10/16/1996 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r Bob. Cornet and Gary Johnson presented the proposal. Mr. Johnson explained last time it was determined that tlus is a background building and presented a more accurate color rendering than was originally presented. The samples have been provided, as requested at the previous meeting. Mr. Gallagher asked if they laiew the name of the samples. Mr. Conway agreed to locate the sample. Mr. Johnson stated that the landscape design has been revised as previously requested. Mr. Cornett explained this background building has been revised slightly as some gables have been added. He has presented the colors to Biskind for approval. The landscape architect has redesigned the landscaping per Mr. Zergott's suggestions. The lighting has been reduced to moonlight or one hundredth of a foot candles at the property line, per Biskind's request. There will be one KAR fixture with a forward throw mounded at approximately 25 feet and a shadow just beneath the eve. Mr. Johnson explained there will also be two additional fixtures on the sides which will be mounded at twelve feet, over top of the doors to accomplish a reduction in the lighting along the property lines. Mr. Yager asked if anyone laiew the height of the lighting at Tech Park. Mr. Johnson believed the lighting was approxiinately 25 feet high. Pole lights will be installed with a cut offlithonia style fixture or a round KAR structure and the color will be silver to match Tech Park. In response to Mr. Gallagher's question, Mr. Johnson clarified the fixture will wash the wall but also have a forward throw. He presented a photometrics plan for the members review and indicated the location of the lights (see plan). All of the pole fixtures along the front have been removed. There will be an additional light on the pool shed for visibility reasons in the pool area. A six foot board on board fence, with a recessed brick panel on both sides, will be installed around the pool as shown on plan C-5. Mr. Cornett pointed out the pool would not be visible from the street. Mr. Yager preferred an alumiuum picket style and wondered if it was possible to change the style of the fence. Mr. Cornet indicated the board on board fence with the brick columns was a requirement plauuiug commission made. He noted that many people want the board on board fence for privacy reasons, however, others feel it would be beneficial to be able to see what is going on outside the pool area, therefore this argument can go either way. Mr. Gallagher suggested using metal halide bulbs. Mr. Johnson presented two styles of signage and the members.preferred the Westlake style. Mr. Yager explained the city forester believed none of the existing trees are salvageable. Mr. Zergott could not attend this meeting but left the following comments: the landscape design is acceptable, the names of the maxerials and colors should be presented, and sign package is acceptable. He questioned if this plan acconaplished the members goals in regards to the entrance as mentioned at the previous meeting, The materials were presented, however the members would like more detail as far as the name and company that makes the materiaL Mr. Johnson agreed to fax over specification describing the types of materials. In the future Mr. Yager would li.ke all this information presented at the same time. The lighting was acceptable to Mrs. Krieger. Mr. Liggett commented on the entry way as this was a concern at the previous meeting. He preferred.the entryway to be a shingle rather than the metal. Mr. Yager asked if a different texture were ever considered, to create a subtle and elegant banding. Mr. Liggett wondered if the bands would be all flush or,stepped out. He noted ifthe bands are stepped out it creates shadows which will enhance rather than change the texture. Mr. Yager agreed as it would create a similar effect to changing the texture, however, he believed the soldier course should be identifiable as an element yet not overwhelming. Mr. Yager and Mr. Liggett agreed that the variation in depth of the soldier course brick, for shadowing, should be increased to one-half an inch. Mr. Liggett wondered if stack bonds or soldier coursing would be used at each side of the entry way. Mr. Yager concluded the building looks nice, the previous requests were addressed, the sign package is fine, the colors, are nice, however, the board on board fence along the pool looks awkward. He prefened the brick pilasters with aluininum picket style fencing, and believed the board on board would make the area resemble a trash enclosure. Mr. Johnson again commented the board on board was a planning commission recommendation. He reiterated there is a pro and con to having a board on board fence. Mr. Yager would like his suggestions forwarded to Ron Tallon so that he may u.nderstand this boards