Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects City Hall topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Architects propose larger, front-facing addition for Pepper Pike City Hall; council hears cost estimate
Summary
An architect from Levelheads presented an alternative plan for renovating Pepper Pike City Hall that would preserve the existing chamber, add a front-facing council chamber and community room, and create more flexible space. The firm estimated a cost of roughly $2–2.5 million for the approach, higher than the earlier plan’s estimate.
Architects from Levelheads, led by Christopher Trotta, presented an alternative design approach for renovating Pepper Pike City Hall during the Feb. 11 council meeting, recommending a front-facing addition that would preserve the existing chamber and create a more flexible, usable council chamber and larger community spaces.
Trotta said his proposal emphasizes accessibility, preserving the building’s Georgian architectural character and creating a more welcoming facade on Shaker Boulevard. “How can we be welcoming to and be a beacon to Shaker Boulevard?” Trotta asked, describing options such as French doors, a reception room, and a 40-by-44-foot council chamber with bifolding doors to increase flexibility.
Trotta noted the design would be more expensive than the plan already presented to council but argued the long-term benefits would justify higher cost. “We did a cost estimator look at this… between 2 and 2 and a half million dollars for this project for this approach depending on what options you do,” Trotta said, comparing that to the other scheme’s lower square footage and estimated cost.
Council members praised the concept as forward-looking and sensitive to the building’s style and accessibility needs. Members asked whether the firm had conducted detailed interviews or a needs study; Trotta said the presentation was conceptual and based on the existing study documents presented by the current architect. He proposed next steps including further stakeholder interviews, utility investigations and more detailed three-dimensional design work.
Council did not take action on the design at the meeting. Members requested follow-up work and said they would consider inviting the architect back for further discussion and for more detailed cost and utility analysis, including impacts on existing utilities and the possible removal and replacement of trees on the site.
What’s next
The architects suggested additional study: 3-D renderings, utility relocation analysis, and meetings with stakeholders including the building department and architecture review board. The presentation’s cost estimate will be refined if council directs staff to proceed with a deeper design phase.
