10/20/1999 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

commented that the shrubbery could be changed. Ms. Schulz suggested that the north wall looked like a prison wall. She remarked that the applicants could do some type of fake windows and canopy to soften the appearance. Mr. Yager agreed that the look could be -softened by Ms. Schulz suggestions. Ms. Schulz suggested lowering the height of the light - poles to accommodate pedestrians. Mr. Yager asked if they were looking for final approval tonight and what the applicant's time frame for having the building completed. Mr. Wojtila indicated that the owners would like to have approval tonight. He commented that he felt they had met what the Landmarks board was looking for with the current proposal. Mr. Yager suggested that he was reluctant to approve the current plans. Mr. Zergott suggested that the drive-through area is a safety hazard, the CVS signage needs to be decreased, a canopy and fake windows need to be added to the north side of the building. Mr. Allan indicated that he was surprised that this is a historical site and the buildings are being removed and replaced with a building that does not look historical at all. It is inevitable that the existing buildings need to be replaced, but they should be replaced with a historical looking building. Mr. Yager reviewed his thoughts about the exiting buildings and removing them. The Architectural Review Board has tried to keep loading areas off Lorain Road and this building has the loading area right on Lorain Road. It is impossible to keep the loading trucks invisible. Loading trucks stand 11.5 feet high and the proposed wall will not prevent cars from driving and seeing the trash as well as the loading trucks. Mr. Zergott remarked that the Architectural Review Board was surprised that a proposal that places the loading area on Lorain Road could reach their board. He used TJ Maxx and Sun appliance store as an example of what a loading area facing Lorain Road ' looked like. He commented that it was a disgrace seeing the garbage and trucks along Lorain Road. Mr. Rymarczyk questioned were the cardboard bails would be stored. Mr. Wojtila indicated that there had been a lot of discussion regarding the dumpster area. ? There will be a compactor and a dumpster in the carved out area shown on the site plan. The cardboard will be placed in the compactor and the garbage will go into the dumpster. Mr. Rymarczyk questioned were the compacted cardboard bails would be stored. Mr. Wojtila indicated that the bails would be taken away weekly. Ms. Schulz commented that she would like to see the drive-through pharmacy on the west side of the site and the duinpster on the east side facing Porter Road. Mr. Wojtila reviewed that they had looked at placing the loading area and drive-through in the areas Ms. Schulz suggested but they did not work. Mr. Yager questioned if the Landmarks Commission had viewed each possible layout option for the building. Mr. Wojtila remarked that he had and the architect view each of the possible layouts and then reviewed them with Mr. Mike Gareau Jr. in an informal meeting. Mr. Yager indicated that the traffic engineer submitted a written opinion regarding the drive-through pharmacy and he has indicated that the drive-through exit would not be a problem. Ms. Schulz suggested that she did not think that the drive- through pharmacy alone makes a building ADA coinpliant. She strongly suggested that the Architectural Review Board did not want the drive-through located where it was currently shown. Mr. Wojtila suggested that a drive-through pharmacy was needed. Mr. Self indicated that it is mandated by competition to have a drive-through pharmacy. Mr. Wojtila inquired if CVS would retain their certificate once the requested changes were made or would they have to return to the Landmarks Commission for another certificate. Mr. Yager indicated "no" CVS should work on adding a canopy, fake windows and moving the service area and the Architectural Review Board will talk with the Landmarks ? Commission. It is the responsibility of our own City to know what they are doing. The applicant's duty is to come before the boards and follow the line of commands that they are asked to follow. The Architectural Review Board is asking you as the applicants, to look at the facade, make them charming, more historical, add the canopy, fake windows and the 10