Agenda - 01-24-2005-9a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

The final option, Option Chelow, offers two approaches it a fitUredesign is desired Option Cl - Full "Seamless" Redesign As noted on December 6`h, many of the underlying principles of Citizen Plan #3 are based on sustain ability and improving walkability from existing neighborhoods to the schools campus However, from such a standpoint, there are not only school but also park destinations within the project that would benefit from a design with greater attention to integration and walkability. The original principles of this project (as expressed in the May 2002 process) included the intent to provide for as much of a "seamless transition" as possible between the schools campus and the park, as part of a truly coordinated and co-located master plan. As learned in the Master Plan development, there are some inherent natural barriers to this goal, primarily the Piedmont EMC powerline/easement, and the Jones Creek corridor - both of which serve to separate the site into the two subareas that were reflected in the basic dividing line of the Preliminary Concept Plan However, if a full redesign were pursued where were no longer any "lines" drawn between park uses and schools campus uses, some components of each could be designed in a different fashion School buildings could be in closer proximity to park facilities in some portions of the site, as part of a carefully-designed "mix and match" approach that looks at consistency and compatibility (and walkability) of uses - regardless of whether they are "park" or "school" Conceptually, this was looked at to some degree in the 2003 Design #1, as the Work Group sought to co-locate park facilities that were compatible with other park facilities, and schools uses adjacent to other compatible school uses. But the concept has not been extensively studied without the Preliminary Concept Plan dividing line between campus and park. This type of redesign would be a substantive one and require going back to the site analysis stage. If this option were to be deemed most appropriate it would likely entail 6-12 months of additional work (depending on the process) to emerge with a new Master Plan. Option C2 - Assessment of Plan #3 / Redesign Based on Citizen Plan #3 Model As with the option above, if the Board wished to pursue redesign based on the layout presented in Citizen Plan #3 (as is), a comprehensive assessment of the feasibility of this redesign - at the site analysis stage - would need to be undertaken. If the feasibility finds that Plan #3 could be made to accommodate the planned facilities, a full redesign effort from the site analysis stage could be undertaken. Without the preliminary assessment, a design that emerges from this model may find that some facilities may not be able to located as shown in this sketch (for example, the four- field configuration in the north in Plan #3 may not prove to be practical from an engineering standpoint because of slope and other factors). In this option, following a successful assessment, the boundary lines would be essentially reversed and park facilities would be designed based on whatever could fit into the new park portion of the site, and school facilities designed based on whatever could fit on the new schools campus section The Board may wish to