My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05/20/1998 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1998
>
1998 Architectural Review Board
>
05/20/1998 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:47:51 PM
Creation date
1/28/2019 3:23:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1998
Board Name
Architectural Review Board
Document Name
Minutes
Date
5/20/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
1 <br />-J <br />? <br />the delivery and receiving area provided for the lumber yard. In addition, Mr. Barrow advised, <br />all of the existing doors on the building (shown as orange on the elevation presented) would <br />instead be painted to match the masonry field on which they are mou.nted. It was noted planning <br />commission had some concems about the orange, which Mr. Parisi identified as a tena cotta <br />orange. Colored samples of this factory finished orange metal roof sample were presented. The <br />I.C.I. numbers included: #541, 9208, #359, and #273. There was a question raised by plauuing <br />commission concerning the metal roof and its compatibility to the fabric canopies. Mr. Barrow <br />noted a metal roof is used throughout the shopping center on major elements, and an awning <br />would not be appropriate on the west end of the building, because the metal material acts as a <br />roofing material over the vestibules. In addition, Mr. Barrow identified the fabric awning <br />material as a material that is utilized by the smallshop retailers. Mr. Yager explained the <br />shopping center presentation was effectively done several months back, however, The Home <br />Depot's sensitivity to the overall program is somewhat tainted. He hinted this could be because <br />there is a different architectural firm working on "The Home Depot" as opposed to "Great <br />Northem Shopping Center." Mr. Yager noted there is a scale to the general facade as a hole and <br />"The Home Depot" does not quite fall into that scale. He elaborated the horizontal band oomph <br />to the entrances is totally dissimilar to that which has been created as a program for the "Great <br />Northem Shopping Center" as previously presented. The board requested a rendering of the <br />facade west and east of "The Home Depot" in an effort to evaluate the compatibility of this <br />presentarion to the rest of the shopping center. In his comparison, Mr. Yager noted there is a <br />level of detail that is so elegant about the entire center, that is missing from the "The Home <br />Depot" storefront. He questioned the putpose of the overhead door for loading and unloading <br />on the front of the building. and if the fire department has looked at the pick up area in the front <br />of the building. It was clarified this has not been referred to the'safety department. The members <br />agreed it should be referred to the Safety Department. Assistant Building Commissioner <br />Rymarczyk noted the City Traffic engineer has determined the tumiug radius behind Home <br />Depot is sufficient (ie. fifteen feet is the required setback and 20 feet is indicated on the plans). <br />Mr. Banow advised the purpose of the overhead door is for unloading lu.mber and heavy <br />building material. Mr. Yager stated the lumber canopy juts forward into the parking spaces <br />causing some of the parking spaces to be realigned to accommodate the canopy. While there are <br />canopies across the front of the center, it was noted there is a break such as a column, light <br />fixture, or some manipulation to break up tlie block look that "Ihe Home Depot" displays on <br />their rendering. Mr. Yager suggested that something be worked out between the two <br />architectural firms so as not to change the cost or the character of the building substantially. He <br />further challenged the architect to come up with a design for this facade that will maintain <br />consistency in the shopping center, yet still create the anchor element that is important to "'I'he <br />Home Depot." The major concern was that this is a large facade without any break-up. Mr. <br />Liggett added the entry to Comp USA has the entrance way and accent pieces next to it which <br />gives the repetition to the next unit, but Home Depot does not incorporate this same sort of <br />repetition. He believed the big store image can be portrayed in a more subdued manner to <br />maintain consistency in this development. ,Mr. Zergott explained the garden center looks great <br />from May to Mid June, however in the other odd months there are left over, pallets, bagged <br />goods, etc., which make the property look messy. He questioned if there was a way to hide the <br />garden center behind something so that for the nine months that a garden center does not make <br />money it does not appear as dead space. Mr. Parisi discussed the operation of a garden center <br />and noted in the fall and winter months Christmas trees are sold. He did not want to shut the <br />garden center down during the winter as that space is still being rented out and it should be <br />utilized. Mr. Parisi noted they work very hard with the operations people to keep this garden <br />5
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.