Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> I ,"''1' ~._~ 'l' P/r <br /> iO. <br /> w J-< f \ ;;:, i <br /> ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - NOVEMBER 10. 1997 UJ LflJ L ~ 13 <br /> I <br /> .. would mean precast concrete. He stated he is willing to accept the compromise proposal but <br /> wishes this had occurred under a difTerent chain of events. <br /> Councilmember Hicks asked about the process of submitting plans for building inspector review. <br /> I He reviewed the memorandum indicating that on May 21, 1997 they submitted drawings that had <br /> identification saying precast tipup panels. Mr. Ringwald stated when plans are indicated as '"not <br /> . for construction" then they are not for construction. He explained that Staff does not have time <br /> to review plans that are not for construction. Mr. Ringwald explained that from the time "not for <br /> construction" plans are submittcd to the time "for construction" plans are submitted, details may <br /> . change so Staff does not waste time reviewing the "not for constmction" plans. However, StafT <br /> can dctermine a permit value based on those plans. Once the construction set of plans are <br /> received, the Building Official reviews them in relationship to the Uniform Building Code and <br /> I that is his primary responsibility. Until that review is complete thc Building Official does not <br /> look beyond that scope. Then he assures Rice Creek Watershed and Council approvals are in <br /> place. <br /> . Councilmember Hicks noted that the City received the "not for construction" plans on June 6th <br /> and then found specific reference to concrete panels on June 14th. He asked if this is a normal <br /> . timeframe for this review given the current work load. Mr. Ringwald answered affirmatively. <br /> Councilmember Hicks stated his impression that the materials were to be brick except for the <br /> I. cross and potential breakout for expansion walls. He stated his interpretation of the current <br /> building is brick but, perhaps, there should have been more discussion. Councilmember Hicks <br /> stated he is not concerned that the entire structure be all brick if there are other materials that the <br /> I neighbors believe are aesthetically pleasing. He stated he knows neighbors have been concerned <br /> about lighting and NHLC has been responsive to those concerns. Councilmember Hicks asked if <br /> I residents have been apprised of this proposal or that part of the exterior may be concrete. <br /> Mr. Ringwald explained that when this went before the Planning Commission in October, <br /> I notification was sent out. <br /> Councilmember Hicks commented on maintenance issues and asked what percenfage of the <br /> . exterior portions proposed for precast are now brick and what the dollar difference is between <br /> this proposal and all brick. <br /> . Mike Sehraad, Welsh Constmction, explained that the activity center is about 80% brick and <br /> 20% precast. <br /> I Councilmember Hicks stated the permanent exterior surface on the sanctuary is brick. Mr. <br /> Logelin stated this is correct, except for the expansion areas. <br /> I Councilmember Hicks asked what percentage of precast is now being proposed to be eovered <br /> with brick. Mr. Schraad stated it is approximately one-third. <br /> .. Council member Hicks asked how much it would cost for all brick. Mr. Logelin estimated an all <br /> brick building would be about $75,000, and $40,000 for the new proposal presented tonight. <br /> I <br />