04/12/2006 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

removing the trees it will encourage tenants to place even more items along the sidewallcs. What has been submitted will be less attractive and the applicant should be loolcing to improve the appearance. Mr. Hartman reviewed that the existing shopping center is a 1950's center which they are trying to renovate and cannot accommodate the same style of landscaping newer centers have. Mr. Yager did not believe that there was any reason why the trees could not be maintained if the planter boxes were properly designed. When the plaza came before the city to renovate the center they assured the city that there would be no retail items, shopping carts, or other items along the sidewalks yet the pictures submitted shows just that. Other cities and even other sections of this plaza have tree boxes with grates which are thriving. The applicants need to properly engineer the tree boxes. The reason for placing the trees along the sidewalks was to brealc up the blanlc areas of the walls along the strip center. Removing, relocating or eliminating the trees would weaken the design that was originally proposed and approved. He strongly recommended that the commission require the applicants to keep the trees or replace them with stronger, livelier trees. Furthermore replace the planters and grates and request that the building department enforce the removal of the shopping carts, pop machines, and other ancillary uses taking place along the sidewalks which are weakening the overall appearance of the plaza. If the trees are removed then the owners should be aslced to redesign the plazas fagade to add life to it as the trees were prescribed as part of the design scenario. Mr. Hartman said that the trees would remain but did not lcnow that they would be improved. The broken grates and sidewalks would be replaced and if the trees are damaged during the replacement they would be replaced with a like material. Mr. Yager said that by properly engineering the replacement sidewalks, the problem can be solved. He further asked the owner to remove the shopping carts from the sidewalks. Mr. Hartman said, as a landlord, it was impossible to enforce that carts and other items be removed. Mr. O'Malley suggested that the developer should not be discouraged but should look at the original plan and continue to use innovation to address the problem. Mr. Lasko encouraged the applicant to continue to worlc on addressing the issue. Mr. Cotner aslced if the sidewalks being replaced would be replaced with the multi colored cement as was first approved. Mr. Hartman was not sure if colored concrete would be used again as it could be part of the problem. The cominission requested the applicant seek information as to whether or not multi colored cement was creating safety issues. J. Lasko moved to table the proposal for Great IVorthern Shopping Center, which consists of replacing existing siclewalks and relocating 13 existing trees with the following conditions; 1). Original development plans are to be submitted for review. 2). If any alterations are made to the original plans then new detailed plans are to be submitted. G. Malone seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved. 4. Fifth Third Bank; 28856/28890 Lorain Road: (WRD # 3) Proposal consists of demolishing 2 existing buildings and constructing a new building with site improvements. Note: Variances may be required. Ms. Wenger reported that the proposal consists of demolishing structures on two neighboring properties and constructing a new bank facility. The building is of a Western Reserve style, constructed of red brick and white accents. 6