Background: Staff reviewed the applicable LRCDP patterns and policies as described in the meeting mailing.

Anne Mattson, UHCC User Group co-chair, introduced the project. She said the project's importance was described at the May 26, 2004 CPC meeting and in the meeting mailing.

Tom Pene of BOORA Architects, Inc. said that several elements guided the design:

He said the schematic design is not yet complete and asked the committee to focus primarily on the proposed massing and general elevation concepts.

Calvert Helms of BOORA Architects, Inc. described the proposed design as shown in the meeting mailing attachments. The proposed design enhances the front door, preserves all designated open spaces, provides accessible access to all, and adds on to the building's series of wings that create open areas.

The six existing secure bike parking spaces at the service entrance will be retained and six new lockers will be added. Twenty short-term spaces (ten covered) will be provided. The design of the covered structure will come back to the committee for final review at a later date.

Two additions are proposed, one on the northeast corner (about 8,000 SF) and the other on the southeast corner (about 2,000 SF). Three architectural style options were considered: replicate the building's existing style, integrate the historic campus style (e.g., similar to the Science Complex), or fit in with the more modern, simpler style of the surrounding buildings. The simple forms of the proposed design are meant to fit into the modern style of the area. The northeast addition's band of glazing, and low eave height (where it joins the existing building) also tie in with existing building elements. The desire to match the low eave height combined with the desire to emphasize the new building corner with a higher eave height has resulted in a shed roof. The southeast addition is more similar in design to the existing building because of its minor size.

A new glass entry and stairway emphasizes the main entry. It can be seen when approaching from the main campus and will have a large overhang for protection.

Larry Gilbert of CMGS Landscape Architects described the landscape plan. One memorial tree will be relocated, and a number of trees, two of them quite large, will be removed. The most significant large tree required for removal due to close proximity of the proposed addition is the Catalpa along 13^th Avenue. The project arborist reviewed options to preserve the Catalpa but found that substantial root damage would occur during construction, about 40% of the limbs would have to be removed, and a special sidewalk configuration would be required. Instead, a new replacement large canopy tree that is more conducive to development (possibly a Red Oak) is proposed for the same location. Existing shrubs will be transplanted and brick pavers reused as much as possible.

Larry said the two new courtyards are relatively small (one is about 20 feet wide and the other about 45 feet wide) because they are designed to be passive, quiet spaces functioning primarily as viewing gardens that allow natural light into the building. As a result, courtyard landscaping will be simple. Access into the courtyards is from the interior with emergency exits only to the exterior. The north courtyard likely will have a sustainable water feature similar to the roof catchment system installed in the Straub Courtyard.

The bike parking areas will be located adjacent to the recently approved bike route through Beech Street.

Discussion: In answer to a member's question, Tom said the main addition is sited at the northeast corner to repair the most important part of the site. It enhances the intersection, emphasizes the front entry, and begins to create a larger outdoor room with Oregon Hall. Calvert added that 22 siting options were reviewed before selecting the proposed solution that addresses both external and internal functional issues. Options for resolving serious interior connectivity problems were limited.

In response to a member's question, Tom said the proposed additions will be primarily concrete with brick cladding. The proposed new entry column will be concrete.

Facilities Services guests expressed concern about access into the proposed courtyards. In addition transplanted shrubs should be properly handled so weed problems are not spread to other areas. Larry agreed that Facilities Services should be consulted to resolve these concerns.

The UHCC user group representative was unable to attend, but his written comments were distributed to committee members at the meeting.

A member stated his appreciation for proposals to announce more clearly the main entrance. However, he thought more could be done to successfully achieve this goal, for example, by raising the roofline above the entrance. Another member suggested a protruding entrance rather than a recessed entrance. Others said the entrance should be more prominent from the street as well as the intersection, perhaps even more prominent than the new addition. Larry suggested moving the entry steps out to the street. Members and guests discussed other options to bring the main entrance closer to the street, perhaps using a covered courtyard.

A member said the proposed south entrance also should be emphasized more, perhaps with double doors or a larger porch. The current proposal emphasizes its efforts on the north side of the building, but the south side deserves attention because it is exposed to heavy pedestrian traffic. Perhaps proposed improvements could be distributed more evenly between the north and the south sides.

Another member noted that the basketball courts make it difficult to establish a pleasant entry character on the south. He suggested possibly moving them or reconfiguring them to allow for a nicer landscaped entry. Members discussed possible ideas and suggested working with Housing to refurbish all three courts to make them more attractive and usable.

A member said the jog in the 13^th Avenue sidewalk required to accommodate the proposed northeast addition is awkward. Overall, the relation of the addition to the street seems tight. Larry suggested modifying the raised planters to increase the pedestrian space.

A member said the proposed northeast addition's east elevation and shed roof do not tie in well with the existing building's east elevation. Also, the addition's northeast corner needs to be better defined. Another member suggested using design elements that are a more literal expression of the existing building's design along with a tie to the main Lawrence campus character.

A member said the design of the interior courtyards should be simple because interior courtyards with limited access are difficult to maintain. Another member said the north courtyard's design and function should be revisited to determine if the need for a courtyard is justified and, if so, if the design is effective. Calvert said the courtyards allow for the effective application of sustainability concepts--operable windows, natural light and thermal mass.

A member said the proposed design needs to ensure that the current service area will effectively meet future needs.

Members confirmed that the proposed massing is generally acceptable and that the design is moving in the right direction. However, they agreed that the numerous outstanding issues identified during the meeting and summarized below should be resolved prior to committee action:

Action: The committee's comments will be forwarded to the UHCC user group and architect. Final action will be taken at the upcoming CPC meeting.