MASTER PLAN STUDY SESSIONWN 0,c MEETING DATE: 06-05-06
STUDY SESSION
4
~o os COUNCIL AGENDA. REPORT
DATE: MAY 31, 2006
TO: MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
FROM: DEBRA J. FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER
SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION ON CIVIC CENTER/LIBRARY MASTER PLAN
SITE OPTIONS
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide feedback on site options for the Civic Center/Library Master Plan.
BACKGROUND:
On May 1, 2006, the Town Council discussed the Operational Plan and the Space
Program for the Civic Center/Library Master Plan. These documents built upon the
Town Service Assessment previously accepted by the Council in October 2002. In May,
the Council also discussed the next steps for the Master Plan, including the development
of site options and, ultimately, the development of Master Plan Concepts, including cost
models, financing and funding strategies, and a phasing plan.
This study session presents the site options developed through a design charrette with the
assistance of the Town's consultants, Anderson-Brute Architects (ABA). The Council
sub-committee, comprised of Mayor McNutt and Vice Mayor Pirzynski, has provided
input and feedback to staff on the process for bringing forward the Study Session material
to be presented to the Town Council and on next steps.
DISCUSSION:
Design Charrette
On May 12t", ABA conducted a design charrette with 24 members of the community and
staff (Attachment 1). A design charrette is a collaborative planning process that brings
pouvtA~,
PREPARED BY: PAMELA S. JACOBS
ASSISTANT TOWN MANAGER
NAMGR\PJacobs\Civic Center\6-5-06 Study Session.doc
Reviewed by: Assistant Town Manager Qi~ Town Attorney
Clerk Administrator Finance Community Development
ENFAMEM f
PAGE 2
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION ON CIVIC CENTER/LIBRARY MASTER PLAN SITE
OPTIONS
June 1, 2006
together the ideas of stakeholders to create feasible plans. The charrette was held on the
Civic Center site, over a six-hour period, using the following approach:
■ Small teams developed ideas, opportunities and constraints for accommodating
the space program elements within one of four site planning scenarios; three
concepts were developed per team
■ A facilitated dialogue with the entire group followed to generate shared
understanding and alignment toward the more viable concepts
■ Small teams refined the three concepts into a preferred concept
■ A facilitated dialogue with the entire group followed to share each of the
preferred concepts and to provide the information necessary to determine which
scenarios should be further explored by the consultant team and then shared with
the Council and community
All teams operated within the following initial parameters:
1. A key principle of the Master Plan is that the Civic Center becomes the heart of
the community
2. Maintain a "Small Town" feel
3. Create an easily identified central point of service
4. Preserve Pageant Grounds
5. Protect significant trees
6. A complete demolition of the existing Town Hall is not anticipated
Each team developed a site option according to one of the following four scenarios:
Scenario 1: Highest adapted reuse of existing facilities; all services on-site; no use of
Town property across Main St.; new construction on-site allowed
Scenario 2: Highest adaptive reuse of existing facilities; no use of Town property across
Main St.; police services off-site; new construction on-site allowed
Scenario 3: Minimal adaptive reuse of existing facilities; all services on-site; use of
property across Main St.; Neighborhood Center not reused; new construction on-site
allowed
Scenario 4: Minimal adaptive reuse of existing facilities; police services off-site; use of
property across Main St.; Neighborhood Center not reused, new construction on-site
allowed
PAGE 3
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION ON CIVIC CENTER/LIBRARY MASTER PLAN SITE
OPTIONS
June 1, 2006
Site Options
At the end of the charrette, each team had developed a preferred concept within one of
the four assigned scenarios. In addition to the concepts, the entire group identified design
goals, opportunities and constraints associated with the concepts. Following the
charrette, the ABA team evolved the concepts into four site options incorporating the
design goals and addressing the constraints presented by the concepts.
The charrette participants gained a number of insights about the site's opportunities and
constraints through the process. These include:
■ The "heart of the community" is established through connection (of green space
and of buildings) rather than separation.
■ "Small Town Feel" can be accomplished through placement and scale of
buildings (height and scale can increase at the back of the site).
■ The location of significant trees limits the development area of the site.
■ Providing adequate parking will require multiple level garages (above or below
grade).
■ The existing Civic Center building accommodates all services (excluding police,
library, Town Council Chambers, and the Los Gatos Recreation District which is
in a Town-owned building).
■ All teams recommended that it was most appropriate to move police off-site and
to construct a larger, more functional building in place of the Neighborhood
Center.
Additional insights provided by the Town's consultants include:
■ The scale of the existing Civic Center buildings differs from the urban
streetscape, and that the lower scale structures interrupts the "Main Street" feel.
■ Providing view corridors and connections to Pageant Park eidlances the "small
town feel."
■ The existing Civic Center should not change current uses, as structural upgrades
may be required with change of use, and the cost for the required renovations may
exceed new construction costs.
■ It is infeasible to use only portions of the existing building; thus, all of the
building should be used or none of it.
Drawing on the design concepts developed by the charrette participants and the insights
gained through the process and professional expertise, the consultants are presenting four
concepts for feedback and comment. The four concepts, which are presented in
Attachment 1 and will be discussed in more detail at the Study Session, include:
F
PAGE 4
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION ON CIVIC CENTER/LIBRARY MASTER PLAN SITE
OPTIONS
June 1, 2006
Scheme A Concept: Extended Plaza. This concept aligns most closely with the concept
developed in Scenario 1 of the charrette. The Civic Center and Neighborhood Center
remain, and police, library, and Town Council Chambers (a multi-purpose "Town Hall"
room) are added. This concept features a plaza connecting the new buildings to the
existing Civic Center and to Pageant Grounds.
Scheme B Concept: Great Green. This concept aligns most closely with the concept
developed in Scenario 2; however, the Neighborhood Center is replaced with a larger,
more functional building. This concept features extensive interior open plaza and green
space, as well as multiple connections to Pageant Grounds.
Scheme C Concept: The Boulevard. This concept aligns most closely with Scenario 3.
This concept features a tree-lined "boulevard" into the site and a central plaza connecting
existing and new buildings.
Scheme D Concept: New Town Center. This concept aligns most closely with Scenario
4; however, none of the existing Civic Center remains. This concept features new
construction accommodating all programmatic requirements and the greatest opportunity
for new design. The concept drawing is the least developed and does not reflect actual
spatial relationships of the buildings.
At the Study Session, the consultants will discuss the features of each concept, as well as
the opportunities and constraints associated with each one. Staff and the consultants are
seeking Council feedback on the concepts, including general thoughts and comments on
specific elements in the concepts. For example, Council members may express interest in
certain elements within more than one concept, rather than one concept in its entirety.
Additional Community Input
In addition to the presentation at the Study Session, staff and the consultants will hold a
"community forum" to enable more members of the community to provide input. The
consultants will facilitate a dialogue among community members in the forum and
combine the input with Council feedback in the Study Session, for the purpose of
narrowing site options to one preferred option.
The community forum will be held on Thursday, June 8"' from 7:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in
the Council Chambers. Staff utilized a number of methods to inform the public about the
forum: What's New, home page feature article on the Town's web site, KCAT `s bulletin
board, press releases, and e-mails to board and commission members, charrette
participants and former Community Advisory Committee members.
PAGE 5
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION ON CIVIC CENTER/LIBRARY MASTER PLAN SITE
OPTIONS
June 1, 2006
Next Steps
After comments received at this Study Session and at the June 8th Community Forum, the
consultants will refine the preferred site option to bring forward to the Council along with
preliminary cost information in August. With Council concurrence on the site option, the
consultants will develop the Master Plan concepts including cost models, fiscal analysis,
financing and funding strategies, and a phasing plan. The targeted timeframe for
bringing forward the Master Plan is late Fall, 2006.
CONCLUSION:
The purpose of the June 5, 2006 Study Session is for Council to provide feedback on the
site options developed through the design charrette. Staff is also seeking Council
concurrence on the next steps for completing Phase III of the Master Plan, which includes
the development of a preferred site option followed by the development of master plan
concepts. Staff will continue to consult with the sub-committee prior to bringing forward
information for Council feedback and direction.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Is not a project defined under CEQA, and no further action is required.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds for completion of Phase III of the Civic Center/Library Master Plan are included in
the FY 2006-11 Capital Improvement Plan. However, the current funding level is under
review due to the period of time that has lapsed since the contract was awarded in 2002.
The postponement of work on the Master Plan was not anticipated at that time, and no
provisions were included in the contract for inflation. Contract adjustments may be
required as a result of review. In addition, any work which may be needed/requested
beyond the original scope or as a result of the Master Plan process will require additional
funding.
Attachments:
1. Site Option Schemes A through D
i
r
i
i
d
~ ~ 17 I
~(ZZ 1%O(A MOO I IVN lvNa,Oad
Q
z
P
I
r
ATTACHMENT I
I
i
VN f ~ v~. ~a
. _ 7
~a4 0
N
I
~ Jr
j
l
1
,.XF
r
t p
r~
p" a
3
~t
~Yf 1 _L
t
2 d1:~ ~fk
L
I ~
.I
~r
gi
t
1 l t- s
kr ~~o~o
z
S ~1Y. f
A \ k
r
i
i
.
b
Y
~
~
,nerd- _
° ~
rc
}
j
Oi
J i
l
~y
}.41
U U
9
y
1 it
t"• ~V ~h~, ~
3
>
y5t
f~~~yp
F
~
1