Barton Hills Village, Michigan

shim image News

April 9, 2007



April 9, 2007

A special meeting of the Trustees was called by President Laporte for the purpose of considering the response of the Barton Hills Maintenance Corporation Board of Directors to the proposal regarding land for municipal buildings, and to hear the report and recommendations of the Village Administration Center project. The meeting was called to order by Ms. Laporte at 6:04 PM at the Village Hall

ROLL CALL Present: Trustees Al-Awar, Bogat, Boyle, Butterwick, Laporte, Lindstrom and Wilkes. Absent: Trustees Boddie and MacKrell.

Others attending: Atty. Reading, Supt. Esch, BHMC President Bultman, VAC Committee members Chuck Hescheles and John MacKrell and resident Scott Mabie.

Mr. Lindstrom distributed a written report, referring first to the objectives of the VAC Committee and asking if the Trustees are still committed to the objectives for the project.

Motion Mr. Wilkes moved that the Objectives for the Village Administration Centercommittee be reaffirmed, with the clarification that “accessible” be added to No. 1 to indicate that the project will conform to state law regarding handicap accessibility. Mr. Butterwick seconded; the motion carried. The objectives are:

Develop a cost effective plan to:

1. Provide adequate accessible working space for the administration of the

Village of Barton Hills

2. Provide adequate storage to satisfy the state and federal legal requirements

for record storage

Ensure the plan for the Administration Centeris coordinated with other potential plans

for building construction by the Village of Barton Hills

Make recommendations to the Village of Barton Hills Board of Trustees and, ultimately,

to the residents of the Village in an open forum.

Discussion then focused on the suggested “Process for Achieving a Consensus on the Exterior Design Theme for the Building.” It was acknowledged that there will be no one design that everyone is happy with, so a process is needed to evaluate and prioritize various aspects until a consensus can be reached that can be supported 100% by both Boards and presented to the community with enthusiasm. Mr. Lindstrom suggested a three-step approach whereby the VAC Committee develops priorities for the design, works with an architect to determine design options and develops alternatives to be presented to the Board for discussion. He added that the advice of an architect is needed because the committee and Board do not have extensive knowledge and experience necessary to be able to make informed decisions; further that the committee would like to continue work with architect Ed Wier on this part of the project.

The Trustees offered the following comments concerning the steps of the process.

1) Cost Effective (high priority)

--Mindful of the financial cap in place, money must be spent wisely.

--We need to determine how long we expect the building to last, and how much it will take to construct that kind of building. (50 years was suggested)

--Low maintenance over the life of the building is important and cost effective in the long run.

--Building a good foundation now can offer options for adding on or renovating in the future.

--A utilitarian building now could be updated at a later time.

2) Type of Siding Material (high priority)

--Soft colored brick would fit with the site.

--The siding should be handsome and interesting; brick is not the only choice, although it is low maintenance.

--Wood must be above ground level to protect from termites.

3) Roof (high priority)

--Choice of materials should be considered, although asphalt shingles are probably the most cost effective.

--The details of the roof are not as high priority as the materials used.

4) Porch (low priority) and 5) Emphasize Front Entrance (high priority)

--The style of the porch may be dictated by the design chosen as long as it is obvious to a visitor where the front door is located.

--The committee is not planning a drive-through portico; entrance to the building is effected by the proximity of the landmark tree.

6) “Green” (environmentally friendly) (medium priority)

--A “salt box” style would provide a southern-facing wall where solar panels might be useful.

--Green practices are noted as “must be cost effective”; this is true of the other elements also.

--We can’t be committed to “green at all costs” but we can certainly incorporate some elements of environmentally friendly construction.

--Does the architect have any experience in green building practices?

--The focus is on energy efficiency—where you get the energy from and how you use it. Low flush toilets may be a small item since there won’t be a lot of use, but proper insulation and exterior materials may make a big difference.

--Some green products don’t produce as well as they claim, but others are time tested, like durable materials and super insulation.

7) Driveway (low priority)

--Input from the fire marshal should be sought.

--How will heavy things/deliveries be made?

--The current plan is a walkway to the building with parking reasonably nearby in order to protect the tree. If another plan is desired, now is the time to say so. Do people want to be able to drive to the front door, or will they bring their umbrella and walk in the rain?

8) Fit in with Landscape (a la Olmsted and Wright) (high priority)

--“fit” is in the eye of the beholder, but the main idea is to settle into the landscape rather than rise up in a tall and imposing manner.

9) Outside Door to Basement (low priority)

--The basement is still being discussed, but the thinking is that the items stored in the

basement, if there is one, shouldn’t be so big and heavy that an outside door is needed.

--Using the basement for meeting space wouldn’t be practical, due to the need for an elevator.

--What is the expected price of the basement? Mr. O’Neal suggested $20/30 per square foot, or $40,000-$60,000.

--The estimate from Fingerle (building supply company) was $11,000.

--Does a basement provide other benefits besides space, such as insulation?

--If you are putting in the footings for a slab or crawl space, it doesn’t cost much more to add the walls for a full basement.

--There are more requirements for a commercial basement than residential.

--Can Mr. Wier give us a more accurate estimate of the cost in this case?

--Use effects the cost—will it be just mechanical, or more finished?

10) Windows (high priority)

--Security and energy efficiency are major factors.

11) General Style (high priority)

--The committee is open to whatever style best suits the site and needs of the project.

Discussion then focused on whether it is helpful to continue the effort to share ideas among the Trustees and the committee regarding particular styles and features individuals thought were important. While it was suggested that it was not very helpful since specific knowledge may be lacking, it was generally thought that as a parallel activity it could be beneficial. It was also noted that two story designs aren’t especially helpful, and that limited time is a factor. The committee has received written comments from many of the Trustees, and the others agreed to send such comments to Mr. Lindstrom as soon as possible. Mr. Lindstrom called the question, which was approved and ended discussion.

Motion Ms. Bogat moved that the “Process for Achieving a Consensus on the Exterior Design Theme for the Building” as presented by the Village Administration Center Committee be approved. Mr. Wilkes seconded; the motion carried.

Discussion then focused on the sales agreement offered to BHMC, and the response received. Atty. Reading distributed a copy of the agreement in which BHMC Atty. Lloyd had underlined certain portions. It was noted that BHMC is required by its By-Laws to attach the restrictive covenants to any property it sells. Mr. Lindstrom left.

Ms. Laporte stated the consequences of tabling the discussion:

--The topic would be on the agenda of the April 16, 2007 Board of Trustees meeting

and a vote could be taken at that time.

--Atty. Reading could consult further with Atty. Lloyd about the concerns of the Trustees.

--Both Atty. Reading and Atty. Lloyd will be present at the April 16, 2007 meeting.

Motion Mr. Al-Awar moved to table further discussion of the proposed sales agreement offered to Barton Hills Maintenance Corporation until the April 16, 2007 Barton Hills Village Board of Trustees meeting. Mr. Wilkes seconded; the motion carried.

The meeting was adjourned at 7:49 PM.

Jan Esch, Deputy Clerk