Laserfiche WebLink
<br />feedback regarding compatibility of the roundabout within the historic district. He stated that it <br />had originally come before the Commission as related to the Trolley project, but as it progressed, <br />became a separate project. Mr. Greatens explained the recommendations to date that were <br />included in the memo provided. He stated that Mr. Rich Wilson, Director of the Department of <br />Public Works and Parks, and Ms. Jo Emerick with URS Corporation were in attendance to <br />address additional questions. <br /> <br />Mr. Wilson addressed the Commission members and stated that there had been questions about <br />whether or not the roundabout fits within the context of the historic plaza. He had received <br />comments that the roundabout did not fit within the historical context of the area. He stated that <br />when the roundabout was originally designed that part of Delmar Boulevard was owned by St. <br />Louis County so there was not much consultation with University City. <br /> <br />Questions/Comments from Commission members and responses included: <br /> <br />-A question was asked about the symmetry of the plaza and it was pointed out that in the <br />original plaza designs and maps it was clear that there was a focus on symmetry of <br />curbing and street design. It appeared that the design of the roundabout was not <br />symmetrical. Is there possibility of adjustment? Ms. Emerick stated that adjustment <br />might not be possible due to the angle of Trinity Avenue. <br /> <br />-A question was asked about the radius of the roundabout and that it seemed small; how <br />did it compare to the roundabouts in Forest Park? Ms. Emerick stated that a larger radius <br />was considered but it would result in greater impacts to the surrounding area. <br /> <br />-It was stated that the meeting was not a good format to review the design of the <br />roundabout and that at previous Historic Preservation Commission meetings, the <br />Commission did determine that the design was compatible within the historic district, so <br />it has gone through approvals. However, various items were not scrutinized such as <br />landscaping and light pole selection and this was not evaluated against the 1985 and 1993 <br />planning documents. The Commission would look at items such as landscaping and light <br />poles when it comes back for final review. It was also noted that at previous meetings the <br />Commission was told there was no money to do anything but grass for landscaping. <br />Landscaping would be an item that should undergo critical review. <br /> <br />Ms. Emerick stated that granite curbing was requested and would be implemented as well as <br />decorative lighting. Regarding the area in front of City Hall, she stated the intent was to sod. <br /> <br />Mr. Wilson asked what landscaping would be a better fit in this location. He stated that the 1985 <br />Plan made reference to an open look. <br /> <br /> <br />-Commission members noted that one of the issues previously mentioned with the new <br />curbing adjacent to City Hall was that it seemed to create an awkward open space and <br />hoped to provide a better connection between sidewalks and open space. The original <br />design appeared to have some symmetry. <br /> <br />-Perhaps a long-term solution would be a landscape plan for that area. It would be <br />important to develop a landscape plan for this area when the roundabout is implemented. <br /> <br />-A reference was made to a previous abstract drawing showing the area in front of City <br />Hall as open lawn, but it was noted that it was a mock-up drawing and not part of the <br />design plans. <br />tm; šE <br /> <br /> <br />