01/19/2000 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

` there. Mr. Self indicated that the sign was a simple sign that didn't say "CVS"; it isn't blaring or obtnisive and it is non-illuminated. Mr. Yager commented that the signs are still there, therefore it serves a purpose or it doesn't need to be there. Mr. Yager questioned why there wasn't an entrance sign on Lorain Road. Mr. Self suggested that it isn't needed because of the monument sign. Mr. Self indicated that usually CVS has a pylon sign on one entrance and a monument sign on another, as a secondary sign. Mr. Self indicated that CVS is trying to accommodate the community's wishes and what the regulations are. Mr. Self views the signs as being very non-descript and necessary. Mr. Yager views them as non-necessary. Mr. Self indicated that people need to be told which way to go. Mr. Yager suggests there are two routes to take: one, understanding from the building department and hold off on approval until the board knows for sure what square footage is allowed and two, then hash through what signage is really needed. Mr. Yager doesn't believe a site needs to say enter. There was a debate regarding why so many crround signs were needed and why. Ms. Schultz suggested when the comment was made if you are going to go and have an enter sign and this is both an exit and an enter area, that can be more confusing then helpful. On one of these two islands, we are denoting you put your drive-thru, so that people already know and are driving in this lane that says drive-thru lane, they know they are in the right spot. The site is uniformed and the landscaping is uniformed, so there is no doubt that the area belongs to CVS. Mr. Zergott motioned to accept CVS Pharmacy; PP#'s 235-11-009 to 013 and 235-11-047 Their proposal which consists of a sign package. With the following recommendations: remove "G" from south east and the "F" in the south west corner and put the "H" on the interior court of the loading area. and on the north side of the drive-thru canopy put an exit, an "E" sign. Remove one "E" and make the second a double-sided sign. The inotion was seconded by M. Yager and unanimously approved. Motion carraecl. Ms. Rote then asked for the view pictures Mr. Self handed out to be put in the applicant's file. Mr. Zergott indicated that the small signs were not shown on the View pictures. IV. OLD BUSINESS: V. NEW BUSINESS: 1). North Olmsted United Methodist Church4600 Dover Center Rd. Proposal consists of a 2560 square foot addition being added to the rear of the existing building. Note: The Planning Commission heard this proposal on January 11, 2000 at which time they referred the proposal to the Architectural Review Board. Mr. Solt, serves on the building committee for the North Olmsted United Methodist Church and Mr. Grunau, the architect, came forward to review the proposal. Mr. Zergott questioned if the applicants had photos of the site. Mr. Grunau presented photos of the site. Mr. Grunau indicated the addition would not be an increase in seating as there will only be classrooms and office space added. Mr. Grunau also indicated they lost two parking spaces and would have to reroute the driveway. The handy capped spaces will be moved to the other side. Mr. Solt reviewed that one issue that came up at the Planning Commission meeting was an existing parkinc, lot light that will be removed and replaced to centralize it in the parking lot. Mr. Zergott suggested reviewing materials. Mr. Zergott questioned if the church was using matching materials. Mr. Grunau indicated yes, using the cedar siding with natural stain, roofing shingles will be black asphalt. They will be using the specs from what was installed on the last 5