07/30/2007 Regular Meeting
Minutes
--~_.,~-
A.
ArchitecturallEngineering Review Board Meeting,\ T,"
30 July 2007 - Noon
KIB Conference Room
\
B l I\ON
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 12:07 pm.
L:~.~ -- - ,
B. Roll Call
ARB Members present were Scott Arndt, Gregg Hacker, Charlie Jerling, Jay Johnston.
Absent Members were Jerrol Friend, Reed Oswalt and Brent Watkins. Representing the
Hospital were Brenda Friend and Capt. Ng. Chris Lynch was in attendance.
Representing the KIB Engineering and Facilities Department were Woody Koning, Ken
Smith and Sharon Lea Adinolfi.
C. Approval of Agenda
It was moved and seconded to approve the Agenda. There was a unanimous affirmative
voice vote.
D. Review 95% Drawings/Specs CHC Project
S. Arndt indicated the list of items discussed at the last meeting to be reviewed.
Retaining wall design
Rebar is in and looks cleaned up - grade line not corrected - Drwg Cl.4 - reviews typical
curb profile - shows taper - snow removal equip tears up - normally should be squared
90 at top and bottom - detail needs to be changed.
EPDM did not go away.
J. Johnston said that none of the retaining walls had enough detail to price.
S5.l - footing schedule has changed but they're all supposed to be drawn to 2' - some are
drawn to 15" rather than 2' thick.
Stem wall at moment frame - did not come up with height of walls.
J. Johnston asked if finished grade was on the site plan.
S. Arndt noted the area at corner of SE addition - not sure how it's going to be handled.
There are grade changes - what is the grade there?
\\dove\Departments\EF\Architectural Review Board\ARB Minutes 2007\070730[2] Minutes.doc
Page 1 of?
{J
1 r:.
, \ (I
J. Johnston - C 1.3 - if you have top of wall there, is that enough info?
S. Arndt - didn't scale out in drawings - top of wall to top of footings - didn't find it
anywhere. Think more detail should be provided.
J. Johnston - based on geotech report, the Architect should go through and match.
Structural drawings for concrete plan
S. Arndt -looked good.
Hdwe Specs
G. Hacker - was changed to Best Lock - did not see that in the specs.
Updated door sheet
J. Johnston noted that the details for each door were not listed- still needs some work and
the roofing info has not changed from last meeting.
S. Arndt said the "tucking" detail had not been corrected.
J. Johnston said a real detail is needed - one of its own. He also noted he did not want
the windows removed.
S. Arndt asked ifKS or SLA had received detail on snow stops.
No.
SA A6.1 - did add.
Pocket door detail
SA - A7.1 - not found.
Essential Building
K. Smith showed spec indicating essential building.
S. Arndt said the roofload was still listed at 35 - also 2003 Code keeps showing up-
were to design to 2006 - need clarification on that.
S. Arndt - corrected covering on rebar.
\\dove\Departments\EF\Architectural Review Board\ARB Minutes 2007\070730[2] Minutes.doc
Page 2 of7
Foundation Plan - detailing on seismic ioint
S. Arndt - didn't see anything different on Seismic Joint.
J. Johnston asked where the seismic section was.
Architectural shows roof seismic but not anything else.
S5.1 - number 14-
J. Johnston thought the wall connections were still missing.
Cut sheets for dental area for medical gas piping plan
S. Arndt said they had been added.
M3.1, lower left - added detail.
Damper locations?? Check with Curt
J. Johnston asked that changes be highlighted.
K. Smith agreed.
S. Arndt said dates weren't updated.
Exit signs -ask about that.
W. Koning had questions about handicapped parking - not indicated which are
handicapped - in going for variance and going through the parking plan he thought the
ball had been dropped on the handicapped part - want to make sure there are enough.
They did add the fire hydrant.
Capt N g said he thought 9 and 10 were handicapped as a result of conversation with
USDA.
W. Koning said he wanted to make sure handicapped stalls were on the plans. He also
spoke about the fire wall issue between buildings. S. Thompson found code for 2 hour
wall then got changed.
A4.1 - 2 hour fire wall is back in.
S. Arndt went to C 1.1 - remove existing section of guardrail and remove existing curb
and gutter - intent to push it back a little bit? Detail on C I.2A - trying to figure out what
is trying to be accomplished.
\\dove\Departments\EF\Architectural Review Board\ARB Minutes 2007\070730[2] Minutes.doc
Page 3 of7
W. Koning asked why the power pole was being replaced.
J. Johnston said just a different base was being put on in order to get more parking area.
S. Arndt, with Board's concurrence, called Curt Field at Prochaska to review at 12:55 pm.
S. Arndt - page C 1.1 - toward Rezanoff. - remove curb and gutter and guardrail - what's
happening there - moving toward Rezanoff to create more space?
C. Field - had to wait a long time for the survey in that area - the edge of the curb
existing is skewed relative to the property line - not expected - to maximize stalls and
make the most of that space line needs to be parallel. You can get 3-4 feet more.
S. Arndt -1.0 - Code info, the change in type of bldg. -heard anything more?
C. Field - will review - in the 100% - most of comments have been incorporated.
S. Arndt - still showing EPDM rather than TPO.
C. Field - the names haven't been changed, but have focused on the structural that was
important to you. EPDM is now out of the list. The detailing is the same - just a name
change.
S. Arndt - new detail for the "tucking"?
C. Field - I've drawn it.
S. Arndt - we don't have anything in the plans.
C. Field - we've addressed it.
J. Johnston to S Arndt - were details on the snow stops emailed to Ken or SL?
C. Field - on the roof plans - going forward - didn't put it in the submittal- the south
slope has a layout - the snow guard system - snowjax - has a technique by which you
can layout the whole system - the new plans show not only the CHC roof but the whole
south side ofthe hospital- wasn't in what was sent you - worked on the structural issues.
Want to be responsive - will definitely do what is requested it. He indicated he had
hoped to have approved [95%] with the condition that requested work would be done.
. -
J. Johnston - as long as it gets done.
C. Field - I can send a small sheet to you - to help develop trust - I can send roof plan
sheet and...
\\dove\Departments\EF\Architectural Review Board\ARB Minutes 2007\070730[2] Minutes.doc
Page 4 of?
S. Arndt - also - dates didn't change on these drawings - was hard to identify without
laying out together.
C. Field - do our best to find all the undotted eyes - then use addendums after bids go
out.
S. Arndt - don't want to go out with an incomplete set of plans. Snowguards - we
wanted to take a look at possibilities.
C. Field - go to www.snowiax.
S. Arndt - SO.2 - still mentioning 2003 - rather than 2006 - and the roof still shows 35 -
wondering if that's going to be corrected - design to 2006 and getting to 40?
S5.1 - detail section 13 and 14 and 10 - the scale on the footing pier comes out at 2 foot
on details 8 and 6 - they're not drawn to scale.
C. Field - they may think it can sit at that.
S. Arndt - still showing a 3 foot minimum from the finished grade to the bottom of
footing - doesn't show the ht ofthe concrete wall- have conflicting measurements.
C. Field - the civil folks have straightened out the grade.
S. Arndt- what's the height of the wall?
C. Field - think that's because the soils report is to be the reference for the contractor.
S. Arndt - typically they go off the plans.
C. Field -the SE doesn't delve into this - goes to soils report.
S. Arndt - we'll discuss this more among ourselves. Change orders often are generated
because of lack of detail.
S. Arndt - Hardware specs - we didn't have those.
C. Field - we focused on the more important deficiencies.
S. Arndt - operable wall head details look good - still don't have detail on the pocket
door jam.
C. Field - it's on my list.
Exit signs - powered vs non powered
\\dove\Departments\EF\Architectural Review Board\ARB Minutes 2007\070730[2] Minutes.doc
Page 5 of?
C. Field said Brian has spent a lot of time with Stan Thompson and will have all that kind
of information.
S. Arndt said there were no further questions at this time. There will be another meeting
tomorrow night to hopefully conclude the review.
S. Arndt said that the ARB, as a Board, will make a report to the Assembly once the 95%
has been acted on
C. Field questioned the timing of Assembly meetings.
W. Koning said the approval of the 95% drawings could be done as a Committee Report.
C. Field noted that some ofthe finishing touches that would keep the bid docs from going
out would be the USDA specs - they'll compel some things in the front end - we don't
have that yet - doesn't have the time - haven't done anything except on the site structural
- the USDA acceptance may take a little longer - would be nice to know the 95% had
cleared ARB hurdle
W. Koning questioned the timeline on getting the docs ready for the street.
C. Field - 8/2 optimistically - but if USDA delays us...
W. Koning asked if 100% could be to E/F by the 2nd and those could go to the Plan
Review.
C. Field - we were giving USDA some time to peruse
W. Koning requested getting the 100% to USDA as soon as possible and to the Projects
Office for a final look before going to print.
S. Arndt thanked C. Field for the presentation and W. Koning requested changes be
highlighted.
Continued discussion among Members.
S. Arndt said he was surprised there's a step in the foundation that does not show up on
plan - noting that both he and J. Friend had brought up concern re pouring on
undisturbed.. .
G. Hacker said that the owner/contractor should know exactly...
J. Johnston said he felt they were just not doing the work.
\\dove\Departments\EF\Architectural Review Board\ARB Minutes 2007\070730[2] Minutes.doc
Page 6 of?
There was discussion re the process - asking the same questions at 35% as now. ARB
needs to be able to track the questions [and answers]. It was suggested that the "process'
be cleaned up so as not to waste time.
Capt. Ng asked the Board what they felt the key issues were.
S. Arndt said the foundation was one - excavation.
With the Board's concurrence, the meeting was recessed at 1 :42 pm.
\\dove\Departments\EF\Architectural Review Board\ARB Minutes 2007\070730[2] Minutes.doc
Page 7 of7
