Voting Members Present

• B. Chew
• RS Nieswander (1st)
• T. Vieder (2nd)
• A. Lukaczy-Love
• P. Brown (CH)

Project details presented by Philip Migas of Marous Brothers.  Discussed the conversion of the original Longfellow school into apartments, common areas/community space, leasing office, etc.  The original building will be restored.  The new building will hold 1 or 2 bedroom apartments with common spaces.  The new building will be a mix of brick and stone.  The new building will keep similar proportions, materials, and setbacks to not compete with the original Longfellow building.

Committee Questions, Comments, Concerns

• Will the windows on the original building be painted white?  Per PM: The color hasn't been decided as of yet, but it will be an appropriate historic color to complement the original building.
• The parking vs drop-off vs building access is a bit confusing.  How will people know where the main door is?
• Can the greenspace be developed more into a parkspace with trees or mounding, etc.
• Can the new building have more visual interest with detailing, depth of shadow, change of materials, colors, planes, etc.  The portion of the connector with the residential units are more appealing than the whole of the new building.  The new building looks more institutional than residential.
• Why doesn't the parapet not go around the entire new building?  Per PM: the new building will not be internally drained.
• Can the door shown on pg. 35 mimic more of the proportions of the surrounding windows.
• Can you describe the nature of the renovation of the original building? Per PM: there will be a gentle cleaning and tuckpointing of the historic building.  The new building will be using facade colors similar to the original building.
• Opportunity to create a moment at the axis/alignment of the chimney
• Suggestion to do a sample detergent cleaning of the original building to see what fit best for selecting the colors of the new building.

Mary Louise Daley is in attendance and available to state the Councilman's support for the project.

Jamar Doyle is in attendance and available to state support for the project. 

Motion to approve schematic plans as presented with conditions and comments below:

• Study access to main door and the function of the drop off areas.
• Study the development of greenspace so that it is more functional with amenities like trees, furniture, grading/mounding, outdoor exercise equipment.
• Study the design elements of the new building facade.  Consider adding visual interest with detailing, depth of shadow, banding, change of materials, texture, colors, etc.
• Study realignment of some of the walkways from the parking lot.
• Study creating a moment at the two axis of the chimney for the drop-off.
• Study the connector's connection to the drop-off and orginal building.
• Study using a lighter colored material for the connector.
• Study the lighting for the main drop-off area.
• Return with a full landscaping plan (for more trees), final color, and material selection.
• Study increasing the parapet height of the inside of the new building.
• Study differntiating the connector from the other two buildings.

Voting Member Present

• P. Brown
• RS Neiswander
• A. Lukacsy-Love
• T. Veider*

Project details presented by Mark Green and Doug Giebel.  Presenters addressed the comments and conditions from the Mar. 17 meeting.  Presenters discussed proposed revisions/updates.

Committee Questions, Comments, Concerns

• consider using something other than redbuds because of the acid soil conditions
• consider making the walks a bit more meandering instead of it coming to T-intersections
• Is there fencing?  Is the greenspace meant only for residents of the facility or also for the community?  
• Would like to see more development and attention paid to the rear greenspace.
• Is there any detail from the original building that can be picked-up in the new building?
• Return with some wall sections and closer images to show the propsed details.
• Will be able to realign the sidewalks off the the chimney axis.
• Are you putting any benches or seating under the canopy? Per MG: yes
• How wide is the walkway from the drop-off to the connector? Per MG: 6-8ft
• Decide on the treatments of the light colored metal panels on the the connector and new building (protruding vs. recessed). 
• Consider using something other than a modern wall pack on this historical site,  think safety, ambience, and character with a different lighting fixture.  Consider the temperature, footcandles, etc.
• Screen transformers
• Be really thoughtful about your identification and wayfinding signage.

Councilman Polensek and Jamar Doyle are available on the phone call to provide their support for the project.

Motion to table to the May 19th meeting date for final approval with the conditions that they address these comments from the Committee below:

• transformers are screened
• consider using something other than a modern wall pack for this historical site
• decide on treatments for the light colored metal panels on the connector and and new building
• study the walks and further development of the rear greenspace
• return with wall sections/elevation to show facade details.
• study the use of the redbuds in favor of a planting material that will do better in acidic soils

Project details were presented by M. Green & D. Geibel of Marous Brothers.  Presented details on the revised plans as they attempted to address the comments from the Committee from the 5/5/20 review.

Committee Questions, Comments, Concerns

• Can you reduce the width of the concrete walk between the parking lot and building?
• What did you replace the redbuds with?  MG: Crab apple trees
• Are you still considering mounding in the greenspace?  MG: Concerned about security and cutting off views, they have instead use landscape pads instead.  Would not be opposed to a mound about a foot or so high with some lower growths.
• Suggesting some low rolling mounds, they do not have to be 4ft+.  Suggests using the dirt and spoils from the construction to add slight changes in the topography.  MG: Not opposed to slight undulations of the topography.
• Add additional trail segment form the loop.
• Suggestion to add uplighting or downlighting to the courtyards.
• Was the proposed fence removed?  MG: Yes
• Will the picnic tables be ADA compliant? MG: Yes
• Think about where a person seating in wheelchairs can engage with the table and not be in path or walkway.
• Suggestion to not use contemporary lighting features.
• Suggestion to us uplighting on the vertical elements (particularly the back tower) so that the site is visible from the neighborhood and I-90.

Voting Members Present

• P. Brown (CH)
• B. Chew
• C. Poh
• A. Lukacsy-Love
• RS Neiswander
• Ned Reich
• T. Veider

Motion to approve with the condition to add low undulations to the topography of the greenspace, add uplighting/downlighting to the courtyard areas, add a small trail segment from the loop, reduce the width of the concrete pad/walk between the building and main parking lot, uplighting of the chimney stack.  Passed 6-1 (N. Reich)