Laserfiche WebLink
<br />• ARCHITECTURAL BOARD 0F REVIEW NOVEMBER 18, 1987 PAGE 2 <br />subsequently been changed to Audax). Mr. Carlisle presented samples of <br />both finishes and explained the method of application for each. His company <br />believed that the Audax was superior for use on a retail store. The Board <br />has no probelm with the Audax sta.ting that the finishes.were similar in <br />appearance. Building Commission Conwa_y explained that he brought this <br />back to the Board because he is trying to follow a procedure where-by <br />specific colors and materials are definitely stated in the minutes so <br />that he can better enforce the wishes of the Boards. J. Britton moved <br />to amend the Minutes of November 20, 1987 to read dryvit-like material, <br />seconded by B. Zergott, and unanimously approved. <br />2) First Nationwide Bank, 4701 Great Northern Blvd. <br />Proposal for slight modification to front of unit. <br />Heard by Planning Commission October 27, 1937. <br />Mr, Langer, Osborn Engineering Company, presented plans for the rearrange- <br />ment of the windows and doors which is necessary in order to place an <br />automotic teller machine in the lobby of the building and to change the <br />floor plan. Glass area will be reduced and brick, to match the existing, <br />will be added. J. Britton moved to approve the exterior change for <br />Eirst Nationwide Bank as presented, seconded by B. Zergott, and unanimousl_y <br />approved. rIr. Langer then presented the signs, exnlaining that they are <br />merely replacing thesign faces in the existing cabinets, one on the <br />building and one in the development sign. Signs will be a bronze background <br />with white copy. J. Britton moved to approve the signs as presented, <br />seconded by M. Case, and unanimously approved. <br />Mr. Conway then addressed the Board stating that some items, for example, the <br />First Nationwide Bank proposal,.are so minor that he would prefer not to send <br />them through the entire approval proceedure. He has previously suggested <br />that minor alterations or minor modifications to a previously approved proposal <br />could be approved by some other means. The Assistant Law Director is research- <br />ing this. Mr. Conway would like to follow the guidance of the Boards as <br />closely as possible and Law Director Gareau has suggested that some design <br />criteria should be set up by the Planning Commission and the Architectural <br />Board of Review so that Mr. Conway has more guidelines as to what type of <br />changes he should bring back to the Boards. He also believes that the Law <br />Department should be involved.in setting up these guidelines. Mrs. Case <br />bel.ieves that a joint meeting with the Planning Commission should be set up. <br />Mr. Zergott wonder if:members could get together with the Planning Commission <br />to determine what the Planning Commission really wanted on individual proposals. <br />Board will take this up later. <br />VI. ADJOURNMENT: <br />The meeting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m. <br />M. Case, Chairperson <br />B. Oring, Clerk of Commissions <br />