PL PACKET 04192005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 19, 2005 Page 5 1 responsive to the request that they design a beautiful building that would provide 2 continuity to the City in terms of structure and also be sensitive to the needs of the 3 community for this amenity. 4 5 Matt Duggan, Mekus Studios, Ltd, provided the Commission with a brief history of the 6 proposal noting that a subcommittee was formed to work through the issues and 7 concerns. He stated that they met in December 2004 and also held an Open House in 8 January 2005. He stated that the Open House was well attended adding that they 9 received a very good response from the Community. He stated that they recently 10 brought in a consultant, Charles Nelson, retired State Architect for the Historical 11 Preservation (SHPO), to assist with the design of the proposed building. He stated that 12 the Concept Review proposal has not changed too much since September noting that 13 the most significant change was within the site. First with parking, the first proposal 14 indicated angle parking along the center with the intent to avoid interfering with the line 15 of trees along the boulevard. He noted that the Planning Commission had raised 16 concerns regarding the parking and the potential loss of green space. He explained 17 that both sides of the boulevard are lined with Cedars and they have since learned from 18 an arborist that cedars have a shelf life and they were provided with replacement 19 recommendations of similar species and shape that would be a bit heartier. He stated 20 that they would utilize the list of recommended replacements as needed. He stated that 21 both Roise and Morrow-Nichols have reviewed the new proposal for the parking area. 22 He stated that minor changes have been made to the exterior of building noting that Mr. 23 Nelson suggested a diamond grill pad similar to the large window on the existing 24 building adding that this is a very important element of the building. He explained that 25 their intention is to reuse the stained glass window in the interior of building 26 incorporating the window into the current lobby space. He stated that another element 27 they want to reuse is the stone fireplace and mural currently located above the 28 fireplace. He indicated that they plan to incorporate both into the lobby or in one of the 29 visitation chapel rooms. He assured the Commission that they have been very 30 sensitive to the concerns expressed regarding the design of the building and reviewed 31 with the Commission. 32 33 Charles Nelson stated that for thirty-three years he served as the Chief State Historical 34 Preservationist Officer for the state Historical Preservationist Office (SHPO),ding that he 35 was asked to provide input on the design characteristics for this building. He explained 36 that he provided technical input and evaluation of the design in order to judge the 37 impact of the new design on historic properties. He explained that the first 38 determination was the impact the parking area and access points would have on the 39 landscape qualities of the park. The primary elements seen are an entrance, the Tower 40 of Memories and in the distance the Memorial Chapel. He stated that it is very 41 important to preserve the point of entry noting that if the building were located on any 42 other spot on the property the visual to the entrance would be compromised. 43 Historically, when entering the gate, visitors were introduced to the prominent and 44 important landscape. He noted that the parallel parking along the central mall would 45 take very little space adding that in his opinion the proposed parking solution has come 46 a very long way. He stated that the cedar trees are a very important piece of the