Loading...
10/10/2022 - Meeting Minutes MEETING MINUTES SALT LAKE CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING CONSERVANCY AND USE COMMITTEE ELECTRONIC MEETING HELD, MONDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2022 COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT EX OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT Rob Pett, Acting Committee Chair Jim Cleland, SLC Facilities Catherine Tucker LNovember Joan Swain, SLC Facilities Jennifer Hale Jaysen Oldroyd, SLC Attorney's Office untn$NA111q Barbara Murphy Commian Aiden Lillie, SLC Planning Kathy Davis T_COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT Mom ,2022 ' OTHER GUESTS AND VISITORS Steve Cornell, Committee Chair Preston Croxford, Archiplex Group John Kemp, Vice Chair Anne Oliver Rob Pett welcomed everyone to today's meeting,this 10th of October 2022 and noted there are some attending in-person here, in the Cutler Room at the Salt Lake City and County Building, and others participating via Webex. Rob asked for a roll call of everyone participating and participants responded as follows: Rob Pett, Acting Committee Chair; Catherine Tucker, Committee Member;Jennifer Hale, Committee Member; Barbara Murphy, Committee Member; Kathy Davis, Committee Member;Jim Cleland, SLC Facilities;Joan Swain, SLC Facilities;Jaysen Oldroyd, SLC Attorney's Office; Aiden Lillie, SLC Planning; Preston Croxford,Archiplex Group (Applicant). Agenda Item 1: Review and Approval of Meeting Minutes from September 12th, 2022. Rob asked the Committee if they had a chance to review the minutes and if not, he would allow a few minutes for review. Rob requested a change starting on page three and going throughout the document to change the spelling from "mote"to "moat" where mentioned. Barbara Murphy motioned to approve the minutes with the one correction that Rob mentioned for September 12, 2022. Catherine Tucker seconded the motion. Rob asked for a vote to approve the minutes. The Committee voted unanimously to approve the minutes. Agenda Item 2: Transformer Project Update by Archiplex Group (Preston Croxford) Preston Croxford from Archiplex Group presented an update of his drawing for the transformer replacement after the discussion from the previous meeting. Joan Swain confirmed that those not physically present had copies so that they could also view the updated drawings (Document A100.1). Preston explained the following: 1 Previous drawings were misrepresentative somewhat of the significance of the encroachment on the patio and existing landscape. Additionally, concerns regarding the transformer vault proximity to the moat and building foundation was also addressed in the drawings by opting to move the transformer vault more to the east.This would move it completely outside of the landscape and instead under the parking lot area which would make encroachment of any kind, minimal. Preston referred to the dashed line on the left-hand image of document A100.1 and stated that this would be the new area affected. Some paving would need to be removed in this version but would be replaced with paving that matches what is existing in the area already. Rob Pett confirmed that they modified the floor plan to accommodate this new spacing and Preston confirmed,though said it's not a major change and only resulted in moving the vault a few feet to the east due to the representation not being accurate in the last meeting. Rob Pett asked for clarification on if the new drawing included new rooms being added as well and Preston confirmed that only the area included in the 27 x 27 dotted line marking was to be added on and that the area outside of that was the existing transformer room.The new transformer vault will be accessed by going through the old vault, so it is included in the drawings. Jim Cleland clarified that the beginning of the vault will start at the curb and go out 27 feet from there being located completely under the eastern parking lot. Rob Pett confirmed with Jim Cleland that the existing features of the current vault will stay, but that the stack will be lost as the generator will be across the street. Preston Croxford went on to discuss the image on the right of document A100.1 stating that the red dotted line showed the vault dimensions from above ground and showed what area would be affected with the new vault installation.The only items it doesn't show that are more fully represented on the line drawing is the "line of concrete joint to align with removeable vault lid below" and "new steel access cover flush with pavement." Preston said the steel cover and concrete joint would be the main features after construction to show there was a vault below for repairs and the like. Rob Pett requested clarification on if the finish grade would eliminate the differential settling of the parking lot as it is, but Jim Cleland stated that area would not be affected and would remain. Rob confirmed with Preston that the concrete would be flush with the fire lane and not the curb. Catherine Tucker brought up concerns of the fire lane stating that any reengineering of that area needs to have traffic loading that is both sufficient for current emergency vehicles, as well as future. At base, it needs to support 80,000 pounds, but there is the potential of moving to electric emergency vehicles, which would require an even heavier support system. Catherine asked if the plan had gone through the planning department and Preston said that it is currently under review there. Catherine mentioned that the new vault will need to tie into the existing vault and that there is no seismic separation. Because of this, it needs to be demonstrated that the existing vault meets International Building Code (IBC) 2017 Seismic Standards, or a design developed under the International Existing Building Code (IEBC) or under ASE 4917 demonstrating that the company is increasing seismic loads by less than 10%. Catherine expressed her doubts that this could be done. She shared additional concerns in that she didn't see anything that showed the walls being designed for the level of pressure required when considering the seismic and emergency vehicle requirements. Catherine made it clear that those views were not necessarily under the purview of the conservancy committee but are more so planning remodels. 2 Rob Pett asked if planning is still being done by outside companies and Jim Cleland responded no, but Catherine Tucker said that quite a few are being done by WC-3. Jennifer Hale asked about the timeline for construction and Jim Cleland said that they were hoping to get it out to bid as soon as possible as there was a delay caused by securing funding. Preston said additional delays were going to be also caused by the order for the generators and transformers being fulfilled.The construction will likely be scheduled around when the equipment can actually be received and in some cases,they are reporting a lead time of more than a year. Construction could be delayed until 2024 because of this.Jim Cleland said that this year aligns with when Rocky Mountain Power is wanting to perform the switch from the old equipment to the new as well. Jennifer Hale brought up concerns about the artwork on the parking lot where the vault would be installed.Jim Cleland said he would talk to the administration and Arts Council about it being affected and that maybe it could be a call for artwork to replace it once the vault is installed.Jennifer said that it needs to either be removed or reinstalled as it already has been worn away and doesn't look very nice anymore which was a concern of hers when the installation was first suggested. Jim Cleland stated that having the vault redone will allow the conversation to be started about a future install and upkeep expectations. Preston Croxford brought up expectations on repairing the area and that previously it was stated that there might be some requested improvements on the outdoor dining area.The committee agreed that the area would need to just be restored to its pre-construction state and Jim Cleland added that with changes to security for the building that the outdoor dining option would not be a part of the future of the building. Rob Pett brought up the question as to whether there would be a double slab for waterproofing in the vault and Preston stated that there would be as the existing vault has that feature. There will also be a drain to help if any flooding does happen. The committee asked if anyone had any additional questions or comments and the item was closed. Rob Pett thanked everyone for their comments and participation and asked if there is a motion to adjourn. Jennifer Hale motioned to adjourn. Barbara Murphy seconded the motion. Rob called for a vote. The Committee voted unanimously to adjourn. 3