Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br />Acting Chairman Yager asked for department reports. Planning Director Wenger reviewed . <br />that in 7une, legislation was presented to City Council involving the construction of a 6 foot <br />fence between the North Olmsted Municipal Bus Line garage, the Service Yard and the <br />Library. The Planner recommended Council refer the fence to the Boards and Commissions <br />as it is a development issue. City Engineer, Durbin reviewed that both wrought iron and vinyl <br />fencing will be used in the construction of the fence. The commission was presented with <br />photos of the types of fences that would be used. The aluminum steel rail fence will be used <br />from the library dumpster area forward to the front property line. The vinyl fencing will run <br />from the rear property line forward to the dumpster area of the Library. Service Director, <br />Driscoll and NOMBL Manager, Terbrack want to discourage pedestrians from using the <br />service yard and bus areas as a cut through to Lorain Road. Mr. Stalter, a neighbor questioned <br />if consideration could be made to installing a type of a barrier to use as a baffle to eliminate <br />noise. Mr. Durbin indicated that a solid vinyl fence and landscaping would offer sound <br />protection and the city would be fixing the existing board on board fencing along the south <br />property line. Ms. Wenger advised that the vinyl fence was decided upon for the aesthetics <br />and future expansion of the municipal facilities. She noted that the additional repairs and <br />replacements to other portions of the existing fence would blend/transition into the new fence. <br />S. Hoff-Smith moved to approve the North Olmsted Library of 27403 Lorain Road their <br />proposal which consists of constructing a fence along the east side of the property line <br />between NOIVOL, North Olmsted service garage ancl the Library as presented. T. <br />Hreha seconc9ed the motion which was unanimously approved. <br />2. DSW (Old Kids R Us Building); Great Northern Shopping Center: <br />Proposal consists of a new front facade and interior remodeling. Note: Architectural Review <br />Board addressed this proposal on 7-21-04. <br />Acting Chairman Yager asked for department reports. Planning Director Wenger reported that <br />the proposal is for the existing vacant Kids R Us building to receive a new front farade to <br />house the DSW shoe store. The Architectural Review Board requested landscaping beds with <br />tlu-ee pine trees similar to that of Applebee's. These will be planted near the back entrance to <br />improve the appearance of the rear area. Assistant Building Commissioner Rymarczyk <br />indicated that at this time no variances are required, however, the applicants may require a <br />variance for signage. For clarification, he questioned if the applicants intended to use any up <br />lighting inside the awnings. If that is their intent, it will also require a variance. Assistant Law <br />Director O'Malley advised the commission to give the Board of Zoning Appeals a <br />recommendation on the sign variance needed. Mr. Ports, the architect came forward along <br />with Mr. Thompson from Developers Diversified to review the proposal. The applicant <br />indicated that there would be additional expansion to the area behind the Cingular store. The <br />Cingular store will be downsized but will remain in the shopping center. The entire store <br />front of Kids R Us will be removed and a new store front similar to DSW's prototype will be <br />constructed to blend into the existing shopping center. The fagade will be masonry with some <br />stucco materials being used which will match those of the existing shopping center. There will <br />be no up lighting used in the awnings. The awnings themselves will be black and white <br />fabric. The board questioned where the rear loading dock would be located. The applicant <br />indicated that the existing loading dock would be reconstructed to be a recessed dock for <br />semi-trailers and will not be visible to the public. Mr. Yager voiced that the plans did not <br />reflect the landscaping that is to be added and the main canopy over the entrance was not <br />proportionally sized nor did it blend with the rest of the center. He requested the entrance <br />awning be enlarged to be more proportionately designed and to expand the distance of the <br />2