Laserfiche WebLink
e <br />CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MINUTES - JULY 10, 1979 <br />I. ROLL CALL: Chairman Bugala called the meeting to order at 8:05 p.m. <br />Present: R. Bugala, J. Roberts, D. Ryan, W. Ohman, J. Brown <br />J. Prokasy arrives at 8:10 pam. <br />Absent: B. Gorris <br />Also Present: Building Commissioner Gimdy, Law Director M. Gareau, • <br />City Engineer R. Zurawski, and Recording Secretary B. Oring <br />II. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: <br />J. Roberts moved to approve the mi.nutes of June 26, 1979, as submitted, <br />seconded by W. Ohman, and unanimously approved. <br />III. BUILDING DEPARTMENT REQUESTS: <br />(a) Signs: (Referred from the Architectural Board of Review Meeting of <br />July 9, 1979.) <br />Redwood Inn, 29595 Lorain Rd. - Wall Sign <br />D. Ryan moved to app rove the Redwood Inn Sign as stipulated by the <br />' Architectural Review Board, seconded by W. Ohman, and tmanimously <br />app r oue d. . <br />E1 Charro Restaurant, 30111 Lorain Rdo -Tao Wall Signs. <br />W. Ohman moved to approve the El Charro signs as stipulated by the <br />Architectural Review Board, seconded by J. Roberts, and unanimously <br />app roved. <br />(b) A A R Office Building, 26127 Lorairi Rd. Referred from the Archi- - <br />tectural Board of Review Meeting of July 9, 1979. <br />W. Hallez of General Contractors represented the A A R and explained <br />the plans. The Architectural Review Board had stipulated that the <br />, Dryvit material be used on all existing walls (item '1) , and Mr. <br />• Hallez felt that this request was made because the original plans <br />stated erroneously that the existing walls of the building would be <br />? painted concrete block, not painted bri.ck as actually planned. He <br />requested that they be permitted to paint the exi.sting walls to match <br />, the addition instead of resurfacing them with the Dryvit. Mr. Hallez <br />was in agreement with all the other recommendations of the Architectural <br />Review Board. Mr. Gundy stated that Item 1 could be resubmitted with <br />the landscape plans that must still be reviewed by the Architectural <br />Review Board. J. Roberts moved to recommend approval of the A A R <br />Office Building plans with the recoTamendations of the Architectural