HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-12-11 City CouncilCity of Palo Alto
City Manager’s Report
TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
Attention:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Policy and Services Committee
CITY MANAGER
DECEMBER 11, 2001
ROTH BUILDING: COST
REUSE
OF
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
CMR:340:01
RENOVATION AND POTENTIAL
REPORT IN BRIEF
This report provides an analysis of alternatives for the adaptive reuse of the historic Roth
Building in concert with the furore neighborhood park for the South of Forest Area. The
report discusses alternative uses for the building and concludes that the most viable
financially and progammatically is to move the Development Center currently located in
leased space adjacent to City Hall to the Roth Building. The report addresses demolition
and removal of the wing additions to the original building, and recommends removal of a
portion of the wings and demolition of the basement.
CMR:340:01 Page 1 of 11
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council direct staff to:
1. Proceed with program and design development for the reuse of the Roth
Building for the relocation of the Development Center.
2. Proceed with the asbestos abatement work as well as design of demolition of
the wings and installation of the bracing and enclosure structure for the oriNnal
building. This should include considering the retention of the connecting
corridor of the wing addition with the existing elevator and stairway.
3.Remove the basement area under the wing additions and not replace it as part
of the redevelopment of the Roth Building.
BACKGROUND
In April 2000, the City Council approved the purchase of the Roth Building and its 0.41-
acre site for potential development as a "public facility or alternative use if a public
facility is not feasible," in conjunction with the South of Forest Coordinated Area Plan
(SOFA CAP).
The original portion of the Roth Building is a ’U’ shaped building, approximately
10,000 square feet in size. The two legs of the ’U’ are single story, with the connecting
corridor spine of the building having both a second story and partial basement. A 1947
addition connects two new wings to the historic building with a similar spine along the
south wall of the original building, forming the total building’s ’H’ shape. The
connecting spine contains a stairway and an elevator. The new wings were two stories
tall, with basements and a below grade outdoor courtyard. The tallest element of the
building is the elevator shaft located between the two new wings.
The original Roth Building is considered one of the most important works of Palo Alto’s
premier historic architect, Birge Clark. It was designed in Clark’s signature Sparfish
Colonial Revival style and constructed in 1932. Features of the building include the low-
pitched red tile roof, the Monterey-style wood balcony at the back of the courtyard, hand-
adzed beams, decorative copper downspouts, circular tiled attic vents, hand-pressed
stucco walls and steel sash. Particularly notable are the fresco murals flanking the entry
doors that depict medical procedures of the early twentieth century. Victor Arnautoff, a
disciple of the celebrated Mexican artist Diego Rivera, painted the murals. The siting of
the Roth Building is also significant, as its courtyard was designed around one of the
most majestic oaks in Palo Alto. The building is eligible for the California Register of
I4Astoric Places. With the acquisition of the Roth Building, the opportunity exists to add
one of Birge Clark’s most significant buildings to the community’s other civic buildings
designed by Mr. Clark, which include the Lucie Stern Center and the Downtown Post
Office.
In acquiring the Roth Building, the City entered into a Development Agreement with the
Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF). Through dedication and purchase, the
Development Agreement provides for affordable housing, a child care center and a two-
CMR:340:01 Page 2 of 11
acre park adjacent to the Roth Building. The Development Agreement provides that the
City shall begin removal and demolition of the non-historic Roth Building wings within
twelve months of the closing date (July 2000). All removal and demolition work for the
new wings shall be completed on or before expiration of the thirty-sixth month following
the closing date (July 2003).
It is staff’s intent to enter into a new agreement with Stoecker and Northway that includes
the demolition of the non-historic wings of the Roth Building and the design of a bracing
and enclosure structure for the south wall of the original Roth Building where the wings
are attached. However, this recommendation is dependent on Council’s decision
regarding whether the basement or a portion of the 1947 addition will be demolished, so
it can be included in the demolition of the wings project work.
DISCUSSION
Existing Conditions of Roth Building
In November 2000, the City entered into an agreement with Stoecker and Northway to
analyze the existing basement under the 1947 wings of the Roth Building to determine if
it is suitable for reuse. Stoecker and Northway completed that study and submitted a
report to the City in July 2001.
The basement space in the 1947 addition consists of former medical offices and a below-
grade courtyard located between the wings. The floor area of the enclosed basement and
courtyard consists of a total of approximately 11,258 square feet. The report analyzed
whether the l l,000-square-foot basement could be retained if the 1947 wings were
removed. Retention of the basement would increase the usable area of the Roth Building
to approximately 20,000 square feet.
The Stoecker and Northway report states that the existing basement could be
reconstructed with structural strengthening and renovations of the architectural, electrical
and HVAC systems. The report analyzed three possible retention scenarios with different
basement ceiling heights. The three alternatives for reconstruction ranged in cost from
$1,250,000 to $2,595,000. In adding in the costs for interior improvements, with fixtures
and equipment, the cost estimates increased, to approximately $3,000,000 to $4,400,000.
Based on the costs, staff is recommending that the basement structure under the 1947
wings be demolished and not rebuilt. The addition of an 11,000-square-foot basement
space is not efficient, given the costs to reconstruct it.
Removal of the basement and wing areas of the 1947 addition would satisfy the necessary
separation from the new condominium development as well as add park area. Although
staff is not recommending retention of the basement area or 1947 wing, staff is
recommending exploration of the retention of the 1947 central spine element. Retention
of the 1947 spine would save the existing stairway, elevator, and a central corridor,
providing approximately 4,000 to 6,000 square feet of additional area for the Roth
Building (Attachment B). It would also reduce the demolition "exposure" of the south
CMR:340:01 Page 3 of 11
wall opening behind the wing’s openings after they are removed. The 1947 addition is
not determined to be a significant historic resource and the demolition of all or a portion
of the addition would not have a historic impact. However, when the 1947 wings were
added, the original south wall and stairway of the historic building were completely
removed. The reconstruction of this side of the building, after removal of the 1947
addition, would be subject to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
of Historic Structures.
The City retained Pro Tech Consulting and Engineering in January 2001 to prepare a
hazardous material report for the Roth Building. Pro Tech submitted its report in June
2001. The report identifies asbestos laden materials in the Roth Building and wings that
need to be removed prior to building demolition and renovation. The cost of the asbestos
abatement is estimated at $150,000. The demolition of the existing basement is estimated
to cost $156,000.
Staff intends to seek approval in Fall of 2001 to fund the asbestos abatement work as well
as the design of the demolition of the wings and the installation of the bracing and
enclosure structure for the oriNnal building.
Stoecker and Northway also evaluated the existing architectural and structural conditions,
made recommendations as to how these systems should be upgraded to meet current
codes and buildings practices, estimated the cost of the renovations, and summarized its
findings in a report submitted to the City in April 2000, with final approval of the
Development Agreement.
Stoecker and Northway recommended that the structural system of the Roth Building be
upgraded by replacing most of the interior walls with posts and beams to create a more
open floor plan. Structural shear walls would be added in a few locations to stabilize the
building. The exterior shell of the building would be restored to its 1932 appearance as
much as possible by removing the non-historic east wings of the building and building a
new east exterior wall along the same line as the original east elevation. Windows, roof
tiles and copper gutters salvaged from the 1947 wings would be reused in the
rehabilitation of the historic building.
Stoecker and Northway estimated the cost of doing the structural upgrades and exterior
shell renovations at $1,163,000. This cost was derived at by estimating the construction
cost in year 2000 dollars, and then escalating those costs to an estimated March 2003 start
date~ The cost also included a new heating, venting and air conditioning (HVAC)
system, new stairs, and a new elevator.
The Roth Building needs renovations in addition to those recommended by Stoecker and
Northway. The electrical and telecommunications systems would need to be replaced.
The accessibility features (ADA) of the building need to be evaluated and brought up to
CMR:340:01 Page 4 of 11
the current code. Utility services to the building and streetscape elements such as
sidewalks would also need to be evaluated and upgraded.
The costs associated with demolition of the 1947 wings, hazardous materials abatement
and renovation of the resulting historic building are shown below and detailed in
Attachment A.
Salvage & demolish 1947 wings, asbestos abatement
Renovate historic building including seismic upgrade
Interior/tenant/basement improvements:
Replace/upgrade utility service
Contingency & soft costs
Total
$ 715,000
$1,163,000
$1,247,000
$ 200,000
$1,675,044
$5,400,000
Costs have been escalated to 2003 dollars. This does not include cost for retention and
improvement of the portion of the 1947 addition. This does not include financing costs
of approximately $500,000 (Resource Impact section, page 10).
Alternative Uses
The amount of usable square footage that may be programmed for each alternative must
be considered in order to evaluate the viability of proposed uses and the options they
¯ present. The Stoecker and Northway report states that the Roth Building is
approximately 9,923 square feet, with 7,171 square feet on the ground floor and 2,752
square feet on the second floor. This assumes demolition of the 1947 wings and
basement, retaining only the original structure.
Using the Birge Clark architectural drawings, staff has calculated the usable interior
square feet of floor space for the different areas of the historic building to be
approximately 9,187 square feet, with 6,646 on the first floor and 2,541 on the second
floor. This is not different than the Stoecker and Northway numbers above, it simply
reflects measurement from interior walls to more accurately reflect the interior space for
programming uses. The Stoecker and Northway report also identified where load bearing
walls would need to be placed to create the most flexible "open" areas for the purpose of
programming uses. The remaining interior supports could be post and beam.
To further define the space within the Roth Building for the alternative discussion, the
interior space has been broken down as shown on Attachment B. The wings are
approximately 35 feet wide, and contain 1,598 square feet each when measured from the
Homer Avenue entrance to the back of the courtyard, (Areas A and E). The entrance area
from the courtyard for lobby, stairway, elevator and restrooms is approximately 1,008
square feet (Area B). The remaining first floor corner areas are 1,122 square feet (Area
A, next to park) and 1,320 square feet (Area C, Bryant Street side). The second floor
usable area is approximately 2,541 square feet (Area F). The courtyard, with its majestic
oak tree and flowering jacaranda, is approximately 1,872 square feet. Attachment B also
CMR:340:01 Page 5 of 11
shows the portion of the 1947 addition that could be retained to add approximately 4,000
to 6,000 square feet to the facility, with removal of the basement under the wings, The
final Roth Building development would be approximately 15,000 square feet.
Staff has identified three alternative uses for the Roth Building and identified funding
opportunities and constraints for each. The three alternatives for use of the Roth Building
discussed in this report are: (1) relocation of the Development Center, along with the
creation of community meeting rooms and additional City space, (2) non-profit office
space, and (3) private development.
Alternative 1: Relocation of the Development Center.
The Development Center is currently located in 6,361 square feet of leased space at
Hamilton Avenue and Bryant Street. There are currently 34 employees assigned to the
Development Center. The rent of approximately $374,000 a year is fully recovered
through permit fees. The lease for this facility expires in 2007. There are no options in
the lease for extensions. Existing space constraints and the need for a consolidated multi-
departmental operation would not allow for relocation of these services back to City Hall.
The Development Center could be relocated to the Roth Building. The central area
(Areas A, B, C and F) and the retention of a portion of the 1947 addition would provide
12,000 square feet for a full-service Development Center, as well as additional office and
storage space in the basement portion of the addition. It would also be possible to
relocate the existing City staff from Information Technology using the Downtown
Library Community Room (approximately 700 square feet), and return that space for
library use.
There is an additional 3,000 square feet of space in the two historic wings of the building
that front on Bryant Street. Coupled with the historic courtyard (1,800 square feet), these
areas provide excellent opportunities for the creation of community meeting rooms and a
City board/commission meeting room (Attachment C). The addition of these areas could
provide additional revenues for private events similar to the Lucie Stern Center and
Gamble Gardens. Because the Development Center is closed on evenings and weekends,
the meeting room in the wings and the courtyard could provide a nice setting for civic
functions, lectures, and receptions.
There are some drawbacks to locating the Development Center in the Roth Building. The
Roth Building is farther from City Hall than the current location. The convenience of
staff, applicants and the public walking between the two would be affected. The lack of
on-site parking would also be a consideration. The Development Center averages over
70 walk-in customers per day, who often need to meet with more than one staff member.
During peak seasons, the Development Center averages 90 walk-in customers a day.
Also, customers often come in their own automobiles.
CMR:340:01 Page 6 of 11
Another consideration is the relationship of the primary office use of the building to the
park. While the Development Center would add a weekday population to the park
(especially during lunch) the Center is closed on weeknights and evenings. However,
this would be offset with the use of the wings for community meetings and other
functions.
As a part of analyzing this alternative, staff also considered the option of relocating the
Downtown Library to the Roth Building and moving the Development Center to the
Downtown Library building. The library and park would be an excellent match, as
compared to the office use of a Development Center. Programmatically, the Downtown
Library and Development Center have similar space needs. These consist of a public
entrance, a public counter/informatiordreference area, and flexible areas for offices,
storage (files and plans vs. books and periodicals) and lines of sight for operations.
Public parking would also be an issue for the library at the Roth Building.
The New Library Plan priorities for upgrading the City’s libraries are the resource
libraries: Children’s, Main, and Mitchell Park. Staff has consulted the Library Advisory
Commission and agrees that these three library projects must be funded and launched
before addressing the Downtown Library. Consequently, staff is not pursuing this option
at this time. This option could .be brought forward again at a later date.
Alternative 2: Development of the Roth Building for use by non-profit organizations.
This alternative incorporates the staff recommendations that: (1) the 1947 wing addition
be removed, (2) the basement structure be removed and not rebuilt, and (3) community
meeting room space be included for civic use.
In the last twenty years the City, through the Request for Proposals (RPF) process, has
selected two non-profit organizations that have successfully refurbished the historic
Gamble Gardens and Rhona Williams estate. The selected non-profit organizations were
required to refurbish and maintain these properties at their expense. The City’s
contribution was a nominal rent of $1.00 per year; however, the City does contribute to
materials, services and ongoing funding for both projects. Both estates were bequeathed
to the City so initial costs were relatively low.
However, staff believes that it is unlikely that the City would find a non-profit that would
be ableto raise the funds necessary to develop the Roth Building in this way. First, very
few non-profit organizations located in the City of Palo Alto can assume the cost of
providing a facility that requires the seismic and interior improvements necessary to
develop the Roth Building. Also, very few non-profit organizations in the City have a
need for a 10,000-square-foot facility. The most viable use of the Roth Building for non-
profit development would be through multiple tenant use. The design of the Roth
Building provides the flexibility to divide the building in separate areas for different uses.
Utilizing a creative design program for common lobby and meeting rooms could add to
an efficient and maximum use.
CMR:340:01 Page 7 of 11
With this alternative, the Roth Building could be developed into multiple non-profit
offices ranging areas from 1,500 to 3,000 square feet, which fits the needs of most
organizations. This option for several tenants would remove the burden of finding a
single organization capable of developing the entire building. The use of the building by
non-profit organizations could also be compatible with the adjoining park. The parking
requirements would be similar or more than the Development Center.
Similar to other City-owned non-profit facilities, this would also have an impact on City
staff resources apart from hard costs to develop the building. Staff does not believe this
option is viable given the high costs of lease revenue required to recoup the City’s initial
investment in the building and to renovate.
Alternative 3: Private Development of the Roth Building
The Roth Building could be sold or leased long term for private use, and the City could
recover some or all of the funds used to purchase the site. The City would be responsible
for most site delivery costs such as demolition, asbestos abatement, and parcelization,
which could be recovered through the sale price or lease costs. This alternative would
consist of the historic Roth Building with approximately 10,000 square feet.
The two options for private development of the Roth Building that were considered were
for commercial and residential uses. Staff did not look at an option for mixed-use
development. Staff did not consider the removal of park area for provision of on-site
parking.
Development for private office space would require considerations for additional
employee and visitor parking; historic preservation issues; interface with the park; hours
of use; and increased traffic and other impacts on the neighborhood. Retail development
for 10,000 square feet would have similar considerations. Additionally, current market
conditions do not support the financial benefits for sale or lease of the building to allow
private development. Commercial development could also involve uses such as a private
school, private recreational facility, childcare center (one is currently in development in
the area) and a small hotel. All would have similar parking and neighborhood impacts
that would need to be addressed. The costs associated with these developments could be
similar or more than Alternative 2.
Single family residential development is not viable given the size of the historic building.
Multi-family development as apartments or market rate housing can be explored. With
the requirement for adequate parking and historic preservation, these uses would place
considerable financial constraints on the City to recover costs for acquisition and site
delivery.
Selling the land and building is an option, but not one staff would recommend at this
time, given the economic climate.
CMR:340:01 Page 8 of 11
Parking
Were the Roth Building occupied by principally an office use, such as the Development
Center, the parking requirement would be 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet or
approximately 40 spaces. At the time of acquisition of the building, the issue of whether
to provide on-site parking was deferred until the eventual use of the building was
determined. If on-site parking was required, staff had considered placing the parking
under the parkland. This option is not recommended because of the added costs to the
park development as well as avoiding the removal of usable area for parkland, due to
ramping, stairways and elevators.
The Development Agreement with PAMF also provides for 60 off-site public parking
spaces for the Roth Building at the proposed office building at Bryant and Homer
(250/270 Homer). The off-site parking would be provided only on Saturdays and
Sundays from 8 a.m. until 9 p.m., and on weekday evenings between 6 p.m. and 10 p.m..
Given the civic uses proposed for the Roth Building and availability of shared parking
arrangements across the street, staff is not recommending that any on-site parking be
required. This may affect parking in the immediate area during the workweek from 8
a.m. to 6 p.m. However, staff believes this can be offset by City staff continuing to use
the existing City employee parking provided at the Civic Center, and by providing a
sufficient number of time limit and handicap parking spaces on Homer Avenue and
Bryant Street for customers and visitors.
In the future, when a residential parking permit program for the neighborhood in and
around the Roth Building is instituted, on-street parking by workers in the downtown
would be reduced. The impact of this program will need to be taken into account as the
plan for the Roth Building development goes forward.
RESOURCE IMPACT
Currently, there are no General Fund monies available to finance the renovations of the
Roth Building. The City is facing numerous challenges to its revenue base and is
preparing expense reductions to meet anticipated revenue shortfalls. The Infrastructure
Reserve is dedicated to renovating older, functioning City facilities and the Rate
Stabilization Reserve is at its minimum level of 18.5 percent of annual budgeted
operating expenses.
A potential source of funding is using Development Center lease payments (around
$374,000 annually) to debt finance improvements. The relocation of the Development
Center to the Roth Building would provide this financing opportunity. The City has an
option of subleasing the space, recapturing 50 percent of what it collects in sublease
income. This option results in an ongoing net expense to the City of approximately
$187,000 and would not, in itself, provide funding to completely renovate the Roth
Building for the Development Center until 2007. After 2007, the $374,000 in avoided
CMR:340:0!Page 9 of 11
expense could be used to offset the estimated $416,000 in annual debt service.
Estimating a 30-year loan with a 5.75 percent interest rate could yield approximately $5.9
million in bonds, which includes $5.4 million for the project and $500,000 for financing
costs.
Should voters approve new revenues such as Business License Tax (an associated use of
the DC) or an increase in the Transient Occupancy Tax, additional funds could be
identified for finance of the Roth Building. These costs would not be considered until
2003.
Staff has identified the potential to secure additional funds with development of the Roth
Building from the following:
¯The basement area of the Roth Building could provide approximately 2,000
square feet of storage area for records. The City currently spends
approximately $9,600 a year for records storage. Over five years, this could
provide cost savings of $48,000 and 30 years would result in $288,000 savings.
¯The development of the Roth Building would provide an excellent community
meeting room for the City. The Planning Department alone pays
approximately $3,000 a year in rental and extra staff costs for downtown
facilities (Women’s Club) for community services. Over five years this could
provide cost savings of $15,000 and 30 years would result in $90,000 savings.
¯The opportunity exists to develop a revenue source for rentals for private
meetings and celebrations with the wings and courtyard. Gamble Gardens
receive revenues of approximately $45,000 a year for meetings, weddings and
other events. Over five years this could be $225,000 and 30 years could be
$1,300,000 for potential revenue.
¯The Lucie Steru Center provides meeting and event rooms and courtyards
ranging from 650 square feet to 2,500 square feet. These provide for private
rentals for guests and dining events. Comparably, the Roth Building, in the
downtown could generate revenues from $50 to $100 per hour. At $75 per
hour for a three hour event once a week, this could be $3,900 per year. Over
five years this could be $19,500 and 30 years could be $117,000.
¯Additional opportunities for revenues could be developed through summer
schoo! progams, art exhibitions with the park, and holiday events. An
additional $10,000 a year for events in the downtown could be accrued. Over
five years this could be $50,000 and 30 years could be $300,000.
Historic Preservation funds from the state and federal level should also be
explored.
The review of cost savings and added revenues could provide approximately $50,000 to
$70,000 a year to the City towards gap financing for development of the Roth Building.
These revenues can not be used to secure bonding and financing. Additional
CMR:340:01 Page 10 of 11
opportunities for City departments to add funds for City use should be explored to
develop a final funding scenario for development of the Roth Building.
TIMELINE
The Development Ageement requires that the City complete the demolition of the non-
historic wings by July 2003. Staff’s current plan is to demolish the wings and design the
bracing and enclosure structure in FY 2001-02. However, this could change and
potentially be pushed back a year if the City does not make a decision on what to do with
the basement. The work would then be bid as soon as budget becomes available.
The subsequent renovation and remodeling work of the original Roth Building could be
initiated as soon as the demolition project is completed and the City has determined the
reuse of the building and budgeted for its design and construction.
ATTACHMENTS
A.Roth Building Options - Cost Summary
B.Roth Building Space Layout and retention for portion of the 1947 addition.
C.Analysis of Community meeting and Board/Commission meeting space.
C ent Plannin= Manager
DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW:~
kI_,ES WHITE, Interim Director
Planning and Community Environment
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
HARRISON
Assistant City Manager
cc:University South Neighborhood Association
CMR:340:01 Page 11 of 11
ROTH BUILDING OPTIONS
COST SUMMARY
I ~T~ I U~T I U~TCOSTI
RENOVATE ROTH BLDG. !
-Hazardous materials abatement i
Salvage and demolition of wings and basementI $15
Brace & enclose original building
Seismic and exterior upgrades l
Interior improvements/$120
Interior basement improvements l $60
Replace/upgrade utility service l
Furniture, fixtures & equipmentl $40
SubtotalI
. Contingency @ 15%
Soft costs @ 30%
TOTAL (SAY)1
~kDD NEW BASEMENT @ SOUTH SiDE !
Construct new basement
Interior. improvements
Furniture, fixtures & equipmentt
Subtotal
Contingency @ 15%1
Soft costs @ 30%
TOTAL (SAY)
TOTAL COST
RENOVATE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY
Allowance for seismic upgradeI
Interior improvementsI
Furniture, fixtures & equipment!
¯ Subtotal!
Contingency @ 15%!
Soft costs @ 30%1
TOTAL (SAY)!
PARKING OPTIONS
Surface parking south of Roth Building
Contingency @ 15%1
Soft costs @ 20%!
TOTAL (SAY)!
1
26,000 !
1 I Ls I
9,923 I SF
944~ t Ls 1
9,923 I SFI"
11,258
11,2581~,2~s
8,950
8,950
8,950
$190
$120
$40
I
I SF
I SF
SF
40 I spaces $5,500
$20
$40
$40
Below-grade parking (on-site or across street) 40 spaces $50,000
Oontingency @ 15%}
Soft costs @ 30%1
TOTALi
$125,000
.$390,000
$200,000
$1,163,000
$1,190,76u
$56,640
$200,000
$396,920
$3,722,320
$558,348
.$1,116,696
$~,4oo,ooo
$2,139,020
$1,350,960
$450,320
$3,940,300
$591,045
$1,182,090
$5,700,000’
$179,000
S358,000
$358,000
$895,000
$134,250
$268,500
$1,300,000
$220,000
$33,000
$44,000
$300,000
S300,000
$600,000
$2,900,000
S:morfis\Roth Bldg\Cost Summary2, Last Updated 8/22/01
ROTH BUILDING OPTIONS
COST SUMMARY
O ES: All costs are based upon construction occurring in 2003. I I
Hardscape and landscape costs have been excluded, assume part of park construction.
S:morris\Roth Bldg\Cost Summary2, Last Updated 8/22/01 "
/
ATTACHMENT C
COMMUNITY AND BOARD/COMMISSION MEETING ROOMS
A pressing need for the City Hall civic area is community meeting space,
conference rooms, and an efficient board/commission meeting space. The
city currently has two facilities for community meetings in the downtown:
the council conference room and the council chambers. The council
conference room (576 sf) can only serve a small portion of community
meetings and department meetings, due to size and limited scheduling time.
The Council Chambers (2,446 sf) presents setting, physical and room
arrangement challenges for medium size conznunity meetings and is also
tightly scheduled. This often requires the staffto secure meeting space such
as the Women’s Club or Williams House for community meetings. These
facilities often charge the City for their use and require staff to set up and
tear down for each meeting. A city community meeting room as large as
1,000 to 1,500 sfis needed for the civic area, in addition to providing
revenues from private rentals and programs.
A second need is an efficient space for boards and commissions to conduct
public meetings and study sessions. The council chamber and conference
room currently serves this purpose but often present challenges. The
chamber serves the Council and Planning Commission well. However, when
the ARB and HRB conduct meetings during the workday, their effectiveness
is diminished by the separation of the boards from the applicant, staff and
the public, and the poor configuration for architectural presentations. It is
often comparable to conducting hearings in a bus depot. The remaining
commissions meetings are held in the council conference room and face
similar challenges. An efficiently desired Board/Commission room of
1,500 sfwould alIow more effective community participation in
Board/Commission meetings.
As a point of reference for defining conceptual program space, staff has
provided the for the following:
¯Existing Development Center 6,361 sf
¯Existing Downtown Library 7,842 sf
(Note: this does not include the 774 sq.ft, used by other city
departments which would bring the total to 8,616 sq. ft.)
¯Counci! Conference Room
¯Council Chambers (w/o passage halls)
¯Women’s Club (large meeting room)
¯Lucie Stem Ballroom
¯Lucie Stem Cormnunity Room
¯Lucie Stem Fireside Room
¯Lucie Stem Patio
576 sf .
2,446 sf
1,900 sf
2,800 sf
1,125 sf
650 sf
6,300 sf
2