| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CITY OF MESA
MINUTES OF THE
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
SEPTEMBER 2, 2009
A meeting of the Design Review Board was held in the Lower Level of the Council Chambers 57 East First Street, at 5:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
Tim Nielsen - Chair Lesley Davis
Wendy LeSueur – Vice Chair Debbie Archuleta
Tom Bottomley Tom Ellsworth
Craig Boswell John Wesley
Delight Clark Angelica Guevara
Dan Maldonado Dan Brock
Dan Stubbs
MEMBERS ABSENT Shahir Safi
Nicole Posten
Greg Lambright Bruce Heywood
Brent Henderson
Zona Savage
Tammy Sampson
A. Call to Order:
Chair Tim Nielsen called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
B. Approval of the Minutes of the August 5, 2009 Meeting:
On a motion by Craig Boswell seconded by Delight Clark the Board unanimously approved the minutes.
C. Election of Officers:
Boardmember Boswell nominated Tim Nielsen for Chair
Vote: Unanimous
Boardmember Boswell nominated Wendy LeSueur as Vice-Chair
Vote: Unanimous
D. Design Review Cases:
CASE #: DR09-16 Fire Station 220
LOCATION/ADDRESS: 5763 East Main Street
REQUEST: Approval of 13,705 sq. ft. COM Fire Station
COUNCIL DISTRICT: District 5
OWNER: City of Mesa
APPLICANT: Dan Brock
ARCHITECT: Dan Brock
STAFF PLANNER: Lesley Davis
REQUEST: Approval of a 13,705 sq. ft. COM Fire Station
SUMMARY: Dan Brock and Nicole Posten represented the case. Mr. Brock explained the project would be a LEED Gold building constructed of insulated concrete with block veneer, and would have solar panels. The parking for Fire Personnel would be secured behind gates.
Boardmember Tom Bottomley was concerned with the white roof on the large sloped planes. He liked the contrast with the brick but not in this form. He was concerned the roof would look dirty most of the year. He stated the north elevation was the least attractive and was the most visible. He thought the split face element at the bay doors was out of scale.
Boardmember Wendy LeSueur agreed with Boardmember Bottomley. She thought the white was too stark, the entry should have more detail, and there should be more shadowing. She also thought the lights should be decorative.
Chair Tim Nielsen confirmed the apparatus doors would be different, with bay doors on the west and bi-fold doors on the east.
Boardmember Bottomley asked if the north elevation could be more detailed. Mr. Brock explained the functions are utilitarian. He stated they could use split face instead of brick; however, the floor plan cannot be changed. He stated the white roof was for the LEED. He could tweek the roof massing, but they have to screen some equipment and exhaust fans. He also suggested adding high windows.
Bruce Heywood, the owner of the Advanced Health Care of Mesa, adjacent to the west, then spoke and stated he was concerned with the noise from the fire trucks. He wanted a light on Main so they would not need to turn on the sirens until they were down the road. He also wanted the west wall to be 8’. He thought the building was beautiful, and was happy the trucks would pull out to the east.
Dan Stubbs Assistant Chief, Mesa Fire, then spoke and stated the Fire Department is very sensitive to noise issues. He stated there should be a light at 58 Street. He said they always try to be good neighbors.
Chair Nielsen asked if they could sand fill the wall or use landscaping to mitigate the noise. Mr. Stubbs stated they have not found anything like that, that works. They could try an 8’ wall if it is allowed. He stated that as landscaping matures they seem to get fewer complaints.
Dan Brock stated they will be building a new median break with a light. He stated they could build an 8’ wall, and use landscaping to increase sound mitigation.
Zona Savage, another area neighbor, then spoke. She had several questions: What area will the station cover; when would it be built; would area property values go up or down? She also wanted the City to annex the County area to the north to help cover the cost of the fire station. Chair Nielsen explained that the Design Review Board only reviews the design of the building. He suggested possibly Mr. Stubbs and Mr. Safir could answer her questions in the lobby, outside the Lower Level chambers. She stated that when Fire goes in next door they are very respectful. She also stated she had no problem with the white roof.
Boardmember Dan Maldonado suggested using trees with a denser growth along the drainage channel.
Boardmember Bottomley stated he was concerned with the bi-fold doors and asked if they could use the roll up doors instead. Mr. Brock stated they have to use the bi-fold doors because they function better. They are using the rollup doors on the west because they are far less expensive and because they would be using them to bring the trucks back in to the building so they can take more time. He stated they could add horizontal lines to the bi-fold doors. He then suggested using the exposed truss element on the middle of the north elevation. Boardmember Bottomley stated he was still concerned with the hipped shade element at the entry. Boardmember LeSueur thought the element detracted from the entry. She suggested they eliminate it completely, and use trees to provide shade. Chair Nielsen suggested using a fascia element, instead of the hipped roofs.
MOTION: It was moved by Tom Bottomley and seconded by Wendy LeSueur that DR09-16 be approved with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the development as described in the Design Review Board staff report and as shown on the site plan, landscape plan, floor plans and exterior elevations.
a. Provide an 8’ wall on the west and south property lines.
b. On the north elevation, provide the same entry gable on the SES room, as the one at the main entry on the east elevation.
c. Appartus doors on the east to match the pattern of the doors on the west.
d. Study the detailing on south elevation, look at replacing the hipped element with a fascia.
e. Provide decorative lighting.
f. Replace the Palo Brea along the west with a denser tree species.
2. Compliance with all City development codes and regulations.
3. Compliance with all requirements of the Development Services, Engineering, Transportation, and Solid Waste Departments.
4. Compliance with all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations if the pad/building sites are to be individually owned or if there is to be a condominium form of ownership.
5. All backflow preventers 2” or larger shall be screened with landscape material located within a 6’ radius of the backflow preventer. All backflow preventers less than 2” shall be placed in a wire mesh basket and painted green. (The City of Mesa has requested the change to green, to discourage theft.)
6. Fire risers, building downspouts and roof access ladders are to be located within the building.
VOTE: Passed 5 – 0 (Boardmember Clark left prior to the vote)
CASE #: DR09-17 Public Safety Training Facility
LOCATION/ADDRESS: 3260 North 40th Street
REQUEST: Approval of a 24,246 sq. ft. addition to the existing City of Mesa Public Safety Training Facility
COUNCIL DISTRICT: District 5
OWNER: City of Mesa
APPLICANT: Dan Brock
ARCHITECT: Dan Brock
STAFF PLANNER: Lesley Davis
REQUEST: Approval of a 24,246 sq. ft. addition to the existing City of Mesa Public Safety Training Facility
SUMMARY: Dan Brock and Nicole Posten represented the case. Mr. Brock explained this building would be an expansion of the existing Police and Fire Training Facility. The building would allow additional floor space for recruit training and additional space for administrative offices, which would allow the Police and Fire to each have their own administrative office. There would also be a medical office, which would be used for physical exams for Police and Fire personnel. He stated that other agencies would use the clinic. The building was designed using the same materials and similar design of the existing auditorium. He stated there would be a shaded outdoor patio, and there would be landscaping around the building and in the new parking area.
MOTION: It was moved by Craig Boswell and seconded by Tom Bottomley that DR09-17 be approved with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the development as described in the Design Review Board staff report and as shown on the site plan, landscape plan, floor plans and exterior elevations.
2. Compliance with all City development codes and regulations.
3. Compliance with all requirements of the Development Services, Engineering, Transportation, and Solid Waste Departments.
4. Compliance with all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations if the pad/building sites are to be individually owned or if there is to be a condominium form of ownership.
5. All backflow preventers 2” or larger shall be screened with landscape material located within a 6’ radius of the backflow preventer. All backflow preventers less than 2” shall be placed in a wire mesh basket and painted green. (The City of Mesa has requested the change to green, to discourage theft.)
6. Fire risers, building downspouts and roof access ladders are to be located within the building.
VOTE: Passed 5 – 0 (Boardmember Clark left prior to discussion of this case)
E. Other business:
Planning Director, John Wesley, then told the Board that the Council discussion regarding modification of the various Boards would probably take place in early October.
F. Adjournment:
Respectfully submitted,
Debbie Archuleta
Planning Assistant
da