Laserfiche WebLink
going to the roof structure. The applicant said it is like an above roof beam or element. It is <br />raised above the roof to allow water underneath it. Mr. Crook asked the applicant to explain the <br />ABS panel. What they moved away from because of the concern with ABS is to use a 2 x 2 <br />extruded aluminum frame and the exterior frame would form the ridge, using aluminum like a <br />standing sheet metal roofing. It can be custom made, rather than buying panels so that they can <br />create a long angular end piece and get ribs that look good and have consistent spacing, while <br />having a much sturdier design. <br />Mr. Crook said the shape is much better than what was previously submitted but asked if the roof <br />could be extended east to the edge of the white EIFS on the south elevation. He said it almost <br />looks like a topper on top of the roof, not like a roof element. The applicant indicated the <br />mechanical units were in the way. Mr. Crook said the color is nice and offers a nice attraction. <br />Mr. Crook asked why the small ridge is on the top and does not come to a point. The applicant <br />stated that because this building's shape is a modular design, whereby, the front faces different <br />directions and the only thing that can be stretched back is the rim, but the other ones come to a <br />straight point, however, they are only 64" deep, but this one is 92" deep to fill out the south view <br />a bit more. The reason they cannot go to a point is that the width is wider than normal. Mr. <br />Crook said since it can be custom made, the pitch could change and feels they may be able to do <br />it. He felt the front pitch, which is quite steep right now, may be able to get a little flatter. He <br />likes the shape of the ridge but asked if it could come to a point and make it more pyramid <br />shaped. Changing of the pitch, while keeping the depth could help out with the unit. Mr. Crook <br />said that this location is unique and has two front views, the west and the south. Mr. Houtz said <br />the less expensive option is the standard topper is 64". Mr. Crook said an earlier submittal; the <br />topper went to a point and was a greater side dimension. He asked if the same depth could be <br />kept and change the pitch. The same height, base width and length will be kept while changing <br />the angles to come to a point, which brings them back to an initial design of it being a topper <br />pyramid. <br />Mr. Zergott asked the applicant if they will be doing exterior maintenance. Mr. Duda said new <br />EIFS will be put on along with modern signage. Mr. Zergott asked if any consideration was <br />given to green space along Brookpark Road and adding trees. The applicant was not aware if <br />they have buffer between the sidewalk and the parking lot in the area. Mr. Rymarczyk informed <br />the applicant that there was no sidewalk. Mr. Ulewicz asked the applicant if they thought of <br />installing flower bed containers. The applicant indicated they rent this property and would need <br />to check with the landlord first. Ms. Wenger asked the applicant if they were aware of what is <br />being planned for the vacant land next door. The applicant stated they knew of none. She <br />instructed him that it would be in their best interest to check with your landlord. She indicated <br />that there may be the potential of something coming up that could affect their property. <br />Mr. O'Malley asked the Chairman if the signage has been reviewed for conformance of the <br />code. Mr. Rymarczyk indicated the applicant had already been issued permits for signage.