CityView Portal
| We are sorry but no more comments are being taken for this case |
| Return to CityView Portal |
| Submitted comments will appear below after staff approval. | |
|---|---|
| Barbara Karl | 3/8/2008 2:27:01 PM |
| The recommendations of the Town Square Advisory Committee are a wise compromise and I support their efforts and their recommendations. In addition, the comments of Win Beach, Cathy Gleason, and Dianne Holmes make additional points to preserve Town Square and I encourage the P&Z Commission to include those suggestions in their final decision. Barbara Karl | |
| Win Beach | 3/7/2008 4:10:29 PM |
| I have read the lengthy staff recommendation on the website and find it rather confusing to understand which of the many memos, reports, and resolutions will be considered the final word and design for the Town Square site plan. However, I am submitting these comments for your consideration: 1. There is mention of kiosks in the park. Please ensure that your decisions states there shall be no kiosks in the park. They are inappropriate. 2. The Advisory Group's resolution states that " . . . existing plantings on the east side of the park should be retained the maximum extent possible." This is a poor way to protect the very core of what Town Square was founded on. Change 'should' to "shall" and end the sentence after " . . . be retained." Your careful consideration of this site plan in relation to the original park schematic and the Advisory Group's recommendation is appreciated. Win Beach | |
| Yvonne Lindblom | 3/7/2008 7:51:40 AM |
| I support the recommendations of the Town Square Advisory Commission. | |
| Helen Nienhueser | 3/6/2008 4:57:06 PM |
| I support the recommendations of the Town Square Advisory Committee. HJelen Nienhueser | |
| Cathy Gleason | 3/6/2008 3:40:16 PM |
| Planning and Zoning Commission, While I am not familiar with the details of the modified Town Square Park plan, I hear that the treed berm on the east side along E Street will remain intact, which I fully support. The best feature of Town Square is that it provides a sense of calm in the middle of downtown, despite the bustling traffic on three sides. As for the plaza design (modified, I assume) on the east side, please use pavers that are permeable and of a simple, natural design. The one I saw at the Open House in February reminded me of oil spill slicks and I didn't realize it was supposed to represent some kind of Native fish-catching theme until I filled out the questionaire. I honestly don't think anyone else will "get it" either. As far as I know, Town Square Park has no other Native-themed amenities and this just looks out of place. To the best of my recollection, a similar design is slated for the west side - same comments apply to this area as well. I am concerned about the proposal to replace the existing Mountain Ash trees along the south side with Columnar Aspen; this tree has become quite popular in the last three or four years in Anchorage, but I have no idea why it is proposed for this area. They literally stick out like a sore thumb, based on the conceptual drawings I've seen. This species is found no where else in the park. If the Mountain Ash need to be removed, please replace them with another species of tree more "Alaska-looking" and with a species already in Town Square, so that a cohesive, blending look is achieved in this popular downtown parkland. As for the personalized bricks, I'm not sure what the latest proposal is, but my husband's and my brick are along the south side and would likely be affected by any work done in that area. I would like to see the bricks integrated elsewhere into Town Square or left where they are. Thank you for your consideration. Cathy L. Gleason | |
| Dianne Holmes | 3/6/2008 2:54:37 PM |
| Dear Commissioners, P/Z spent considerable time during the Downtown Comp Plan (spring '07) ensuring that any changes to Town Square will always benefit from your review. I applaud you for your vision and recognize that this was done in part because there are enough of you on PZC with gray hair that recall the horrendous effort from the 1980s that went into establishing and protecting the park. The design before you is a compromise from the F and E streets designs that were originally made for the benefit of convention center pedestrians and for the benefit of the downtown businesses who desire a way to have larger events than might ordinarily be held at the park. Please recognize the hard work of the appointed Town Square Advisory Group who have operated under an incredibly tight time frame and other pressures--all in the name to make the 'bid' deadlines for E and F streets projects--just in case the administration grants use of those funds for the revised design before you. The only areas of concern on the administration's E and F streets designs has been the removal of the E st berm--which would expose the whole park to traffic noise--and the proposed pedestrian awnings in the SE corner of the PAC--which as you know is actually park property. With the compromise arrived at by the Advisory Group's efforts and the public process, a plaza interior to the E St berm is being proposed per a 1985 schematic that was found among Ruth Moulton's papers. This interior plaza satisfies the public's desire for a quiet, green park and will allow for interior, terraced seating as currently exists on the south and north sides of the park. For the F St design that you were told you could not comment on--please note that the awning that would have impeded use of the area for events like the ice sculptures--seems to have been removed from the plans--but only because of budget reasons. I urge you to include in your comments a reaffirmation of PZC's 1984 condition that stated anything to do with that corner of the park must have a separate public process and may not be usurped for any reason. My fear is that if monies become available for the F St pedestrian design in the future, that the awnings will reappear and will be built, unless you include their exclusion in your resolution. The lighting and irrigation systems are not controversial and should be priorities in any funding. I also urge you to prioritize the several changes proposed for Town Square as defined by the TS Advisory Group. PZC is NOT advisory and the public is depending upon you to take the politics out of the remodeling of our hard-won downtown park. Unless you do this, any administration can too easily manipulate the use of scare funds (as has already happened in the last few weeks, or at least the attempt was made to do so). Age and historical perspective do have their benefits at times, and in this case, it is truly so. Thank you for your intense protection of our downtown oasis. | |