11/20/1996 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I> changiug anytlung. Mr. Yager commented that Rini's is a relatively quiet building and this proposal provides a significant contrast: He suggested incorporating a more dimensional look as tlus would enhance the image that they are attempting to portray. Mr. Yager explained the glass, pilasters and brick could all be a part of the overall scenario, as it appears the proposal is limited in its scope. He noted, althougli the building looks awkward in this particular location, it is also dynamic and refreshing. Mr. McAndrews explained.the concept of a video store aud noted the location is ideal, because it allows him to capitalize on the existing traffic pattern. Mr. Yager asked if the applicant had photographs of a sign similar to what is being presented. Mr. Klien explained part of the issue with the design concept is adapting the basic elements that create the arclutecture of Hollywood Video to the vagaries of the specific site. He elaborated, in this particular location, because there is an existing mansard canopy, a new design concept is required to create that same dynamic look. Chairman Zergott believed the whole building is now a sign, and he could not accept this proposal as presented. He thought, because this proposal is in a strip center, it should be treated as such, and not as a separate entity. Mr. Yager disagreed, and believed a more extraordinary approach can be used to promote the Hollywood Video image. He explained that the presentation is for a two dimensional face, whereas a three dimensional face may be a more appropriate design for this particular proposaL Mr. Yager made several suggestions including extending the mountains down to the ground so that people can actually physically touch the mountains. He elaborated the canopy can be developed to portray a theater type style. Mr. Zergott did not believe this particular design belonged in a strip center. W. Yager argued that this is a_poor example, architecturally speaking, of a strip center. He believed the intent of this particular proposal is superb, however, it does need to be further developed. Mr. Yager challenged the architect to develop a more elaborate design, instead of just a facade. Mr. McAndrew's asked if the suggestion is to make the mountain scape a part of the building. Mr. Yager responded by sketching his suggestion, which showed the mountain scape design extending above as well as below the facade. Mr. Klien asked if the board would have a problem with extending this design the entire length of the facade. Mr. Yager believed that more would be better, but cautioned, if they would like to portray the inside they may opt for less mou.ntains. In response to Mr.. Gallagher's question, Mr. Yager clarified that he would have no problem with the sign exceeding the height of the mansard, as the shock value is important for`this particular sign. Mr. McAndrews questioned if the rest of the board would approve this design. Mr. Zergott voiced his objection to the proposaL Mr. Liggett was not present at the meeting tonight, but provided the board members with his concems on each proposaL Mr. Zergott read those comments aloud. The members requested clarification of the location of the proposed Holly- wood Video in comparison to the Rini's location. Mr. McAndrews explamed there is a neutral pier between this proposal and Rini's. Mr. Klien wondered if the suggestions of Mr. Yager would be acceptable, as he preferred not to develop something that has no chance of being approved. Mr. Yager suggested making a motion at this time so that the direcrion can be clearly understood. M. Yager moved to accept the concept of the Hollywood Video proposal with the following comments: look 'into a more dynamic overall approach to the mountains, possibly dropping down the mountains to create a more three dimensional look; and present a full elevation showing the relationship to Rini Rego's. The motion was seconded by T. Gallagher. Roll call on motion: Yager and Gallagher, yes. Krieger and Zergott, no. There 'was extensive conversation , in the framing of the motion. Mr. Zergott clarified, his basis for rejecting. the proposal is the entire front elevation is now a sign, which would look great in Myrtle Beach, however it does not work for a shopping center in North Olmsted: Mr. Yager agreed the whole building is a sign, but noted it now is a part of the architecture. Mr. Gallagher believed it gives a theatrical entrance. 3