Laserfiche WebLink
I-„ <br />-- - Mr. Zergott responded the theatrical approach did not work for Media Play, as=they, are- now out <br />of business. Mrs. Krieger suggested using a concept similar to the Hollywood Video in Berea. <br />Mr. Klien eaplained the Berea. store has a sign on the front and does not create that same <br />dynamic approach. Mr. Yager stated, ifthe proposal receives the appropriate approvals, it would <br />not have to return to planning commission. Mr. Zergott noted the proposal has not received this <br />boards approval and therefore it should return to planning commission. Mr. Zergott would like <br />planning commissiou to re-review the proposal. Mr. Yager wondered what the community had <br />to loose by approving this proposal, as the strip center has a deep setback. Mr. Gallagher <br />believed that particular area needs more accent. It was noted that, if the proposal remains the <br />same, it would have to go before the board of zoning appeals. Chairman Zergott reiterated that <br />he would like this proposal to be re-reviewed by planning commissiou. Mr. Klien stated the <br />suggestion is to redevelop a design concept, and questioned if this new design would have to be <br />reviewed by architectural review board prior to retuining to planning commission. It was <br />clarified either Mr. Yager or Mr. Gallagher can review the revised design independently, so that <br />it would not have to come back before this board and will proceed to planning commission. The <br />applicant, however, has the option of comirig back to the architectural review board next month <br />to have the revisions reviewed. Mr. McAndrews preferred to return next mouth and wondered <br />how the proposal can be amended to resolve the objections. Mr. Zergott responded the entire <br />building has become a sign and this board has been attempting to tie in the strip centers. He <br />clarified, if the applicant prefers to be different, he should develop a building of his own, as this <br />looks out of place in a strip center. Mr. McAndrews asked if the problem would be lessened <br />with the reduction of the sign.. Assistant Building Commissioner Rymarczyk noted code only <br />allows 75 square feet maximum for area of signage, and a four foot maximum height. Mr. <br />Zergott explained reducing the sign, reduces but does not elimiuate his objections. Mr. Gallagher <br />recommended referring the proposal to planning commission. Mr. Yager, wondered if it were <br />. possible for two members to attend the next planning commission meeting representing either <br />side, as this would speed the entire process up by a month. Mr. Rymarczyk asked where the <br />proposal is going next. Mr. McAndrews reiterated he prefers retumuug to the architectural <br />review board next montli. The members had no problem tabling the proposal until the next <br />meeting. Mr. Yager recommended submitting revised sketches to the clerk for the boards <br />review. Mr. Zergott, added photographs of a similar sign design may assist the board in the <br />review process. Mr. Klein agreed to forward the revised design to city hall prior to the next <br />meeting. <br />3) Guitar Center (formerly Fretters) - added to amended agenda. <br />Request approval of signage. <br />Mr. Klien, architect presented the proposaL He ;explained, the existing four (former Fretters) - <br />sign panels will be replaced with new signage. The architectural review board members reviewed <br />the proposed signage for Guitar Center, which included a guitar logo. Mr. I{lien noted the <br />channel lettering on the panels will be red with white outlines. He added the proposal also <br />includes channel letters on the building to display products, as they do not only sell guitars. The <br />existing masonry and canopy will be repainted a charcoal grey. Mr. Yager asked if the same <br />panel will.be used. In response, Mr. I{lien clarified, the existing panels will be relocated and <br />refinished. Mr. Yager noted the letters will actually be smaller than the existing Fretter letters. <br />Mr. Zergott would like to see the added verbiage removed. Mr. Yager believed three signs are <br />appropriate, and questioned the need for the sign on the back side of th?e canopy. He elaborated <br />the signs on the backside of the canopy are relatively hidden from the right of way, and are <br />unnecessary. The members agreed that the sign panels on the rear of the building, along with any <br />4