Laserfiche WebLink
,. <br />so large and asked what happened to the side panels of the entry. Mr. Elbin indicated that the <br />front entrance was Babies "R" Us's proto type entry look. Mr. Yager questioned if the <br />applicants had pictures of other Babies "R" LJs stores. Mr. Elbin indicated that he did not. <br />Mr. Liggett indicated that he had received pictures of Babies "R" Us store which showed the <br />top band that was a stucco material. Mr. Elbin commented that if Babies "R" Us were going <br />to propose a proto type building from scratch they would use stucco material. Mr. Liggett <br />commented that the front entrance piece is so large compared to the rest of the building. If <br />there is a way to salvage the FASCIA and cover it with a similar material to what you have on <br />the entryway it could help scale the entryway down. The entranceway is so large that the rest <br />of the building is too far down, it Iooks miss-proportioned. Mr. Yager questioned if either of <br />the men presenting the proposal were architects. Mr. Elbin indicated they were not architects, <br />but representatives for Developers Diversified. Mr. 4'ager commented that the existing <br />building sits down offLorain road and as you enter the site drivers can see the roof tops. The <br />new entrance would hide a couple of them, but not all of them. The Fascia will be removed <br />and hopefully the brick beneath it will be in good shape. If it is not in good shape could you <br />create a parapet situation a couple of feet up that would help hide the roof top units, which <br />are in bad shape. Mr. Elbin indicated that he wasn't sure what the tenant would be doing as <br />far as replacing units or where they would be placed. He thinks that once the facade is done <br />most of the units will be covered and once a second tenant goes in they will have a front <br />entrance to cover the other units. Mr. Yager indicated that on a new building the City <br />requires that no roof top units be seen. He understands that the entire front facade is not <br />being redone, but the facha board will need to be addressed. He questioned why the entrance <br />was so proportionately large as a second tenant will occupy 20% of the building and require <br />an entrance also. It would be physically dwarFed compared to the Babies "R" Us entrance. <br />Mrs. Schulz commented that unless the second tenant's entrance was just as high, and <br />questioned if the Architectural Review Board really wants that. Mr. Yager indicated that the <br />site was a bit of a challenge, because of how far-back it sits from Lorain Road, but the new <br />front seems to be proportionately off by at least a third. If he understood the floor plan better <br />he could look into it and say that makes since and proportionately it's O.K. If the rnassive <br />size it is, is for display, what is it that you are displaying that needs ta be seen from 480 feet <br />away. Mr. Rymarczyk questioned the possibility of an addition being added later. Mr. Elbin <br />indicated that Mr. Rymarczyk was correct, but that would not be looked into until there is a <br />second tenant. Mr. Yager questioned if the back of the front facade would be flat. Mr. Blair <br />suggested the back front would only be out about a foot and a half. W. Yager asked if the <br />sides would be extended around the sides as was done at Great Northern Mall. Mr. Liggett <br />inquired as to how much higher the new facade would be compared to the existing building. <br />Mr. Yager indicated that there were S side panels on either side of the canopy and if they were <br />taken down to 4 side panels on either side it would look better proportioned. Mr. Liggett <br />suggested lowering the height of the facade to have a better proportion, he feels if the width is <br />narrowed it would look even less proportioned then what the current plans do now. Mr. <br />Yager suggested that the pilasters that are on the sides of the glass are a different width from <br />the coping element that is above. The pilaster at the top of the facade should have dimension <br />or don't put the notched angles in, as the notches fight against the Babies "R" [Js sign. Mr. <br />Liggett commented that the front facade was way to tall compared to the rest of the building. <br />There needs to be a parapet on either side, which would help balance the proportion. Mr. <br />Yager suggested having parapet on either side would compliment a second tenant, as it would <br />appear to be reaclung out to that area. It would also hide any rooftops. The length of the <br />front facade rieeds to be smaller; the developer could take out two pains of glass from either <br />end as long as it would not hurt internally. Mr. Yager suggested that the plans were hard to <br />read which was unlike Dev.elopers to do. He suggested squeezing it in by a third. Mr. Blair <br />3