
Proposed Muslim Mosque
#166
Posted 03 August 2005 - 05:56 PM
There is also a letter from someone on the Planning Commission, who emphasizes in a defensive tone that the Planning Commission's only role was to ensure that the mosque design met the technical legal requirements for structure height, etc.
I found myself wondering, isn't there any room for the Planning Commision (or someone) to concern itself with the style of buildings proposed for Folsom? --Suppose a fancier of Russian architecture wanted to erect a structure with lots of red, bulbous onion domes. Or someone who enjoys Inuit/Eskimo culture wanted to erect a large igloo-shaped building. Isn't there some role for the City to say, "Sorry, that doesn't fit with the architectural style of Folsom"?
--I would just like to think that someone at the City has looked at the mosque design and ensured that it is, at least, harmonious with (though not necessarily identical to) the California-style architechture of the rest of the City.
#167
Posted 03 August 2005 - 06:01 PM
#168
Posted 03 August 2005 - 07:26 PM
--I would just like to think that someone at the City has looked at the mosque design and ensured that it is, at least, harmonious with (though not necessarily identical to) the California-style architechture of the rest of the City.
Good question. Does anyone know if the City of Folsom's building codes include any guidelines for subjective review of a buildings architectural style? Or are they simply objective, technical requirements (dimensions, color, # of parking spaces, etc.).
Can a building permit be denied simply based on aesthetic qualities?
#169
Posted 03 August 2005 - 09:16 PM
Can a building permit be denied simply based on aesthetic qualities?
Yes, Folsom has architecture design guidelines. They are guidelines only, and not written into any building code of which I'm aware. For instance, the city's historic district has the Historic District Commission which reviews plans for construction to ensure that it adheres to the spirit of the historic district and maintains the historic perspective there. Most newer developments were approved by the Architectural Review Committee for design aspects submitted with the overall developments' plans - i.e., Broadstone submitted its own design guidelines for approval as did The Parkway, Empire Ranch, etc. That's why you don't have extremes of design styles within a development (among other reasons not related to the question at hand).
The Architectural Review Committee reviews a project's architectural design to ensure it is not incongruous with neighboring buildings and has enough design features so as not to be simply a box building. In the case of the mosque, the applicant submitted his plan which I believe was reviewed by the ARC. The neighbors to the proposed mosque are the commercial buildings across Levy on the other corner of Sibley and Levy, the tow and storage yard uphill on Levy from the mosque site, and the rental yard and gravel yard further up Levy. So, the mosque was reviewed and found to be of sufficient architectural interest to be approved by ARC. The Planning Commission has an opportunity to make design suggestions if desired.
I think we should remember that houses of worship have their styles - the Jewish have their synagog styles, the Catholics their Cathedral styles, the Mormons their temples, and even Jehovah's Witnesses have their styles. So, it stands to reason that Muslims want to adhere to their Mosque style. It wouldn't be reasonable to expect them to design a California Mission-style mosque, do you think?
#170
Posted 04 August 2005 - 09:09 AM
I do agree that each religion is entitled to its own style for religious buildings. Still, every community has an interest in ensuring that the building is not an eyesore for the rest of the community.
As an example, some of you may be familiar with the stark-white, "stalactite"-style Mormon temple constructed just north of San Diego. Some may love it, but I know many others consider it a tremendously jarring sight.
On the other side of the coin, we have the saki factory already located on Sibley. That building (and surrounding gardens) have managed to evoke a Japanese style while still blending very well with the surrounding area.
Thanks for the info re: the ARC. Presumably they have done their job, and we will soon have a building that all Folsomites can admire.
#171
Posted 06 August 2005 - 10:36 PM
A mosque would bring architectural diversity to Folsom unparalleled in any other property in our city. It would make Folsom resemble the diverse city it actually is, and what is this "california" style architecture that seems to prominent in Folsom anyway? Spanish style roofs, French windows, persian rugs, turkish pillows....
Folsom needs this mosque to stand out from the other suburbian cities out there that are beginning to look all the same with all their 3 house-floor plans.
Besides, mosques are gorgeous.
#172
Posted 07 August 2005 - 11:16 AM
A mosque would bring architectural diversity to Folsom unparalleled in any other property in our city. It would make Folsom resemble the diverse city it actually is, and what is this "california" style architecture that seems to prominent in Folsom anyway? Spanish style roofs, French windows, persian rugs, turkish pillows....
Folsom needs this mosque to stand out from the other suburbian cities out there that are beginning to look all the same with all their 3 house-floor plans.
Besides, mosques are gorgeous.
While palm trees aren't native to the Folsom or Sacramento area, they were brought here in the late 1800s/early 1900s when the Italians came here because the climate was very close to their mediterranean climate. Joe Murer did the same plantings of palm trees at his house. See the historic Murer house on Folsom Boulevard. You'll find all kinds of palms in the area that were planted long, long ago. Tile roofs came for similar reasons- mediterranean influences and of course the spanish influences via the California missions.
#173
Posted 07 August 2005 - 12:38 PM
You just proved my point, they were BROUGHT here, just like EVERYTHING else in California. If it's not a teepee, it was brought here.
It's time for some diversity in this town.
We need to start supporting this new mosque. Plain and simple.
#174
Posted 08 August 2005 - 07:04 AM
It's time for some diversity in this town.
We need to start supporting this new mosque. Plain and simple.
I thought it was in EDH. Anyway, I heard it has great Italian food.
#175
Posted 08 August 2005 - 12:40 PM
#176
Posted 08 August 2005 - 12:48 PM
With a 70 ft. minaret, this is going to be a VERY prominent building. I think it's reasonable for all of us to worry about whether we will like it.
#177
Posted 08 August 2005 - 12:51 PM
Don't forget the Tuscan revivial of the late 20th century when Folsom settlers brought with them the faux painting techniques and vast spectrum of tans and taupes from their native San Jose

Sinatra "Here's to the Losers"
#178
Posted 08 August 2005 - 01:01 PM

Good point

#180
Posted 08 August 2005 - 01:14 PM
With a 70 ft. minaret, this is going to be a VERY prominent building. I think it's reasonable for all of us to worry about whether we will like it.
Good points. I agree that we should all concern ourselves with the goings-on in this city and speak out when the need arises.
I guess I'm a bit put off by this discussion right now because I received a very anti-Islamic flier on my door last weekend. The flier asked the question "Did you know there is going to be an Islam Mosque in FOLSOM?!". The back of the flier attempted to argue the Islam = evil and that we must not let such people worship here. It reminded me of the white supremacist flier about "the future of the children" we received a couple of years back.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users