Loading...
1990-12-18 Regular MeetingARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES December 18, 1990 - Borough Conference Room 1. The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:10 p.m. Attending the meeting were: Ray Camardella, Bill Beaty (departed at 8:30 p.m.), Cliff Ford, Ron Chase, Mike Milligan, Dennis Nicholson, Jim Wheeler, Dave Herrnsteen and Robin Heinrichs (arrived at 7:40 p.m.) 2. The September 10, 1990 meeting minutes were reviewed and approved. 3. INFORMATION ITEMS: a. Ray reviewed the Old Harbor School Structural Repair Project with the Board and discussed how Engineering Evaluation & Investigation Services was selected to do the initial study. It was explained that Rick Button was recommended to perform the inspection work on Main Elementary Roof by Tom Smith of the National Contractors Roofing Association. A wind storm damaged the siding at Old Harbor and Rick was asked to look at the project on the same trip as the Main Elementary Inspection. Specific elements of the project were discussed including the stream berm, crawl space water penetration, site eroding, siding alternatives and flashing. The selection process was briefly discussed, including the need for a meeting the first or second week in January to short-list the proposals and the need for a follow on meeting to interview the proposers. b. Ray reviewed the Main Elementary Roof problem and explained that the Architectural Firm and Contractor had been notified of potential liability in correcting the problem. CTA had indicated that if they made a mistake they would not try to duck the responsibility to fix it. They had also contacted their insurance carrier regarding the problem. It was questioned how problems such as the roof at Main could be identified better. Ray explained that it would help to require inspections and a maintenance management system that provided basic building information for review. Part of the problem was that even though ceiling tiles were stained, there was not sufficient follow-up in pursuing the cause of the problem. It was assumed that it was a roof leak that couldn't be found. C. The High School Alteration projects were reviewed. Ray explained that a "Request for Proposal" was advertising for the projects and that an expedited selection of an Architectural/Engineering firm would be required to enable construction to occur for Phase I this summer. 4. The Rezanof Drive Sidewalk plans were reviewed. Ray explained that a handicapped ramp had been added by addendum to the project where the crosswalk intersected the new sidewalk. Robin brought up a concern about the opposite side of the street having enough space to allow the children to wait for the crosswalk guard while on the corner. It was decided that not much could be done about the potential problem and that the guard would probably have to cross smaller groups of children at one time. There was considerable discussion about the need for an overall pedestrian path Master Plan for the Borough. It was felt that a need for such a plan exists to alleviate traffic/pedestrian conflicts, especially around the school sites and in the denser populated subdivisions. Dave brought up the point that if a Master Plan was developed, then when excess rock was encountered on projects such as in the New Elementary School project, it would be utilized for construction of the paths. It was decided that the Parks Board would be appropriate to take the lead role in developing the Master Plan. Mike Milligan indicated that he would address the subject at the next Assembly meeting. Robin questioned whether asphalt would be cheaper than concrete, it was explained that it would probably be a trade off but could be explored with the contractor. Ron Chase moved to approve the Rezanof Drive Sidewalk plans, seconded by Mike Milligan. The motion passed by unanimous vote. 5. Ray reviewed the two site development plans for North Star Elementary. It was explained that the intent was to allow one of the land owners to quarry the rock on the site to a designated elevation for use in resale. Considerable discussion was held regarding the split level two-story concept versus the one story concept. Ray explained that the split level two story concept had advantages over the one story concept for the following reasons: ■ Better site adaptability and saves on ground space; ■ More energy efficient having a higher volume/perimeter ratio and less out side surface area for heat loss; ■ Construction was less costly; and ■ The split level design allows for better traffic flow with minimum pedestrian/traffic conflicts. Ray explained that it may require an elevator but the costs for installation and maintenance were not prohibitive compared to the benefits. (installation cost of approximately $80,000, 0 & M costs $1,000/year) Dave expressed concern about the elevation differences on the site and preferred that it be leveled as much as possible. Considerable discussion occurred about the elevation differences with the consensus of the group agreeing that it would be beneficial to minimize the differences. Robin pointed out that we need to be careful about the site development so that we don't limit future growth as was done on the existing Hospital site. Ray explained that we were not making final design decisions with tonights review, and the one or two story option would be pursued during the Schematic drawing phase of the project. The split level two story concept would be used for the procurement agreement since it removed less material overall. Jim asked why the large elevation difference between the parking lot, receiving and the main entry on the split level concept? Ray said he would check with the Architect and report back at the next meeting. Ron Chase moved to accept the split level two- story concept in lieu of the one story concept due to the preference it displayed for life cycle costs, development costs and efficient use of the land area on the site. Seconded by Mike. The motion passed with 5 ayes and 2 nays. 6. BOARD COMMENTS: Dennis Nicholson commented that he agrees that the split level two-story concept for the new school is a good idea, but wants to wait for the Schematic design before locking into any design concepts. Robin Heinrichs commented that he would like to see the maintenance function formalized so that we won't get caught being blindsided by unforeseen projects. Jim Wheeler commented that he would like to see the same elevation access to the school on the parking to building entrance and the receiving entrance and the school to playground elevation difference minimized. Dave Herrnsteen commented that he agreed with Dennis' comments on the new school and he felt we should pursue using the rock from the site in pedestrian path projects. He also concurred with Jim's comments on the access elevations. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Signed, B 11 Beaty, Chairman IN Submitted by, � % J 111- l t �i Ray Camardella Director, Engineering/Facilities