Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes <br /> January 18, 2005 <br /> Page 3 <br /> ensure that all concerns are addressed. <br /> 2 <br /> 3 Mr. Tyson stated that the Open House went well noting that all of the people who attended were <br /> 4 very interested in the presentation, which included renderings of the current building as it looks <br /> 5 today, the new proposed structure, the park area, the bell tower and the mausoleum. He stated <br /> 6 that several invitations were sent to people who have relatives interned in the cemetery noting <br /> 7 that many came out of interest in what is happening in the Park area. He stated that the feedback <br /> 8 received was very positive adding that it has been given to the Planning Team for incorporation <br /> 9 into the plan. He stated that there were several discussions regarding the signage, parking, and <br /> 10 the possibilities of placing benches along the way for guests to use as a place for recollection <br /> 11 while visiting the park. He indicated that comments made regarding the historical nature of the <br /> 12 building are being reviewed and would also be included in their final report to the Commission. <br /> 13 He stated that their plan is to proceed within the timetable outlined by the City and plan to come <br /> 14 back with a responsible proposal for the Commission's review. <br /> 15 <br /> 16 Commissioner Jensen referenced page nine, stating that the client has searched the National <br /> 17 Historic Register database for references noting that nothing has been found for this facility. Mr. <br /> 18 Tyson stated that the report referenced was prepared earlier this past fall and acknowledged that <br /> 19 no formal designations have been found. He stated that a survey of the Bell Tower and <br /> 20 Mausoleum were done by the City of Minneapolis adding that it did not include the building. <br /> 21 <br /> Commissioner Young asked if the City of Minneapolis' review included the overall landscape as <br /> a whole unit. Mr. Theisen explained that they do not have the results of the final survey report. <br /> 24 He noted that the only things reported back included the application and a copy of the survey. <br /> 25 <br /> 26 Commissioner Young stated that she is very pleased to see that they are willing to wait for the <br /> 27 results from the Architectural Preservationist's review of the property. She asked that the <br /> 28 pictures and drawings located in the basement of the building are made available for their review. <br /> 29 Mr. Tyson assured the Commission that they would make every about the building and area <br /> 30 available for review. <br /> 31 <br /> 32 Commissioner Jensen noted that the plan shows they are wrapping building on three sides and <br /> 33 asked if the architectural team would consider a second floor. He explained that this could <br /> 34 possible address the shortage for square footage and circulation. Mr. Tyson stated that he would <br /> 35 discuss the suggestion with his clients noting that the packet provided outlines several options <br /> 36 and reviewed with the Commission. <br /> 37 <br /> 38 Commissioner Jensen referenced Option B noting that most of the new construction is occurring <br /> 39 midpoint and at the back of the structure. He stated that if they are looking at saving square <br /> 40 footage they could consider this as an alternate sketch and option. Mr. Tyson stated that he <br /> 41 would discuss this with their architect and have them review. <br /> 42 <br /> 40 XI. PUBLIC INPUT <br /> 45 NONE <br />