05/11/2005 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • • Planning & Zoning Board April 13, 2005 Page 15 Chair Rafferty opened the public hearing at 9:42 p.m. Chair Rafferty invited the applicant to make comment. Jim Bermel, 400 Stinson Boulevard, NE, Minneapolis 55413, Fairview Health Services, Corporate Real Estate Department, introduced himself and asked if they had any questions. Chair Rafferty asked for the architect to come forward. John Harris, Principal Harris Architects, 331 Second Avenue North, Minneapolis, architect. Chair Rafferty asked if he did the first plan. Mr. Harris replied he had not. Chair Rafferty expressed concern that this was a large building and there was not enough architectural design element to this. Mr. Harris responded Fairview wanted this to blend into the existing building as much as possible. He stated they were adding a trellis, a bay window and well as other elements, and he did not feel this would look like a plain brick box. He stated they had worked with City staff on this and staff appeared satisfied they were doing the appropriate thing. Chair Rafferty asked if Mr. Harris believed this was a good plan architecturally. Mr. Harris replied he would not have put his name on this if he did not believe this was not a good project. Chair Rafferty asked if Mr. Harris believed more architectural elements should be added. Mr. Harris replied he believed the elements they added were appropriate and they had worked with City staff on this. Chair Rafferty stated he believed this proposal was "extremely boring" and he did not see any strong elements in the design, except the trellises, but expressed concern that the trellises were too few and too small. Mr. Tralle agreed there were insufficient architectural design elements in this proposal. Mr. Harris replied he believed this existing building was a strong statement and he believed the new addition would maintain and enhance the original expression. Mr. Tralle asked if they could add another gable end on the east side to give it some symmetry. He expressed concern that this was a long building with no break. Mr. Harris noted the original design concept of the building was an austere building with a strong gable element that ran the length of the building. The gable was intended to be the one major design element of the building and it was their intention of keeping this as a strong element and not repeating it just to repeat it. Mr. Laden noted by making the building longer, the proportions did not match up and now the gable was no longer a major design element, but he did not think they should simply add another gable either. Mr. Harris stated they had worked with staff and did the DRAFT MINUTES