Agenda - Council - 03/08/2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

s- Utilities Supervisor Nelson explained the process noting that ultimately those materials would go p p p g y sewer s through the sanitary stem and end u at a larger water treatment facility. g y p • ' • feedback on the massing diagram, elevations and Senior Planner McGuire B��gl asked for feedb g g � � architectural renderings. Commissioner pp Geng ler stated that she appreciates the attention to detail and elements that pull the facility together ether with its surroundings and make it aesthetically pleasing. Commissioner Anderson asked the purpose ur of the burn outs and whether that is just an aesthetic p � p element. He stated that he does not prefer those bump outs. Mr. England stated that the bum outs are for aesthetic purposes to add relief and break up that g p p � single elevation that faces the public works facility and Highway 10. He stated that it brings g p y dimensionality to a single material face. Chairperson Bauer noted that there are design requirements in The COR and agreed that the bump outs break up �that fa ade. He stated that if this side were just one continuous material, that wall would not be aesthetically pleasing. Commissioner Anderson commented that this is an expensiveg building and was unsure that feature =' was needed. He stated that he would prefer to not have the bump outs. l Chairperson Bauer asked a rough estimate for the bump outs. Mr. England commented that the cost difference to exclude the bump outs would be fairly minimal as it is Just a bit of framing to bring out that material. He stated that perhaps it is not a series of patterned-bum outs but somethingelse that breaks u that fagade. He believed it would draw p p p i more attention to not having anything along that wall. f Commissioner Anderson commented that part of the building faces the public works building and did not think attention should be drawn to a water treatment plant. He commented that if attention is drawn to the facility,it could create a security issue. He stated that he would prefer the building to appear plain. Senior Planner McGuire Brigl commented that staff can work with the architect to review options to break up that fagade. She stated that the City would still want to follow its design requirements. Commissioner walker commented that he likes the appearance of the building. He noted that he does understand the concern of Commission Anderson but wants the facility to look nice and not like a large garage. He referenced the landscaping and ongoing maintenance costs. He commented. that he thinks the building looks fabulous. Chairperson Bauer thanked staff for the presentation and acknowledged that this is a need for the `p community because of the issues with water quality. Planning Commission/January 27,2022 Page 4 of 22