition of the existing 3,831 square foot Danby’s Station Café building and the construction of a new one-story, 1,250 square foot Dutch Bros restaurant building with a drive-through. The project also calls for the redevelopment of the parking lot and burial of overhead public utilities. More information about the project is provided below. Page 6 of 24 Building: The proposed drive-through is designed in a contemporary modern style. The façade consists of brick veneer masonry colored "shale" gray. This is accented with two tower elements that are composed of Nichiha composite cladding in the brand-specific "DB Blue" color located on the north and south sides of the building. The façade also features framed canopies above the drive- through window and doorways. The proposed outdoor patio area and walk-up order window will be partially covered by a similar grey metal canopy and supported by masonry columns to match the facade. The windows are trimmed in anodized aluminum-colored grey. Landscaping and Lighting: As part of the Special Use Permit application review process, a landscape plan and photometric plan will be required, and the project’s landscaping and lighting will be evaluated for compliance with the Village’s requirements. Signage: The proposed sign package incorporates the Dutch Bros. corporate brand identity throughout, which consists of six (6) wall signs, one monument sign, three (3) traffic directional signs. Section 4-5-10 of the Village Code allows for a maximum of 2 signs per establishment, not exceeding 1 freestanding sign. A sign variation will most likely be requested to allow for a greater number of wall signs and to allow for off-site signage to direct drive-through traffic on Nicoll Way. Note: The Sign Code exempts directional signs and drive-through canopy information signs from calculating the total allowable number and size of signs on a zoning lot. ARCHITECTURAL APPEARANCE GUIDELINES Village staff have excerpted the following sections of the Architectural Appearance Guidelines as they are relevant to the application request. 1.1 New construction should be compatible with the character of the site, adjacent development, and the adjacent streetscape. The adjacent commercial restaurants have facades that utilize similar finishes and styles. 1.1.5 Maintain the rhythm of the street (in terms of building setback and massing) and continuity of its landscaping. The project is located in the Roosevelt Commercial Corridor where certain architectural guidelines are expected to be observed. 1.3 Building design should not be so unique nor harshly different or exotic in its design so as to narrowly constrain potential reuse if the original use changes. The structure has no architectural design elements that would constrain potential reuse and could be reasonably repurposed or adapted. 1.1.5 Parapet walls should have a defined top which frames the building. A running board on the parapet walls is indicated on the building's elevation, which defines the top. 1.8 Colors should be muted and compliment each other, with no more than two or three colors on each façade. The façade is composed of three complimentary colors (light gray, blue, and silver aluminum). 1.8.1 A natural, neutral color should be chosen for the primary exterior façade material in new construction. The primary color of the façade is gray or “shale” in color, a natural and neutral palette. Page 7 of 24 2.2.1 Wall-mounted fixtures should not directly allow light projection to the sky. The wall-mounted fixtures will not allow light to project directly to the sky. 4.5 All development adjacent to Roosevelt Road should implement, or restore, the Roosevelt Road streetscape elements, in order to achieve continuity of public improvements. The proposed appearance is aligned with the appearance guidelines outlined in this section. 4.6 Wherever possible, a large expanse of roof shall be avoided. Visual diversity can be achieved by varying the roofline and/or the addition of dormers. The proposed structure has a flat roof design with varied heights in an asymmetrical manner that does not allow for a single large expanse of roof. Budget Impact: Contribution to Strategic Plan Action Requested: The Architectural Appearance Commission is being asked to consider the petitioner’s request for exterior appearance and make a recommendation to the Village Board for approval, approval with conditions, or denial. In reviewing the request, the Commission should consider how the proposed exterior appearance conforms to the Appearance Review Guidelines. In reviewing the project, the AAC may wish to inquire about/encourage the petitioner to: 1. Utilize design elements to create an alteration that is in harmony with the surrounding buildings. 2. Consider the proposed project in the context of the larger Roosevelt Road Commercial Corridor. 3. Incorporate Architectural Appearance Guidelines into feedback and review comments. Staff recommends the AAC consider the following conditions of approval: 1. The project shall be constructed in substantial conformance with the plans and drawings as submitted and the testimony presented at the February 11, 2026, Architectural Appearance Commission meeting. 2. A building permit shall be required for the exterior alterations. Attachments: 1. Exterior Appearance Review Application 2. Narrative Statement 3. Aerial Map 4. Zoning Map 5. Proposed Building Elevations 6. Color Rendering or Elevation Drawing 7. List of Building Materials & Colors 8. Dutch Bros_Glen Ellyn_Concept Site Plan 9. Existing Color Photos Page 8 of 24  VILLAGE OF GLEN ELLYN Exterior Appearance Review Application Packet Community Development Department 535 Duane Street – Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 – Telephone 630.547.5250 – Fax 630.547.5370 Page 9 of 24  APPLICATION FOR EXTERIOR APPEARANCE REVIEW Date Filed: 12/18/2025 Application No: 2025-0060 Name of Applicant: Core Acquisitions Address of Applicant: 10 Parkway North, Suite 120 Deerfield, IL 60015 Property Interest of Applicant: Contract Purchaser Name of Owner: Chris Zaras Address of Owner: 750 Roosevelt Rd Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Contacts: Type Name Address Phone Email 10 Parkway North, Suite 120 Petitioner Core Acquisitions Deerfield, IL 60015 10 Parkway North, Suite 120 Web Administrator Core Acquisitions Deerfield, IL 60015 750 Roosevelt Rd Glen Parcel Owner Chris Zaras Ellyn, IL 60137 Property Address: 750 Roosevelt Rd Project Name: Web Project Project Description: The proposed project involves the redevelopment of the property at 750 Roosevelt Road. The existing Danby’s Station building will be demolished, and a new Dutch Bros Coffee building featuring dual drive-thru lanes will be constructed. Legal Description of Property: THE EAST 35 FEET OF LOT 19, ALL OF LOTS 20, 21, 22 AND 23 IN BLOCK 13 IN ROOSEVELT GARDEN-HOMESITES, BEING A SUBDIVISION IN THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 13 AND IN THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 39 NORTH, RANGE 10, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED MAY 5, 1921, AS DOCUMENT 148152, IN DU PAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS. Page 10 of 24 Zoning: C4, Office District Lot Dimensions: 0.76 Lot Area: : 05144230380000 CONFORMANCE WITH APPEARANCE REVIEW GUIDELINES: 1. Explain why the proposed architectural style was chosen: Developer is providing Dutch Bros prototypical brick design for a majority of the building with the nationally recognized blue cement fiberboard finish on the tower element. The brick finish reflects Dutch Bros most elevated finish providing a consistent feel with similar building design throughout Roosevelt Road in Glen Ellyn. 2. Provide information about the architectural style and exterior materials of the buildings in the surrounding area. Buildings along Roosevelt Road are predominantly suburban commercial in character, featuring brick or masonry façades, articulated rooflines, muted and elevated materials used in a cohesive and visually consistent manner. Developer is providing a consistent finish with the majority brick and masonry finish for Dutch Bros. 3. Please explain how the project complies with the Appearance Review Guidelines. The project complies with the Guidelines by utilizing preferred materials such as brick masonry, limiting the exterior color palette, clearly defining roof and wall planes, screening mechanical equipment, and incorporating landscaping and site design that enhance visual quality and pedestrian safety along the corridor while still maintaining Dutch Bros brand identity with the blue tower element. 4. Please explain why any deviations from the Appearance Review Guidelines are proposed. Any minor deviations from the Appearance Review Guidelines are proposed to accommodate Dutch Bros’ required brand identity and standardized prototype elements that are essential to the brand’s recognition and operational efficiency. Page 11 of 24 December 18th, 2025 Attn: Exterior Appearance Review Committee Re: Exterior Appearance Review – 750 Roosevelt Road, Glen Ellyn, IL Applicant: Core Ventures, LLC Adam Firsel, its Manager 10 Parkway North Blvd, Suite 120 Deerfield, Illinois 60015 Property: 750 Roosevelt Road, Glen Ellyn, IL Tax Parcel: 05-14-423-038 Legal Description: THE EAST 35 FEET OF LOT 19, ALL OF LOTS 20, 21, 22 AND 23 IN BLOCK 13 IN ROOSEVELT GARDEN-HOMESITES, BEING A SUBDIVISION IN THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 13 AND IN THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 39 NORTH, RANGE 10, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED MAY 5, 1921, AS DOCUMENT 148152, IN DU PAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS. Project Description: The proposed project involves the redevelopment of the Danby’s Station located at 750 Roosevelt Road in Glen Ellyn, Illinois. The existing building will be demolished and replaced with a new Dutch Bros Coffee building featuring dual drive-thru lanes, designed in accordance with the brand’s current national standards and operational model. The redevelopment will revitalize a highly visible site along Roosevelt Road, enhancing site circulation, access, landscaping, and overall aesthetics while activating an underutilized parcel with a high-quality national tenant. Construction is anticipated to commence following receipt of all required entitlements, with project delivery targeted for 2026 and full site completion shortly thereafter. Sincerely, Adam Firsel - Manager Core Ventures, LLC Page 12 of 24  Aerial Map - 750 Roosevelt Road Legend Subject Property 0 150 300 Print Date: 1/14/2026 Notes ft Disclaimer: The GIS Consortium and MGP Inc. are not liable for any use, misuse, modification or disclosure of any map provided under applicable law. This map is for general information purposes only. Although the information is believed to be generally accurate, errors may exist and the user should independently confirm for accuracy. The map does not constitute a regulatory determination and is not a base for engineering design. A Registered Land Surveyor should be consulted to determine precise location boundaries on the ground. Page 13 of 24  Zoning Map - 750 Roosevelt Road Legend Zoning and Development Zoning C3: Service Commercial District C4: Office District C6: Commerical/Multi-Use Planned Development District Subject Property 0 150 300 Print Date: 1/14/2026 Notes ft Disclaimer: The GIS Consortium and MGP Inc. are not liable for any use, misuse, modification or disclosure of any map provided under applicable law. This map is for general information purposes only. Although the information is believed to be generally accurate, errors may exist and the user should independently confirm for accuracy. The map does not constitute a regulatory determination and is not a base for engineering design. A Registered Land Surveyor should be consulted to determine precise location boundaries on the ground. Page 14 of 24  EXTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE - PROTOTYPICAL w/ CANOPY S NOTE: GC TO PROVIDE 3"x2" SMOOTH DOWNSPOUTS AND ALL NECESSARY ADAPTORS AT AWNING AND CANOPY LOCATION; COLOR: BLDG DB DARK GRAY E. Material: Exterior Finish ID TAG MATERIAL MANUFACTURER MODEL REMARKS Zone ZONE 1 (BODY) FULL BED FACE BRICK ZONE 1 (BODY) COLOR: NIAGRA MIST 1J BRICK VENEER GENERAL SHALE BRICK SIZE: MODULAR INSTALL: RUNNING BOND PATTERN (2-1/4" H X 3-5/8"W X 7-5/8"L) "The name DUTCH BROS. and all associated logos, distinctive designs, content, information, and other materials featured, displayed, contained herein, and made available by Dutch Bros., including but not limited to, the "look and feel" of the establishments and products, all text, images, colors, configurations, graphics, designs, illustrations, photographs, and pictures (collectively, the "Materials") are owned by and/or licensed by DB Franchising USA, LLC FULL BED FACE BRICK ZONE 1 (BODY) COLOR: NIAGRA MIST 1K BRICK VENEER GENERAL SHALE BRICK SIZE: MODULAR INSTALL: SOLDIER COURSE (2-1/4" H X 3-5/8"W X 7-5/8"L) FULL BED FACE BRICK ZONE 1 (BODY) COLOR: NIAGRA MIST 1L BRICK VENEER GENERAL SHALE BRICK SIZE: MODULAR INSTALL: ROWLOCK SILL (2-1/4" H X 3-5/8"W X 7-5/8"L) ZONE 2 (TOWER) FIBER CEMENT ILLUMINATION, AWP 1818 W/ ZONE 2 (TOWER) 2C NICHIHA COLOR: BLDG DB BLUE SIDING FACTORY PANEL CORNERS ZONE 4 (FRAMED CANOPY) WESTERN STATES METAL 3 SIDES; COLOR: BLDG DB DARK ZONE 4 (FRAMED CANOPY) 4A FASCIA T-GROOVE, 10" ROOFING GRAY NATURAL NORTHWESTERN ZONE 4 (FRAMED CANOPY) 4B SOFFIT HEWN ELEMENTS 1x6, T&G, 1/8" REVEAL, SEALED SPRUCE Draft Print 01/28/2026 1:24:14 PM DB2550SQ-A1 DB2550-A1 Dutch Bros Coffee - New Freestanding Store on Heights, IL 60004 4 LEFT ELEVATION - DRIVE-THRU WINDOW 3 REAR ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" 1/4" = 1'-0" and are protected by copyright, trademark, trade dress, patent, and/or other intellectual property rights and unfair competition laws under the United States and foreign laws." Project No: IL For: Dutch Bros Coffee 1930 W. Rio Salado Parkway Tempe, AZ 85281 A1 PROTOTYPE 6/27/25 A1 PROTOTYPE 6/27/25 ISSUED NOT FOR REVIEW FOR CONSTRUCTION 10.01.2025 REV: DATE: DESCRIPTION: SHEET NAME: BUILDING ELEVATIONS - COLOR SHEET COVER DRAWN BY: CB JL CHECKED CHECKEDBY: BY:EK MW SHEET NUMBER: 2 RIGHT ELEVATION - WALK-UP WINDOW 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 FRONT ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" A6.1 c 2025 DB Franchising USA, LLC Page 15 of 24 Page 16 of 24 Page 17 of 24 Page 18 of 24  Call Before You Dig NORTH 1-800-892-0123 EXISTING FEMA NOTE GENERAL NOTES POND 125.00' FOUND 3/4" IRON PIPE AT CORNER PIN: 05-14-423-050 ADDRESS: ROOSEVELT RD. GLEN ELLYN, 60137 OWNER: GLEN HILL NORTH LLC 756.60 KEY NOTES PIN: 05-14-423-051 ADDRESS: ROOSEVELT RD. FOUND MAGNAIL FOUND 3/4" IRON PIPE GLEN ELLYN, 60137 ONLINE & 0.18' W. FOUND 3/4" IRON PIPE AT CORNER OWNER: US BANK CORP AT CORNER S89°33'04"W 18" PINE 756.97 756.98 756.95 756.99 757.25 757.40 BLOCK 13 PIN: 05-14-423-051 ROOSEVELT GARDEN-HOMESITES PER DOC. NO. 148152, RECORDED MAY 5 1921 ADDRESS: ROOSEVELT RD. 12 "P IN © E GLEN ELLYN, 60137 OWNER: US BANK CORP 15 " EE TR S0°44'48"E 12 "T R BORE HOLE (TYP.) EE PIN: 05-14-423-051 6" TR EE ADDRESS: ROOSEVELT RD. N0°44'48"W GLEN ELLYN, 60137 12 "T R EE OWNER: US BANK CORP T FOUND 5/8" IRON REBAR ONLINE & 0.44' S. S89°33'04"W 10 "T T FOUND MAGNAIL REE 0.12' W. & 0.46' S. PIN: 05-14-423-051 5.0' ELECTRIC AND TELEPHONE EASEMENT 5.0' ELECTRIC AND TELEPHONE EASEMENT PER DOC. NO R61-26743 PER DOC. NO R61-26747 10 "T ADDRESS: ROOSEVELT RD. R EE 5.0' ELECTRIC AND TELEPHONE EASEMENT PER DOC. NO R61-26749 EXISTING GLEN ELLYN, 60137 18 "T R EE LOT OWNER: US BANK CORP ORDER TAYLOR AVE. EXISTING N.I.C. 14 "T AHEAD SPACE 7" T R EE (ASPHALT) LOT ORDER N.I.C. R EE AHEAD SPACE NICOLL WAY ORDER AHEAD SPACE 15 "T R EE S0°44'48"E 10 "T REE SITE PLAN TAYLOR AVE. 757.80 (ASPHALT) 15" TREE PAVING AND CURB LEGEND PROP. 18" TREE PIN: 05-14-423-051 COFFEE 6" TREE ADDRESS: ROOSEVELT RD. 1,250 S.F. 14 "T R EE GLEN ELLYN, 60137 E 12 EG "T OWNER: US BANK CORP R EE I I CORE ACQUISTIONS STORM 21 "T REE 750 ROOSEVELT RD GLEN ELLYN, IL 60137 WVV E E FOUND 5/8" IRON REBAR AT CORNER N89°29'45"E SAN STORM FOUND CUT CROSS SAN 0.17' E. & 0.50' N. PT# 1621 SANITARY MANHOLE GLEN ELLYN RIM= 755.50' ROOSEVELT RD. INV (W)= 750.40', 8" DIP (ASPHALT) PT# 1876 SANITARY MANHOLE RIM= 758.25' INV (E/W)= 749.15', 6" DIP ROOSEVELT ROAD PARKING SUMMARY C2.0 Page 19 of 24 Page 20 of 24 Page 21 of 24 Page 22 of 24 Page 23 of 24 Page 24 of 24