MINUTES
TOWN OF NORMAL DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION
CONFERENCE ROOM C CITY HALL
100 E. PHOENIX AVE.
NORMAL, IL
REGULAR MEETING
June 12, 2006@ 4:00 p.m.
Members Present:
Rick Kentzler, Dennis French, Pam Locsin, Mark Comerford, Kathy Wilcox,
Members Absent:
Rebecca Landau, Dirk deWerff
Others Present:
Lauren Kerestes, Associate Planner; Wayne Aldrich, Downtown Redevelopment Director; Debbi Feid, Office Associate; Harry Fuller & Barbie Fuller, Fuller Development; Robert Veriecella, Pub II; Terry Stralow, owner of Pub II; Randy Jacobs, Stelle Construction; Kevin Collins, Collins Designs.
Call to Order:
Mr. Kentzler called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and noted a quorum was present.
Minutes:
The commission approved the minutes of the regular meeting on May 8, 2006.
Carried Over: CC-06-02-04, Marriott Hotel, Site Plan and
Elevations
Ms. Kerestes mentioned the waivers from the Downtown Design Code
that were requested and approved for the hotel and conference
center in November 2005.
She noted the submittal for the June 12, 2006 meeting included a
Beaufort Street hotel/conference center elevation, signage plan
for the hotel, light fixture samples, landscaping plan, and
parking deck elevations. She said that the monument sign
included in this submittal is eight feet tall, two feet taller
than the code maximum. According to the architects, the hotel
will comply with the six foot height maximum by simply making
the base smaller and avoiding a waiver from the code. The sign
itself is white and red vinyl and the base is the same
cream-colored, textured cast stone as the base of the hotel
structure.
She also mentioned that the photo in the packets of the light
fixture proposed for the exterior of the hotel building is not
full cut-off; however, the architects have confirmed that all
lighting will be full cut-off and non-glare in compliance with
the Design Code and Community Design Standards. A waiver is not
required.
Ms. Kerestes said that lighting for the hotel, hotel tower, and
conference center and signage for the conference center will
need to be reviewed at a later date. Staff has been working with
the applicant on meeting code in terms of the lighting proposed
for the site.
Ms. Kerestes then listed the waivers requested from the Downtown
Design Code pertaining to the hotel, conference, and parking
deck at the June 12, 2006 meeting:
Waivers
1. Anti-monotony
The applicant requests an anti-monotony waiver for the south
elevation of the conference center along Beaufort Avenue, where
there are areas of blank wall in excess of 15 feet. Like the
Fell Avenue elevation, the south façade is considered secondary
and will house facilities to accommodate the conference center.
Ms. Kerestes explained that the architects have designed
pilasters approximately 25 feet apart to help break up the long
planes of brick along the south conference center wall.
Additional pilasters (i.e. pilasters at 15-foot intervals
instead of every 25 feet) would create an undesirable “striping”
effect. She indicated that the area between Beaufort Street and
the south façade of the hotel will be generously landscaped to
minimize monotony and provide for a downtown trail extension.
Furthermore, the presence of the parking deck across the street
to the south offsets the need to create a highly ornate or
decorative façade on Beaufort.
2. Parking Deck
Ms. Kerestes said that the parking deck component to the
south of the hotel, while an integral part of the building’s
function and design, will require a waiver from the entire
Design Code. She said that currently, there are no standards for
parking decks in the code; however, Town staff and the
architects designing the hotel deck are interested in design
recommendations from the DDRC, similar to the review of the
Multimodal Transportation Center parking deck. The material for
the hotel deck will be pre-cast concrete. The deck towers will
mimic the hotel tower and have a pre-case brick veneer. She said
that the architects do not have a preference on whether the
pre-cast finish is natural/ smooth/ exposed aggregate, etc.
Their intent is to match the look of the other two public decks
proposed for downtown. The brick color, windows and the pre-cast
concrete on the hotel deck will match the hotel colors. The
pre-cast concrete, in particular, will match the “cream” colored
EIFS planned for the hotel.
There were no concerns from the Commission regarding the
anti-monotony waiver request.
Ms. Kerestes presented drawings of West Beaufort elevations and
parking garage. Ms. Kerestes called Lohmeyer Russell Architects
via telephone conference call. Ms. Kerestes spoke with
architects Josh Livingston and Jim Lohmeyer and opened up the
call for discussion.
Mr. Kentzler asked what type of finish was planned for the
pre-cast concrete. Mr. Livingston said they would be agreeable
to the type of finish the commission would like. Mr. Aldrich
said he thought a tinted, smooth finish would look best and that
he liked the framing element within the concrete panels as
shown. The Commission said this would help to decrease the large
horizontal spans of concrete panel.
Mr. Livingston said that the color of the concrete would match
the color of the EIFS on the hotel. The Commission liked this.
Mr. Aldrich explained that the deck towers would be pre-cast
brick and therefore, more durable than a ¼ inch brick veneer.
Ms. Kerestes asked if the decorative aluminum railings had
recently been added to the deck. Mr. Livingston said that they
had, because the railings helped minimized the massing of the
deck, particularly along Beaufort. Mr. Livingston said that the
railings would likely be aluminum with a high performance paint
finish that matches the window mullions of the garage and hotel.
The Commission discussed the details of the parking deck.
Overall, the Commission was supportive of the design,
recommending that the concrete be smooth, rather than textured
to expose the aggregate and that the color match the hotel EIFS.
Mr. French moved to approve the waivers pertaining to the
Beaufort hotel/conference center elevation and the waiver
pertaining to the parking deck. Mr. Kentzler seconded.
Ayes: Mr. French, Mr. Kentlzer, Ms. Locsin, Ms. Wilcox, Mr.
Comerford.
Nays: None
The motion declared carried.
CC-06-06-09, 107-111 E. Beaufort, Fuller Development,
Signage Plan for NV Lounge, WOW Cage & Wingery and H. Fuller
Companies.
Ms. Kerestes shared that the signage plan for 107-111 E.
Beaufort includes the following components:
NV Lounge – 111 E. Beaufort
- 17” cut satin aluminum letters with black anodized enamel surface and skeletal 12mm green neon halo lighting (east façade), much like the letter signage approved for the Bank of Illinois and the shadow boxes for the Garlic Press Deli
- One black cloth ATM awning (east façade)
- Two 8’ tall and 12” wide cloth banner, double sided, black with green lettering (north façade)
- 2’4” x 7’0” 19mm Color LED Display sign (north façade)
- HP vinyl window graphics (north façade)
WOW Café & Wingery – 107 E. Beaufort
- One double sided projecting sign, lit with directional flood lights (like the Emack & Bolio’s sign), approximately 3’6” x 3’6”
- Sleatel neon interior window sign, approximately 3’6” x 3’6”
- HP vinyl window graphics
The H. Fuller Companies – Upstairs 107 E. Beaufort
- Black HP vinyl lettering
Ms. Kerestes said that overall the signage plan is consistent
with the code. She said that the directional lights for the WOW
projecting sign will be the same as the lights for Emack and
Bolio’s. Ms. Kerestes did ask Mr. Fuller to reposition the Emack
and Bolio’s lights to avoid glare from the westward approach.
The Commission did not raise any concerns over signage that did
not require a code waiver.
Ms. Kerestes explained that Mr. Fuller is requesting three
waivers pertaining to the sign plan for 107-111 E. Beaufort.
Ms. Kerestes said that staff is supportive of the first two
waivers, but not the waiver pertaining to the LED sign, because
the sign is not in character with the downtown or the intent of
the design code.
- Interior Lighting of Canopies
The code states that canopies cannot be internally lit, unless they are at the entryway of a building. In this case, staff recommends in favor of the internally lit ATM canopy, because of the visibility and safety concerns associated with withdrawing money or making transactions. Ms. Kerestes said that staff will review the proposed light level to avoid unnecessary glare.
- Banners
Currently, there are no standards for “banners” in the code. Thus, the banners proposed for NV Lounge would require a waiver from the code. Standards for banners will be addressed during the next set of code revisions. Until now, the Children’s Discovery Museum is the only other building that has banners, and those have been permitted based on their temporary and seasonal nature, much like temporary signage.
- Flashing/Moving
According to Sec.15.17-11(7)(c), signs may not flash or move, except for those listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The proposed LED sign would display messages, including time, temperature, and advertisements for bands and events at the lounge. These messages would change approximately every 15 seconds.
There was much discussion about the signage plan for the
properties. Mr. Comerford said that he liked the proposed LED
sign. Mr. Collins spoke about the growing need for this type of
sign and that it may require a revision of the existing sign
code.
Ms. Kerestes said that staff’s recommendation for denial of the
third waiver was a matter of whether or not the sign is
appropriate for the character of the downtown. She added that,
given the current code regulations, approving a waiver for this
sign may or may not open the door for other establishments with
“lesser quality” signs to do the same. Mr. Fuller said he would
willing to sign a separate contractual agreement pertaining to
regulations that are not addressed in the code, such as
frequency and timeliness of message displays and brightness of
lighting. He also agreed to provide a video or sample of the
product.
The commission agreed that they were supportive of all three of
the requested waivers.
Mr. Comerford moved to approve all three of the waivers for
107-111 E. Beaufort as requested. Ms. Wilcox seconded.
Ayes: Mr. Comerford, Ms. Wilcox, Ms. Loscin, Mr. Kentlzer
Nays: None.
Mr. French reclused.
The motion declared carried.
CC-0-6-06-10-, 102 N. Linden, Pub II, Building Addition
and Out door Dining Area
Ms. Kerestes explained that the Pub II had bought and demolished
the residence to the east of the existing Pub II building. She
said that they planned to expand the kitchen and restroom area
of the existing building and also establish an outdoor seating
area for 50-100 patrons. She explained that the building
addition will be brick and consistent with the existing
building. Black awnings also be incorporated into the addition
similar to those elsewhere on the Pub II. The outdoor bar area
will be constructed with a combination of wood and wood
composite materials. The roof of the outdoor bar will be black
asphalt shingle. The proposed fence that encloses the outdoor
seating area will also be brick with a decorative black metal
railing.
Ms. Kerestes showed the commission samples of the materials that
would be used for the addition. Ms. Kerestes noted that no
waivers were requested for the project. Ms. Kerestes said the
applicant would come back at a later date for approval of the
light fixtures for the fence that encloses the outdoor seating
area.
Mr. French moved to approve Pub II building addition/expansion
project and outdoor seating area as submitted. Ms. Locsin
seconded.
Ayes: Mr. French, Ms. Locsin, Mr. Comerford, Ms. Wilcox,
Mr.Kentzler
Nays: None
The motion declared carried.
DBL-06-06-01, 106-108 W. North, The Garlic Press, The
Garlic Press Deli redevelopment project.
Ms. Kerestes explained that the approval of this business loan
was for the redevelopment work done at 106-108 W. North Street
by The Garlic Press. She said the agreement between the Town
Council and The Garlic Press had established their eligibility
for the Downtown Business Loan Program, as well as the Moratz
Façade Improvement Grant Program. In 2003, The Garlic Press
approached the Bank of Illinois about participating in the
business loan program and was subsequently approved by the Bank.
While the actual work was approved by the DDRC as part of the
Certificate of Compliance process, formal action was never taken
by the DDRC to approve the loan itself; however is required for
the Town to participate in the financing.
Mr. Comerford moved to approve the Downtown Business Loan for
The Garlic Press as specified by the program guidelines and
within the parameters established by the Bank of Illinois. Mr.
Wilcox seconded.
Ayes: Mr. Comerford, Ms. Wilcox, Mr. French, Mr. Kentlzer
Nays: None
Ms. Locsin abstained
Motion declared carried
Other Business:
Mr. Randy Jacobs of Stelle Construction presented some changes to the project at 130-138 E. Beaufort. Since the item was not listed on the June 2006 meeting agenda, the Commission could not vote on the item, but were able to provide some input on the proposed changes. Ms. Kerestes distributed plans of the north elevations (College Avenue façade) of the building. Mr. Jacobs said that when the building was first designed; the tenants of the first floor commercial spaces were unknown. The original elevation for the College Avenue façade showed two sets of windows to the east of the stair. Since the DDRC’s initial approval of the design, Cosi Restaurant has signed a lease for a portion of the first floor space; however, the kitchen of the restaurant would occupy the area where the windows were slotted. In order to avoid windows in the kitchen area, Mr. Jacobs said the property owner requests that the window openings be bricked in or filled with opaque glass. He also requests that louvers be added above the window openings to the east to provide relief air into the space.
Ms. Kerestes noted that, per the Town’s Inspection Department, similar establishments would typically be required to provide relief air through the roof and not from louvers on the side wall.
The Commission discussed the issue and determined that they would like to see both of these window openings remain as originally submitted with the exception that the glass be opaque instead of clear. This would maintain the initial window openings and allow a future tenant to replace the opaque glass with clear. The Commission said that this could be deemed a minor change and approved through expedited review with the proper site plans and documentation. The Commission was not amenable to the “bricked-in” option.
Adjournment:
There being no other business the meeting was adjourned at
5:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Debbi Feid
Office Associate
Lauren Kerestes
Associate Planner