ARB - October 27th 2016

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
Mayfield
Village
Oct 27, 2016

The Architectural Review Board met in regular session on Thurs, Oct 27, 2016 at 7:30 p.m. at the Mayfield Village Civic Center Conference Room. Chairman Parker presided.    

ROLL CALL

Present: Mr. Ed Parker, Chairman (Ed recused himself @ 7:45 pm serving as Meeting Chair to present Bandshell Project), Mr. Ivo Tombazzi, Mrs. MaryAnn Wervey, and Mr. Joshua Klein

Absent: Mr. Carmen Miozzi (Chairman Pro Tem)

Also Present: Mr. John Marrelli (Building Commissioner) and Ms. Deborah Garbo (Secretary), Steve Jerome (Councilman), and Garry Regan (The Grove Committee Chair)

CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTESJuly 28, 2016

Consideration of minutes deferred to next meeting date.  

CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTESOct 13, 2016

Mr. Klein, seconded by Mrs. Wervey made a motion to approve the minutes of Oct 13, 2016. 

ROLL CALL

Ayes: All 

Nays: None               

Motion Carried. Minutes Approved as Written.

PROPOSAL:

  1. Addition of (2) Loading Docks
    Weston, Inc.
    600 Beta Dr.
    FMC Architects, LLC

DISCUSSION:

  1. The Grove Amphitheatre
    425 North Commons Blvd.
    Bandshell Project
    MELD Architects

OPEN PORTION:

Weston, Inc
600 Beta Dr.
Dock Additions

Chairman Parker called the meeting to order. We’ll begin with the addition of two loading docks at 600 Beta Dr.

Rob Namy, Chief Operating Officer with Weston, Inc introduced himself.

Frank Castrovillari, AIA, President FMC Architects introduced himself.  With the previous project, we provided docks at the rear of the building. A tenant came in and took up a good portion of that.

Weston is pursuing tenants to get in this side of the building, but the biggest thing is we need the dock door. We did an elevation, the best location for it is right where we put it for means of access to the street and the swing around for trucks. We provided a screen wall to help hide the big truck that’s going to be parked there. Not all day long, they usually come in the morning, do their stuff for a couple hours and take off in the evening. The wall’s approximately 15’ on the left hand side, the dock goes down, the grading will go from 8’ to 10’. The street’s actually 7’ below that. That’s why we only went 8’ high with the walls. We believe with the additional 7 feet, anybody driving by won’t see probably 90% of that truck head on.

We’re going to try to match the building. If you don’t know what the building looks like, it’s one of those stone precast panels, probably 20 different colors in there. We can’t get CMU to match all 20 colors so we picked out the most vibrant color. This is the color that’ll match the majority of the front of the building, it’ll be split face; sample displayed. The grout color will match this as well. On top, we’ll cap it with a preform concrete cap that’ll look like limestone.

Councilman Jerome asked, can you add a color into the concrete top?

Frank Castrovillari replied, we can add a mixture to it. It’ll be a little more expensive to do it that way.

Rob Namy said, if you haven’t seen the docks on the rear of the building, they really came out spectacular. We have the capstone on the top of those, retaining walls on either side. The surrounding of the building, I think we matched the block really well also. We’re trying to do the same thing here.

Mr. Marrelli said, if they’re going to form and do grey concrete, can you get the color right, but you’re telling me that they’re pre-made.

Frank Castrovillari replied yes, it’s made out of concrete, adding a mixture in there looks just like limestone. It’s an alternate to limestone, and the building does have some headers and things like that that are pretty colorish. If you want it to match this color, we’ll do that.

Mr. Marrelli said, it’ll probably look better in the contrasting cap.

Mrs. Wervey agreed.

Chairman Parker’s main concern is, is this a part of the back of the building? Is this setting precedence on Beta?

Mr. Marrelli directed everyone to Sheet A-1 of the site plan. The front of the building is near the top of your sheet. You can see the setback. I asked for the screen wall when I was on site meeting with the contractors. If you go down the street, the other buildings, their docks are like this one on the size. There’s nothing in front of the front wall. But behind the front wall, it’s dock city. Because of the way this building is configured, the front is on the north east end, this is actually the side. That lends itself to them being able to use it. It’s closer to the front than most. There’s not enough depth on the north side to make that turn. Correct me if I’m wrong that if you don’t get tenants that require this kind of dockage, you’re not going to actually construct it?

Frank Castrovillari replied, we’re seeking approval because there are a couple of tenants who are interested. If the tenant wants it, then we have approval and we’ll build it. If we get a tenant that says they don’t need it because he has a smaller truck and there’s a smaller dock back here for a smaller truck, then Weston doesn’t want to spend the money and put a dock in that’s not going to be used. We’re just trying to get all the preliminary stuff done and all the dollars associated with it to say we have approval and we’re ready. I understand the permit is good for one year.

Chairman Parker said, I was worried if this loading dock got built and their lease expires, I feel weird about that being on Beta Dr. and the potential of having an empty loading dock facing Beta Drive.

Rob Namy gives a little history on the building. This building has been empty for 10 years. We got involved maybe a year ago. We’ve been able to bring a tenant to the table right now and occupy half the building. We put a brand new roof on it. Just today we passed all our final inspections. We brought a new company here to Mayfield Village, a terrific company called Mr. Beams/Wireless Environment. I don’t want to say one of the three potential prospects that we’re working with right now for sure are going to go in there, but we have three really good prospects that we’re working with right now. We don’t do well when we sit with empty buildings. Our goal is always to keep buildings occupied. This will help us with marketing the property. Everybody that we’ve talked to so far has said there just isn’t enough room for a 53’ – 56’ trailer to come in there.

Chairman Parker asked, when do you anticipate that you would have one?

Rob Namy replied, in four months we’ll have an occupant.

Mrs. Wervey asked, did a Structural Engineer do this detail?

Frank Castrovillari replied, I did the details and the Structural Engineer reviewed it.

Mr. Marrelli said, our Civil Engineer looked at it and came up with a handful of questions that are being worked on.

Mrs. Wervey states, unfortunately I have much experience with these retaining walls that have fallen.

Frank Castrovillari said, the good thing is the existing grade is already 2 feet down. Technically our dock only has to go down another 2 feet. The wind is actually the biggest issue.

Mrs. Wervey comments, the biggest issue is to make sure they build per plan.

Frank Castrovillari said, we’ve got a very good contractor. He did the other docks on the other side. He’s been working with the company for years.

DECISION:

Mr. Klein, seconded by Mr. Tombazzi made a motion to approve the proposed Two (2) Loading Docks for Weston, Inc at 600 Beta Drive as proposed. 

ROLL CALL

Ayes: Mr. Parker, Mr. Tombazzi, Mrs. Wervey, Mr. Klein        

Nays: None                                      

Motion Carried. Drawings Approved.

Mr. Marrelli asked, what color are the overhead doors?

Rob Namy replied tan, just like we did on the other doors in the back.

****************************************************************************

Mr. Parker recused himself at this point 7:45 p.m. serving as meeting Chairman to present Bandshell Project.

The Grove Amphitheatre
425 NCB
Bandshell Project Presentation
MELD Architects

Ed Parker with MELD Architects begins presentation. For the past 8 – 9 months now we’ve been working with the Grove Committee to look at the future of the bandshell. Preliminarily we were looking at budget studies to see how much money we could get in the first year and then Phase II for the second year which would be in 2018 which would be the Green Room.

  • History of The Grove by Garry Regan

Mr. Regan introduced himself as Planning & Zoning Member, also Chair of The Grove Committee. In 2012 the then Mayor asked a group of citizens, staff and a couple members of Council to sit around the table and come up with some ideas about a template for this hill that was rising on SOM Ctr. that nobody seemed to know what it was for. To take you back about 20 years in history when the Village was going through with the building of Parkview Pool at Wilson Mills at the then Progressive headquarters, we said, wouldn’t it be nice if we had an outdoor area, an outdoor Amphitheatre type for different events. That’s always been in the back of minds. A lot of us are from the east side of Cleveland, Cain Park area.

The fill dirt was acquired, the hill starting rising up and then they finally grassed it in. In 2012 the Mayor asked us to come up with an idea for a building and programming. Out of that with the help of everybody has come to be known as The Grove, a neat little outdoor Amphitheatre that sits right next to the Village Pool, across from Progressive, right at the terminus of The Bruce G. Rinker Greenway Trail.

The first year we put in the stage that you see there, pathways and a bike rack. Lighting in the second year. The first year we rented everything; generators, power, audio, and a tent. We had 4 programs.

The second year we had 16 or 18 programs. We got power, bollards. The Village ran power from SOM. We had lights. Then instead of renting the tent, we bought the 20 x 40 tent. We used that as a bandshell and storage room. We continued with that for 3 years.

Last year with the construction going on at the Community Room, and the inability to use the green space at the Gazebo, four concerts that normally would have taken place at the Gazebo were moved down to The Grove on Thursday nights. Also because of the shift of the fireworks display, we were able to coordinate a massive Grove event where we had 1200 people for fireworks that night. We did 26 events, Fridays, Saturdays, a few Thursdays and a couple of Sundays.

Our planning and wish list have always been supported 100% by both Mayfield Village Administration and Council with both the infrastructure and programming.

  • Cuyahoga County Grant Program

We’ve started talking permanency. Although the tent is nice, it didn’t give us a lot of flexibility. We ran the idea by and was well received by Council, let’s go ahead with the planning process, the concept idea of what you see there. We’ve had a couple iterations. For the entire summer at The Grove, we had a concept board out there, similar to what you see tonight. We’ve made some changes. The Mayor, Ed, Diane, Bill Thomas, John and I have been meeting every two or three weeks to come up with ideas & costs. We’re getting to the point where we’re close.

In the spring there was an announcement made by Cuyahoga County that the County was going to do a two year program called the Community Development Supplemental Grant Program. Most community development grant programs are tied to income, housing and other requirements that pretty much exclude places like Mayfield Village. This supplemental grant program is being put out as a merit program. Those stipulations as far as income, poverty and housing do not apply to this grant program. It’s open to all projects. When it came out I immediately sent it to the powers that be to see if there’s a match here. The Mayor and I went down to the County. We had follow up calls with the Community Development people on where we were at in our process. We had a concept, we were talking budget. The Grove is open to everyone, it’s free. We don’t ask for residency. Our story line is only 3400 people, we can’t do this with just ourselves. We need other people in order to make it work for us as well. It was well received. There’re no guarantees, but the comments we received back from the County were that we were far ahead in our process. We believe we have a very good project.

We’re looking at $50,000 towards our construction. It’s a two year program, we won’t get it all in the first year, but we’ll apply again in the second year for Phase II for the other $50,000. It’s $50,000 for each application for two years.

Phase I will be signage on SOM. We’ve been there four years and people still ask; where is it? We have some signage out there, but we don’t have electricity on SOM so we don’t have any lighted signage. On days of events, we run out with 2 sandwich boards that say ‘Event Tonight’. This LED signage that’s being proposed for Phase I only for SOM right now, will have the events going on.

Ed has provided us with an acoustics evaluation. We’re looking for functionality, aesthetics. This will give us permanency. As we get into Phase II, that’ll give us storage on site and also what’s known as a Green Room, a changing facility for the performers.

  • Presentation of proposed Bandshell by Ed Parker, MELD Architects

Mr. Parker begins. From concept to where we are today, all of the changes that have been made have been driven by cost and function of the actual acoustics and the space. With the original design we were doing the arch right off of the offset of the existing arch. After being evaluated by an acoustical engineer, we learned that’s a very bad idea because of the effect that it points all the sound directly back to the center. That’s why you see these changes.

Tom Cappello presented us with a survey showing a 36” sewer line that goes directly into the center of the stage. The reason I bring that up is the changes/switching helped us to dodge that sewer line.

Comments made about our original materials was that they were really good for reflecting sound but once again, with that shape, it was reflecting it all back to the center. Part of the image of the roof was to have a nice monolithic wood roof. Through conversation, the angle would actually not have projected it out exactly where we want it. We needed a little more depth here, so this knife edge helps to project, it’s not on the same angle as the roof.

Materials, we’re showing cedar. This actually will have a ¾” gap between it. Cedar with spaces between them.

Mrs. Wervey asked, is that real space? When it rains does rain come in there?

Mr. Parker replied, it’ll come into the wall, this will be a race wing and it’ll bleed right through.

Let’s talk about the structure. We started the concept, there’s a lot of cantilevers and extremely thin beams which makes it really heavy. We started looking at engineering to see if there were other ways to do it. We looked at doing larger structural members and then having the roof as purlins going opposing direction. Another thing we looked at was putting wood to the bottom of the purlins also. This Phase only included generic lighting in a sense that it’s providing house light, safety lighting, not stage lighting. So our concern was if we finish this with wood and in the future we come back with audio and stage lighting, now we have to tear the wood apart. I showed it both ways, and honestly, everybody liked the exposed purlins. On the top, it will be solid for projecting sound.

Mrs. Wervey asked, what’s the point of this, is it to project sound or to have cover?

Mr. Regan replied, both. Another thing is when you’re sitting on the hill facing west, the sun in every one of our evening performances was setting in your eyes. This will give us we’re estimating about 15 - 20 minutes of additional sunscreen. The other thing, we can adjust the timing of our programs.

Mr. Parker states, we did go through a bunch of sun shading studies to show exactly what would be needed to achieve shade on the hill.

Mr. Regan said, the purpose of this is to give this a professional look and to give it permanency. It’ll give us flexibility. Certain people won’t come here unless you can provide them some shelter. Diane’s talked about maybe having the Appreciation Dinner at The Grove in the future.

Mr. Klein asked, what’s the dimensions on this, the usable space, how big is this?

Mr. Parker replied, 1500 sq. ft. range. This at the widest is about 55’ - 60’. Back to the question about sound. My understanding is that everything about this structure is for theater & performance. So sound, a focal point, everything going with that function. The shelter side of it, we’ve had many conversations, honestly, if you get to the point that you’re actually talking about it being a shelter, people will go, yeah right.

Mr. Regan said, right now we’re talking about an orchestra that has 70 people in it. If they come, you want to present it in such a way that’s it’s a classy presentation.

Mr. Klein said, I think it’s cool. Do you have a projected budget?

Mr. Parker replied, Phase I is at about $325,000 - $350,000 and that included Phase I renderings. Phase II is basically the storage and the sign that faces the parking lot. If we built it now you’d have an unfinished side on the back side, before you would finish it spending more money than you would need to when you do finish it.

Mr. Klein asked, how will it affect the sound if Phase II never gets done? 

Mr. Parker replied, I’m being guaranteed that Phase II is happening.

Mrs. Wervey said, I think you have to think about that.

Mr. Regan said, I must tell you that everybody who has performed at The Grove has said that we have good acoustics. Even when we use the tent and the tent projects the sound, just doesn’t do it as efficiently as those lines do. I’m not an engineer, but I don’t think we’ll suffer in Phase I, I think we’ll gain something. When we had the tent, we had some very hot evenings and people asked us to take the sides down. The music goes out the side. We’ll have to deal with that for 8 months.

Councilman Jerome asked, why does the structure sit back so far? If the circle is supposed to be the stage, why is it covering half of it?

Mr. Parker replied, because of the sewer line. 

Councilman Jerome said, I wouldn’t put it in the wrong place just because of the sewer. 

Mr. Regan said, it’s not in the wrong place. We’ve eliminated a potential issue by moving it back. We’re getting the same structure, the same amount of use.

Mr. Parker added, you do get a little bit more stage area, but there are some benefits to pushing it back also. Now you’re going to get a little bit more paving by that corner. I know that it’s very insignificant how much that paving is. But what it does is it frames the columns better.

Mr. Marrelli states, you’ll get better site lines from the top of the hill with it pushed back.

Councilman Jerome asked, how tall are the left and right wall?

Mr. Parker replied, left 8 / 8, right 11 / 8 and back wall at 13 / 4.

Councilman Jerome said, I think that right wall seems like a wall for a jail. It seems so tall.

Mr. Parker said, it is a large wall. Part of what’s driving it is the fact that it’s going to be for storage.

Discussion ensued about moving the whole structure up.

Mrs. Wervey suggests, I would put something out there that’s physically that tall to see what it’s going to look like.

Mr. Klein agreed. It won’t be going in during Phase I, so you could have Phase I built and put something temporary there to see how it feels.

Mr. Parker agreed that’s a good point.

Councilman Jerome asked, is there a way to make those walls shorter?

Mr. Parker replied, in my mind I see this getting developed even further and potentially having concessions and bathrooms in there. The shape of the Green Room, it could go longer and wider. Right now it’s being tracked as a 650 sq. ft. room.

Mr. Regan said, when you talk to the programming side of it, they say you need a bigger Green Room. When you talk to the Service Dept. they say you need a bigger storage room. If we ever acquire lights or sound, maybe. This is not designed to be an all-weather place or an all-purpose room.

Councilman Jerome states, I’m in agreement, we need it. It should be a certain size. I just worry about how we fit this. Your point is good, set something up temporarily to see how it’s actually going to look when you’re on the hill.  

Mr. Parker said, I was thinking flexibility for stage props.

Mr. Regan said, I think Phase I will give us an opportunity to maybe re-visit that wall size. I want to remind everyone, if you have the time, come to the Public Meeting on Monday, Nov 14th at 7:00 p.m. at the Community Room. I don’t think the County seems to care, it’s just a requirement for the grant funding. I myself want people there. I’d rather have 30 people there cheering and screaming and supporting it than nobody showing because they’re happy with it and if you don’t like it, don’t show up.

Mrs. Wervey said, but you need to hear both sides.

Mr. Parker states, originally we were showing a stone finish. As we were going through this trying to figure out how we could make this thing more economical, we found this Castle Rock product. It’s a regular CMU product but it actually is a split face. The biggest thing to note about this is that it is a CMU. It’ll be saving us a lot of money. Size is 8” & 4”, we’re running two walls next to each other. One of the reasons why we’re doing that is because the joints of the CMU will get really sloppy on one side of the wall because of the curve.

Mrs. Wervey asked Ed to demonstrate on the rendering.

Mr. Parker explained design & materials to the Board. Multiple alternates will be added to this packet. I think I’m going to BID as an alternate a cast stone. We’ll have an alternate for the lights, regular glow light safety and then alternate potential 256 color LED’s. In the future, that would be the sound and lighting phase. One of the concerns I had up front was the lighting. Through research, all of the stage lighting has to be further away from the audience because we drop shadows on them. Originally we thought we could light the stage from the canopy. But as we explored that further, the lighting would need to be more out here. Phase III might, depending on how far this got developed, there could be potentially lighting spots at the edges here. Lighting is a future phase, it’s not going to be in our budget now and we really need to engage with people that do theatre.

Mr. Regan said, we’re going to crawl before we walk. There’s also potential for a drop down screen for movies.

Mrs. Wervey asked, if you get the $50,000 from the County, what stipulations do they put on you?

Mr. Regan replied, what they’re looking for is; is it going to get done? Where’s the rest of the money? Does it enhance the community services? It sounds like we’re going to be able to walk in that room and say we’re going to build this with or without you. The application is due Dec 23rd. The BIDS will be in by then. That’s going to enhance what we’re presenting to them. They want to spend the money. This is casino money.

Mr. Parker said, I asked the same question in trying to understand how it would be perceived up front. We’re building this no matter what. If you give us the money, it helps us.

Mr. Regan added, and you could be a part of it.

Mrs. Wervey said, that’s the question. When you say “You could be a part of it”, what does that mean?

Mr. Regan replied, there will be something in the paper that says the County gave money to this. Other than the Public Meeting requirement, that’s it. When I asked them they said most of the other people will have road projects.

Councilman Jerome said, I think the fact that it’s open to everyone, that helps. We don’t charge anyone. It’s not just for Mayfield Village residents. 

Mr. Regan states, we pay taxes too here. When we went to the County, I asked the question, are we wasting our time because we’re not a needy community. They made a point to say its merit. I think Council did have to pass a resolution to seek the funding. We have to have the Public Meeting, we’re allowed up to 13 pages for our application, I wrote a letter, we’ll attach Ed’s work, we’ll clip our BIDS and we’ll go with it. Again, no guarantees. I’ve been told we’re so far along and they want to spend the money.

Mrs. Wervey asked about soil borings for the walls.

Mr. Parker replied, we just did those. I don’t have the results yet, should have those next week.

Councilman Jerome said, I’m going back to the walls and making sure they’re not going to block the natural aspect of The Grove. What if you set this up where you could put shrubbery and bushes in front of the wall. The natural setting is what people like about The Grove.

Mr. Parker replied, by moving it back did give us more planting room. The question will be who is planting it. That’ll be a talk we need to have, maybe the Garden Club.

Councilman Jerome said, the wall bothers me because of the natural setting. If there’s room to put some plants and it softens it, I think that’ll help.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, Mr. Klein, seconded by Mrs. Wervey made a motion to adjourn the meeting.

ROLL CALL:

Ayes: All
Nays: None

Motion Carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.