Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners review EMS Station No. 1 renderings and delegate color, signage and fence decisions to staff pending DRB approval
Summary
Design renderings and material/color options for the new EMS Station No. 1 in Granby were shown to commissioners on April 1. Commissioners asked staff to finalize choices and approved delegating the final color and minor exterior details to county staff contingent on Design Review Board (DRB) approval.
County project staff presented exterior renderings and material/color samples for the new EMS Station No. 1 during the April 1 meeting. The discussion covered roof and wall color options, trim and signage placement, and a proposed security fence around personnel and apparatus areas.
Architects showed material palettes including a darker onyx/charcoal pre‑engineered metal for the apparatus bay, lighter siding options for the administrative/living quarters, and an accent blue that had been proposed for roofing and canopy elements. Commissioners and staff discussed whether a blue roof would be appropriate for the site and whether the Design Review Board (DRB) or municipal design review would approve bright roof colors in that location.
The proposed site plan includes a secured fenced area and gates behind the apparatus bay for crew parking and a small personnel patio; the DRB and nearby property owners raised questions about fence style and height. Commissioners heard legal and DRB review would be required and noted options between higher‑security fencing and lower‑profile tie‑rails or buck‑rail styles for screening.
Because color and final exterior details are design items that will be reviewed by the DRB, the commissioners directed county staff — including the assistant county manager and project manager — to finalize the color palette, signage placement and fence approach and to seek DRB approval as required. The direction included a contingency that staff bring back any items that the DRB requires to be decided by the board. Commissioners noted they would not be the final signatory for minor aesthetic choices and preferred staff handle vendor/architect coordination.
Why it matters: Final color, signage and fence decisions affect the building’s integration with nearby healthcare facilities and the character of the area; early DRB engagement reduces the risk of rework and delay.
What’s next: Project staff will submit final exterior colors and fence plans to the DRB, coordinate signage placement (including soffit lighting or other low‑cost illumination options), and proceed with permitting once DRB comments and county legal reviews are addressed.
