Boy, now I’m not sure where to put this novel with the two or more threads going on. So I’ll try here and see what happens. The following is only my opinion.
On this thread, I would like to know what you used for the search phrase to find the images of the visitor center, I tried with no luck.
I believe, that most us will say that a visitor center/museum is a good idea and that the problem is that most are concern about the location (North Yard). I find myself in agreeing with the majority in the discussion group that this would not be a desirable location. Like most here, I wouldn’t like more “modern intrusion” in or near the yard (the bathroom facility was needed and looks nice, but….), I don’t want to see the Chama yard go the way of Durango where you can snap a shot of a train and head in for a Big Mac by taking only a few steps. As has been stated on this forum, the yard is a museum and one that you can walk around freely (unlike Durango) is one of the charms of the area. The Friends did a nice job with the walking tour and yes it can be improved on. Instead of a building in the North Yard, why not use something like the National Parks and Forests use for showing where natural or historical features are located (like mountain peaks). They usually use metal or wood plaque(s) with images and text engraved or painted on them to help people understand what they are seeing; they can be placed outside and don’t need a large building to house them (metal would be better imho). They could be one or two large ones that overlook the yard, say in the clock tower area that gives some history, what buildings is what, what equipment is what and so on. They can be mounted in such a way to cause minimum visibility from the yard area itself. I’m not saying that these should replace a visitor center/museum, just that they would work better at the site that is being purposed.
Now, let’s bring up several reasons why the visitor center/museum should not go where it is being purpose that are not related to “don’t mess with the yard” argument. First, if the center is to be two or more stories (street level and yard level) high and the project will be receiving either State or Federal funds to build any part of it, then it must comply with ADA rules. Which in this case means an elevator will be a must for this building. This will use up some space in the building roughly the size of three offices (elevator shaft through each floor and a machine room and don’t forget the maintenance cost on it as well). Multi-story building usually cost more per foot to build because of the elevator, stair and as a rule it will face more stringent building code requirements than a single floor structure. I, myself would prefer a building that is on one level, the space that would be used for stairs and elevator and additional cost of a multi-story building could be used for exhibits and a larger building.
Secondly, it sounds like that the location is being selected with the hopes that people will visit the local business by having to walk to the center, good idea, and bad implantation. Why do I say that, parking! There just is not enough parking at street level in that area. If people cannot park near (as in feet) they will not go to it. There have been studies done on this and is one reason business take time to look at parking availability when they select a location (just look at how non-handicap people use handicap parking, because it is nearer). Also, do you want people using the parking that is being used for train riders? If the plan is to use the parking in yard area instead of street parking then the “walk by” business opportunity is lost. So when selecting a site look at areas where parking can be added or expanded.
Thirdly, space. 5,000 sounds large, but it depends on the purpose of the structure. If it is for only handing out brochures on what you can do in the area, then it is large and overkill. If it’s main purpose is to be a visitor center/museum, then it is not and in fact the space will be enough in the long run. If a library and office(s) space is to be included then it will defiantly not be enough space. With that in mind, the site should be an area that will allow growth in the future.
I think that there are several places that it could go and still answer the above problems. Maybe the South yard area, or south part of town and use it to get people that are going to the Pagosa Springs to stop. If the Yard is where it should be, what about rebuilding the roundhouse with 8 or 10 stalls, having the museum in most of the stalls area with 4 stalls being used as the repair and rebuild shops (a glass wall could separate the two areas with it being used as live exhibit. If you need more space add another stall. Just an idea (and yes this would be expensive to do but would it be worth doing?).
Phil
