03/18/1999 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.,• ^ CITY OF NOR'I'H OLIVIS'I'EI) "TOGETHER VVE CAN MAKE A I)IFFRENCE" :. ARCHITEC'TURAL REVI]EW BOA12D 1VI_iNU'Y'ES -1VIAItCH 18, 1999 COleTFERENCE R00M 5:30 PM I. ROLL CALL: Assistant Chairman, Yager called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. PRESENT: Commissioners, M. Yager, C. Allan, K. Schulz, and T. Liggett. ALSO PRESENT: Building Commissioner, D. Conway, and Clerk of Commissions, D. Rote. ABSENT: B. Zergott. H. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: T. Liggett motioned to approve the minutes of February 17, 1999. The motion was seconded by, C. Allan and unanimously approved. III. SIGNS: 1) Field Stone;31333 Industnal Parkwav: Proposal consists of a revised signage package to be reviewed. Note: Originally heard by: Planning Commission 2/13/96, and 3/12/96, the Architectural Review Board 3/20/96, and Board of Zoning Appeals on 2/28/96. Acting chairman M. Yager called all interested parties forward to present their proposal. Mr. Cerny, and Mr. Hammerschmidt were present to present Field Stones proposal. Mr. Cerny indicated the sign package was redesigned. There are three different signs, the ground sign that will be placed in the middle of the cold-sac. Originally each tenants names were to be added to the ground sign. The proposed ground sign will be slightly smaller as the tenants' names will not be added. The coloring for the ground sign will inirror the elisting building. There will be a red tile accent stripe, light beige background, field stone lettering will be green, and brick the same color as the eYisting building. The ground sign will also include field stones logo. Second sign is a series of signs that will be tenant identification signs for the building. These identification signs will be used in leu of placing tenant signs on the building itsel£ T11e signs would be placed on either side of the entrance points for each tenant. Again the logo will be used on each tenant sign. The plaques on the tenant signs are removable plaques that bare the tenant's identification. The tenant signs would match the colors of the main ground sign. The last sign is for the owner of the building High Tech Pools, and they would like to have a wall sign on the back of the building. The colors for the rear wall sign would be blue, white and red. Light fixtures directed at the back of the building will indirectly ilhiminate them. Mrs. Schulz asked if the tenant identification signs would replace the existing signs on the doors. Mr. Cerny suggested tlie signage on the doors would be kept. Mr. Conway suggested the individual tenant identification signs could be used in leu of the wall signs that are allowed for each tenant. Mr. Liggett questioned if the signage on the doors would be removed once the tenant identif?ication signs were in place. Mr. Hammerschmidt indicated the signs were allowed on the doors because the sign package had not been completed. The door signs can not be seen from the street. Mrs. Schulz indicated the offices were not classified as retail. Mr. Liggett suggested it did not make sense to have both door and identification signs. Mr. Conway suggested the identification signs would be 2'ft from the wall. Mr. Cerny indicated each tenant is allowed 30'sq ft. for a wall sign. The proposed identification sign is 4'feet. Mr. Yager asked if there were questions from the audience. 1VIr. Hanobik a neighbor asked if the sign facing 480 would be lit. Mr. Haminerschmidt suggested the sign itself would not be lit, but 4 small lights would be used that would shine towards the wall. Mr. Young a concerned resident asked what the Architectural Review Board members did and if they were all residents. Mr. Yager reviewed what each member did and who was and was not a resident. Mr. Young suggested the flood light in the front of the building can be seen and is on all night. He further suggested the parkway decimated the resident's area. Mr. Hammersclmiidt indicated there were no street lights on that side of the town and the lights are there to protect the tenants when they leave at night. Mr. Yager suggested the sign package they have submitted is very sensitive to the residents. Mr. Liggett asked how the building department viewed the identification signs in front and the signs on the door. Mr. Conway