Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Item A: City Hall Complex
ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Workshop: City Council Priority Issue – City Hall Complex Meeting Date: December 12, 2007 Agenda Item Number: A Department: Central Services Staff Contact: Mike Penwell www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5547 ISSUE STATEMENT The purpose of the workshop is to update the council on recent public involvement activities including an October 18, 2007, public forum; present the results of a new round of public opinion research; update the council on the current status of conceptual designs and cost models for both the City Hall Complex and the Police Patrol Facility; and discuss next steps for the City Hall Complex master planning process. Multiple design options for a consolidated city hall—along with estimated costs—will be presented and discussed to provide feedback to the design team for narrowing the design direction to a single option for further study. Schematic designs and costs for the Police Patrol Facility will also be presented along with a schematic design for a portion of the Federal Building reflecting its potential use for Municipal Courts and City Prosecutor. Finally, a proposed schedule for council decision-making during the completion of the Implementation Plan phase will be presented for input and feedback. Please see attachments A, B, and C for Community Forum #5 and Specialized Input Group (SIG) reports. BACKGROUND At the October 17, 2007, work session, the council voted to proceed with development of a Police Patrol Facility concept design for site E, a portion of Land Transit District’s RideSource nd site, located near the intersection of Garfield Street and West 2 Avenue. The council also voted to continue to explore acquisition of sites E and F. The council will receive an update on the status of acquisition efforts at the December 12 workshop. At the November 28, 2007, work session, the council voted to proceed with planning for a City Hall/Police Patrol Facility based tentatively on a 2010 ballot measure. Consolidated City Hall Design Options As part of the ongoing conceptual design process, two options for a consolidated City Hall have been developed by the design team. While each accommodates full program consolidation or future expansion, as well as meaningful sustainable design strategies, they are intended to demonstrate different approaches to issues which could ultimately impact the success of the project including: the appropriate shape and visibility of a lobby atrium; visitor and staff circulation within the building; the position and visibility of the council chamber; the visual and physical connections between indoor and outdoor places and the nature of outdoor areas including landscaping, paving surfaces, water elements and other site amenities. The design F:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M071212\S071212A.doc team will facilitate a discussion with the council to help inform the completion of the conceptual design process for the City Hall Complex. Police Patrol Facility Schematic Design Schematic design options were developed for a Police Patrol Facility on the Garfield Street site to test it in more detail relative to the space needs, site circulation, parking, and security require- ments previously identified in the Development Plan Phase Space Needs Report. A two-story patrol facility of approximately 33,500 gross square feet was identified as optimal and will accommodate the required fleet and personally-owned vehicle (POV) parking with either surface or structured parking. The proposed schematic design layout and associated costs will be presented to the council. Federal Building Schematic Design Part of the existing Federal Courthouse building, located immediately north of the City Hall site, has been identified as a possible transitional, short-term or long-term location for Municipal Courts and the office of the City Prosecutor. To confirm both the viability and cost of this ap- proach, schematic design options were developed to test the space needs and security require- ments of those functions. Results of this study will be presented to the council. Timing Planning for the City Hall Complex has thus far been predicated on the possibility of referring a ballot measure to voters on the November 2008 ballot. Extending the planning horizon two years has many implications, particularly for the preservation and maintenance of the existing City Hall building as well as other downtown facilities owned or leased by the City. Deferred maintenance must be addressed if City Hall will be in use for several more years. The lack of space in City Hall, 858 Pearl Street, and other downtown facilities will also need to be addressed. A proposed schedule for council decision-making during the completion of the Implementation Plan phase will be presented for input and feedback. While the current planning work needs to be completed, we will also be looking for input from council on possible next steps for City Hall Complex planning. The design team will facilitate a discussion of these issues with council at the December 12 workshop. RELATED CITY POLICIES The City Hall Complex master planning and public participation process relates to the council values of effective, accountable municipal government; a safe community; and sustainable development. The council has identified a continuing goal in 2007 to adopt an implementation plan for a parallel process for the construction of a new City Hall and Police Patrol facility. The approved City Hall Complex Action Plan identifies key issues that must be addressed as work toward the goal progresses. COUNCIL OPTIONS The council is asked to provide feedback on the developing conceptual design of the consolidated City Hall, the Police Patrol Facility, and the potential use of the Federal Courthouse for Municipal Courts and City Prosecutor as well as the schedule for council decision-making during the F:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M071212\S071212A.doc completion of the Implementation Plan phase. City Council feedback will be incorporated into the consultant team’s remaining Phase 3 scope of work and reflected in the materials presented at the next council workshop scheduled for March 12, 2008. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION There are no specific recommendations for this agenda item. SUGGESTED MOTION There are no suggested motions related to this agenda item. ATTACHMENTS A. October 18, 2007 Community Forum #5 Report B. Sustainability Specialized Input Group Report C. Accessibility Specialized Input Group Report FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Mike Penwell, Facilities Design and Construction Manager Telephone: 682-5547 Staff E-Mail: michael.j.penwell@ci.eugene.or.us F:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M071212\S071212A.doc City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Community Forum #5 Report INTRODUCTION The City of Eugene held a Community Forum on concept designs for a new city hall to foster dialogue and gather input as part of the continuing design process. The meeting served to update and expand awareness of the ongoing master planning process and how residents could continue to be involved. More than a hundred people met at the First United Methodist Church, 1376 Olive Street from 6:00 to 8:30 p.m. on October 18, 2007. Childcare, food, Spanish and Sign translators, and Assisted Listening Devices were used by Forum participants. The agenda for the Forum was: Welcome Project History Reactions to 12 Public Buildings (clickers) Small Group Discussion What did you like or dislike about the buildings. Use adjectives. Designs in Progress: Drivers and Concepts Full Group Discussion: Exterior, Outdoor spaces, Entry way, Materials Next Steps The Forum opened with an orientation for newcomers to explain the multi-phase master planning process, an update for all on recent city council decisions, and an explanation of how the input from the Community Forum would be used. The body of the meeting was dedicated to exploring what features and qualities would make this special public building emblematic of Eugene now and into the distant future. Forum participants included a broad community mix, including many with no previous design or architectural background. To help everyone engage in a meaningful dialogue, the presentation began with a PowerPoint presentation showing twelve diverse public buildings. Participants were asked to use clicker technology to record their first reaction: Like it, Neutral, Don’t Like it. The Forum then broke into small groups and wrote why they reacted to the various images, using adjectives where possible to capture their thoughts and feelings. These two exercises helped develop participants’ understanding of how architecture affects them, and the design vocabulary to express their thoughts in the full group discussion. Thomas Hacker then explained the project drivers for the concept design, which have emerged from the technical studies and public involvement completed to date. He also showed the concept designs in progress. The drivers discussed were: A Sense of Welcome: A building which is inviting, easy to understand and navigate, and a model of universal access and community interactivity Efficiency: reflected in appropriate consolidation, functionality and adaptability A Model of Sustainability: a living building using less energy and demonstrating appropriate technologies Capacity for Future expansion: potential to consolidate services incrementally over time, adaptability Mr. Hacker then showed multiple images to facilitate large group discussions about: Building materials, Building architectural forms, Outdoor environments, and Building entrances. The group engaged with Mr. Hacker about what they thought was appropriate for a new city hall in each of these building component categories. The information gathered in Community Forum #5 will be used to inform the ongoing design process and will be evident in the work presented to city council at the December 12, 2007 workshop. The Forum organizers and presenters included: Judith Castro, T’NT Jonah Cohen, Thomas Hacker Architects Inc. (THA) Dana Ing Crawford, THA Julie Fischer, T’NT Thomas Hacker, THA Mike Penwell, City Jana Rygas, T’NT Consultants (T’NT) Steve Simpson, THA Ellen Teninty, T’NT Chris Watchie, T’NT FIRST REACTIONS Participants were shown twelve public buildings and asked to respond “Like it, Neutral, or Don’t Like it” using clicker technology. Responses were not to be linked to whether the building was appropriate for Eugene’s City Hall, but as a way to learn about what they reacted to and why. They then discussed and recorded their thoughts in small groups. (See Attachment A) #1 City Hall Pasadena, California Like it 53% Neutral 27% Don’t like it 20% #2 City Hall London, England Like it 35% Neutral 16% Don’t like it 49% #3 City Hall San Juan, Puerto Rico Like it 43% Neutral 26% Don’t like it 31% #4 Town Hall Saynatsalo, Finland Like it 42% Neutral 12% Don’t like it 46% #5 Town Hall Kakegawa, Japan Like it 51% Neutral 18% Don’t like it 31% #6 City Hall Columbus, Indiana Like it 41% Neutral 13% Don’t like it 47% #7 Public Library Vancouver, B.C. Like it 58% Neutral 12% Don’t like it 30% #8 Provincial Courts Vancouver, B.C. Like it 52% Neutral 24% Don’t like it 24% #9 City Hall Bellevue, WA Like it 30% Neutral 16% Don’t like it 54% #10 City Hall San Jose, CA. Like it 40% Neutral 15% Don’t like it 45% #11 City Hall Seattle, WA. Like it 43% Neutral 22% Don’t like it 35% #12 Federal Courthouse Eugene, OR. Like it 45% Neutral 13% Don’t like it 42% ISSUES DISCUSSED IN FULL GROUP General Comments on Concept Designs (See Attachment B for additional written comments) A living building respects the natural environment. Isn’t this project less sustainable because it requires demolition? The site is currently highly underutilized. In the long run it will be more sustainable to use the land properly. The demolition must model sustainable practices and reuse the materials. The council has already made this decision after a lot of study. There are many underutilized plazas in Eugene. Why are you making another? This can be smaller than other plazas and programmed properly If services that are utilized everyday are located in front, what will be inside? Patrol will not be in. Not sure about courts because may be able to use federal courts across the street as a potential to lower costs Do police need to be near court because they use it every day? Patrol does not use courts everyday. Detectives will be close to courts. Why create a separate building for the council? To create an iconic form and a central gathering space. Council chamber does not have to be separate. Has council decided on a modern international design? Is sustainability more important than style? No discussions with council about style. Needs to resonate with the people. We do want a building that cleans water, utilizes brown water, and photovoltaic cells and we will be dealing with some cost limits Regarding lay-out, point of entry SW corner; building rises up on NE corner. th Worried when you’re walking down 7, it will be a dark wet canyon in winter. We intend to deal with this by stepping the building back at the west end of the tower. The tall bar on the north side of the site maximizes both south and east daylight which will reduce energy costs and create a nicer work environment. Can you consider a void or two in that north bank of the building? Yes, we are considering cut outs to reach more light Design is part of sustainability. Current City Hall won an award when it was built, but many feel it is very ugly now. We need a safe design that will last 100 years. What about the ugly factor? We will try very hard to not let that happen. Input on Materials I like the combination of natural and modern. Fits Eugene. Natural, but we are growing, forward thinking. Combine with green space. I agree. Wood is beautiful. Include wood component. City is noted for forests. Examples: Hult Center, Valley River Inn. Glass to see outside. We are outdoor people. Stress wood and outside, warmness of wood. Aesthetics are difficult to analyze. But also need to think of practicality, efficiency, sustainability. For example, concrete creates mass. Need to think beyond aesthetics to include efficiency. Very good point. People may react negatively to the idea of concrete, but can be used as part of an overall palate. Very sustainable. Concrete can be made to look warm. Wood, so straight; has a hard look. Federal Courthouse used industrial materials. Don’t seem to last, unlike the Coliseum in Rome. Sound and accessibility are affected by materials. Big glass open space is difficult because of echoes. Can be moderated by wall hangings. Sight, hearing, mobility affected by materials and shapes of materials. We are trying to learn as much as we can about that. I vote for more natural materials. Passive solar, stone, glass, water features. We have plenty of metal at Courthouse. Durability: whatever materials can stand up to traffic as building ages. Materials, but also how they are put together. How they are detailed. Natural environment is something Eugene is known for. Rivers. Like natural resources incorporated into it. Moving water to reflect rivers, confluence. Would be attractive. Rainwater to percolate through retained and cleaned in process. Input on Building Exterior Library speaks most to Eugene; where it’s going. Playfulness of form, may not have best efficiency or use of space. Do like playful, less formal Would like something that light would go right through. Would be more friendly. I like Vancouver library; safe lasting design. But we don’t know what we need in 100 years and round is not flexible in the interior. If this is a citizen’s building, vertical prowess should be considered. Would allow for lesser expense. Like the Vancouver Library. Looks back on tradition, utilizes glass, and has modern feel. Also offers room for interior gardens, photovoltaic cells; more accessible than square shape. Circular lobby – provides space that activity can happen. Balance, curves, round flowing. View from all around. Useful public space. But as a practical matter, difficult to use space for office work that goes on in city hall. Vertical, flat, square is more practical for offices. Two could be brought together. Incorporate greenery. Drum could be emblematic, but building could be practical in places that are less public. Two lower buildings: simple, prismatic, if each were made in a single material, then we would be disappointed. Those simple geometric forms rely on rhythmic repetitions on façade that will make it interesting and inviting. Dislike forms that do not reflect community. Hult Center reminds me of where I live. A square box – no. Regarding the aesthetics of façade, natural stone more Eugene than concrete. But what is the practicality of maintenance: what is cost and efficiency of cleaning windows? Do they open? Energy efficiency is important. Race: we need to think about it and address it. Form can look like “rich white guy”. It needs to be “common” and use ancient forms. That would be better than ones that look like they came from Portland. Input on Outdoor Spaces th Wayne Morse Plaza is only a block away. More emphasis on south side near 8. Entrance good. Small plaza more appropriate. More emphasis on internal courtyard. Get light into building. What do you think about structure built at edge, but open space behind it? Good. We already have places that fulfill that function (plaza). Make sure it doesn’t pull from other plazas. I love the wigwam (placeholder shape for council Chamber.) This will become center of our town. Your ideas are great. Wish you were from Eugene. People are what it’s about. We’ve lived in Eugene for long periods of our lives. Would like to see open spaces where bikes arrive. Place where people can gather and talk by bikes. Have space so you don’t need to climb around racks. Need a way to get out of rain and chat for bikers. Where is parking? If our open space is on the south side, how about surface parking adjacent to it? The city owns the valuable half block on the other side. Could make th landscaping incorporate 8 as a strong double-sided streetscape. Plaza could extend across street, as opposed to plaza all in interior. Building accommodates fleet vehicles. East side of downtown needs some parking. Planning incorporates 25 years of future growth space so maybe some could be used for public parking now. Hanging garden example is beautiful, I love them, gorgeous. They are flexible; you can take them up and down. I agree that we already have Wayne Morse Plaza, but wonder if we need some open space. I want to be attracted to the surroundings and go there for more than just paying parking tickets. Architecture doesn’t have to supply all aesthetics. Art, sculpture, walls can also make it Eugene. Wigwam is very NW, but could also be satisfied by local sculpture. Arts – important. Building also needs to be inspiring to the people that work there, not just people that go there. Maximize natural light. Sustainability. Energy efficiency. Vancouver, B.C. library incorporates exterior overhang. Pass-through, elegant use of space. It’s urban with a small plaza. Water feature. Not a tank. In Seattle, columnar basalt fountain – wonderful place to escape. What will hanging gardens look like in winter? Building should also make people interested in what is going on in City Hall. Original design incorporated things we are talking about. Roof top garden is great. Europe is utilizing it; U.S. is lagging. Input on Entry Way I like the Vancouver, B.C. library, but don’t like that it is right up against the street. An open space is important to draw me in. There is lots of emphasis on one side. Hult is one-sided. Make sure to soften other side if there is a budget issue. The drum thing (placeholder for council chamber) in main entrance is ideal. th Come in right off 8, then can see where you want to go. What does it look like coming in from other streets? At current City Hall you have no clue where you th are going. Need to address from other streets. I come in off 7. What will that be like? Need to widen other entries. Buildings that are most comfortable have something that draws me past entrance. Regarding the large atrium, make sure they don’t get stuck and not drawn into the rest of the building. Yes, it’s critical what you put next to atrium. Will I see something on the walls that tells me I am in Eugene? Want to see written and visual history of Eugene. Deaf people like to see and read. We won’t be able to hear the water. We want to get artists involved in interior spaces of the building. I’d like to see entryway flat, at grade or maybe a shallow-rise ramp. Steps keep people from entering. The building has a goal of universal accessibility, unlike many buildings in history. Council chamber is too close, too scary. Don’t need it to be out there. Yes, I’ve thought about that, and other people have said that also. Concept incorporates an entire city block. In terms of access, not sure where transit stops will be. Are there other models where ground level is open, pass through? Structures are above? As an idea, it makes sense. But in reality, the block is so big it would be too dark and you’d lose universal accessibility In our political climate only half of us believe in global warming. Building shouldn’t be preachy. It would be better if it took a humbler tone. World’s greatest building for arts and outdoors; not necessarily ultra-sustainable. I don’t like the drum. Iconic emphasis should be on service function. When you put the drum in there, you get redundancy, conflicting. The front door needs to be entrance all of the time. Sustainability should be highly visible. Shouldn’t be humble. Appendix A Community Forum #5 Small Group Discussion Notes #1 CITY HALL PASADENA, CA Looks like a church Colonial Classic Historic Religious Too southern California Timeless Inviting Interesting Survived the test of time An appropriate grandness Classical Many places to allow your eyes to rest Looks too old, Spanish Looks substantial, a plus Self-consciously formal Don’t like colonial-style architecture Beautiful exterior, massing, silhouette Somewhat inappropriate in NW climate Uplifting, historical NOT Eugene Practical Classic, well proportioned, good colors, fits the community Too grandiose, intimidating Style out of character for NW Gingerbread, too old fashioned Typical California It looks like a mission Beautiful, but not appropriate for Eugene Classy, classic Historical example, not appropriate to current situation Entertaining, but full of itself Commanding, imperial Like intricate detailed design, but won’t want to pay for it here Pretentious, not human scale Like the artistic details Old design Like Spanish structure Needs fountains Too much for Eugene Like: Spanish style, ethnic, different than other Eugene buildings Don’t like: traditional, California style, mission-like, old looking #2 CITY HALL LONDON, ENGLAND Very closed-off Coliseum Impersonal Fun Busy Difficult to add on to Fun to explore Simple Unique Cold Monotonous Self conscious Too trendy Looks like a modern art museum No place for eyes to rest Allows lots of light Dizzy Like: intriguing (not for Eugene) Dislike: Space seems underutilized, showy/too much, not inviting/inaccessible Impressive, very dramatic, good daylight Fun/interesting Inside good/outside bad Contemporary design gives impression of moving forward Nobody liked it Scary look Scary, contrived Ego trip, does not reflect function Looks like an eggshell Neutral Is it cost efficient? Too abstract. Too much World’s fair project Impractical In scale with very large population Ugly, incomplete looking Way beyond normal Good lighting, but real space wasteful Not earthly, fear of overheating Playful and modern looking Too dizzy looking Can’t believe people can maneuver in it without falling Scary! Like: modern look, continuity in circles Don’t like: too modern, doesn’t fit surroundings, not welcoming, looks like a hamster cage #3 CITY HALL SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO Resistance to the modern Symbol of Latino identity It’s familiar Colonial-Latino Decorative Shape of the doors Colors – more life Alive Roof tiles Needs more trees, plants, flowers Needs open space Practical Too regional in style Doesn’t relate to us Too federal Simple Subdued Looks like a City Hall Timeless Will not lose appeal Safe (positive) Very mission-like Same as #1 Very successful South face for our climate Too strip-mallish No entrance No fluidity of design 2 dimensional Fits community, more human scaled Don’t like Spanish style in NW Colonial, like a mission Has application to Eugene Very old –fashioned and Spanish It’s not for here No outdoor space, all façade Boring. Been done Old Regal, presents authority Like it Good, homey feeling Plain, not pretty No personality Like: arches are great! Continuity in arches Don’t like: Mission style, steeples look churchy, weather exposure #4 TOWN HALL SAYNATSALO, FINLAND Opens up with glass and natural light Very closed off Jail Foreboding Too plain Angles Striking Fortress-like Impersonal Too simple for here! Incredible interior spaces Humanized scale No visual appeal Lots of bland blocks Warm materials Does not look like City Hall Trendy Too blocky Grass growing in building No windows Like: Materials, spaces connect to environment, represents past architecture Dislike: Not enough windows, obtuse/angular Relationship with landscape is positive, but too few windows No windows is bad The Frank Lloyd Wright aspect is good, but not well done. Green space is good No identifiable entrance Has artistic statement Pleasing shapes, warm colors Boring Like modern look, geo design and offsets Pleasant spaces, brick facades Too angular Blank walls with no windows Like warmth of brick Good materials, interesting pieces Brutal Relevant to our situation Uninviting, choppy Clean design, some greenery Ugly, bland, no windows Lacks functional design, not aesthetically pleasing Disconnected Too plain Like: multi-level entry, clean and fresh lines Don’t like: Boxy, looks empty, nobody there, too spread out, not very wheelchair accessible #5 TOWN HALL KAKEGAWA, JAPAN Institutional Closed-off Unattractive Jail-like Needs: more color and life, more energy Open – spacious Plain – lacking detail Nice, but too un-intimate Denver International Airport Does not look like a City Hall Good open air/light Sense of a used public space Open, airy Lots of light Too open Like: Interior is nice, day-lighting, dramatic atrium Dislike: don’t like outside, feels unfinished Good daylight, but questionable use of interior space Cold exterior Like berm integration with building Everybody loves atriums Good merge with landscape Nice use of natural light Open, lots of light Openness, peaceful Ugly outside Nice on the inside Light Too much dead space Industrial Interesting and OK Open, good gathering space Sense of spirit, relevant to our situation Airy and functional Inspiring Light is natural, light-filled Open Daylight-flooded. Good Wasted space/volume Too rectangular Potential overheating situation Good atrium feeling in town hall Lacks vegetation main body Could be good energy design Like it Lots of windows Not sure where things are Like: open, airy, bright for gloomy Oregon weather Don’t like: acoustical nightmare. Too open space echoes #6 CITY HALL COLUMBUS, IN Claustrophobic Don’t like it Very closed-off Depressed Edifice not personal Nice try Disappointing Too trendy Why have a bridge that does not connect? Too weird, cold Dislike: Looks too governmental, over-designed, boring Lack of windows facing city; turns its back on townsfolk Nice courtyard space Not inviting Archaic Big lawn – waste of open space – should be useful, incorporated in building Brick is positive An attempt at embracing. Love the royal blue sky against the orange, red brick Static, restrictive Like the courtyard, how offices look at courtyard Striking, bold, powerful Weird Ego trip, like dramatic aspect What’s the wasted board almost meeting across the front? It appears to be a liability. Looks like the Pentagon Too abstract Thought-provoking Moving, military looking Looks like a prison Looks good Good energy potential Looks funny, odd shape, like a slice of cheese Like: welcoming, circle = closure Don’t like: army base look, inefficient space, too long walkway #7 PUBLIC LIBRARY VANCOUVER, B.C. Like it because: It’s round Different than what we have here, would represent us in a way that’s different Inclusive United Nations Do not like it because: seems fragile Very old Lacks life and color Unattractive Like coliseum Energy inefficient I hear the insides are unique Coliseum Does not look like City Hall Looks cool Texture is good Want to explore Coliseum Classic, timeless Like: Powerful, geometric concept, interesting (would like to visit) Dislike: Too much cement, literal translation of coliseum Love it Nice use of light Like curvature No landscaping Great mix of classical and contemporary Windows make it inviting Where is the green space? Space age is cool Fun/interesting Incorporates classic forms with modern materials Favorite Old character but modern twist Light, open Faux coliseum – ugh! Approachable, yet stand-out (don’t like round) Lots of windows are OK Is this in Rome? Mussolini meets Disney Modern interpretation of a classic Looks like the coliseum Commanding presence, eye catching Good solar potential Well lit interior Some design with curves is pleasant Interesting aesthetics, lots of windows – daylight Nice, lots of windows Like: Roman coliseum look, great public meeting place, circle = welcoming Don’t like: square windows in round building #8 PROVINCIAL COURTS VANCOUVER, B.C. Green Spacious Open Large patio – good Needs rustic building Warm – nature Soft Yes Lane County Public Service Building Nice garden. Where is building? We like this – restful, pretty Like: the greenery (hopefully non-invasive), park-like environment Dislike: Building gets lost Gardens within building complex, good What are we looking at? Like the open and green space No context – not rejuvenating, not interesting Holistic, organic, soft, human, nurturing Too hidden Looks like they haven’t done needed yard work Organic, human scale Wasted space, no activity Not enough visibility because of excessive greenery. Might be dreary in winter Inviting Relevant to our situation Aggressive engagement of outdoor space Where is the building? Green space, great open space Not official looking Like garden feeling, greenery Can’t see structure Lovely, needs flowers with plants Like it a lot Like: open and GREEN Don’t like: parking structure look, similar to current building, 1960 style #9 CITY HALL BELLEVUE, WA New Angular Impenetrable More safe Like the Pentagon Like a warehouse The depth of the design is nice, but it’s a bit stark Very closed-off Nice colors Nice color contrast Cold Not inviting Forced Parking garage Too blocky, cold Great design Dislike: Too blocky Too massive and block-like Uninteresting A factory No personality Good material use Discordant angles over-done, need more windows No Boxy Like corners Large enough Good use of lot space Different spaces Interesting angles Not unified Looks like a penitentiary I like the contrast in materials The lines are nice Too generic Too many buildings and angles Scary, imposing Slits for windows, jumbled, prison-like Jail, hospital Colors wash Too commercial looking Industrial Too boxy, cold Confusing – where do we go? Front door? How do we find the parking lots? Like: nice, clean look Don’t like: Too many horizontal lines, boxy/square, regular office look, not welcoming, how to get inside? #10 CITY HALL SAN JOSE, CA Technological Needs culture Doesn’t reflect the community Too tall Like a class project Orange juice squeezer Old one looked better Scattered Different design Like: Dome, that it’s not square or rectangular, different forms Dislike: Tower is too big in relation to dome, too much metal (not warm) Don’t like contrast between tall and low profile Novel, too much for Eugene Las Vegas hotel No; however enjoy domes Modern with clean lines Looks like a casino in Las Vegas` Modern Functional, recognizable variety of spaces Looks weird, but is it cost effective? Doesn’t look like a City Hall What does this say about city government? Bureaucracy and city council Sterile, looks like a hotel Goes with skyline Too “big city” looking Modern, somewhat interesting aesthetics. Too large and cold; institutional looking Too big, not homey Just another high rise Awesome modern building Very pretty, worldly Like: Nothing Don’t like: Las Vegas look, space shuttle offices #11 CITY HALL SEATTLE, WA Too closed and square Pleasant Inviting Gentle 60’s style Spacious, open Good design Like: urban, quiet, dignified Dislike: too ordinary Looks like a Pacific NW building, not too boastful Bland, but clean, inviting, novel BAD 1962 architecture; never good in the first place Looks too much like this City Hall Looks like a school Functional, variety of materials Might be practical in the rain; plenty of visibility A viable choice! Finely crafted, good human scale Too complicated and fussy Sterile Too much air Too linear Cold, stiff Nothing outstanding Standard high rise Don’t like it Not unique enough Very plain building Like: Nothing Don’t like: Too boxy, square, looks like a walk-in clinic #12 FEDERAL COURTHOUSE EUGENE, OR It looks like a building on the Death Star Technological and does not reflect our community Changes with lighting Goes well with wet Lots of interior meeting spaces Unique, like Eugene Costs nothing to change look Fits with the Butte Too trendy Too blocky Sprawling Hard Like: Nice sculptural elements Dislike: Obtrusive, not warm, friendly Like interior, but not exterior Excellent day-lighting into courtrooms Oh shut up and love it No! Cheap look on outside Beautiful on inside Interesting with detail Distinctive, busy Great sculpture Neutral Lacks human scale Jumbled and confusing, inappropriate materials, left existing building in place Good modern, progressive Not compatible Sterile, metallic Unsightly; doesn’t belong Looks like a washing machine Hard to find things in it Like it at night time (light design wonderful) Don’t like: Looks like inside of a washing machine Appendix B Community Forum #5 Comment Cards The new Eugene City Hall is going to be a green building, built on string budget on limited space in downtown. The building should not be more than 4 floors high. Several entrances, even as open walkways on all 4 sides would help spread the parking problem, rather than concentrate it. We need to see your plans for the other two facades. The wigwam is totally unharmonious with the rest of the plan. If it has to stay it needs to incorporate more features of the atrium so it isn’t quite such a sore thumb. Your water recovery garden is wonderful. Pyramid building forms. Federal Court House had to be certain number of steps higher for flood water or as superior building? Might City Hall have same requirement? For security reasons, NO public parking UNDER the building. Also, integrate the “anti-car bomb” defenses into the design. It does little to make a beautiful design if the next day a line of concrete planters are placed along the street edge. The building needs a plaza that is large enough to provide space for a public/civic function (i.e. stage speakers) and for the protest opposing it, without walking on the grass or blocking the sidewalks. The building needs to have an exhibit space for changing art, natural history and local history. Eugene MUST have a place to protest a city action at the City Hall. Having a protest at the Wayne Morse Plaza regarding a city matter DOES NOT WORK! The materials used need to be able to survive deferred maintenance without looking run down. Avoid painted surfaces. Staged construction may make fiscal sense, BUT I have two concerns: 1. If you leave vacant ground for future development, the public may resist the loss of open space when it becomes time to expand. 2. If you plan on adding floors, the problem is changing building codes. Please set specific, quantitative sustainability goals soon. 1. Each time I go to City Hall, I’d like to feel proud, dignity, wonder, change, happy, welcome, inspired, and different. 2. Your rain fountain is so wonderful. It will draw people in just to see it. Involved with weather: sun and rain. 3. I like the wigwam (placeholder for council chamber). This building will become the emotional center of Eugene. So if we can combine the atrium, council chamber (public forum), and lobby, it would use people as part of the design. What will the wigwam give to those who walk by? A dark tower. How about a glass wigwam (Oregon history) that has paths around it on many levels. People can walk or stand on it: it can be a lobby when city council is not in session. And people can see out during meeting like our current council. Will the Buttes show? 4. Hey, did you know that Eugene is one of blind people’s favorite cities? Odd, but cool. 5. Please note: Hult Center points the wrong way for the one way streets. 6. Let the design redefine government! – of the people – for the people. Some aspects of the Eugene Public Library that I like: 1. Covered bike parking, open, easily accessible 2. Brick/steel/glass exterior 3. Wood trim and ceilings inside 4. Terrazzo floors 5. Combination of high spaces and low ceilings The purpose of redoing the City Hall is to consolidate city services; moving the municipal court and part of the police department works in contrast to consolidation. You can’t do two levels of underground parking without excessive expense. Combine the public artwork budget with the potential energy production of rainwater movement through the building. Bringing a piece of history into the city th hall could be a representation of the tower of the former City Hall at 11 Avenue and Willamette Street. Can bicyclists have a bike bridge over street (safer)? Can the artwork be accessible to the blind? Artwork that can be touched? Don’t like the atrium with ramp. It’s too much ramp; hard for manual wheelchairs or elderly. Not reasonable way to use ramp. Prefer non-atrium concept design option (3B). Have you made sure that all the city services now scattered around the city are included (except police, maintenance, fire, etc)? Scheme 3B seems best: -richer indoor/outdoor spaces -better phasing -big statement (like circular atrium) -Kakegawa space is a nice model -Smaller urban space is good -Drum is too STATIC Really like the idea of a water element inside, the gardens, the rainwater use. Love the hanging gardens! You need to have visitor parking on site.Folks coming to the building shouldn’t have to cross a street. We don’t have to provide employee parking. Open, lots of light, homey. Regarding Building Form: 1. For diagrams 1B and 2A, these put too much emphasis on circulation, making major iconic statement (the drum) about what is essentially a service function. 2. For diagram 3B this concept put iconic energy on Council Chamber - appropriate emphasis. Circulation entry and central public space, as in Kakegawa Town Hall and Vancouver Provincial Courts, work well without undue emphasis on form. Please keep in mind the needs for cost effectiveness and shelter from rain. Etched glass in windows of atrium. Words and pictures. Like the atrium. Don’t like the wigwam. Eugene is fun, and so is the WIGWAM! Atrium that cleans the air! 1. Please read the book Cradle to cradle: Remaking the things we make. Please do not make our City Hall defy gravity or nature. 2. Is Eugene industrial? Shouldn’t City Hall reflect the nature, history, climate? 3. Please do not build blank walls i.e. Hult Center. Concrete is cheap, is Eugene cheap? Must we have a “modern” building imitating great buildings of the past? 4. Must City Hall be one continuous building? Can we have administrative buildings separate on site and something “interesting” for council chambers? 5. Red brick looks great i.e. library, downtown fire station. City of Eugene City Hall Complex Master Plan Sustainability Specialized Input Group Report INTRODUCTION City Hall Complex Master Planning began in October of 2005 in response to a Council Goal regarding Eugene’s aging City Hall. Since then, many studies and extensive public involvement have facilitated policy decisions by the city council to guide the design process. The current phase of master planning will lead to a concept design to be shared with the city council and the public in December 2007. Specialized Input Groups (SIGs) of residents with specific expertise relative to particular topics have been organized to assist the consultant team in thinking through and examining three themes central to this phase: Accessibility, Sustainability, and Police Facilities. In addition, an open Community Forum will provide feedback on the development of the design. For the Sustainability SIG, sixty residents were invited to serve as citizen advisors because of proven interest and experience that establishes their credibility in the community on this issue. They were invited to attend either a daytime or evening meeting to discuss the results of the consultant team’s Eco-Charrette, expand on the themes, and offer new ideas. (See attachment A for list of participants.) BACKGROUND The city of Eugene, the city council, and the residents of Eugene share a deep concern for the environment and the broader concept of sustainability. The city council included a commitment to “Embody Environmental Stewardship” in the Master Planning Project Values and adopted a policy statement to “Incorporate Meaningful Sustainable Design Goals.” The consultant team participated in an Eco-Charrette on September 14, 2007, which led to a draft Sustainability Vision and Performance Ideas for a new city hall that th was shared with SIG participants on the evening of September 26 and the morning of th September 27. (See attachment B for draft Eco-Charrette documents.) This report catalogues the input gathered from the Sustainability SIG participants. ISSUES With responsible maintenance and system replacements, the building should last for a century or more. Basic building structure and adaptability are keys for a building to sustain its usefulness. Strategies that are the oldest are the most effective – like daylight, fresh air, orientation, and thermal mass Make the bones strong. Orient them the right way for light and air. Stick with the tried and true. The public sector shouldn’t take risks to be cutting edge, or it will discredit sustainability. Intensive maintenance is not always bad. Use of labor can be positive. It is important to plan for enough maintenance. Think about buildings aging gracefully. Accept that some parts will age faster than others. Whatever the design, it should be able to incorporate and make changes in wiring, as that is likely to need future changes. Systems have lifetimes and will need replacement, even exterior building skin. Make sure systems are sufficiently independent from each other. We should be looking at the region’s long term change in temperature, sky dome light, and change in actual amount of rain water. We can predict a range and have the building respond to it. Rightsizing. Do buildings need to be grand? Do we need to plan for growth? It’s important to set the bar very high. Humble materials, low maintenance, cost benefit ratios, etc. High bar generates excitement and therefore a team of excited community members where the city could really come together about this. Knowing the fiscally conservative nature of the city with bond measures, make sure that the structures are designed in a way that they can be developed to add more sustainability down the road when possible. Consideration should be given to create a flexible building for assembling or dissembling so we don’t end up in the same situation we have right now with completely destroying the structure. 100 year horizon may be too long. Maybe a 50 year building is better and we should expect to take it apart and rebuild in another way. We may be looking at a new model of sustainability in 50 years. The Courthouse does not seem adaptable. Rectangles are more adaptable. Design the building so that it could be converted into housing. You will need straight elements to do this. Need to create a building the community cares about and is worth saving. The building needs to be built in a flexible way to adapt to weather changes. Need proper orientation for systems and responsive bones. How are we using the facility now and how can we use it differently beyond autos? My area of interest is the sense of place and feeling connected. History is important for sense of place. Looking back and seeing where we were gives us humility of how much we thought we knew. The building should be designed with sustainable maintenance practices in mind. This includes ideas from materials to ergonomic workspace for custodial staff. Cost of construction is small compared to running the building over time (staff, energy, maintenance, etc.). Talk with maintenance people to inform the design. The simpler the building, the easier to maintain. Build things that are easy to clean. For example, no tall towers. Use tested materials that lend themselves to recycling and to long term maintenance. Don’t opt for cheapest systems n the final cost cutting stages of project or we will pay way more in maintenance and repair. Give recommendations to city council on maintenance, like no toxic materials used for cleaning. Build ergonomic spaces for custodians. Shouldn’t have to lift over head to recycle, for example. Need well-designed custodial closets that don’t require staff to turn on all the lights to get to their equipment. Maintenance staff needs training support to adapt to greener maintenance practices. Materials that are local, non-toxic, and easily maintained are sustainable. Use things that are easily replaced, and also sourced locally. Does the use of the material help the local economy? Does it increase local pollution? Don’t over-process so one can’t recognize it as local. Be concerned about off-gassing of materials Don’t use carpeting. Use of wood on public buildings has come back to bite us because it loses out when the maintenance is needed. Sometimes the less durable materials (wood) are more sustainable in terms of the total energy embodied, even if replaced three times. Materials once treated with chemicals, can’t deconstruct for reuse. Hult Center is a good example of wood use. Wood is a local product with good potential. Concrete is not very flexible and hard to remodel later as needs of city change. Anticipate seismic code changes. Concrete is local, gives fire resistance, thermal, etc.; can be used in ways that can be flexible. May have a future economy that needs reusable pieces of buildings that are detached and used again. Concrete as outdoor paving units. City keeps misusing paving materials. Concrete can be very good for this. Broadway redo is a black eye of design and materials mismatch Make the outside fit Oregon (not like the courthouse!) Need to utilize materials that reflect uniqueness of the Northwest. Natural history museum show the long beams indigenous people used in building Encourage a sense of welcoming. Wood and glass. Do you have an artist involved? You can end up with “plop” art rather than integrated art. Make the skin flexible so the structure is able to change. Design needs to support reuse and recycling. Waste, recycle, compost aspects need to be designed in and not cut out later. Recycling areas need to be standardized and easily recognizable. Have on-site composting. Have storage space for reusables, like office equipment. Don’t design exposed staging areas for dumpsters. Energy efficiency is a must. Our energy vision for a new city hall is way above the most efficient building stock: run it as one-fourth to one-third of current energy load. One-fourth of the energy could be produced on site – solar, electric. Envision a building where the power could go out and no one notices for a few hours. How to eliminate waste in use of building? Not convinced of photo-voltaics in this climate. There is a wall of them in Lillis but not integral to the sustainability of the building. Solar panels have payback in a year, expensive to make but good payback. We have them locally. Learn from the Lillis experience. Be careful that what you are proposing works. Work with the climate and with what is free. We need to think about behavioral adaptation. One thing people were expecting in the new Federal Courthouse was air conditioning and not all areas have it. Cooling – having a vegetative roof; it greatly helps. Can you capture the daylighting after it has penetrated the building? The Federal Courthouse allows for every part of interior space to receive natural light. Find out if there is any passive solar energy as a result and if their energy consumption is reduced. Could you emulate it and make use of it? How to get rid of heat, not add to it, is key. How can we use heat instead of throwing it away? Use waste heat from computers. Roof extending well beyond the walls is a good concept to reduce glare, heat. Deconstruction is an important part of sustainable practice. It’s expected that deconstruction of the existing City Hall could achieve 95-98% waste diversion. Don’t let deconstruction flow out into the right of way, which is hard for alter-abled access. Learn from the take down of the existing City Hall what might make the take down of next one easier. How can we take apart a building without use of fossil fuels (heavy equipment)? Use reduce, reuse, and recycle as a guiding principle for design process. Ask do you really need to have an element that will later need to be recycled? Fully acknowledge the urban context. An underused and unkempt open space is worse than having great architecture. Don’t create something suburban. Show the community what density and urban buildings can really be. We really need to look at density. Love the idea of a temporary open space that can be built in later if needed (for future expansion). Create a truly urban building. While you say there are inefficiencies having services spread out, it makes the city more livable because workers support other services. Don’t want building to be isolated. Making bridges out to the rest of the community is key. Bridges out via views, corridors to nature, and as part of a larger urban network. We have a nascent green building corridor along 8th (Farmers Market) to the connection to the river. This is creating a sense of living space. Parking would be underground, two levels. Think of parking as an entire mix of use downtown, not by building. There’s growing need in that area. This project could include the streets around it and influence downtown transportation plans. Include streets in thinking about City Hall. Make it a place to gather. A safe . place The building can model, educate, and motivate its users and the public. Visibility and monitoring of sustainable practices are keys. Make things visible and accessible. Can’t model and educate about them if you can’t see them. Things that can be seen get better care. Green roofs that aren’t seen get neglected. Also must be easy to get out onto the roofs. Use local material and let us see it. Really simple things, like a sign saying this wall was made with xxx or changing signs that say how much energy was saved. Been trying to get Lillis to say what is happening there. Native plants. Bioswale. Have a food producing roof and have a café on top and the only way to get there is by stairs, unless you physically can’t. Need to coordinate with user expectations, both public and maintenance staff. Need to change culture. For example, floor materials (wax) are a big contributor to off-gas. In Lillis they built a floor that needs no waxing but gets it anyway because shiny equates with clean. Integrate transportation choices that engage the public to look at transportation in a different way. Need to monitor and document deconstruction to educate and inspire others. Interested in very intensive monitoring and verification of energy performance of project and also enough time with maintenance, etc. to keep track of energy and other uses to see how the building is performing. How do we monitor these things and make it known to the public? Ashland city courthouse has kiosk where public can see what’s happening in building. How to have people see what’s going on without going into building? In growers market, shows what is happening through meters. Meters as artwork? Localized metering shows people their own energy use. For example a meter showing watts used in this room. This will educate people to meet a core goal. Sub meter to user. The sensors in the Lillis building that turn lights off, etc. are a nightmare. Meters would be much better than sensors or automatic controls to train occupants. Public access to computers that allow search into building performance. When doing budgeting show figures that say this is going to be the running cost of the building compared to what it would cost as a typical building. This is a civic building and I like the idea you are trying to find out what would make it welcoming. Can bikes ride through the space? Do I feel safe there? I see it as being an attraction and I like the café idea. While I walk through the building, can I see information about the building? Lubricate other sustainability aspects. How can this project begin to change permitting, financing, and other construction related issues? Social Equity can be practiced from the design process to specified labor standards for construction, maintenance and deconstruction. Hoping people who are going to work in it every day have involvement in the planning. Need to consider social equity issues. Examples of who has windows in offices and who controls temperature ranges. I see so many courtyards and plazas fail because they are not child-friendly. By using apprenticeship programs and other things that put people on the road to good jobs and wages, rather than bringing in out-of-area labor, can have a positive impact on both our economy and social equity. U of O had study on this. In San Francisco consultants are required to comply with project values and social equity concerns to be hired. Is there potential for having certain values like this included in subcontractor requirements? Worth talking about this. It can be done. Needs to be driven by the owners and written in the specifications. In this case, the city. Example in the Eugene Enterprise Zone where there are standards about responsible contracting are incorporated. It’s okay to have a building that requires people to maintain it, rather than trying to maintain it with technology. There is value in hiring people to do this. What are studies that have been done to look at impacts of deconstruction and design on social equity issues? If it was a lovely place it would attract me. It could allow you to rub elbows with the people who work there. Talk with young people about this. Use their perspective on effective technology Formats for input don’t pull in youth. This project has taken a very different tact on Public Involvement and is actually reaching young people for input. What method of measurement will help with accountability to sustainable goals? LEED is destructive as a design tool, but good as a rating tool. Design a good building; then see what its rating is. Value of LEED is accountability. But the problem is it gives points for doing things, but no points for not doing things. The need to get LEED points sometimes overshadows other values. The value of a system, like LEED is that it keeps you on target. Cost of getting certification can be substantial. We are capable of being beyond LEED. We don’t want to add things just for points. There are other protocols like cradle to cradle, and precautionary principle. Precautionary principle should be incorporated into anything that you call sustainable. The debate about sustainable strategies is related to budgetary pressures. We should use LEED, but not depend on it. I think the formal measurement systems work and should cover it. The wheel (rating system of LEED) was invented, so use it. Use the measurement system that gets what the community wants rather than checking off the LEED list. Have benchmarks about your intentions. Otherwise, it’s like auditing a class. You don’t get credit and can’t prove what you did. LEED isn’t really important. LEED forces you to follow through with your strategies. Carbon issues take a higher importance in our current list of concerns. Carbon and its climate impacts can be estimated and measured in design process and this is a project that could do that. Gives you something measurable to fall back on. Can use carbon as a metric. It’s challenging but can be done. Transportation to the building impacts overall sustainability. Redefine the work space – e.g. more teleworking. How could you have someone interact with the building with other transportation choices? You could have signature transit station that provides direct access. Bike racks are integrated into education and art; use a rotating one behind glass. It can educate. Make office space accommodating to bringing your bike up to your office. Building could be designed to allow you to ride bikes in a different way: have more shelter, ride your bike in a safer way in the dark, need a sense of security and flexibility; maybe you can spend the night in the office if the weather is bad. Human powered vehicles are changing (recumbent bikes). They don’t suit themselves to standard bike racks. Maybe have areas for plug-ins for hybrid vehicles to recharge. Have pedestrian gateways. Create a residentially friendly downtown where there are incentives, for people not to have a car. In thinking beyond the use of fossil fuels, remember the City Hall is connected to other transportation hubs: Amtrak, Greyhound. Need to be aware of connectivity. The location of the building can satisfy transportation needs. Why are we not considering multi-use? City hall below and commercial and residential above it? Costs could be off set. Provide ancillary services to staff on site, like opportunities for dry cleaning, day care, fitness center, food. On site day care reduces stress and energy consumption. Attachment A Sustainability SIG participants: Lisa Arkin. Oregon Toxics Alliance Mel Bankoff, Community Member Charles Biggs, Community Member Deb Brewer, EWEB Government Affairs Phil Carroll, City of Eugene Planning Commissioner Lou Christian, Building & Construction Trades Council Alec Dakers, Rainbow Valley Construction Adrianna Delgadio, Girl Scouts/Mujeres En Poder Jan Fillinger, Architect Tom Halferty, Community Member Karyn Kaplan, UO Recycling Alison Kwok, UO Architecture Brian McCarthy, Cameron, McCarthy, Belbert & Scheibe Steve Mital, UO Sustainability Coordinator Dal Ollek, City of Eugene Public Works, President AFSCME #1724 Rod Olson, Commercial Energy Management EWEB Keli Osborn, City of Eugene Permit Review Manager Nir Pearlson, Architect John Reynolds, UO Architecture Petra Scheutz, LCOG Transportation Lauri Segel, Goal 1 Coalition Jan Spencer, Community Member Scot Stolarczyk, Architect Webb Sussman, Eugene Bicycle Coalition Fred Tepfer, UO Planning Cary Thompson, Helios Network Aaron Toneys, Good Company Andrew Verner, UO College of Business Frank Vignola, UO Physics Department Aaron Whitney, Habitats Inc. Sara Whitney, Habitats Inc. City Hall Complex Master Plan Accessibility Specialized Input Group Report INTRODUCTION City Hall Complex Master Planning began in October of 2005 in response to a Council Goal regarding Eugene’s aging City Hall. Since then, many studies and extensive public involvement have facilitated policy decisions by the city council to guide the design process. The current phase of master planning will lead to a concept design to be shared with the city council and the public in December 2007. Specialized Input Groups (SIGs) of residents with specific expertise relative to particular topics have been organized to assist the consultant team in thinking through and examining three themes central to this phase: Accessibility, Sustainability, and Police Facilities. In addition, an open Community Forum will provide feedback on the development of the design. For the Accessibility SIG held September 27, 2007, individuals with specific expertise were invited to serve as citizen advisors, including members of the Eugene Human Rights Commission’s subcommittee on Disability, Board members of LILA (Lane Independent Living Alliance), and other local experts. This is the second meeting to gather specialized input on accessibility. SIG participants included: Mary Otten, Human Rights Commission, Police Commission Karen Hyatt, Human Rights Commission staff Fred Tepfer, University of Oregon Marion Walter, University of Oregon, retired Joel Phifer, Lane Regional Program, Braillist Cindy Lashbaugh, resident Gene Organ, LILA Board Chair, State of Oregon Disabilities Coordinator Dave Kleger, LTD Accessibility Services Committee Consultant Team Participants included: Jonah Cohen. Thomas Hacker Architects Dana Ing Crawford, Thomas Hacker Architects Mike Penwell, Project Manager, City of Eugene Ellen Teninty, T’NT Consultants Christian Watchie, T’NT Consultants Associate BACKGROUND When the city council said Eugene’s new city hall should be “User Friendly” in the guiding values for master planning, they meant for everyone. Since that time, the consultant team has had discussions with many Eugenians about what user friendly means, but none more important than the meetings with representatives of Eugene’s residents with physical and mental disabilities. At the first Focus Group on Accessibility, held in September of 2006, Universal Design was discussed and incorporated into all future design efforts. This means: Design that serves the widest range of people operating in the widest range of situations without special or separate designs. The principles of universal design include: Equitable use Flexibility in use Simple and intuitive Perceptible information Tolerance for error Low physical effort Size and space for approach and use At the Accessibility Specialized Input Group (SIG), held September 27, 2007 and at a subsequent discussion, October 11, 2007, with the deaf and hard of hearing (see Addendum), participants were shown three different design schemes for feedback. The comments and suggestions of participants follow in this report. ISSUES Entrance to the Building Access at all entrances, on all sides of the structure!!Don’t make me go around the building to get to the one door that is accessible. Shorten distances to entrances. We arrive at corners, but entrances are mid-block. Bring services closer in. How far do you have to walk from the street to get in? Where will the bus stop be? Can you cross the street there or do you have to walk back to the corner away from the entrance? Parking lots are dangerous to walk through. Don’t have us cross a parking lot to get in. Bus stop on 8th does not come from the bus station. Problems with inbound and outbound buses. At least one direction is on wrong side of street and forces crossing. I do drive. I want an accessible parking space right by the door. I can’t walk distances. Please shorten distances. Want accessible parking on street next to building. Hilyard Community Center is good. It has covered walkway. Minimize outside ramps—not up. Universal access at all entrances is a given. Outdoor Space We have an aging demographic. I don’t see a need for big open plaza, especially if it creates a greater distance. Point of City Hall is business. Make that as easy as possible. Make the pathway to the building clear so I know when to turn into the building from the sidewalk. How will I know where the entrance is without seeing? Atriums and large open spaces are really hard to navigate. Avoid curves because they reorient without informing sight-impaired. LTD station is impossible for me. No right angles. I have to ask for help every time. Ceremonial activities are important for a city hall. The Council Chamber might not work for that, but a plaza will. But design matters. Curvilinear is confusing to many, not just blind. Gives inconsistent sense of direction. The more square the better. I’m a proponent of gathering space, but realize the restrictions created for accessibility. Look at it carefully. What is the path of travel across the plaza /entrance? What are the slopes? You can have good outdoor space, but give a direct path of access. Surfaces of the sidewalk—not much ripple/bumps. Yes edges, but no truncated domes. Edge treatments are OK—but no tripping hazards. No exposed aggregate sidewalks. Some have to drag a foot. No truncated domes—but other textures of pavement that communicate. Will the textures work with thick-soled shoes and canes? Make sure they are detectable through thick soles and by canes. No curbless streets!!!!! Driver awareness is not good enough. Stress level would keep me away. Trees are potential problem because of uneven surfaces near them with dirt and circular cut outs. Avoid curbless entirely. . Inside the Building: Stairs, Ramps, Elevators Floor to floor ramps require too much effort. Stairs and elevators will be used over ramps every time. Too much travel out of direction—people won’t use it. Well I don’t see why you have stairs. It seems unessential. It’s a bolder statement to have a ramp and no stairs. Employees need to have stairs. Options are good. How about elevators? Minimize walking required by placement. Stairs, ramps, elevators: 1) Can you find them? Can you tell where they are going? 2) Observable equality of access/ egress 3) Most important: egress in emergencies with minimum third party assistance. Elevators will shut down. Everyone comes through same entrance. Everyone accesses interior the same. Ramps, stairs, elevators all together. Ramp takes up a lot of space. It represents duplication because we need stairs. At the first Focus Group we heard that ramp was a good thing. Today I am getting a different impression. OK if everyone uses it, but not parallel. Integration of multiple uses is important. Ramp can serve more purposes. Ramp can be part of the sunscreen. Ramp can be used to display art. Also places to be able to people watch or have a conversation. OK if everybody uses ramp. Keep stairs, but push them back. Ramps are long distances. I can’t make long distances. Resting places? All close and obvious? You choose the method? Same place where you get off? I like the idea of a ramp. Slopes are noticeable to people on wheels. Again: 1) Navigable (2) Perception of equality (3) Escapability Ramp needs rest places. Seats along ramps. Hilyard Center is an example. Ramp discussion needs to continue. More detailed level next time. Still conceptualizing, not schematic design. It’s vision. Inside the Building: Finding Your Way Entry portals to services all work off the same Atrium. Atrium? Large open spaces are very difficult. High ceilings are difficult. How am I supposed to find my way? Please no big open areas. Use right angles. We’ve heard many, many times that there’s a need for staffing human reception. There’s a lot of request for a greeter. OK if after you go through main entrance, available assistance right by door. Braille signage. Visually impaired will need available training and assistance while learning the new building. Could you have a cast map? LTD cast map is OK for review, but not much more. Curves are pretty much impossible. Atrium interior acoustics very disorienting. Reverberant. Water echoes are tough. Echoing rooms are tough for me too. Inside the Building: Council Chamber and Services Council Chamber. Does it have to be round? Round rooms are terrible for acoustics. Round tables, but room could be any shape. Sound issues with round. Visual problems with circular. Lack of clarity about front. Round table. Break notion of us against them with raised dais, etc. But function is primary—acoustics. Do you have problems with current Council Chamber? YES Inadequate space in Chamber now. Have expandability/adjustability in new chamber. Different size audiences—variable capacity. Not one-use room. Flexibility. Raised dais allows Reps to see who is testifying. Not cheap version of making room smaller. Good soundproofing. Pillars and supports under council chambers, if made on 2nd floor, would be a hazard for sight-impaired. nd The scheme that puts Council Chamber on the 2 floor involves a lot of extra travel. Symbolic value to have chamber on ground floor. Streetscape could give view into Chamber. We’ve heard a lot of call to break physical barriers between service and citizen and address the power issues with architecture. The new Federal Court--the whole “being above” makes me bristle. New Federal Court restrooms are ineffective for scooters. Meets code but not practicality. Applaud the Kakegawa City Hall idea. Look at design elements of other three sister city halls—maybe you can carry design element from each. All of us invited here think that every meeting room needs to be looped (for sound). What spaces get used most of the time by more people—put that where you can get to it easier. What’s the next step for us? Design goes to council in December and back to the public in early 2008. If council decides to go for a bond measure in November 2008 and it passes, they decide on the project budget. Access and sustainability are things which will make the project successful—but it must be done cost effectively. Can’t throw out core values. .We SIG participants are accustomed to negotiating a solution that addresses multiple accessibility challenges; we can help you with prioritization and choices." October 11, 2007 Present: Ingrid Reasoner, LILA, Deaf Case Manager Eric Seratte, LILA, HOH/Deaf Coordination Assistant Linda Diaz, LLA, HOH/Deaf Coordinator Christian Watchie, T’NT Consultants Associate What would make a building intuitively welcoming, specifically for those who are deaf or with hearing impairments? Make it visually warm and welcoming. Like wood and the warmth of it. Have things to look at and touch. Have a more open and welcoming information desk. In addition to the person welcoming you, you need a directory and signage to guide you. A greeting person who knows how to talk with the deaf and is not afraid. Have a Sorensen Phone (a communication system that links the deaf with an immediate interpreter 24 hrs. a day) like the Federal Building. Have an accessible telephone prominently located, but also allow for privacy, like a booth. Use a color system for directions. Words and colors are welcoming. Have BIG PRINT on the signs. This helps not only the deaf but the elderly. Make directions obvious to all. Have adjustable lighting, but no fluorescents. Have art with pictures, history, that represent our past and with new things that represent today. We need to show why we are special. Art needs to be easy on the eyes, like black and white images. Have some color but not too busy. Have sign language art – a sort of “we are all in this world.” City services need a disability office or staff person who is versatile in all forms of disabilities. Many people who are hard of hearing don’t like to stand out in the crowd. What design elements, other than building layout, are helpful and which are detrimental? Ramps are good but need to have some sort of resting spaces. Too big of space causes echoes for hard of hearing. This is trouble. Lane County building and Atrium are awful in this regard. Having too much change in light causes dizziness for people with vertigo, especially if it is bars of light. Don’t have elevators with glass on the outside. You can have glass but not an entire wall of it inside an elevator. You need to incorporate an alarm system for the deaf with light strobes. In the restroom have good lighting and have the alarm system there too. What elements are helpful (and detrimental) in outdoor spaces? Fountains are wonderful and so are the outdoor gardens. Keep it simple – not too big. Know where you need to enter the building. ѽ¬±¾»® îçô îððé ̱æ ß½½»·¾·´·¬§ Í°»½·¿´·¦»¼ ײ°«¬ Ù®±«° λæ Û«¹»²» Ý·¬§ Ø¿´´ Ó¿¬»® д¿²²·²¹ ̸¿²µ §±« ª»®§ ³«½¸ º±® §±«® ±²¹±·²¹ °¿®¬·½·°¿¬·±² ·² ³¿¬»® °´¿²²·²¹ ¿ ²»© ½·¬§ ¸¿´´ º±® Û«¹»²»ò ̸» ®»°±®¬ º®±³ ±«® Í»°¬»³¾»® ³»»¬·²¹ · ¿¬¬¿½¸»¼ò DZ«® µ²±©´»¼¹» ½±²¬·²«» ¬± ¸»´° « ¸¿°» ¬¸» ¼»·¹²ô ¿²¼ §±«® ±°¸·¬·½¿¬·±² ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ½±³°´»¨·¬·» ±º ¬¸· °®±¶»½¬ ©·´´ ¾» ²»»¼»¼ ¬¸®±«¹¸±«¬ ¬¸» °®±½»ò É» ©·´´ ¬¿§ ·² ¬±«½¸ ©·¬¸ §±«ô ¾«¬ °´»¿» ¿´©¿§ º»»´ º®»» ¬± ®»¿½¸ « ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¬¸» ©»¾·¬» ¿¬ ©©©ò»«¹»²»½·¬§¸¿´´ò½±³ ±® ±«® °¸±²» ´·²» êèîóëîîî ÌÌÇ çèìóíðíëò Ö±²¿¸ ݱ¸»² Ю·²½·°¿´ô ̸±³¿ Ø¿½µ»® ß®½¸·¬»½¬