Public input sought

Pleasanton Community Center/Library Project scheduled for June 18, 26 & 27 at 7 p.m.


The Pleasanton City Council is sponsoring three citizen input meetings for the Community Center/Library Project.

It was suggested to hold several meetings to find out what the citizens of Pleasanton and those who may be utilizing the buildings to be a part of the process.

The meetings will be held at Pleasanton ISD’s Douglas R. Williamson Performing Arts Center at 7 p.m. on Monday, June 18, Tuesday, June 26 and Wednesday, June 27.

Three options were presented to the council at the June 4 meeting by RVK Architects.

The three options are:

Reuse

Option 1- As Is

Structural:Existing structures ability to carry new mechanical system. Limited by existing column locations. Recommended existing building structure documentation evaluation. Potential for structural unforeseen conditions. Nonconventional construction techniques. Architectural: Combustible building materials. Adapt to lower ceiling heights. Varying adjacent floor heights. Limited to current building footprint. Building over existing exterior walls. Composite of varying building systems. Existing roof pitch allows ponding. Working within existing building constraints (Structural and MEP).

Renovate

Option 2- Partial Removal

Structural: Minimal limitation by existing column locations. Minimal potential for structural unforeseen conditions. Salvage existing concrete slab and steel structure. Architectural: Non combustible materials. Opportunity to raise ceiling and adjust building footprint. Ability to align floor slabs. Energy Efficient building envelope. Unified building systems. All new construction infill. Minimal existing roof pitch allows ponding. Working within existing building constraints. (Steel Structure)

Rebuild

Option 3- Complete Removal

Structural:Designed to meet current building codes. Designed to meet prevailing performance standards. Limited potential for unknown conditions. Conventional construction techniques. Most flexible. Architectural: Non combustible materials. Freedom to set building footprint and ceiling heights. Ability to set floor heights to parking and plaza/accessibility. No trenching of existing slabs. Energy efficient building envelope. Working within site constraints.

Costs

The positive side of Option 1-As Is, is that it is the most affordable. The negatives of Option 1: Least flexible. Non conventional building techniques. Combustible materials. Least efficient envelope. Most unforeseen conditions. Work within building constraints. Opinion of Cost for Option 1: Building and parking renovation: $2,876,348. Structure breakout: $203,486. Plaza allowance: $250,000. Landscape allowance: $20,000. Existing structure evaluation: $15,000. Opinion of total building and site construction cost: $3,164,348.

With Option 2- Partial Removal, the positives are: it preserves best the existing super structure, infill with conventional building techniques and non-combustible materials. The negatives: new and old envelopes and moderate unforeseen conditions. Opinion of Cost of Option 2: Buildings/parking renovation and addition: $3,147,708. Structure breakout: $368,507. Plaza allowance: $250,000. Landscape allowance: $20,000. Existing structure evaluation: $7,000 Opinion of total building and site construction cost: $3,424,708.

For Option 3- Complete Removal, the positives are: it is the most flexible, conventional building techniques, non-combustible materials, most efficient envelope, least unforeseen conditions and work within site constraints.

The negative is it is the most expensive. Opinion of Cost of Option 3: New building and renovated parking: $3,745,193. Structure breakout: $829,365. Plaza allowance: $250,000. Landscape allowance: $20,000. Opinion of total building and site construction cost: $4,015,193.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *