CCP 11-10-1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

7/8 e A statement made of the City Staff was that "the PUD amendment did not sufficiently clarify the exterior materials to be used on the building addition. Therefore the Staff requested clarification as to what was planned and was verbally infonned by a representative of NHLC that it would be brick which would match the existing building." However, the applicant (Welsh Construction) and the Owner's" Representative were not the individuals contacted. We do not know who was contacted. The Planning Commission also asked that NHLC meet with Staff and come up with an elevation plan that would include brick as a part of the Activity Center. No amount of brick incorporation was recommended. October 14. 1997 NHLC me' w;th Staff or toe b'lild;nC sit, A plan was cle,cribed to ;'lcc,;"cnte three h'lnds ()f brick on the west and east walls of the Acti vity Center that would align with the three brick reveal patterns in the brick wall reveals of the new addition. The Staff was asked to comment on the plan. The response was that it appeared to make an attempt to tie in the Activity Center with the remaining building, however, the City Council would make the final recommendation. October 27. 1997 Citv Council Meeting The meeting was, in most part, a summary of the Planning Commission Meeting with the proposed sketch showing the addition of three horizontal bands of brick. The proposal was rejected as it did not include a sufficient amount of brick. -e The meeting concluded with a request that NHLC research it records to determine if there was any oversight on behalf of the City Council regarding the misunderstanding over the use of brick - on the total wall surface. NHLC could then return and make its presentation at a future City Council Meeting. In addition they requested that NHLC come back with another proposal that - would be a suitable compromise between the non-use of brick and the incorporation of some brick on the west and east walls of the Activity Center. - - SUMMARY FOR REVIEW BY CITY COUNCIL I This report is our response to the request of the City Council to report our findings. We, NHLC, are satisfied that the abovementioned scenario is an accurate documentation of the I facts we have at our disposaL Prior to 1997, all infonnation regarding Stage I appear to be accurate and the present dry-vit walls I are still considered to be temporary until Stage III begins. It is apparent to us that no commitment or obligation for use of building materials beyond Stage I was ever agreed upon. Our conclusion, based on our research beginning in early 1997,is that our presentation to the City I of Arden Hills in the matter of building materials, or any other mater, has never been disguised or misleading in any way. It appears evident to us that the drawings identified as Exhibit A Page 7 and Page 8 of 10 pages presented at the April 2, 1997 Planning Commission meeting and Exhibit I A page 3 and page 4 presented at the October I, 1997 City Council meeting clearly refer to the incorpomtion of othe, buildiag materia',s ,n addition ,0 brick. The preliminarj and f;,lal drawings ,. clearly reinforce our original intent. Refer to page 1/A3.2 Lower Level Floor Plan and page l/A3.4 Upper Level Floor Plan that specifically refer to wall sections on the west wall of the 7 a:'.cityufmlcnhills\aNnhls. I --