02/14/2005 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.,_ would be directional signs and a wall mounted KIA sign on the second floor of the east elevation. Mr. Suhayda indicated that there would be a, total of 6 new trees planted about 2- inches in caliber and 6-foot high arborvitaes planted along the northern property line. Commission member's comments: Mr. Rerko questioned if the windows would be backlit or have lights of any kind. Mrs. Lord questioned if the applicants would be placing advertisements in any of the windows. Mr. Schumann questioned whether or not the building would be brick or siding as the plans dated February 3, 2005 showed siding not brick and he does not see it called out on the plans. Mr. Rerko asked if the roof top would be flat, and questioned how the roof would be drained. He also asked what would take place behind the 6 glass overhead doors: He said there were 3 existing trees in front of the rear home along Porter Road that looked to be within the landscape bed area which should be preserved. . He believed that the 3 existing trees along Lorain as well as the tree at the corner of Porter should also be preserved. He asked what would be done to address the utility lines along Lorain Road and suggested burying the utility lines. He suggested placing trees around the site like CVS did as well. He believes CVS has 17 trees that wrap along their site and are set about 25-feet apart. He sited other dealerships with trees and felt that as cars are no higher than 5 feet tall, properly sized trees would not block any views. He mentioned that there were 4 trees to the north of the existing tree on Dewey Road which also should be preserved. Mr. Barker said the commission would like the applicant to have a planting scheme along Lorain Road similar to CSV's, but the type of trees used could be different. Mr. Barker reviewed that the board would like to see brick pavers used along Lorain and Porter Road tree lawns as well. Applicant's response: Mr. Suhayda stated that the only lighting would be from the showroom itsel£ There would be no advertisements in the windows and the addition would be entirely, brick constructed. The roof would be flat and downspouts would drain the roof. There is to be no drains along the front of the building. The existing aluminum awning would be duplicated along the north side of the addition as well. The 6 glass overhead doors would be service/garage bays. The landscaping beds which are to have trees would buffer the view of the service/garages bays. The existing rear building will be used as a detailing area. Mr. Kula believes placing trees along Lorain Road would block the view of the cars. He said he would talk with the City Forester to look at keeping the existing trees on the back parcels. He questioned why the commission was discussing and requesting tliings along Dewey and'Lorain Road as he was present to address the area which is part of the historical district. He believes that the building being presented ties into the CVS, and Library look. Law Department comments: NIr. O'Malley said the corner itself is within the historical district and that the overall proposal is addressed as one site. He reviewed that CVS also extended further than the historic district. However, CVS developers were guided by Landmarks in the development of both the building and site to achieve the historical appearance.' He advised that Landmarks review for a Certificate of Appropriateness is independent of the other boards and commissions. The Architectural Review Board, Planning Commission, Council sequence is separate and Landmarks does not make recommendations to other body's. Landmarks works independently and has the authority to require brick pavers as well as additional trees if they so chose. If the commission chooses to continue to use CVS''as a model for the Landmarks District and continue the features of CVS corner over to the applicants corner so be it. 2