2013-12-03_PR_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

94system, maintaining an iconic design element but reworking the structures to provide 95increased lighting and improved amenities and imagery. TheDesign Team will also carry 96over the design element from the truss system to the CP Lexington Restroom Building to 97continue the imagery and visually connect Central park facilities. 98 99McILwainreoriented the Commission to the design process through a written memo 100outlining; 101Building Planning –Key Concepts 102Image/Style of Buildings and Roseville Parks 103Building Form and Imagery Concepts 104 105McILwaintalked about how the enclosed building designs create a very identifiable 106Roseville styleso that structures across the community are easily identified.The buildings 107will not look exactly the same;the buildings are designed for a specific site. Locations are 108aligned with parkconnections, surround natural amenities and park features. Each building 109includes a large bay element that serves as a beacon to the community. The design helps 110make a bigger impact with a smaller structure through the roofline which provides for 111meeting room volume (as an example). High glass provides an open and airy feel. 112 11350% Plans for Villa, Sandcastle and Oasis Parks were shared. These buildings are designed 114to accommodate 30 people at tables, approximately 50 people standup reception style. The 115maingathering areas will be multi-use and serve as ice rink warming space during the winter 116months. 117 11850% plans for Autumn Grove Park and 90% plans for Lexington Park were presented. 119McILwaintalked to the Commission about the orientation of the buildings and the reasoning 120for facility layout. Lexington and Autumn Grove buildings are 2200 sq. ft. with the gathering 121room coming in at 900 Sq. ft., thesebuildings have a separate warming room that will be 122used for youth programs during the non-ice seasons. An electronic sketch-up of Lexington 123Park was shared to give Commissioners a more dynamic view of the building and its internal 124and external components. 125 126Brokke explained that there were no designs for the Rosebrook site because of possible 127consideration for use of thePressGym site. Brokke also reminded the Commission that the 12850% designs may still need some adjustments. 129 130Evenson reviewed and updated the Commission on the Contractor Request for Proposal 131(RFP’s)process. 132Proposal packages are nearly 100% complete 133ASU will be presenting Best Value materials at a November 14 meeting for 134contractors 135RFP will be released mid January 136 137Evenson briefed the Commission on recent NRATS efforts; 138Natural Resource projects are focused on those with high potential for success