Page 11 of 12

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: June 9th, 2017, 9:40 pm
by contrast
grant1simons2 wrote:
June 2nd, 2017, 8:06 am
What's snarky is the constant battering of its construction after businesses chose to pay less for the project than originally intended. This forced the city to go with the lowest bid.

By the way, it wasn't a personal attack. I know you're a good guy Mike. It was intended to give hell to people posting on Twitter everyday about how slow construction is. I get the same feeling that you do, but this kind of construction that's goal is to preserve takes a lot longer than new construction. I agree, downtown is starting to look a bit depressing along Nicollet and Hennepin, but in 4 years both streets will be completely transformed.
... and Washington Ave.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 4th, 2017, 9:02 am
by grant1simons2
Some renderings and more details

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/www/gro ... 200402.pdf

This is when stuff gets exciting and I start wondering if this will actually happen as proposed

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 12:26 pm
by amiller92
The Cultural Landscape Association and state Historical Preservation Office have concerns: http://finance-commerce.com/2017/07/lat ... -concerns/ Preservation is fun!

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 12:49 pm
by EOst
They're kind of right, though. I don't mind the ramps (some things do have to change), but those are pretty significant changes and additions to the water features. The bubblers in the runnels are just a mistake.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 12:54 pm
by amiller92
One could argue that the current water features not working makes them something that needs to change...

But I don't really have an opinion on whether the proposed changes to the water features are too big or not. But I do think there's some irony in the fact that we're going to make big changes to the design to add ramps (because I think everyone agrees that accessibility is a value greater than preservation) but we've got to dither over other details.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 1:13 pm
by EOst
But the details are the point. Preservation doesn't set something in amber, but it does require that changes be the minimum necessary.

The runnels and the main basin just aren't that. Can you even call it a basin if it's 1/4 inch deep? 3" deep runnels aren't very modernist either.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 1:17 pm
by MNdible
I did have a little heart palpation when I realized that the depth of the main pond was only going to be 1/4" -- that detail was sort of buried in the proposal. I'm still inclined to support it, because I appreciate the value of being able to quickly convert that area from a water feature to a programmable space, even though it will be a very significant impact to the original design.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 2:25 pm
by mnmike
If we are going to have a 1/4 inch deep reflecting pool basically...which I am fine with...I like the idea of the bubblers. They will attract people to the space, and they don't change the appearance at all when not on.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 2:27 pm
by mnmike
PS, if anyone wants to see what the 1/4 inch deep pool would look like...as shown in their example, check out the reflecting pool at Lakewood cemetery. A beautiful building to check out if you haven't.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 2:56 pm
by EOst
I don't think reflecting pools or bubblers or fountains are bad in themselves, but I don't think easy programmability (what an awful word) is enough reason for such a profound change. I think it would really mess with the original visual proportions of the plaza.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 3:10 pm
by mnmike
At quick glance...you really can't tell that the water is only 1/4 inch deep...it just looks like a pool of water. Which is why I am okay with it.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 3:14 pm
by EOst
It's not just the depth of the pool itself. The water level was well below the level of the plaza:

Image

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 3:25 pm
by amiller92
I guess I don't know exactly what they are thinking with the proposed change, but I could also see not having a 2+ foot dropoff for people to potentially fall over could be an accessibility/safety issue too.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 3:32 pm
by EOst
Maybe. But is there no other way to address that issue while maintaining the basic design of the basin?

I mean, I appreciate the practical arguments in favor of flattening out the basin/pool, but it's arguably the central feature of the plaza. If cheap practicality were enough to outweigh historic considerations, we would already have bulldozed it.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 10th, 2017, 3:47 pm
by Nathan
I would argue that the fountains are the key factor of the plaza and that the depth of the pool itself is not as crucial. I actually like that in this form it's now a functional space, not just to be looked at but to be played in and enjoyed. I don't personally think that the basin being level with the plaza has that big of an impact. It's definitely a fresher more contemporary version of peavey plaza but the original concept and design features still shine through.

(Disclaimer, I was very active with save peavey plaza and did a fair amount of their graphic design work, this is one of my pet projects)

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 11th, 2017, 9:10 am
by amiller92
EOst wrote:
July 10th, 2017, 3:32 pm
Maybe. But is there no other way to address that issue while maintaining the basic design of the basin?
It's the same shape and it contains water. That's not the basic design?

Would it be better to keep the drop off and build a physical barrier around the pool? That seems like a bigger change to me. And it makes the space less useable too.
I mean, I appreciate the practical arguments in favor of flattening out the basin/pool, but it's arguably the central feature of the plaza.
This is what's "fun" about preservation. Just assert that whatever is changing is the central feature - not the fountains, terraces, trees, materials, etc. - just whatever isn't the same - and you can stop anything. Fun!
If cheap practicality were enough to outweigh historic considerations, we would already have bulldozed it.
Yes, safety and accessibility are "cheap." Who cares about those things?

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: July 16th, 2017, 12:46 pm
by thatchio
I like the design where the pool becomes an activated space with water that jets up. It's pleasant to look at or listen to, and kids will enjoy it. I wonder if they would build up the ice in winter for ice skating, as 1/4" I'd suspect is too thin and could see damage from those with picks on their blades.

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: May 11th, 2018, 3:45 pm
by grant1simons2
FENCES ARE UP!!!

THIS IS HAPPENING

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: May 11th, 2018, 3:58 pm
by John
grant1simons2 wrote:
May 11th, 2018, 3:45 pm
FENCES ARE UP!!!

THIS IS HAPPENING
:D :D :D

Re: Peavey Plaza

Posted: April 23rd, 2019, 9:08 am
by seanrichardryan