Agenda - 11-12-2013 - 1 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Informal Resident Advisory Work Group Cedar Grove Community Center August 13, 2013 Page 2of7 21 • John Thomas stated the program showed a 40% factor for walls, toilets, circulation, mechanical and other spaces and explained that this was standard factor that was used for non - program space at the programming stage. However, because this project is a renovation project, the final number for this factor will likely be lower. • The group was reminded that only 10,000 square feet of renovation has been funded. • The concept of mothballing versus deconstruction of the classroom wings was discussed. Jeff Thompson stated that the $250,000 budgeted for deconstruction could be used for mothballing if that approach was undertaken. ■ Mothballing of the wings will require installation of minimal HVAC to maintain a temperature above 55 degrees in the winter and below 80 degrees in the summer, upgrade of the fire alarm to meet current codes and fire rated walls and doors to provide isolation of the classroom wings. • To meet the charge from the Commissioners, two alternate approaches will be explored, a mothball plan based on reusing the existing bathrooms and a deconstruction plan including new replacement bathrooms. • However no final decision or recommendation had been made on whether the wings are to remain and be mothballed or if the wings are to be removed had been made at this stage. • The Committee will make a recommendation to the Commissioners in October for a preferred approach. The final decision to mothball or deconstruct the wings will be made by the Commissioners • The group was reminded about the septic field limitations. The existing septic tank has a 2,400 gallon a day capacity, the building if fully utilized requires 3,500 gallon a day capacity. The park has been allocated 1,000 gallons a day of the capacity for its septic system. Therefore, 1,400 gallons of capacity are available for the renovated facility. • There was discussion regarding whether the 1,000 gallon a day figure included the planned bathrooms in Phase 2 of the park. Lori provided the architect with information at the meeting that stated this number was only for Phase 1 of the park. • Phase 2 of the park is not planned to be constructed for at least 5 years. • The county environmental health department has done a preliminary review of the septic system and believed that 1,400 gallon a day was enough capacity for a "reasonable" 10,000 square foot community center. • The site is located within a "critical" watershed and the impervious surface maybe limited to 6% of the total site area. The architect needs to review this with the Orange County Planning Department and verify is this correct as several of the support staff members in attendance believed that this was not the correct number. Gravel parking lots are counted as "impervious" surface. ■ The additional land purchased across Hwy 86 for a future septic field is not "contiguous" and cannot be used to offset impervious surface requirements, but could be the site for a proposed "park and ride" lot. • It has been asked previously if a police substation had been discussed as a possible use of the building. At this point it has not been included. • John Thomas presented four preliminary options for the rehabilitation of the building to the group. The preliminary plans were conceptual in nature and intended to prompt discussion about the relationships between spaces and their sizes. The group was encouraged to look for elements in the various plans they like and do not like. As the plans are developed and refined over the next few weeks furniture and other items will be added to the plans to show how each space could be used and laid out. • The highlights and differences in each option were discussed. These included the following; o Option "A" ■ The existing Gymatorium remains in place and the roof is not raised