05/04/1992 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

north and south sides, specifically adding 2 maples on the island on the north side and adding low plantings on the.south side, and this landscaping along with the ground sign should be reviewed by Mr. Zergott prior to the B.Z.D. meeting. Also the memo from Mr. Griffith to Mr. Deichmann should be incorporated into these minutes and it should be noted that this developer has made it lmown, both tonight and at previous meetings, that he would be more than willing to provide an off duty policeman at peak hours to perrAt an orderly ingress and egress to this parcel. This Commission also feels very strongly about right turns only on to and off of this property. The Commission would also like to make it lmown to Council that Planning Commission has a grave concern about this type of development on this particular site, and believes that it is incumbent on them to look at this to determine whether or not additional legislation should be passed to regulate this business, seconded by J. Thomas. Roll call an motion: Gorris, Bowen, Orlowski, and Skoulis, yes. Mr. Thomas and Mr. Morgan, no. Motion carried. During the framing of the motion, Mr. Dubelko advised that the developer does have an obligation to get the traffic off of Lorain Road and onto his site, to keep traffic from backing up. This is not in this Board's jurisdiction, but the City can regvlate it. It was decided to ask Council to review this. 3) Moen Corporate Headquarters, Inc. located on the west side of Great Northern Boulevaxd, south of I-480. Proposal to construct three story office building. - Heard by Architectural Board of Review on April 29, 1992. Mr. Cocco presented plans. In reference to the sign, Building Commissioner Conway advised that the building sign will be 9 feet by 36 feet, or 324 square feet, will no longer be back lit, and will now have individual letters. In response t,o questions raised at the previous meeting, Mr. Conway advised that the Pierre Radisson sign was 9 by 21 foot (189 square feet), and the Hampton Inn was only 60 square foot. The Architectural Board had no problems with the dimensions of the sign in comparison to the width of the building, and noted that the coverage on the building would be less proportionately. Mr. Cocco advised that the sign now would be less than 36 feet wide due to the changes and clarified that the tear drop logo would be lit individually and the Moen name would be in black letters (projected slightly away from the building) which would be back lit to cast a lighted background for the letters, the white background has been eliminated. Mr. Thomas believed that this sign is more appropriate for this type of building. The Architectural Board had requested a detailed landscaped plan which N1r. Zergott has reviewed. He had no objection to the plans as a whole, but did make some suggestions which are noted on the plan. Mr. Cocco agreed to take suggestions into consideration. He further advised that additiona.l mounding and planting had been included abutting the multi-family property. Regarding the 20 foot high light poles requested by the Commission, Mr. Cocco advised that the Architectural Board did not object to the 30 to 35 foot poles if the fixtures were deeper in order to cut out more of the glare. He advised that the rnamber of poles would have to be doubled if the height is reduced to 20 feet. In response to questions, Mr. Conway did not Im.ow the height of the poles in the Corporate Center, but he was sure they were higher than 20 feet. He added that frequently there were problems with containing light, and it was always possible that this might have to be addressed after the lighting was installed, if what they do does not work. Mr. Cocco pointed out tha,t the lights are on timers and are not on around the clock. The A.R.B. also suggested that the outermost lights could be turned off earlier and those closer to the building left on later for security. Regarding the sidewalks, City Engineer Deichmann advised that the apartments 3