11/11/2002 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED "TOGETHER VVE CAN MAKE A DII'FERENCE!" LAND1VIARKS COIVIMISSIOIrT MINUTES - NOVEMBER 11, 2002 IN OLD TOWN HALL 7:00 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL: Chairman Lord called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. PRESENT: B. Lord, P. Barker, T. Dubowski, L. VanAuken, M. Davis, K. O'Rourke and J. Lang ABSENT: G. Corell, and J. Dailey II. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINTJTES: The Landmarks Commission minutes from the October 14, 2002 meeting have been submitted for approval. Mr. Lang pointed out that he should have been listed as absent in the roll call section. He is listed as absent later in the minutes. L. VanAuken made a motion to accept the minutes as corrected. The motion was seconded by J. Lang and unanimously approved. Mrs. Lord commended the board members on a lively discussion that seemed to look at the heart of the whole issue surrounding the ordinance. Mr. Barker pointed out they were supposed to receive some information from Mr. O'Malley regarding discussions between the law department and the building commissioner. He said they have not received anything yet. III. NEW BUSINESS: Discacssion with members of the Board of Zoning and De>>elopment regarding the new lzbrccry lighl fixtur-es - Mrs. Lord mentioned the need to change the original agenda to allow a presentation regarding the library lighting by the Board of Zoning and Development. J. Lang made a motion to amend the agenda for the discussion of the library lighting. The motion was seconded by P. Barker and unanimously approved. Mr. Nasher, Chairman of the Board of Zoning and Development, came forward to address the board. He said it was brought to his attention that the Landmarks Commission is reviewing the lighting proposal that Council and the Planning Commission has addressed. It is his understanding that Landmarks does not favor the proposed lighting. He asked if the board has another proposal. Mr. Barker indicated the board had no knowledge of what was being picked for the fixtures until they received their packets. He said it might be good to get an explanation from a representative from the architectural company and have him tell the board what lighting was chosen and what the choices are. Mrs. VanAuken said when she received the information in the mail, she realized there must be a lot more information about the lighting and they would like to see where it is supposed to go. Mrs. Lord said that to her knowledge there was never a disagreeinent on the lighting. The board just wanted to be involved. Mrs. Creadon, the service director, brought up that at a meeting last week Councilman Miller requested that Landmarks look at the lighting to make sure it is satisfied with it. She said Landmarks gave its approval on all of the plans that had been submitted to them July 12'i', via a letter to Spice Constantino. The lighting at that point had not been decided or chosen. The design development phase was just getting under way. She said that the Architectural Review Board has seen the entire plan and approved it. The Planning Commission has approved it as well. They would like Landmarks' input so they can move forward. They need to have Council's approval and would like the matter to go back on the agenda for Council's meeting on the 19`l' of November. If they do not et approval, it puts them another 30 days behind schedule and they are due to go out to bid November 20 ' through the 22"d. They want to stay on the timeline to begin construction in February 2003. Mrs. Creadon pointed out that Tim Hunsicker of Spice Constantino is present to go tlu-ough any concerns the board may have and also present where the fixtures will be in the lighting plan. Mr. Hunsicker indicated he has the actual lighting plan that describes all the fixtures. He said that what the board members received was the final design decisions and recommendations after going through