Multimedia Reporting (Kuhr-Musser)

When architect Ieoh Ming Pei constructed the glass pyramid in the frontcourt at the Louvre Museum in Paris, he faced a large number of cultural protestors. A group of French elites as well as concerned citizens thought that the glass structure, which is about 70 feet high, took away from the historical integrity of the famous building. The pyramid opened to the public in 1989 and is now one of the most famous structures in the world.

If we fast forward almost two decades, we have a similar situation in the making in Lawrence. Although it's on a much smaller scale and less world renown, the Carnegie Library matter creates the same problem: How do you expand on a historic building without threatening its integrity?

Historic Resources Administrator, Lynne Zollner, said her job is to make sure that every governing factor of the project is well informed of every proposal. She said architect David Dunfield's proposed two-story glass structure could cause public debate.

"I don't think everyone's happy with it," Zollner said. "And I think that there will be a lot of public discussion over it."

One person who is not happy with the design is ecology architect Sven Alstrom, member of the Historic Resources Commission. He said the city commission could do better.

"It needs to look like a public building instead of a commercial building," Alstrom said. "This [the design] doesn't blend in with the original building at all."

The Carnegie Library building, which is on the National Register of Historic Places, was constructed in 1904. In 1937, during the Great Depression, an expansion made from different material was added to the back of the building. The building already has a contrast in appearance.

Altrom said he suggests a remodeling of the 1937 addition instead of adding a new section to the back and creating more contrast. All of the handicapped accessibility updates, necessary in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, could be added to that portion.

"Do we need to leave it [the 1937 expansion] alone?" Alstrom said. "If we're going to spend the money, why not remodel the contrasting addition?

Alstrom said that if the only solution is to expand, the city should use this as an opportunity to add more to the cultural history of the building. He said the expansion should be even more modernized and artistic to reflect the new millennium, not just an updated entrance.

"The building tells the history of this city," he said. "So let's tell it."

However, like the Louvre pyramid situation, some people are embracing the idea of a modern facelift.

Ann Evans, executive director of the Lawrence Arts Center, the previous tenant of the currently unoccupied building, said that she doesn't mind the concept of a modern extension. Her main concern is the accessibility issue.

"The building has to be accessible," she said. "I want it to be used in the best possible way. I would like to see it modernized."

City Commissioner Mike Amyx commended Dunfield on his design.

"I think he's done a good job to make an addition that meets requirements," Amyx said.

Amyx likes the way Dunfield's plan lines the proposed windows up with the old. The brick foundation would also extend under the proposed expansion to maintain continuity.

Amyx and the other city commissioners met in a study session on Feb. 22 in order to examine the situation more. The final decision, as Amyx said, is still about "a year down the road."

Administrator Zollner said Lawrence citizens need to receive just as much information as the city government in order to make a good decision. She said the building belongs to the Lawrence community, so citizens should have a say in its fate.

"It's very important for the community to speak up," she said. "Everyone should express their opinion."

Getting the community involved in the decision, Zollner said, will keep the commission from making a hasty decision that will cause more grumbling throughout the community.