Laserfiche WebLink
Count Response <br />1 Afocused group to reviewthe aesthetics of proposals would be valuable in maintaining the desired qualityof <br />the COR. <br />1 Asub-committee of the Planning Commission is necessary to maintain the architectural standards setoutin the <br />vision. The purpose ofthe newcommittee should be to resolve any large deviations from the standards. <br />1 An outside source could help to be responsive ofthe market and growth needs of the city. <br />1 <br />Existing processes have done well with this. Staff have done a greatjo b of overseeing the construction of some <br />high-qualitysites. Even Casey's looks better than the average Casey's due to a fewchanges proposed bystaff. <br />The VA and clinic buildings are two other exam pies. Another committee also ties the hands of staff in that even <br />when they have a tenantthen they have to call a time-outfor architectural review. <br />1 <br />lam in favor of a system thatensures we maintain adistinctive yetcohesive overall design for the COR. <br />However, Idon'twanttoo much red tape that bogs down the process. If we established something like this, I <br />would like to see architects and designers seated on the committee. <br />1 Ithinkconsistencyis helpful in building co hesiveness. An oversightcommittee can lend itself to looking atthe <br />bigger picture ambiance of the COR. <br />1 !think itwould be good to have some level of review and managementof look and style of buildings. Should <br />leave some o ppo rtu n ity fo r creativity tho ugh. <br />1 Such a group is useful to maintain a consistentvisual presentation of the structures in the City. Might be useful. <br />1 We don't need everything looking the same. Standards to be followed give the area a sterile, rather than a <br />unique look. <br />1 We have some townhouse rightnowthatare reallyugly. We should have a qualified committee to approve <br />architectural design to blend in with the restof the COR. <br />1 We should maintain our appearance <br />1 Yes, or at least a subcommittee of the planning co m mission. Architectural standards seem to be open to a wide <br />varietyof interruption and effecton finished productifleftunattended. <br />19 <br />