View
3
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER
MASTER DES IGN GU IDEL INES
R O Y S T O N H A N A M O T O A L L E Y & A B E Y
Mark Cavagnero Associates
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation Inc.
Horton Lees Brogden Lighting Design
Kate Keating Associates Inc.
FINAL REPORTDecember 20, 2005
Table of Contents
Section 1: Executive Summary
Section 2: Project Overview and Background2.1 Introduction2.2 Master Design Guidelines Goals & Objectives2.3 Marin County Civic Center Master Plan of 1972-19902.4 National Historic Landmark Status2.5 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Principles2.6 Marin Civic Center Open Space Ordinance
Section 3: Site Organization3.1 Introduction3.2 View Corridors3.3 Site Circulation
• Pedestrian Circulation• Bicycle Circulation• Public Transportation• Vehicular Circulation and Parking
Section 4: Buildings and Architecture4.1 Introduction4.2 Frank Lloyd Wright Design Properties4.3 Building Guidelines
• Context: Siting, Orientation, Scale, Building Height• Function: Entry Orientation, Building Usage, Parking Approach• Visual Impact: Form, Roof Treatment, Walls and Openings, Exterior
Walkways/arcades, Materials, Color, Lighting
Section 5: Landscape & Site Elements5.1 Introduction5.2 Planting and Irrigation5.3 Paving and Surfaces 5.4 Site Furniture5.5 Fences and Screening5.6 Riparian Environments: Gallinas Creek, the Wetlands and the Lagoon 5.7 Park and Recreation Areas 5.8 Streetscapes 5.9 Parking Lots5.10 Lighting5.11 Signage and Wayfinding
Section 6: Potential Future Development Sites6.1 Possible Future County Facility Needs6.2 Overview of Site Analysis Report for Civic Center Expansion6.3 Additional Analysis and Site Selection Criteria6.4 General Recommendations
Section 7: Conclusion
BibliographyAcknowledgements & CreditsMaster Design Guidelines Summary Table
1
Executive Summary
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
The Marin County Civic Center is located on approximately one hundred and sixty acres in the City of San Rafael, twenty miles north of San Francisco. The Civic Center complex consists of three principal elements which include County government buildings, the fairgrounds and other culturally related facilities, and a park area. The entire site was master planned by renowned architect Frank Lloyd Wright who, at the age of 90 years old, received the commission from the Marin County Board of Supervisors in 1957.
The government complex was Wright’s last major work and his largest constructed project. It is composed of two buildings, the 580-foot long Administration Building and the 880-foot long Hall of Justice, which are set at a slight angle to each other and joined together by a central rotunda. The rounded ends of the two build-ings are built into the side of the hills, where they are not merely placed on parcels of land, but the buildings are integrally con-nected to the landscape. In 1991, the buildings and surrounding area were granted status as a National Historic Landmark.
In August 2004, the County of Marin retained the services of Royston Hanamoto Alley & Abey (RHAA), landscape architects and environmental planners, to lead the process of creating Master Design Guidelines for the Civic Center campus. RHAA’s project team included architects Mark Cavagnero Associates; traffic and parking engineers Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation Inc.; lighting designers Horton Lees Brogden Lighting Design; and signage designer Kate Keating Associates.
These Master Design Guidelines were created to provide a framework for future development that recognizes the need to maintain the visual prominence of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Civic Center buildings within a setting that engenders an overall sense of openness.
REPORT ORGANIZATIONThe Master Design Guidelines report begins with a Project Overview and follows with design guidelines for Site Organization, Buildings and Architecture, and Landscape and Site Elements. Each chapter is divided into detailed sections which begin with design guidelines that are followed by related background in-formation including any laws and ordinances that would apply to new building on the site. Part of the Civic Center campus, including the Administration Building, the Hall of Justice, and Lagoon Park, was named a National Historic Landmark in 1991. Issues relating to this status are discussed in detail. In a similar vein, the Marin Civic Center Open Space Ordinance approved in 1992 and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties are also described. Finally, the report reviews
Portrait of Frank Lloyd Wright. Reproduced from the Administration Building Dedication Brochure, 1962. Anne T. Kent California Room, Marin County Free Library
The Hall of Justice (foreground) and the Administration Building (background)
Frank Lloyd Wright’s concept for the Civic Center. Reproduced from the cover of the Administration Building Dedication brochure, 1962.
2 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Executive Summary
Potential Future Development Sites that have been identified in studies conducted prior to this one.
PHILOSOPHICAL PRINCIPLESSeveral over-arching principles apply to all of the recommenda-tions in the Master Design Guidelines.
Sustainability. The County of Marin has set forth a policy to honor sustainable design principles, as described in the Draft Marin Countywide Plan, February 2004. New development at the Civic Center should strive to meet or exceed an environmental performance level based on the LEED™ Gold standard (from the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System), subject to fiscal and programming constraints. These Guidelines identify and encourage green design concepts and practices.
Access. The County of Marin is committed to ensuring that no person with a disability is discriminated against in any program, service or activity. Any altered, remodeled or newly constructed facility on the Civic Center campus will be accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities. To achieve these practices, the County requires compli-ance with all federal, state and local laws, regulations and ordinances.
Historical Consideration. In 1991 eighty-one acres of the Marin County Civic Center site were designated as a National Historic Landmark. These guidelines will ad-dress the County’s responsibility with regard to the site’s unique status, and will provide the County with guid-ance regarding potential future developments and site improvements.
Strategies for the Future. The Marin County Civic Center has amply served County residents for 30+ years and will continue to do so for decades to come. These Guidelines will help the County plan for the future while maintain-ing the Civic Center’s integrity and central role in Marin County culture and government.
Commitment to Children, Families and Seniors. The County is committed to providing community, recreation, and cultural resources for all Marin County residents. These guidelines help to ensure that current facilities and any possible future development will be of the highest quality and accessible to all.
MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINESThese guidelines are intended to provide a standard for future development and the criteria necessary to protect the architec-tural character of the site, preserve historic structures and reduce adverse visual effects while relating any new development to the historic context.
•
•
•
•
•
3
Executive Summary
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
The guidelines ensure that future projects will meet the Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, comply with the Civic Center Open Space Ordinance, and build on the design principles set out by Frank Lloyd Wright. These guidelines also suggest that all future development be designed sustainably in accordance with green building practices.
The Master Design Guidelines define design parameters for the following elements:
• Site organization to include views, parking locations and capacities, and traffic
• Buildings and architecture
• Landscape and site elements to include planting, irriga-tion, paving, site furniture, riparian environments, lagoon, park areas, streetscapes, parking lot design, lighting, and signage
Architectural guidelines are provided for possible future develop-ment that relate to the character of any new building in terms of context, function, visual impact, massing, and materials. These architectural guidelines attempt to capture Wright’s definition of “organic architecture” which required respecting the site, the nature of the building materials and creating an honest expression of buildings function. They also relay his sensitivity in relating a building to its context through orientation, scale, and building height. They also recommend an overall approach to the visual impact of new buildings that respect the Civic Center’s pre-eminence. These include guidelines relevant to new facilities such as building form, roof treatment, materials, colors, and light-ing, to more generic guidelines for the Civic Center landscape, streetscape, park areas, paving, and parking.
The following are the general architectural design principles, which support Frank Lloyd Wright’s architecture:
• Associate the building as a whole with its site by extend-ing and emphasizing the horizontal planes of the build-ing. Where possible, programmatic elements should be elevated entirely above the ground to further emphasize the horizontality.
• Reduce the box-like nature of the building by making walls transparent and screen-like. Where program needs reduce the transparency of the exterior walls, walls should be designed to emphasize the lightness of the building through detail, rhythm and scale. Openings should be hu-man-scaled and should act singly or in a series, typically as light screens instead of walls.
• Reduce the number of building components in order to allow light, air and views to permeate and unify the build-ing.
4 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Executive Summary
• Use uniform materials as much as possible to emphasize the form of the building, making it clearer and more ex-pressive.
Finally, the Master Design Guidelines provide direction in the areas of signage, wayfinding, and lighting in the Civic Center.
The attached Summary Table outlines the Master Design Guidelines, with more details in the accompanying full report and technical appendices.
POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITESA key component in the Master Design Guidelines creation process was to reevaluate and analyze previously studied de-velopment site recommendations and site capacities to identify additional land use criteria that should be considered in subse-quent designs. Issues discussed for site development include the following:
• County facility needs• Traffic impacts• Parking capacities• Visual impacts• Possible development sites• Site utilities
Based on the above, the Master Design Guidelines outline site selection criteria that the County can use for projects in the future. This document does not propose new development or authorize any new construction, but provides general guidelines for project proposals formulated elsewhere. The document dis-cusses previous site analysis reports that identify potential sites for new development on the campus. The sites for possible future development include the following:
Site 1 - Civic Center Parking “Pit”Site 2 - Temporary Dog ParkSite 3 - East Parking Lot and ArmorySite 4 - Overflow Parking LotSite 5 - North San Pedro RoadSite 6 - General Services BuildingSite 7 - Marin Center
This report recommends that Sites 1-4 and 6 remain in consider-ation as locations for possible future development and for further evaluation. Site 5 is outside the scope for analysis in this report. Site 7, the Marin Center, is currently undergoing a separate mas-ter planning effort. It is understood that future development in this area will be to enhance the County fairgrounds and other cultural amenities of the campus. Note that any development on Site 1, Site 4, and Site 6 is covered under the Marin Civic Center Open Space Ordinance approved in 1992 and would require a majority approval of the voters in Marin County.
The Administration Building upon completion in 1962
3
5
2
1
6
4
7
Potential Future Development SitesSite 1 - Civic Center Parking “Pit”Site 2 - Temporary Dog ParkSite 3 - East Parking Lot and ArmorySite 4 - Overflow Parking LotSite 5 - North San Pedro RoadSite 6 - General Services BuildingSite 7 - Marin Center
5
Project Overview
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
2. PROJECT OVERVIEW
2.1 Introduction
LOCATION & EXISTING BUILDINGSThe Marin County Civic Center is located in the City of San Rafael, east of Highway 101 and twenty miles north of San Francisco. The approximately one hundred and sixty acre site is varied in type and form. Gallinas Creek runs along the northern end of the campus and links to wetlands that lead eastward to the bay. The southern end of the site is an oak woodland landscape of rolling hills, mature trees, and seasonal grasses. The San Pedro ridge frames the site to the southeast. The first major civic structure built on site was the four story Administration Building which was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright before his death in 1959. The building was completed under the direction of architects William Wesley Peters and Aaron Green of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation in 1962. The second structure at the Civic Center, the five story Hall of Justice, was completed in 1970. The U.S. Post Office was also designed by Wright and completed in 1962.
The site hosts other structures as well. The General Services Building along Highway 101 was completed in 1971. The Marin Veterans’ Memorial Auditorium was designed by William Wesley Peters and Aaron Green, the same architectural heritage as the Administration Building and the Hall of Justice, and completed in 1971. The Exhibit Hall was designed by the Taliesin Associated Architects, led by Anthony Puttnam and was completed in 1976.
Marin County Civic Center - 1970
Marin County Civic Center - 2004
6 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Project Overview
GALLINAS CREEK
EXHIBIT HALL / SHOWCASE CENTER
UNDEVELOPEDAREA
MAINTENANCE BUILDING
ARMORYLAGOON
JAIL
HALL OF
JUSTICE
ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING
GENERAL SERVICES BUILDING
MARIN VETERANS' MEMORIAL AUDITORIUM
HIGHW
AY 101
N. SAN PE
DRO RO
AD
AVEN
UE O
F THE
FLAG
SCIVIC CENTER DRIVE
PETER BEHR DRIVE
PROJECT BOUNDARY
PROJEC
T BOUNDARY
PROJECT BO
UNDARY
OVERFLOWPARKING
LOT
POST OFFICE
LAGOON PARK
PROJECT BOUNDARY
Marin County Civic Center - 1970 Marin County Civic Center - 2004
7
Project Overview
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
PREVIOUS STUDIESOver the last 30+ years various plans and studies have been completed to guide the County’s stewardship of the site. These include the following:
Marin County Civic Center Master Plan: 1972 - 1990, Taliesin Associated Architects of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, June 1972
Schematic Master Plans: Grading, Utilities, & Planting, Taliesin Associated Architects of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, December 1974
Conceptual Landscape Plan for Marin County Civic Center and Marin Center, Department of Parks, Open Space & Cul-tural Services, Marin County, by Steve Petterle, August 2000
County of Marin Facilities Master Plan, Gensler, April 2002
Preliminary Site Analysis Report for Civic Center Expansion, Heller Manus Architects, March 2003
•
•
•
•
•
Both firms are from the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation. In 1960 Marin County leased the southeastern edge of the site to the State of California for a National Guard Armory. The 99-year lease agreement will expire in 2059.
The Marin Center property was deeded to the County several years ago by the State of California who originally purchased the eighty acres specifically to be home to the annual Marin County Fair, which moved to the site in 1972. There are no known land use restrictions on the site as long as the Marin County Fair is accommodated.
Marin County Fair 2003, Photo by Charles Benton
8 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Project Overview
This project will review and update previous studies to equip the County with design guidelines that incorporate environmental protection and land use planning considerations for future de-velopment on-site.
2.2 Master Design Guidelines Goals & ObjectivesPOTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITESA key component of the Master Design Guidelines will reevaluate and analyze previous development site recommendations and site capacities to identify additional land use criteria that should be considered in subsequent designs.
Issues to be discussed for site development include the follow-ing:
County facility needsTraffic impactsParking capacitiesVisual impactsPossible development sitesSite utilities
Based on the above, the Guidelines will outline site selection criterion that the County can use for projects in the future.
DESIGN GUIDELINESThe Master Design Guidelines will also define design parameters for the following elements:
Site organization to include views, parking locations and capacities, and traffic
Buildings and architecture
Landscape and site elements to include planting, irrigation, paving, site furniture, riparian environments, lagoon, park ar-eas, streetscapes, parking lot design, lighting, and signage.
PRINCIPLESSeveral over-arching principles will apply to all of the recommendations in the Master Design Guidelines.
Sustainability. The County of Marin has set forth a policy to honor sustainable design principles, as described in the Draft Marin Countywide Plan, February 2004. New development at the Civic Center should strive to meet or exceed an en-vironmental performance level based on the LEED™ Gold standard (from the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System), subject to fiscal and programming constraints. These Guidelines identify and encourage green design concepts and practices.
••••••
•
•
•
•
9
Project Overview
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Access. The County of Marin is committed to ensuring that no person with a disability is discriminated against in any pro-gram, service or activity. Any altered, remodeled or newly constructed facility on the Civic Center campus will be ac-cessible to and usable by persons with disabilities. To achieve these practices the County requires compliance with all fed-eral, state and local laws, regulations and ordinances.
Historical Consideration. In 1991 eighty-one acres of the Marin County Civic Center site were designated as a National His-toric Landmark. These guidelines will address the County’s responsibility with regard to the site’s unique status, and will provide the County with guidance regarding potential future developments and site improvements.
Strategies for the Future. The Marin County Civic Center has amply served County residents for 30+ years and will continue to do so for decades to come. These Guidelines will help the County plan for the future while maintaining the Civic Center’s integrity and central role in Marin County culture and government.
Commitment to Children, Families and Seniors. The County is committed to providing community, recreation and cultural resources for all Marin County residents. These guidelines help to ensure that current facilities and any possible future devel-opment will be of the highest quality and accessible to all.
The County is also committed to the ongoing enhancement of security on the campus for employees and visitors alike. These guidelines assume that security is a critical responsibility of the County and that it will be thoroughly addressed in any possible future development projects. In addition, the campus will con-tinue to be a cultural centerpiece for the county and a gathering place for all to enjoy.
2.3 Marin County Civic Center Master Plan of 1972 - 1990Fundamental to the organization of the Marin County Civic Center is the idea that the entire campus, while made up of vari-ous governmental, cultural and recreational components, must nevertheless be experienced as a composite whole. The Civic Center and Fairgrounds form an integrated complex of related elements on an informal park-like setting that is visually appealing and accessible to all.
As expressed in the Marin County Civic Center Master Plan of 1972 – 1990, it is the intent of the County to maintain its open space heritage while providing for future growth. This sentiment is best summarized by the criteria established by the County of Marin for use in the development of this master plan:
•
•
•
•
10 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Project Overview
DIAGRAM OF HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARY
The site is to be treated as a composite whole. Any potential conflict between governmental activities and recreational-cultural activities must be resolved without interference or dilution of either.
Beyond identifying known and fixed items, flexibility to ac-commodate future developments is necessary.
New buildings must respect and enhance natural land formations. Extent of building and land coverage must be limited.
Variations in contemporary design for future building stages, not incompatible with present buildings, shall be consid-ered.
The possibility of grouping and combining new buildings as against constructing isolated elements should be thoroughly explored.
Introduced over thirty years ago, the stated criteria continue to provide a basis for current and future planning efforts and serve as the underpinnings for these guidelines.
2.4 National Historic Landmark StatusNational Historic Landmarks are buildings, sites, districts, structures, and objects that have been determined by the Secretary of the Interior to be nationally significant in American history and culture. The Marin County Civic Center received its landmark designation
•
•
•
•
•
as an historic district on July 17, 1991. The following is a summary of the landmark application describing the extent of the historic district and the significance of the contributing resources.
11
Project Overview
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
BOUNDARY DESCRIPTIONThe boundary of the eighty-one acre landmark site extends from North San Pedro Road to the south, U.S. Highway 101 to the west, edge of the lagoon to the north, and an adjoining residential neighborhood to the east.
Within the landmark designation, the Civic Center is classified as part of the Modern Movement and is an expression of Wright’s “organic architecture.” The contributing resources of the district include the Administration Building and Hall of Justice complex and the U.S. Post Office building along with the parking areas, roadways and lagoon, that compose the landscape setting. MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTERAs indicated in the landmark application, the Marin Civic Center government complex is the last major work of Frank Lloyd Wright and his largest constructed project. It is composed of two build-ings, the 580-foot long Administration Building and the 880-foot long Hall of Justice, which are set at a slight angle to each other and joined together by a central rotunda. The rounded ends of the two buildings are built into the side of the hills, where they are not merely placed on parcels of land, but the buildings are integrally connected to the landscape allowing the roadways to flow under and through the buildings.
Extending from the domed rotunda are repetitive arches that exhibit a light screen-like character and create a horizontal rhythm that recalls Roman aqueduct construction such as the Pont du Gard in Nimes. The screen of arches helps modulate the daylight. Adjacent to the rotunda is a terrace at the end of which springs a 172-foot triangular spire that complements the rhythmic, low-lying structures beyond.
Both the four-story Administration Building (completed in 1962) and the five-story Hall of Justice (completed in 1970) are con-structed of a combination of steel with poured concrete and pre-cast/pre-stressed concrete elements. The floor system uses pre-cast/pre-stressed double-tee floor members. Vertical supports are primarily small-diameter, extra-strength steel columns with pre-cast, elliptically shaped, concrete covers. The roof system is composed of a series of pre-cast concrete trusses supporting a thin, barrel-arched shell of reinforced concrete. Pre-cast units of ornament adorn the roof to help mask construction irregularities. Although intended to have a golden color, the roof is painted a sky blue color since no gold paint or coating had been de-veloped at the time to withstand tarnishing. The walls are of an intensified sand/beige color to compensate for the fading that would naturally occur over time.
The public enters the Administration Building from the center of the archway over the entrance drive. An ornate gold anodized gate leads to the interior of the building. Each of the interior floors have open light wells that increase in width from bottom to top to allow natural light to pour down from the roof. Though
View of Administration Building
Pont du Gard in Nimes
Entrance to Administration Building
Interior light wells
12 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Project Overview
intended to be open to the outside, it was deemed necessary to cover the roof openings and barrel-vaulted skylights were subsequently installed.
UNITED STATES POST OFFICEThe U.S. Post Office (completed in 1962), located near the main entrance to the grounds at North San Pedro Road, is Wright’s sole federal commission. The one-story, elliptically shaped building has a flat roof hidden by a parapet and is constructed of rein-forced concrete masonry block painted the same color as the Civic Center complex. A broad, round-arched canopy of cast concrete is cantilevered from the façade above the glass entry wall. Originally, a large plastic globe of the world was mounted on a pole centered halfway inside and halfway outside of the building. However, as the plastic deteriorated over time, the globe was removed. The County owns the property under the Post Office (the lease expires in 2012) and is committed to the preservation and restoration of its historic resources. It encourages the restoration of the post office to its original form.
NON-CONTRIBUTING RESOURCESNot all buildings in the eighty-one acre landmark site are included as part of the historic designation, and are classified “non-con-tributing resources.” The Standards of Treatment do not apply to these buildings. The four non-contributing resources on the site include: 1) The County General Services Building near the west edge of the site along Highway 101, 2) the Marin Veterans’
DIAGRAM OF NON-CONTRIBUTING RESOURCES
View of U.S. Post Office today
View of U.S. Post Office with original globe
13
Project Overview
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Memorial Auditorium near the north edge of the lagoon, 3) the Exhibit Hall Building at the north portion of the site that includes the fairgrounds and associated storage buildings, and 4) the Marin County Jail situated in the hill adjacent to the Civic Center and generally concealed from view. Also on the Civic Center Campus is a fire station located near the Post Office. The fire station is maintained and operated by the City of San Rafael, but the property under the station is owned by the County. The County leases this land to the San Rafael; the current agreement expires in 2006.
2.5 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards provide a reference for preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction proj-ects related to historic resources such as the Marin Civic Center site. As a National Historic Landmark, all treatments undertaken within the historic district of the Marin Civic Center should be ap-proached with sensitivity and in accordance with the following ten principles:
1. County General Services Building 2. Marin Veterans’ Memorial Auditorium
3. Exhibit Hall 4. County Jail
14 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Project Overview
A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be re-tained and preserved. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic prop-erty shall be preserved. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than re-placed. Where the severity of deterioration requires replace-ment of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be under-taken using the gentlest means possible. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construc-tion shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
2.6 Marin Civic Center Open Space OrdinanceApproved in 1992, the intent of the Marin Center Open Space ordinance is to preserve the aesthetic quality of the Frank Lloyd Wright Civic Center buildings and grounds by preventing the construction of any building at the Marin County Civic Center grounds without the prior approval by a majority vote of the County electorate. The Civic Center grounds is defined as the land bordered by North San Pedro Road to the south, U.S. High-
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
15
Project Overview
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
way 101 to the west, the railroad right of way to the north, and Civic Center Drive to the east.
This ordinance does not, however, prevent or impede the County from: maintaining, repairing, restoring, or rebuilding the existing Civic Center building; maintaining, repairing, altering, or adding at-grade parking, pedestrian, or playground facilities; maintaining, altering, improving, or adding landscaping, utili-ties, or fencing; approving or constructing minor structures that do not exceed two hundred and fifty square feet and that are incidental to the operation of the Civic Center facilities; or mak-ing interior changes or modifications to the Civic Center building. Furthermore, it does not prevent or impede the placement on the Civic Center grounds of temporary structures for the purposes of seasonal activities such as Christmas tree sales and the County fair, and other temporary activities such as the weekly farmer’s market.
Projects undertaken within the Civic Center grounds (as shown within the dashed line of the diagram below) are therefore sub-ject to the requirements of this ordinance in acknowledging the Civic Center’s open space heritage.
DIAGRAM OF OPEN SPACE ORDINANCE BOUNDARY
16 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Site Organization
View Number 6, from Marin Center toward Civic Center
View Number 8, from intersection of Civic Center Drive and No. San Pedro
View Number 9, from the Hill in Lagoon Park
SECTION 3: SITE ORGANIZATION
3.1 IntroductionThe Civic Center campus is unique for its natural and cultural history alike. Care must be taken to protect and enhance the campus while also planning for the future of Marin County. The issues discussed in this section relate to the overall organization of the site.
It should be noted that Frank Lloyd Wright’s master plan ad-dressed site organizational issues as well. Of this the National Historic Landmark Nomination states that “the master plan for the site respects its topography. The buildings, hills, roads, parking areas, lagoon, and prominent landscape features were linked together to facilitate the movement of people and automobiles.” It goes on to point out that while Wright’s plan set aside the north portion of the site for the fairgrounds, many of the features for this area were never built. The lagoon is the “major surviving feature of this part of the grounds.” 3.2 View CorridorsThere are many spectacular views through and to the Civic Cen-ter site. Views help to define the site and orient visitors thereby enhancing their overall experience of the landscape and build-ings. The following guidelines are to help protect, enhance and frame significant view corridors at the Civic Center.
GUIDELINES
Where views from the Civic Center buildings to the east and south are obstructed due to tall trees, replacing the trees with smaller species should be considered. (This must be handled with care; a thorough tree planting master plan is required.)
Undesirable views of Highway 101 from the Civic Center buildings should be mitigated with buffer and screen plant-ing along the site’s western edge. Care must be taken, however, to protect the view from the highway back towards the buildings.
Several important views are listed below and indicated on the View Corridors diagram.
View from Highway 101 southbound to the Hall of Justice and Administration BuildingView from the offices on the east side of the Administration Building eastward toward the San Pedro ridgeViews from the offices on the east side of the Hall of Justice
•
•
1.
2.
3.
17
Site Organization
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
1
2
34
5
6
7
8
9
4
to the lagoon, Lagoon Park, the open space in the northeast corner of the site, and the bayViews from the offices on the west sides of the Administration Building and the Hall of Justice to Mount TamalpaisView from the island in the lagoon south and eastward toward San Pedro ridgeView from the northern edge of the lagoon southward to the Civic Center buildings framed by the San Pedro ridgeView from the open space area just east of the existing corral southwest to Mount Tamalpais
4.
5.
6.
7.
VIEW CORRIDORS
18 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Site Organization
View from entry at Civic Center Drive and North San Pedro RoadView from the hill on the west edge of Lagoon Park
Where views of the Civic Center buildings are obstructed due to tall trees, replacing the trees with smaller species should be considered. (It should be noted that virtually all of the Monterey Pines on the campus will be removed within the next few years due to disease.) Careful attention must be paid to the historic character of the site when selecting replacement trees; drastic changes should be made only after careful consideration.
3.3 Site Circulation and Parking Capacity
PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATIONThe following guidelines outline an approach to enhancing pe-destrian accessibility to the Civic Center.
GUIDELINES
Sidewalks along primary and secondary streets are pre-ferred site-wide in order to strengthen connections between buildings and recreational features on the site. Signage and nighttime lighting should also be included. Sidewalks will improve overall pedestrian safety and access to alternative parking lots for events.
A paved walkway of a minimum 12’ in width that circles the lagoon entirely should be completed per Frank Lloyd Wright’s original plan. Signage and nighttime lighting should also be included. Width and material should be consistent.
Pedestrian access to the undeveloped area in the northeast corner of the site is encouraged. Paths should be adequately signed for wayfinding and formalized to the degree necessary to protect sensitive habitats. Habitat control fences will be necessary to protect sensitive wetland areas. Paths should typically be approximately 4 - 6’ wide.
Existing trails on the site may or may not be formalized, based on the adjacent natural conditions at the discretion of the County. If formalized, trail width and materials should be consistent and determined on a case by case basis.
The County of Marin is committed to enhancing the travel experi-ence for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users to ensure that alternate modes of transportation are successful in reducing car traffic. The Marin Countywide Plan underscores this commitment with repeated emphasis on the importance of pedestrian links and connections between neighborhoods, shopping centers, employment centers, schools and recreational sites.
Similarly, Frank Lloyd Wright and later planners agreed that ac-cess to the entire site by way of foot paths, walkways and bicycle
8.
9.
•
•
•
•
19
Site Organization
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Existing pedestrian or multi-use path
Proposed pedestrian or multi-use path
Existing bicycle lanes
Proposed bicycle lanes
routes was critical to the site’s success as a recreational, cultural and civic destination. Plans for the Civic Center campus have always included a comprehensive network of walkways. Cur-rently the site lacks several critical pedestrian links. Stronger and consistent pedestrian connections would enhance accessibility to the site for visitors and employees alike.
It is also becoming increasingly important to provide access to
PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE CIRCULATION
20 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Site Organization
the Civic Center from adjacent neighborhoods, as the campus now serves as a neighborhood park for an increasing number of local residents. Currently access to the site from adjacent areas is limited and could be improved.
For the purposes of this document, primary streets include major arterial and key north/south and east/west routes – North San Pe-dro Road, Civic Center Drive, Peter Behr Drive, and the Avenue of the Flags. Secondary streets are Judge Haley Drive, Vera Schultz Drive and Armory Drive.
BICYCLE CIRCULATIONThe following guidelines would improve bicycle circulation and accommodate increased bicycle usage on the Civic Center campus while reducing adverse effects on the landscape and environment.
GUIDELINES
Civic Center Drive and other primary streets should have striped bike lanes and should meet all City, County and State standards.
Bicycle access via bike paths or multi-use paths throughout the open space areas is encouraged. Care should be taken in designing these paths to avoid user conflicts and safety problems.
Coordination with relevant County agencies, City of San Rafael plans (including the Northgate Promenade), and in-terested citizen groups is encouraged.
The Transportation Section (Built Environment Element) of the Marin Countywide Plan emphasizes the importance of non-automobile transportation. The plan suggests expanding and improving exist-ing bicycle facilities and access. The County of Marin believes that “roadway designs should strive to adequately serve all types of users.” Again, this sentiment was expressed in the Marin Civic Center Master Plan developed in 1972. The plan recommended that “various areas be linked with bicycle paths” including a loop around the lagoon and along Civic Center Drive.
Today the Civic Center lacks a strong draw for cyclists. Only North San Pedro Road has striped bike lanes; the pathways in the rec-reation areas are not connected in a logical fashion; and there is a lack of adequate bike parking/storage. The Countywide Plan recommends adding a bicycle route along McInnis Parkway and a bicycle path along Civic Center Drive. While these addi-tions would improve the Civic Center’s accessibility to cyclists, a more comprehensive approach that provides links internally on the site as well as to other areas of the County is preferred. The County should also explore ideas such as providing additional bike parking (possibly covered areas) in various locations on site and implementing a “loaner” bike system would be beneficial
•
•
•
21
Site Organization
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Bus shelter on Civic Center Drive
for County staff and visitors to the Civic Center.
The Marin County Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (June 2002), the North San Rafael Vision 2010 (November 1997) and the North San Rafael Vision Promenade Conceptual Plan (November 2002) identify the need to establish new pedestrian and bicycle con-nections from Terra Linda to the Civic Center. All suggest that this connection run under Highway 101 along the railroad tracks and then follow Civic Center Drive to North San Pedro Road. The County will work in collaboration with these previous efforts if and when such improvements are made on the campus. In addition, the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) plans have incorporated these ideas into their plans for a future station at the Civic Center. SMART is discussed further in the following section on Public Transportation.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATIONThe following general guidelines address public transportation is-sues on the Civic Center campus that will help to accommodate increased transit utilization.
GUIDELINES
The County is committed to enhancing public and alternative modes of transportation to and from the Civic Center. Future transportation planning efforts should emphasize options other than the use of private vehicles.
Bus shelters are encouraged on the Civic Center campus and should be designed specifically for the site.
Additional bus service to the Civic Center for cultural events (evenings and weekends) and access to the library is en-couraged.
Coordination with and support of the SMART project and sta-tion at the Civic Center is encouraged.
Public transportation to and from the Civic Center campus is provided primarily by Golden Gate Transit bus service. The same was true in 1972. Today five bus routes stop along Civic Center Drive including the 33, 57, 59, 75, 123 lines. The primary bus stop is located at the intersection of Civic Center Drive and Judge Haley Way. Even so, most visitors travel to and from the Civic Center via automobile.
In addition to the regular bus service, the Marin County Depart-ment of Health and Human Services provides a free, wheel chair accessible shuttle service from the San Rafael Transit Center to 120 North Redwood Drive in San Rafael. This service increases public access to Marin County social service agencies and the Civic Center campus.
The Marin Countywide Plan supports and emphasizes the need
•
•
•
•
22 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Site Organization
for expanded local bus service. It also encourages bus service providers to “post current schedules and maps at all transit stops and other key locations” and to “provide shelters that adequately protect riders from inclement weather.”
The Marin County Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, June 2000, states that communities “may choose to have bus shel-ters designed and built uniquely for individual sites.” This ap-proach seems especially appropriate at the Civic Center given its unique architecture and history. It should be noted that bus shelters must be installed in accordance with all disabled access requirements.
The Countywide Plan also supports the Sonoma-Marin Area Rapid Transit (SMART) project, which proposes to bring rail ser-vice to the Civic Center campus. A new regional transportation district was established in 2003 to oversee the development and implementation of passenger rail service in Sonoma and Marin Counties. The goal of the SMART project is to provide passenger train service to Sonoma and Marin County residents along the Northwestern Pacific (NWP) rail corridor that lies next to Highway 101. A transit station is proposed at the northwest corner of the Civic Center campus. Further details regarding the station and its location at the Civic Center is discussed in Section 6.1, Possible Future County Facilities Needs.
SMART passenger train service will provide a much needed trans-portation alternative for thousands of commuters traveling within and between Sonoma and Marin counties as well as commuting to San Francisco. For example, currently the average southbound automobile trip between Santa Rosa and San Rafael during the peak morning commute along Highway 101 takes 70-80 minutes. The same trip by train will take approximately 55 minutes (CalTrans Report, 2001).
VEHICULAR CIRCULATION & PARKINGThe following guidelines present recommendations from an analysis of the potential traffic and parking impacts that would be associated with possible future changes to the Marin Civic Center campus in the County of Marin, including four alternative schemes for expanding use at the Marin Center together with additions such as the Public Safety Building and the Court Facilities which are also under consideration. The traffic and parking study was completed in accordance with the criteria established by the County of Marin and the City of San Rafael, and is consistent with standard traffic engineering techniques.
GUIDELINES
The northbound, southbound and eastbound approaches to Civic Center Drive/Peter Behr Drive should be re-striped to include separate left-turn lanes and through/right-turn lanes and the intersection should be signalized as part of the de-velopment of the new Court Facilities.
•
23
Site Organization
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Civic C
enter
Civic C
enter
Freitas Parkway
McI
nnis
Par
kway
Pete
r Behr
Arm
ory
N S
an P
edro
Roa
d
101
1
3
4
5
6
2
McI
nnis
Par
kway
Pete
r Behr
Arm
ory
N S
an P
edro
Roa
d
Freitas Parkway
Merrydale Overcro s sing
DriveDrive
LEGEND
xx(xx)
A.M. Peak Hour VolumeStudy Intersection
P.M. Peak Hour Volume
North
Not to Scale
142(136)
889(642)
76 (18)
(279)542
(545)614
(58) 30
(154
)146
(56
) 2
1
(38
) 2
6
237(
397)
59 (
42)
169(
141)
8/046
26(187)
15(45)
28(43)
(163) 47
(11) 15
(110)181
(115
)66
(275
)88
(10
)31
146(
207)
556(
176)
43 (
21)
8/042
(290)295
(24)123
(235)390
(173
)25
(450
)91
(
4) 4
256(
429)
321(
135)
42 (
1)
8/041
566(
333)
148(
74)
79(135)
74(106)
(214
)122
(65
)107
8/043
2(4)
1(0)
7(10)
(60)15
(1) 0
(6)12
(
9)
9
(209
)230
(
3) 1
3
161(
18)
440(
399)
4
(3)
8/044
6 (13)
3 (0)
18(28)
(5)0
(0)0
(12)4
(12
) 5
9
(210
)257
(28
) 7
2
30 (
12)
375(
380)
29 (
8)
8/045
FIGURE 1: STUDY AREA AND EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
24 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Site Organization
The County should coordinate events at all of the various fa-cilities throughout the Marin Civic Center campus to ensure that the parking supply is not exceeded.
The County should improve the signing and pathway con-nectivity between the east parking lot and the Marin Center facilities so that this parking area can be more readily as-similated into the supply for large events.
Traffic impacts are typically evaluated by determining the number of trips the new use would be expected to generate, distributing the new trips to the surrounding street system based on existing travel patterns or anticipated travel patterns specific to the proposed project, and then by analyzing the impact the new traffic would be expected to have on critical intersections included in the study. Parking impacts are evaluated by deter-mining if the planned supply of parking will be adequate for the new land uses or development proposed.
The study area consisted of the following six intersections chosen with input from County staff. Although worst-case conditions for the Marin Center would exist in conjunction with a large event at one or more of the venues, since such events typically occur when there is limited activity at the Civic Center or in the area in general, conditions were evaluated during the weekday morn-ing and evening peak periods when commute traffic creates the greatest congestion in the vicinity of the Marin Center.
Civic Center Drive-Redwood Highway/Freitas ParkwayCivic Center Drive/Merrydale OvercrossingCivic Center Drive/McInnis ParkwayCivic Center Drive/Peter Behr DriveCivic Center Drive/Armory DriveCivic Center Drive/N. San Pedro Road
The location of the project area is shown in Figure 1.
The complete Vehicular Circulation & Parking study, including the full analysis, tables, assumptions, methodologies, and discussion is contained in the Appendix. This includes an analysis of exist-ing and future traffic and parking conditions under alternative scenarios.
•
•
1.2.3.4.5.6.
25
Buildings and Architecture
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
SECTION 4: BUILDINGS & ARCHITECTURE
4.1 IntroductionUnique to the Marin County Civic Center site is the sense of open space organized around Frank Lloyd Wright’s landmark Civic Center building with its golden spire serving as the symbolic center of the campus. This is consistent with Wright’s original plan that stakes out a variety of uses to claim and organize this large continuous space that was once undeveloped land. As shown in his last site plan, each proposed building acknowledges the Civic Center as the focal point of the campus allowing a clear line of sight across the open space from each of the buildings back to the emanating spire.
The following guidelines provide a framework for future develop-ment that recognizes the need to maintain the visual prominence of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Civic Center Building within a setting that engenders an overall sense of openness. Important to this dis-cussion are the aspirations of the previous Marin County Civic Center Master Plan and the significance and implications of the Civic Center’s status as a National Historic Landmark. Thorough review of these issues as well as an understanding of the underly-ing design principles of Frank Lloyd Wright will inform the recom-mendations of these guidelines.
These guidelines are intended to provide a standard for future development and the criteria necessary to protect the archi-tectural character of the site, preserve historic structures and reduce adverse visual effects while relating any new develop-ment to the historic context. The guidelines ensure that future projects will meet the Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, comply with the Civic Center Open Space Ordinance, and build on the design principles set out by Frank Lloyd Wright. These guidelines also suggest that all future development be designed sustainably in accordance with green building practices.
Last Frank Lloyd Wright Site Plan
Civic Center spire
26 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Buildings and Architecture
4.2 Frank Lloyd Wright Design PrinciplesPer item 9 of the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, that to be compatible with the architectural character of this site, one needs to be compatible with the tenets of Frank Lloyd Wright’s own work.
The following design principles are derived from Frank Lloyd Wright’s work, including the landmark Marin Civic Center Ad-ministrative Building and Hall of Justice. They follow the intent set out in the Master Plan of 1972 –1990, the Historic Landmark Designation, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Treat-ment of Historic Properties, and the Marin Civic Center Open Space Ordinance.
General architectural design principles, which support Frank Lloyd Wright’s architecture:
Associate the building as a whole with its site by extending and emphasizing the horizontal planes of the building. Where possible, programmatic elements should be elevated entirely about the ground to further emphasize the horizontality.
Reduce the box-like nature of the building by making walls transparent and screen-like. Where program needs reduce the transparency of the exterior walls, walls should be de-signed to emphasize the lightness of the building through detail, rhythm and scale. Openings should be human-scaled and should act singly or in a series, typically as light screens instead of walls.
Reduce the number of building components in order to allow light, air and views to permeate and unify the building.
Use uniform materials as much as possible to emphasize the form of the building, making it clearer and more expressive.
Frank Lloyd Wright’s work was based in his belief that a building is a unified whole; that form and function are one. This has become associated with the term “organic architecture.” For Wright, organic architecture required respecting the site, the nature of the building materials and creating an honest expression of the buildings function. The following images illustrate these principles with buildings designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. They are intended to show in general terms a range of ways that these design principles may be used in building on the Civic Center site.
•
•
•
•
27
Buildings and Architecture
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Associate the building as a whole with its site by extending and emphasizing the horizontal planes of the building. Programmatic elements should be elevated entirely above the ground to further emphasize the horizontality.
Robie House – 1906 Fallingwater - 1935
Marin Civic Center, Hall of Justice - 1970 Hall of Justice Entry Arch - 1970
FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT DESIGNED PROJECTS
28 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Buildings and Architecture
Reduce the box-like nature of the building by making walls transparent and screen-like. Where program needs reduce the transparency of the exterior walls, walls should be designed to emphasize the lightness of the building through detail, rhythm and scale. Openings should be human-scaled and should act singly or in a series, typically as light screens instead of walls.
Willits House – 1901 Robie House -1906
Marin Civic Center Roof and Spire - 1970 Exterior Entry Arch, Administration Bldg. - 1970
FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT DESIGNED PROJECTS
29
Buildings and Architecture
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Reduce the number of building components in order to allow light, air and views to permeate and unify the building.
Florida Southern College - 1938Guggenheim Museum - 1959
Marin Civic Center Interior, Upper Floor - 1970 South End of the Administration Building - 1970
FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT DESIGNED PROJECTS
30 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Buildings and Architecture
Use the uniform materials as much as possible to emphasize the form of the building, making it clearer and more expressive.
V.C. Morris Building - 1948 Guggenheim Museum - 1959
Marin Civic Center -1970 Administration Building -1970
FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT DESIGNED PROJECTS
31
Buildings and Architecture
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
4.3 Building GuidelinesThese building guidelines are intended to provide a standard for future development related to the character of the building in terms of its context, function and visual impact. They follow the intent set out in the Master Plan of 1972 –1990, the Historic Landmark Designation, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties, and the Marin Civic Center Open Space Ordinance. They further build on the design prin-ciples set out by Frank Lloyd Wright.
These guidelines also suggest that all future development be designed sustainably. New development at the Civic Center should strive to meet or exceed an environmental performance level based on the LEED™ Gold standard (from the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System), subject to fiscal and program-ming constraints. Specific areas of interest are identified within the guidelines but do not represent the full extent of possible environmentally sensitive design practices.
CONTEXTThe distinguishing character of the Administration Building and Hall of Justice in bridging the hills, serve as a powerful reminder of Frank Lloyd Wright’s genius in relating building to site. The following guidelines attempt to capture this sensitivity in relat-ing a building to its context. More specifically, they outline an approach toward development on the Civic Center campus in terms of siting, orientation, scale and height.
GUIDELINES
SitingIntegrate the building with the site by working with the topog-raphy to create an environment that allows the campus to be seen as a composite whole.
Site the building to maintain a sense of open space throughout the campus while preserving as much contigu-ous outdoor space as possible.
Where parking is necessary, it should be sited with sensitiv-ity so as not to obscure the sense of open space or diminish the presence of the buildings.
OrientationOrient buildings, wherever possible, to create a clear line of sight toward the Civic Center spire - acknowledging it as the focal point for the Civic Center campus.
Where it may be difficult to create a line of sight to the Civic Center spire, the building should nevertheless acknowledge the Civic Center as the center of the campus.
•
•
•
•
•
32 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Buildings and Architecture
Orient buildings, wherever possible, to conform to LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards to maximize ecological design efficiency and minimize en-ergy use.
ScaleScale buildings so as not to diminish the prominence of the Administration Building and Hall of Justice on the site.
With respect to neighboring structures, scale buildings to avoid large-scale discrepancies.
Building heightA new building should not be so tall as to overwhelm the Administration Building and Hall of Justice. The height of a new building (or portion of a building) will be determined by programmatic needs with the utmost care and sensitivity to its surroundings.
FUNCTIONThe principle aim of the Marin County Civic Center complex is to provide a place for governmental, cultural and recreational activities. To this end the buildings and site must function together to allow for ease of public use. The following guidelines provide recommendations toward organizing building functions. More specifically, it addresses issues concerning entry orientation, pro-gram placement and parking approach.
GUIDELINES
Entry orientationWhere possible, orient main building entries toward the ar-terial roadways of the site to promote circulation efficiency throughout the campus.
The siting of the building takes precedence and should be carefully considered per the ‘context’ guidelines before un-dertaking the placement of entries.
Main building entries should be clearly distinguished from the rest of the structure to ensure recognition and ease of access.
Organize building entries to promote pedestrian circulation between buildings.
Building usageBuildings should promote public activity throughout the site.
Public uses should be maintained on the ground level, wherever possible, to promote accessibility and street level activity.
Less active functions such as administrative, educational,
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
33
Buildings and Architecture
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
non-profit, or similar uses should be placed on the upper level wherever possible.
Parking approachParking should be on site and easily accessible, but should not obscure the site’s sense of open space or diminish the presence of the buildings. Further discussion on parking lots is in Section 5, Landscape and Site Elements.
All methods of sharing existing parking through parking man-agement programs should be explored before pursuing the construction of parking structures.
If required, parking structures should be lined with program space, dense landscaping, or a designed series of earth berms with plantings to conceal their appearance and use as a non-occupied building. The feasibility of underground parking structures, covered by landscaped park-like areas or new buildings, should be explored.
Parking fields and parking structures should be designed to be environmentally sensitive, minimizing hardscape and built structures while maximizing open space.
VISUAL IMPACTCentral to the Marin County Civic Center complex are the Frank Lloyd Wright designed Administration Building and Hall of Justice, which span three hills with their graceful arches. In overlooking the site from the top of these hills, these buildings evoke a civic presence across the landscape. The following recommendations prescribe an overall approach to the visual impact of buildings that respect Civic Center’s preeminence. More specifically, it addresses issues concerning form, roof treatment, walls and openings, exterior walkways, materials, color and lighting.
GUIDELINES
FormUse fewer forms to present a simpler and “quieter” effect to enhance the beauty of the surroundings.
Long, low forms are preferred in accordance with Frank Lloyd Wright’s design principles and the visual quality of the Administration Building and Hall of Justice.
Do not use forms that visually challenge the topography but rather allow the building forms to be complementary to the landscape.
Emphasize formal clarity of the building by maintaining a simple palette of materials.
Roof treatmentRoof types that are larger, simpler, visually quiet, and formally cohesive are preferred.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
34 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Buildings and Architecture
Avoid roof types that appear smaller and visually busy, and might be interpreted as residential in scale.
Roof types should be differentiated from the existing landmark buildings to avoid mimicry and to protect the historic integ-rity of the landmark buildings. Refer to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
Roof treatments should be visually integrated into the overall architectural concept.
Incorporate the need for mechanical and electrical equip-ment into the building design to avoid placing such items onto the roof.
Sustainability issues such as use of renewable energy and daylighting should be considered and incorporated into the design of the roof.
Walls and openingsTreat exterior walls as light screens, wherever possible, to take advantage of natural daylight and views to provide building occupants a connection between the indoor spaces and the outdoors.
Harmonize all necessary openings – doors, passages and windows – with good human-scaled proportions.
Organize exterior wall openings to act singly or in a series, typically as light screens instead of solid walls.
Exterior walls should not mimic the Administration Building and Hall of Justice, but may be sympathetic in its intent as a screen to modulate daylight. Refer to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
Buildings must respect any privacy issues with regard to nearby residential structures.
Sustainability issues such as optimizing energy efficiency and use of daylighting should be considered and incorporated into the design of the exterior envelope.
Exterior walkways/arcadesExterior walkways and arcades should be of good human-scaled proportions and integrated with the buildings.
If exterior walkways/arcades serve no functional and pro-gram purpose, as the Civic Center arcades do, do not inte-grate them so as to mimic, copy or degrade the landmark structure.
An arcade does not require arch forms, which in itself may
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
35
Buildings and Architecture
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
be seen as mimicking. Refer to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
MaterialsEliminate the combination of different materials in favor of uniform materials as much as possible to emphasize hierar-chy and clarity.
Choose a simple material palette to express building con-tinuity.
Materials should convey a sense of substance and evoke a civic quality.
Use natural, non-reflective materials where possible to com-plement the landscape.
Sustainability issues such as recycled content and mate-rial origination should be considered in making material choices.
ColorBuilding colors should not compete with or otherwise diminish the visual character of the Frank Lloyd Wright Administrative Building and Hall of Justice.
Building colors should follow Frank Lloyd Wright’s intent of relating the building to the landscape.
Avoid bright colors so as not to clash with, compete with or otherwise diminish the existing landmark structures.
LightingThe overall feel of the open space, as a natural setting should be respected, with security and wayfinding/orientation light-ing given precedence. Further information is included in Section 6, Landscape and Site Elements.
Buildings should have visually restrained and elegant lighting, and should be designed to be compatible and complemen-tary with the landmark structures.
Exterior building lighting should be designed and shielded as necessary to avoid off-site lighting and night sky pollution.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
36 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
SECTION 5: LANDSCAPE AND SITE ELEMENTS
5.1 Introduction HISTORY AND APPROACHThe Marin County Civic Center Master Plan 1972 - 1990 and the subsequent Schematic Planting Master Plan prepared in Decem-ber 1974 by the Taliesin Associated Architects of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation provide a framework of ideas for planting and irrigation that are equally appropriate today. Both reports suggest that the Civic Center site be treated as “one continuous informal open space with a natural or ‘native’ feeling.” The 1974 report further states that “a largely ‘native’ landscape would be most appropriate in order to maintain and reinforce the pastoral character of the Civic Center site, to provide a sympathetic set-ting for the buildings, and to minimize maintenance and irrigation needs.”
Over the last 40 years, the landscapes at the Civic Center have matured and endured. A generally native and indigenous ap-proach to much of the landscape of the Civic Center seems appropriate for the past, present and future of the site. The 1974 report defines plant groupings for specific locations on the site based on the location’s environmental conditions and functions. This approach works well for such a large and diverse landscape.
In August 2000, the Board of Supervisors approved a Conceptual Landscape Plan by landscape architect Steve Petterle of the County’s Department of Parks and Open Space. The intent of the plan was to renovate the existing landscape of the Civic Center and Marin Center. Although approved by the Board, no working drawings or further documentation were completed. However, the landscape and site elements’ guidelines presented below are consistent with the approved Conceptual Landscape Plan.
Many of the plant groupings described below are similar to those defined in Wright’s earlier report; others have been modified and amended for current conditions. The guidelines below take into account both the natural and the cultural landscapes of the site; the goal is to respect Frank Lloyd Wright’s original vision as well as the natural environment. Other factors include existing conditions; soil fertility; deer damage potential; aspect and sun exposure; location; level of required maintenance; water con-servation; native species; and sustainability.
SUSTAINABILITYUsing sustainable design practices is a priority for the County of Marin. Planting and irrigation design are key components of
37
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
sustainability. To that end, it is proposed that durable, low water use plants be used wherever possible. Typically plants that are native to the area are more likely to thrive with less supplemen-tal water and fertilization, but non-native ornamental species may also be appropriate for some areas on the Civic Center campus.
IRRIGATIONState-of-the-art irrigation systems and techniques are also impor-tant to sustainable landscapes. The Civic Center landscapes,
LANDSCAPE ZONES
LAGOON
Building entries and courtyardsNative hillsides
Streetscapes
Park areas
Riparian environments
Building entries and courtyardsNative hillsides
Streetscapes
Park areas
Riparian environments
38 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
where irrigated, are watered using recycled water. Reclaimed or recycled water impacts the types of plants that can be used. In many cases the irrigation systems operated on site are as old as the landscapes themselves, and require extensive maintenance to remain operational. Updated and improved irrigation systems for the more manicured areas of the site would improve water use efficiency, reduce maintenance costs, and improve plant health and durability. For example, drip irrigation systems should be considered for planting areas with low water needs.
5.2 Planting and IrrigationLANDSCAPE ZONESThe following plant groupings, or landscape zones, describe dif-ferent areas of the Civic Center campus based on the type of planting appropriate for that area.
NATIVE HILLSIDES PLANTING AND IRRIGATIONThe hillsides on the campus are currently dotted with mature Oak trees as well as some non-native trees and shrubs.
GUIDELINES
The existing Oak trees are to be augmented with additional Oaks whenever and wherever possible. Oaks will serve as the “signature tree” for this landscape as they thrive on these hills, are long-lived, and are appropriate to the site’s cultural history.
Non-native trees and shrubs – especially those that are invasive, unsightly, and/or unhealthy – should be replaced over time with species appropriate to the Oak woodland landscape.
Both deciduous and evergreen plantings should be selected to enhance the native Oak woodland landscape and be appropriate in size and scale with respect to any adjacent historic structures. For example, new planting should not in-terfere with views to or from the Civic Center buildings when they reach maturity.
The present grassy ground cover is to be preserved and aug-mented with additional native seeding when necessary.
The hillsides adjacent to the Administrative Building and Hall of Justice are now inhabited by a variety of trees. In general, the native Oak species appear to be healthy and thriving. Some of the Pines and Poplars are doing less well; many appear to be dis-eased and in some cases are obstructing views. The County has indicated that virtually all Monterey Pines on the campus will be removed within the next few years due to disease. There are also several species of ‘volunteers’ in this area such as Cotoneaster that do not add to the beauty or character of the site.
•
•
•
•
California Live Oak tree
Native Hillside
39
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
The Native Hillsides plant grouping described below is preferred where existing slopes exceed roughly 20% or where heavy foot traffic is not expected or desired. Currently this applies to the hillsides adjacent to the Administration Building and the Hall of Justice as well as the area south of the General Services Building along Highway 101. Frank Lloyd Wright’s affinity to the rolling hills of Marin supports the approach of enhancing the Oak woodland ecosystem wherever possible.
It should be noted, however, that Sudden Oak Death syndrome is a serious problem in Marin County. The County must use cau-tion in order to protect existing trees and reduce the potential of introducing the disease to the site.
STREETSCAPES PLANTING AND IRRIGATIONThe guidelines listed below are intended to provide guidance for the improvement of streetscapes on the Civic Center campus.
GUIDELINES
Primary streets, such as Civic Center Drive, Peter Behr Drive and the Avenue of the Flags, should each have a clear and consistent streetscape planting approach and design. Plant palettes, especially street trees, should be devised for each primary street. Formal street tree planting is encouraged where appropriate. Cohesion and clarity in planting and materials will enhance the visitors’ experience and improve wayfinding on the site. Special attention should be paid to the protection of view corridors. While unity is desired, some breaks in street tree plantings may be necessary to preserve views.
Secondary streets, such as Judge Haley Drive, Armory Drive, and Vera Schultz Drive, should also have a clear and con-sistent streetscape planting approach and design. Because these streets have less traffic and importance on the site, the street tree planting can be less formal than those for the pri-mary streets. However, designing a planting palette for each is encouraged in order to guide future improvements.
Over the last several years improvements have been made to some streetscapes on the Civic Center campus. Median plantings on Civic Center Drive include flowering perennials, small shrubs and trees. The median of Peter Behr Drive is planted with a row of flowering Redbuds and perennials. Most of the streetscapes, however, lack unified or cohesive planting schemes.
For example, the east side of Civic Center Drive beyond Judge Haley Drive is not planted with street trees, presumably to allow a clear view to the adjacent lagoon. The west side of the street is too steep to plant with street trees. Between Civic Center Drive and the Administration Building the median of Peter Behr Drive is attractive, but the south side of the street is considerably less so. It is lined with diagonal parking and a sidewalk that is adjacent to a
•
•Garden outside cafeteria
Peter Behr Drive
Cafeteria courtyard
40 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
native hillside area. Currently there is not an adequate transition between the more urban vehicular and pedestrian realm and the natural planting area beyond. The north side of the street is similar, although it has a better feel due to the denser planting of the native hillside area.
BUILDING ENTRIES, COURTYARDS, PATIO PLANTING AND IRRIGATIONThe guidelines listed below are intended to provide general direction for the maintenance and improvement of building–as-sociated landscapes on the site as well as for any future devel-opments.
GUIDELINES
As is currently the practice, highly ornamental plantings are appropriate for the building-related landscapes of the Marin County Civic Center buildings including interior courtyards such as the patio adjacent to the cafeteria and the former exercise courtyard of the original jail. These landscapes should reference Wright’s historic plans whenever possible and appropriate and should include a balance of decidu-ous and evergreen plants. Where the exterior of the building meets the natural ground plane, plantings should be mature and appear to be part of the natural landscape.
The entry landscapes of the Veteran’s Memorial Auditorium and the Exhibit Hall should be enhanced and improved with additional appropriately scaled plantings. This would also enhance wayfinding for visitors to these venues.
Planting adjacent to any future development – at entries, in courtyards, etc. – should be contemporary in nature and ap-propriate in scale, color, and texture for the new architecture. It should not attempt to match or mimic existing plantings on the site.
The 1974 plan suggested that landscaping adjacent to buildings be smaller in scale and more detailed than other planting areas. This approach is still appropriate, generally speaking, for the cam-pus now and in the future. Planting at the main entries to the Administrative Building and Hall of Justice appear to be healthy and well-tended. This is also true of the planting beds ‘inside’ the buildings on the ground floors. The landscaping adjacent to the structures at the Marin Center, however, are not as attractive.
The planting in the courtyard/patio at the south end of the Ad-ministration Building is a specialty water-conserving garden. This seems appropriate for this space. The courtyard/patio adjacent to the cafeteria includes an artificial pond and fountain, a lawn area, and many ornamental trees and plants.
PARK AREAS PLANTING AND IRRIGATIONThe following guidelines are intended to enhance current park
•
•
•
Lagoon Park
Courtyard at south end of Administration Building
41
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
lands and to guide the development of additional parks on the site.
GUIDELINES
The irrigation in the Lagoon Park area should be upgraded for efficiency and ease of maintenance.
Perimeter tree planting to define the edge of the site and to screen the park from adjacent neighborhoods should be maintained and enhanced. Replacement trees in the lawn areas must be able to tolerate lawn watering and should provide as much shade as possible. Trees along the site’s perimeter, away from the lawn area, may be Oaks or other natives that do not require or tolerate irrigation or understory planting. A balance of deciduous and evergreen species is desired.
The character of Lagoon Park should be extended around the entire lagoon, as was originally intended, to form a complete loop of green space. The planting of this space should be pri-marily lawn due to its versatility and ease of maintenance.
Planting for park areas to be developed in the future should connect both literally and figuratively with the existing open space at the Civic Center so as to create a cohesive whole.
The park area immediately southeast of the lagoon has provided visitors to the Civic Center a functional recreational landscape for decades. The open expanse of turf is popular with individuals out for a stroll and families looking for a relaxing place for a picnic. Given the popularity and multi-purpose nature of the space, no changes to the planting are suggested.
5.3 Paving and SurfacesThe following guidelines are intended to outline the preferred ap-proach to paving treatments and surfaces on the Marin County Civic Center campus. Further discussion regarding pedestrian circulation, path widths and preferred routes can be found in Section 3.3, Site Circulation and Parking Capacity.
PRIMARY PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS PAVING AND SURFACESFor the purposes of this study, the pedestrian routes between the buildings on the campus, adjacent to arterial streets, and circling the lagoon are considered “primary pedestrian connections.”
GUIDELINES
Existing sidewalks should be made as consistent as possible in terms of design, material, color and finish.
The preferred material for primary pedestrian routes is stan-
•
•
•
•
•
•
42 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
dard gray concrete with a consistent medium broom finish. Where the route is directly adjacent to historic structures and “Taliesin Red” paint color has traditionally been used on the paving, it is recommended that integrally colored or stained concrete be used in lieu of surface paint.
SECONDARY PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS PAVING AND SURFACESPedestrian routes such as trails are considered secondary pe-destrian connections. Existing trails should be evaluated by the County for their popularity, usefulness, safety, and overall ap-propriateness.
GUIDELINES
County-sanctioned pedestrian paths and trails should be for-malized where doing so would not conflict with adjacent uses. This will increase access to various site amenities.
For existing trails that are not formalized, the preferred surface material is stabilized decomposed granite. Where conditions require additional stability and durability, concrete or asphalt may be appropriate.
STREET PAVING AND SURFACESStreets throughout the campus, as mentioned above are and should continue to be paved in asphalt and adhere to City of San Rafael and Marin County design standards when applicable.
GUIDELINES
Asphalt paving with concrete curbs for primary and second-ary streets is preferred.
In particular, the Avenue of the Flags should be repaved with asphalt. (It is understood that the Marin Center Master Plan will address further design issues of the Avenue of the Flags. While certain details on the Avenue of the Flags may change as a result of the Master Plan, it is desired that the overall look and feel of the street be consistent with that of other streets on the Civic Center campus.)
SPECIAL LANDSCAPE FEATURES PAVING AND SURFACESThere are several existing special landscape features on the site. Additional features such as a plaza and outdoor courtyards may be developed at the Marin Center in the coming years.
GUIDELINES
Paving for outdoor courtyards adjacent to historic structures should be historically appropriate and of the highest quality available. Painted or exposed aggregate concrete surfaces should be replaced over time with integrally colored concrete. Examples include the outdoor area adjacent to the cafeteria and the outdoor area at the south end of the Administration Building.
•
•
•
•
•
43
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Paving and surfaces of new special landscape features ad-jacent to new architecture should match in spirit with the new building and be site appropriate. Paving materials should be generally neutral, of the highest quality and as permeable as possible in any given situation. Paving and surfaces in these cases should support a unified view of the overall campus whenever possible, but may be contemporary materials and treatments as is appropriate for new development.
Paving materials and site surfaces in any landscape are important as they help to define spaces and connections. Surface treat-ments also signal the importance of an arrival point or building entry and provide visitors with a sense of orientation.
At the Marin County Civic Center much of the paving for side-walks and pedestrian paths has varying materials, quality, and levels of maintenance. These include standard gray concrete, “Taliesin Red” painted concrete, exposed aggregate concrete (sometimes tinted) and asphalt. The roads are paved in asphalt and lined with concrete curbs. Special landscape features, such as patios and courtyards adjacent to existing structures, are generally paved with exposed aggregate concrete or painted concrete. The use of “Taliesin Red” at the entries of the Civic Center buildings ties in with the building’s interior décor and is historically appropriate.
In general, the quality of paving materials at the Civic Center should be significantly improved and updated. It is preferred, too, that paving treatments and materials be consistent based on function as much as possible and promote permeability to reduce stormwater runoff. For example, primary pedestrian con-nections throughout the site should be upgraded with the same surface. This will provide clarity for pedestrians finding their way through the site.
5.4 Site FurnitureThe following guidelines are intended to outline the preferred ap-proach to site furniture on the Marin County Civic Center campus that will be accessible to all users.
GUIDELINES
Park Areas and Lagoon PerimeterIt is recommended that all site furniture in Lagoon Park and the landscape surrounding the Lagoon be replaced with high quality, easy to maintain, durable pieces consistent through-out the campus. These pieces should become campus standards for park-like settings.
Benches, tables, trash receptacles and any other desired site furniture should be of similar design, color, and materials. Please see recommendations below.
•
•
•
Existing picnic table
Existing bench
Existing recycling and trash receptacles
44 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
The design of the furniture should be site appropriate and considerate of the historic buildings on the site. The use of the “Taliesin Red” as an accent color should be considered depending on the furniture’s location, but is not required.
Courtyards & PatiosOutdoor furniture for spaces related to the Administration Building and the Hall of Justice should be consistent. Further study on historic information regarding Frank Lloyd Wright’s original intent could be done in order to choose an appropri-ate standard for these spaces. Otherwise, the campus-wide standard site furniture should be used.
New buildings on the campus with related outdoor areas such as courtyards or patios should use the Civic Center’s standard furnishings whenever possible. When this approach is not appropriate, the new building should establish site furniture standards specific to the architecture. These pieces should also be respectful of the overall setting and character of the campus.
The pieces shown here - benches, picnic tables, trash and re-cycling receptacles, bollards, and bicycle racks - are recom-mended as site standards for the campus. Several factors that
•
•
•
Backless Austin Bench by Landscapeforms Austin Bench by Landscapeforms
Metal Austin Bench Timber Form Model 38918-W
45
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Timber Form Model 38918-W
influenced these selections are durability, availability, ease of maintenance and comfort. (The County must also decide if additional measures, such as the addition of middle armrests, are necessary or desired in order to discourage sleeping on the benches.)
BenchThe Austin bench by Landscapeforms (www.landscapeforms.com) is available in backed or backless, six feet in length, extruded aluminum or ipe wood slats. Ipe is a durable and extremely dense, tight grained exotic hardwood that is naturally resistant to rot and decay without preservatives. It is available with Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification. The design with arms is preferred.
Picnic TableThe Timber Form Picnic Table Model 38918-W has massive wood members and is available in six or eight foot lengths. The Western Red Cedar material is preferred. Trash and Recycling ReceptacleThe Mission Bay Receptacle, Model SLMIS-32R, made by Forms + Surfaces (www.forms-surfaces.com) is made in cast aluminum. The charcoal gray color is preferred.
BollardThe Annapolis bollard by Landscapeforms, with a custom pow-der-coated finish in Taliesin Red is preferred. Where the Taliesin Red color is not appropriate, the brushed stainless steel finish may be substituted.
Bicycle RackThe stainless steel Bici Linea bike rack by Santa & Cole is preferred, and is available in various sizes.
Site furniture now on the campus of the Marin County Civic Cen-ter has been on-site for quite some time. Site furniture is located along the lagoon and in Lagoon Park includes benches, trash
Mission Bay Receptacle by Forms + Surfaces
Annapolis bollard by Landscapeforms
Bici Linea bike rack by Santa & Cole
46 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
receptacles, and picnic tables. These items are functional but dated and generally unattractive. Given the attention paid to and the quality of the Civic Center’s interior furniture, a new and upgraded approach to site furniture is recommended.
For example, the trash receptacles currently in the Lagoon Park are oil drums and the benches and tables are worn and uninvit-ing. The bollards in front of the exhibit hall are steel pipes painted “Taliesin Red” that are faded and worn. Site furniture in outdoor spaces related specifically to buildings, such as the patio off the cafeteria, differs significantly in character from those found in the park areas.
5.5 Fences and ScreeningThe following guidelines outline the preferred approach to fences on the Marin County Civic Center campus.
GUIDELINES
It is preferred that permanent chain link fencing be used as little as possible in the public park and recreation areas of the campus. When it is necessary, black vinyl coated fences are preferred for durability and aesthetics.
All fences should be planted with shrubs and vines wherever possible.
Planting barriers including trees may be appropriate where Civic Center property abuts residential neighborhoods to provide a visual screen (for example, as currently exists along Madison Ave.). Any possible future development on the campus should consider and address these issues.
The Marin County Civic Center campus has fencing in only a few areas. There is chain link fencing along the southern edge of Lagoon Park in order to control access to the County Fair; along the southern edge of the east parking lot adjacent to Madison Avenue; around the north end of the Hall of Justice for security; around the southern end of the Administration Building for secu-rity; and in various places along the northern edge of the Marin Center. The fences vary in height and materials, but are typically 6’ tall galvanized chain link.
Maintaining and ensuring safety on the campus for all users is the County’s first priority. In addition, the aesthetics and functionality of fences and screens are important. The County is committed to finding and appropriately addressing fencing, screening and access issues with its neighbors to the north, south and east.
5.6 Riparian Environments: The Creek, Wetlands and Lagoon
•
•
•
47
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
View of wetland area
Gallinas Creek leading out to the bay
The following general guidelines underscore the County’s com-mitment to sustainability and natural resources.
GUIDELINES
Enhance, protect and restore riparian habitats on the Civic Center site to the highest degree possible.
Provide as many interpretive and educational opportunities for Marin residents in these riparian areas as is feasible.
Improve water quality of the lagoon; explore sustainable solutions for water filtration.
Gallinas Creek runs along the northern edge of the campus, ad-jacent to the Avenue of the Flags, and empties into the wetlands in the northeast corner of the site. These wetlands are linked with the bay just beyond. Any changes, additions or improvements to the Civic Center campus must take into account these unique ecosystems. To that end, the use of sustainable design practices will be required of any future development that may impact the creek and wetland areas.
The Marin Countywide Plan’s section on Biological Resources highlights the County’s commitment to the protection and res-toration of riparian systems. In particular, the plan designates setbacks called Stream Conservation Areas (SCAs) to protect the active channel, water quality, flood control functions, and associated fish and wildlife habitat values along streams. The setback width is to be 50 - 100 feet on each side from the top of the bank depending on the size of the adjacent development. Although the Marin County Civic Center campus is technically in the jurisdiction of the City of San Rafael, it is recommended that the County consider implementing this policy along Gallinas Creek.
Unlike Gallinas Creek, the lagoon is a man-made water feature originally designed by Frank Lloyd Wright in the late 1950s. Today the lagoon is fed by natural springs and rainwater run-off from the Civic Center campus. It is included in the “historic district” defined in the Civic Center’s National Historic Landmark applica-tion of 1991 and as such must be retained as a character defining feature. The lagoon is aerated by pumps and hosts wildlife such as ducks, geese and fish. The water quality and relative “health” of the lagoon is unknown.
In addition to Federal and State laws, the Marin Countywide Plan makes clear the County’s commitment to the protection of water resources such as wetlands and riparian areas. However, given that relatively little is known about the creek, wetland, and lagoon it is recommended that further study be performed to assess their current condition. Recommendations for the preservation, maintenance and enhancement of these unique amenities can be made after more is known.
•
•
•
View of Gallinas Creek
48 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
5.7 Park and Recreation AreasThe following are general guidelines for both new and existing park lands on the site.
GUIDELINES
The preferred approach is to complete the loop around the entire lagoon with parkland as originally envisioned. The path along the lagoon should be considered a primary pedestrian route and enhanced accordingly. Site furnishings should be upgraded per the guidelines above. Lighting should be improved for safety and nighttime ambiance. Signage and wayfinding should be clear and encourage visitors.
New park areas may be developed on-site in the future. Such development should connect seamlessly with the existing park lands per Wright’s original design. While the new park areas may differ in character from Lagoon Park, it is desired that new parks have adequate transitional space between landscape types in order to enhance the cohesive quality of the campus. For example, the open space in the northeast corner of the site may be enhanced with improved access to the public. The access points to this more natural landscape should be clearly connected to the existing park areas, but they do not need to match the pastoral design character of Lagoon Park.
The Marin County Civic Center Master Plan 1972 - 1990 placed a strong emphasis on protecting and enhancing the open space of the site. The Master Plan states that the open space on the site “links the entire project and connects and enfolds the vari-ous elements. As much as is possible they have endeavored to make the open space areas contiguous and continuous; one area flowing into another, the whole making an apparently uninterrupted environmental pattern into which the buildings fit and naturally merge. A practically continuous and uninterrupted open space area surrounds the entire lagoon extending into the park lands on the southeast and into the spacious planted and grassed terraces along the Fairgrounds to the north.”
In reality, an uninterrupted open space surrounding the entire lagoon does not currently exist. The Lagoon Park is an open, multi-functional lawn in the southeast. A green space does follow the lagoon along Civic Center Drive, but the open space connec-tion on the northern edge of the lagoon was never completed, thereby isolating Lagoon Park from visitors to the Marin Center and vice versa.
5.8 StreetscapesThe guidelines below outline the preferred approach to streetscape design on the Civic Center campus.
•
•
Island in the lagoon
Lagoon Park
49
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
GUIDELINES
Concrete sidewalks adjacent to primary and secondary streets are preferred. In particular, Civic Center Drive between Armory Drive and the Avenue of the Flags should have a concrete sidewalk along its eastern edge of no less than 6’ in width. See section 5.3 on paving above for further details.
Streets should have adequate night lighting for vehicles and pedestrians to enhance safety and in order to improve the site’s accessibility during evening events. Civic Center Drive, the Avenue of the Flags and Armory Drive are of particular concern. Lighting fixtures and design for streets should be consistent site-wide. See section 5.10 on lighting for further details.
Site signage should be easy to see and understand in order to enhance wayfinding and improve accessibility. See section 5.11 on signage and wayfinding below for further details.
All intersections should be appropriately striped for pedestrian crossings; curb-cuts and other appropriate measures should be taken to ensure disabled access.
The County should consider striped bike lanes on primary streets, particularly Civic Center Drive, in order to encourage cycling. See section 3.3 for further information on bicycle circulation.
Street trees are encouraged as they define edges and beau-tify the site. Highlighting the same tree on a single street is also preferred in order to add order and clarity to the campus. Special attention should be paid, however, not to obstruct view corridors with new street tree planting. See section 5.2 on planting for further details.
The streets on the Civic Center campus are varied in appearance. Although all of the primary and secondary streets are paved with asphalt, not all have sidewalks, bike lanes, parking spaces or street trees. Some of the differences in the site’s streets have been described above in the sections on paving and planting. Generally speaking, the preferred approach to streetscape design at the Civic Center is to provide a consistent experience and clear wayfinding for visitors.
5.9 Parking Lots
The following are guidelines for parking lot improvements and for any new lots to be added on the site.
GUIDELINES
All existing parking lots on the Civic Center campus should be redesigned to incorporate bioswales to capture and treat
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Existing Exhibit Hall parking lot
Civic Center Drive
Civic Center Drive
50 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
run-off on-site wherever possible. These swales should run in between rows of parked cars and be planted with species specifically chosen for their water filtration abilities.
Existing parking lots should also be densely planted with shade trees. Soil fertility and irrigation strategies must be devised in order to promote sustained health and growth of trees in such harsh environments.
The terraced parking areas west of the Administration Build-ing should be improved by planting vines to cover the large expanses of the concrete walls.
Planting for lots that may host the farmer’s market should be controlled so that the market would not be negatively impacted.
Where possible, existing lots should be repaved with perme-able surfaces to reduce stormwater run-off.
Parking lot lighting should be enhanced for safety. See sec-tion 5.10 on lighting for further details.
All new lots on the site should strictly adhere to the sustainable design practices listed above. The feasibility of underground parking, covered by landscaped park-like areas or new buildings, should be explored.
The feasibility of installing solar panels in shade structures over parking areas should be explored.
The parking lots on the Civic Center campus would value from aesthetic and functional improvements. Vast expanses of asphalt with few trees are not what Frank Lloyd Wright and his associates envisioned for the Civic Center campus. In the revised 1972 plan they defined the problem as follows: “The critical problem in plan-ning and developing the parking areas in the Marin County Civic Center complex is to provide the maximum possible number of spaces and at the same time preserve the unique natural beauty of the site.” The architects go on to say that “grade level parking areas should be heavily planted” and that “trees and shrubbery [should] be thickly planted around all parking areas and between the rows of all parking spaces.” They envisioned a “canopy of greenery over the rows of vehicles (in maintenance parking areas as well as in public parking spaces) to form an apparent garden of vegetation to the viewer.”
The preferred approach today, over thirty years later, is to return to this idea of highly vegetated parking fields. In addition to beautifying the campus, the County has an opportunity to demonstrate cutting-edge sustainable design strategies in the Civic Center’s parking lots. Using bioswales to filter run-off from the lots, dense tree planting for shade, and permeable paving to reduce run-off, these sustainable parking gardens could be models for development county-wide and beyond.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Example of a Parking Lot with Bioswales
Example of a Parking Lot with Permeable Paving
Existing Exhibit Hall parking lot
51
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
5.10 Lighting
The lighting system for the Civic Center campus should appropri-ately address historic areas separate from new areas and act as a unifying element that is coordinated and integrated with signage, landscaping, and architectural elements. In addition, care must be taken to ensure that excessive light pollution into adjacent neighborhoods is avoided. By utilizing lighting fixtures and effects to reinforce a sense of safety and security, establish a strong night-time identity, facilitate wayfinding, and simplify maintenance, the lighting design for the Marin County Civic Center campus will contribute to the safety and enjoyment of all night-time users and visitors.
GUIDELINES
Functional CriteriaProvide adequate light for safety and security. Two main light-ing factors that reinforce a sense of safety and security are adequate horizontal illuminance at the ground for navigation of pathways, and adequate vertical luminance at surfaces such as building forms, building entries, people, signage and planting to provide visual context.
Create a strong nighttime identity. Establish a hierarchy of il-luminated site features, such as the spire on the Administration Building, where brightness, color, and coverage can indicate degree of significance and focus.
Use lighting to promote wayfinding. Illuminate gateways and vertical surfaces to provide context for pedestrians and drivers. Integrate lighting systems with signage.
Address maintenance issues such as standardizing lamp types as much as possible, maximizing accessibility of fix-tures for easier repair and re-lamping, optimizing lamp life, cost, and energy efficiency, and minimizing opportunities for vandalism.
Design Criteria and ApproachThe scale, form, color, and spacing of lighting elements should be cohesive campus-wide and compatible with the historic design precedents and with the simple, and timeless designs of other site elements such as planting, architecture, and signage.
Site lighting fixtures located near historic structures must be respectful of the historic styled designs and site lighting fixtures used elsewhere should be simple, timeless, and cohesive throughout possible future development areas. This concept of a “family of fixtures” should be applied to the major open spaces.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Original nighttime lighting scheme
52 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
The color of light throughout the Marin County Civic Center should be consistent with only slight variations in the color of the light source, which may be considered appropriate for distinguishing adjacent areas of different functions. To maintain this historic color variation, we recommend using warm colored 3000 Kelvin compact fluorescent light sources. All light sources should have the highest color rendering properties available to enhance the quality of the nighttime experience.
The Area Brightness Lighting Diagram contained in this section summarizes the overall design approach. Each possible future project should provide smooth transitions between zones of different light intensities. Zones of varying levels of brightness based on the diagram should be implemented. The lighting solution should provide an appropriate balance of light and level of comfort, with the actual quantity of light (i.e. number of footcandles) as a guideline. Special attention should be paid to providing a visually comfortable transition from one area to the next.
To facilitate seasonal lighting and special events, the infra-structure of each possible future development should include power for the installation of temporary lighting.
The existing historic hat-shaped fixtures, placed 60’ on center, do not provide a uniform coverage of the pathways, where vertical illumination on pedestrians falls off in between light fixtures. It is recommended that a higher light pole with the same fixture head style and profile be considered for greater vertical and horizontal illumination coverage along pedes-trian pathways.
A reconstructed custom hybrid fixture design that represents the original historic fixture concept and overall profile yet with modernized fixture optics and lamp technology is rec-ommended. The use of ceramic metal halide technology is preferred for roadway and street lighting.
Technical CriteriaThis section discusses how the above goals are quantified and achieved from a technical standpoint. Standard practice perfor-mance criteria is defined for major areas and issues such as source color, light levels, and uniformity is addressed. The major areas of the site can be broken down into the following categories for lighting: Parking Areas, Pathways, Recreation Areas, Roadways, Loading Docks, Building Entries, Signage, and Site Features. The
•
•
•
•
•
LIGHTING GUIDELINES BACKGROUNDVision is the primary means by which we gather information about our surroundings. The variations in color, texture, and brightness that make up our visual world inform our perception of our environment. Light is the medium that renders our visual environment and shades our perceptions, and as such it is an important design element.
53
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Historic (retrofitted) pedestrian light pole adjacent to Administration Building and Hall of Justice
Historic light column pole at Lagoon, Veterans’ Memorial Auditorium, and Exhibit Hall and Showcase Theater
To develop a design that is inspiring yet practical and economi-cal, these lighting design guidelines build upon and maintain historic lighting concepts while addressing concepts of connec-tivity and cohesiveness where appropriate with new and future developments. This section will describe how these concept goals can be realized by following some design guidelines that are responsive to the historic character and functional requirements of the Marin County Civic Center campus. The lighting design guidelines presented are intended to establish and define the design goals and criteria initially in the context of a master plan, and ultimately to guide realizable design solutions. This section is comprised of five parts. The first part will discuss the existing conditions and the second part, Functional Criteria, will discuss general exterior lighting issues. The third part, Design Cri-teria and Approach, addresses lighting design guidelines for the site by discussing the intended “quality of light” for each area. A fourth section, Technical Criteria, will present quantifiable design metrics specific to the Marin County Civic Center campus. The fifth part summarizes the important lighting design guidelines from this section in a summary table for both existing and new areas.
EXISTING CONDITIONSAn illustrative summary of the existing lighting conditions observed during a site visit on August 25, 2004 is provided in this section.
54 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
Accent light fixtures for historic spire
Historic globe fixtures of varying size and pattern underneath Administration Building and Hall of Justice
Non-historic parking lot light fixtures located away from historic structure
Non-historic parking lot light fixtures located adjacent to historic and non-historic structures. Note that fixtures match the painted finish of the historic fixtures
55
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Nighttime identity of the Administration Building and Hall of Justice incorporates accent lighting for the spire and internal arcade downlighting. No façade lighting was present or identified.
Pedestrian Pathways:The historic styled pedestrian light pole fixtures have been ret-rofitted and slightly modified from the original historic design. It is assumed that the retrofit may have been done in an effort to meet current light level requirements. Additional light fixtures have been added in some instances where increased light levels may have been required due to changing needs (i.e. floodlights near county jail facility).
Most light fixtures have been moderately maintained. One style of historic light fixture with adjustable fixture heads shown on the original historic design plans could not be found on-site.
FUNCTIONAL CRITERIAThe primary goals of most exterior lighting systems are functional: to provide adequate light for safety and security. Another impor-tant consideration is the nighttime identity of the project. Under-standing that a nighttime identity has already been established through the historic design, a comprehensive lighting design for Marin County Civic Center must seek to adapt and improve the current lighting system to meet current expectations of lighting performance for vehicular and pedestrian wayfinding, and a simplified maintenance program.
Safety and SecurityThe Marin County Civic Center campus is comprised of several dif-ferent types of pedestrian paths and vehicular roadways, public open spaces, park areas, various gathering spaces, recreation areas, and historic landmark and transitional buildings. Given this
Non-historic parking lot light fixture with additional pole mounted floodlight for security lighting purposes at county jail facility
Original loading dock with concealed light fixture (left) and newer loading dock with exposed light fixture (middle and right) at Hall of Justice
56 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
level of complexity and scale, it is imperative that a primary layer of the site lighting system be dedicated to creating a sense of safety and security with special attention paid to the transition areas between different uses.
Two main lighting factors that reinforce a sense of safety and security are adequate horizontal illuminance at the ground for navigation of pathways, and adequate vertical luminance at surfaces such as building forms, building entries, people, signage and planting to provide visual context. The technical criteria as-sociated with these goals are discussed further in Section 3.
It is important to note that due to the historic landmark status of the Administration Building, Hall of Justice and the U.S. Post Of-fice, careful consideration is required when adapting the existing lighting system to meet modern criteria. Improvements may be made, but done such that the appearance and design intent of the historic fixtures are maintained.
Nighttime IdentityWith the variety of buildings and site features that make up the Marin County Civic Center campus, one important function of the lighting system will be to provide historic consistency throughout the Center, much in the same way that hardscape, paving and planting will. While each new development will have its own set of lighting criteria, the use of consistent lighting effects, sources, and equipment among non-historic areas will strengthen the visual identity of the historic landmark areas and ultimately the overall campus. The historic “hat” styled area light is an example of how visual consistency has developed a strong design identity for the project.
One method for creating a strong nighttime identity is to establish a hierarchy of illuminated site features such as the tall spire on the Administration Building, where brightness, color, and coverage can indicate degree of significance and focus. The silhouetted arcade forms along the Hall of Justice and Administration Build-ing create a secondary layer of lighting. The use of medium scaled lighting/architectural/signage elements at key site loca-tions such as the gathering spaces, Exhibit Hall and Showcase Theatre, Veterans’ Memorial Auditorium and U.S. Post Office can help to unify distinct areas of the site; these elements also act as lighthouse-type markers that facilitate wayfinding.
WayfindingAt night many of the visual cues that help direct daytime visitors are less visible, and site lighting must be utilized to compensate for this deficiency. Effective illumination of gateways, such as at the main entrance to the site off North San Pedro Road, signage, gathering spaces, and “landmarks” facilitates wayfinding and reinforces a sense of safety and security as well.
Illumination of vertical surfaces against darker backgrounds is an effective way to create a visual context at night. A wonder-
Original nighttime lighting scheme
57
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
ful feature of The Marin County Civic Center campus is the tall spire at the top of the Administration Building that can be seen from a distance, as well as the long undulating building facade. In addition, the organic styled light posts surrounding the lagoon acts as a wayfinding element as well. At night, these elements provide the visual context for pedestrians and drivers alike. New and future developments that address the illumination of facades and historic building features will be an important factor in the success of the Marin County Civic Center campus.
Lastly, lighting systems that enhance or are integrated with signage are especially important for wayfinding.
MaintenanceThe scale of The Marin County Civic Center campus and its variety of open spaces can translate into a lighting system with many fixtures. Maintenance issues that must be addressed include standardizing lamp types as much as possible, maximizing ac-cessibility of fixtures for easier repair and re-lamping, optimizing lamp life, cost, and energy efficiency, and minimizing opportuni-ties for vandalism.
The key to minimizing the maintenance costs for lighting is to keep the lighting design as simple as possible. By carefully select-ing fixtures that serve dual purposes, providing light for safety as well as night-time identity for example, fixture quantities can be reduced resulting in reduced maintenance as well as reduced first costs and some energy savings.
DESIGN CRITERIA AND APPROACHThe Marin County Civic Center will be a series of inter-connected exterior venues each with its own unique design character to be enhanced by the lighting. In this section, the use of a fam-ily of fixtures and overall design goals including hierarchies of brightness and quality of light that are responsive to each space will be described. The approaches will be discussed in terms of the functional criteria of safety and security, nighttime identity, wayfinding, and maintenance.
For each open space, light levels at the ground, vertical surface luminances, spill light from building interiors, and facade lighting all contribute to our perception of brightness at night. Zones of varying brightness, informed by the technical criteria noted in part four, need to be defined with special attention to providing a visually comfortable transition from one area to the next. In the case of lighting site features and planting, a perceptible differ-ence in brightness between the illuminated object and its con-text is desired. Within the open spaces such as the Lagoon, this contrast will be used to create visual interest, establish night-time identity, and facilitate wayfinding by highlighting “landmarks,” building entries, and transitions. However, excessive contrast is to be avoided.
Like brightness, color and color rendition of light are important
The Spire
58 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
design factors for site lighting. The color of light can act as a visual cue to delineate areas of different function. However, it can be disorienting when a variety of sources are juxtaposed or layered in a small area. A broad range of source color should be avoided.
One aspect of the site lighting system that is as important during the day as it is at night is the lighting equipment itself. The scale, form, color, and spacing of these elements should be cohesive and compatible with the historic design precedents and with the simple, and timeless designs of other site elements such as plant-ing, architecture, and signage. Site lighting fixtures located near historic structures must be respectful of the historic styled designs and site lighting fixtures used elsewhere should be simple, timeless, and cohesive throughout the new development areas of the site for connectivity while being versatile enough to be responsive and appropriate to the character of each space. This concept of a “family of fixtures” should be applied to the major open spaces.
Color and Color Rendering Properties of Light SourceAt the beginning of the design process for each proposed new or future development, careful consideration should be given to the color of light used. Consistency is very important and the use of metal halide sources, preferably 4100 Kelvin color temperature to best match the originally designed 5700 Kelvin color temperature mercury vapor lighting system, is recommended throughout the Marin County Civic Center campus. While mercury vapor lamps are still available, they are a lamp technology that has been surpassed by the energy efficient, high lumen maintenance and high quality color rendering capabilities of compact metal halide. In general, all sources should have the highest color rendering properties available to enhance the quality of the nighttime experience.
Recommended LampingThe use of metal halide technology in the nighttime environment is becoming much more prevalent due to the awareness of the importance of good color rendering in the nighttime environment and re-evaluation of how human vision is optimized at low light levels. Metal halide is becoming the preferred choice for urban roadway lighting. Some design standards for new or future site lighting within the state of California already encourage the use of metal halide sources in order to meet the demands of California Energy Codes. The application of metal halide technology for street lighting represents a progressive approach to emerging technologies and results in a high quality urban environment within the Marin County Civic Center campus.
High color rendering sources including metal halide lamps provide a more realistic rendering of illuminated surfaces and objects - tree leaves appear green, car colors can be distinguished, and pedestrians and surrounding building materials are easily recognized. Poor color rendering sources such as the high pressure sodium lamps currently used for some areas within the Marin County Civic Center campus are a limited spectrum source
59
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
that turn most surfaces and objects to a dull gray. Color and color rendition of light are important design factors since the color of light can either improve or distort the nighttime environment.
Light is measured in foot-candles, which is a measure of the amount of light (lumens) incident over a surface area. This measurement was first defined under photopic (daylight) lighting conditions. The following list describes some of the reasons why metal halide is a preferable technology to high pressure sodium for roadway lighting.
The primary wavelengths of light produced by metal halide sources coincide with the most sensitive nighttime vision receptors of the human eye resulting in improved visual re-sponse at low light levels.
Several studies indicate better visual acuity resulting in quicker reaction times for off-axis detection of hazards when metal halide lighting is used in low-light level situations. This in turn increases safety for approaching pedestrians and vehicles especially at roadway intersections.
High color rendering sources such as metal halide with a color rendering index (CRI) of 70 or better (on a scale of 0 to 100) realistically renders the color of illuminated surfaces and objects while sources such as high pressure sodium with a CRI of 22 distorts colors and renders most surfaces a dull gray. This distinction is critical in recognizing pedestrians, planting, car color, and surrounding building materials.
Areas illuminated with white light are typically described as ‘brighter’ and ‘active’ in comparison to spaces illuminated with high pressure sodium sources. This distinction has already been attributed to the revitalization of parks and retail spaces in many installations.
The use of metal halide and other white light source more closely resembles the original historic mercury vapor light sources designed for the campus, thereby revitalizing the historic nighttime visual environment. More importantly, this also results in a comfortable, active and friendly environment for pedestrians and adjacent business owners.
To promote sustainable lighting, lamps with low mercury content and lamps with high efficacy (lumens per watt ratio) are recommended where possible. Exterior lighting controls such as a photocell/timeclock device that limits unnecessary energy use when areas well illuminated with daylight are rec-ommended for efficient use of our energy resources. Lighting solutions should also be designed to minimize light pollution as much as possible and restrict light trespass into adjacent residential and commercial properties.
•
•
•
•
•
•
60 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
AREA LIGHTING BRIGHTNESS DIAGRAMLight levels are shown in average horizontal footcandles
61
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Color Contrast within Area and from One Area to the NextThe color of light throughout the Marin County Civic Center should be consistent with only slight variations in the color of the light source, which may be considered appropriate for distinguishing adjacent areas of different functions. For instance, the decorative globes mounted in the pass thru archways at the Hall of Justice and Administration Building originally utilized incandescent warm colored sources in contrast to the mercury vapor light sources used along pathways and roadways. To maintain this historic color variation, we recommend using warm colored 3000 Kelvin compact fluorescent light sources. These sources provide an energy efficient and sustainable lamping solution. Variations in lighting level to signal changes is a more common technique, with the color of the general lighting sources remaining relatively consistent.
Uniformity/Contrast of Light DistributionThe brightness diagram contained in this section summarizes the overall design approach. Each project should provide smooth transitions between zones of different light intensities.
Hierarchy of BrightnessLight levels at the ground, vertical surface luminances, spill light from building interiors, and even light fixture “glare” all contribute to our perception of brightness at night. When adjacent areas of the streetscape have perceptibly different brightness levels, our eyes require time for adaptation. These varying brightness levels when kept at appropriate contrast ratios work effectively as wayfinding, while excessive contrast ratios are undesirable from a design standpoint and can compromise a sense of safety and security. Therefore zones of varying levels of brightness based on the diagram below should be implemented. Then the bright-ness of the border areas between these zones can be graded to ensure a visually comfortable transition from one area of the site to the next.
Actual lighting levels may be used as a guideline for establishing the lighting design, but should by no means be the only criteria. The human eye is very adaptive, and may not detect large vari-ances in lighting levels. Illumination levels can be quite deceiving; an object or surface can have high lighting levels but appear very dull and inappropriately lit due to finish reflectances or distribu-tion of light. The lighting solution should provide an appropriate balance of light and level of comfort, with the actual quantity of light (i.e. number of footcandles) as a guideline.
In general, the impression that a person has of the amount of light (dim, adequate, bright) is a much more important consideration than the actual illumination levels. The amount of light that a sur-face or object appears to have is a function of finishes, contrasts, brightness of surrounding surfaces, and brightness of adjacent interior spaces. In areas where certain quantitative levels are required for performance of tasks the qualitative aspects of light-ing must also be considered as having equal impact.
62 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
Special Event LightingTo facilitate seasonal lighting and special events, the infrastructure of each development should include power for the installation of temporary lighting. Especially in gathering areas such as the Lagoon, the easy access to such infrastructure would reduce set-up time and cost for special public and private events or performances.
As illustrated by the above diagram, the existing historic fixtures, placed 60’ on center, do not provide a uniform coverage of the pathways, where vertical illumination on pedestrians falls off in between light fixtures. It is recommended that a higher light pole with the same fixture head style and profile be considered for greater vertical and horizontal illumination coverage along pedestrian pathways.
The light source could be concealed within the bottom housing as originally designed and illustrated in Drawing A. Drawing B illustrates a modern light fixture with a very different fixture profile, but one that utilizes a similar “reflected light” design concept. A reconstructed custom hybrid fixture design that represents the original historic fixture concept and overall profile yet with mod-ernized fixture optics and lamp technology is recommended.
It is important for reasons of visual comfort that the light source be concealed from direct view while maximizing the efficiency of the reflector system.
TECHNICAL CRITERIAIn the previous section, general goals for the Marin County Civic Center campus lighting system were described. The appendix contains a section that discusses how those goals are quantified and achieved from a technical standpoint. Standard practice performance criteria (from The Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) Handbook, 9th Edition) is defined for major areas and issues such as source color, light levels, and uniformity will be addressed. The major areas of the site are broken down into the following
Conceptual Fixture Diagrams
63
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
5.11 Signage and WayfindingThis section addresses existing site signage, a concept for overall site signage and wayfinding, and signage design guidelines and concepts. An updated, comprehensive site wayfinding system would substantially improve visitor orientation and enhance the special character of the Marin County Civic Center campus.
GUIDELINES
Gateway FeatureThe blue roof and gold-leafed spire are so distinctive and •
Drawing A Drawing B
categories for lighting: Parking Areas, Pathways, Recreation Ar-eas, Roadways, Loading Docks, Building Entries, Signage, and Site Features. Please refer to the appendix for detailed information on technical criteria as well as a summary table.
Light Fixture Families
64 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
well-known that gateway enhancements are not functionally necessary at the intersections of Civic Center Drive with San Pedro Road and the Avenue of the Flags.
Gateway features would nevertheless add richness to the site and “announce” the design character of the landscape improvements and signage that visitors will encounter.
Gateway features would likely combine signage with land-scape enhancements.
Primary Vehicle DirectionalThese should be sized for readability at the nominal 25 mph speed limit along Civic Center Drive. They would typically be placed at the intersections with all public roadways, and, in some instances, at advance locations as well.
Upgrades to existing directional signs to the Marin Veterans’ Auditorium and Exhibit Hall complex would essentially repli-cate existing sign copy.
New directional signs at the roadways to the Administration Building and Hall of Justice “overpasses” would identify each building entrance and the principal public destinations it serves most directly.
Secondary Vehicle DirectionalsSecondary directionals are used where slower speeds per-mit readability of smaller copy. Generally, they also display fewer destinations.
Existing secondary signs at the Marin Veterans’ Memorial Auditorium and Exhibit Hall complex should be upgraded.
New signs should be placed along Peter Behr Drive, Judge Haley Drive and Vera Schultz Drive to direct visitors to the parking zone nearest the building entrance that leads most directly to their destination.
Pedestrian DirectionalsPedestrian-scale wayfinding should be provided along the paths of travel from the Administration Building and Hall of Justice and east parking lot to appropriate building entries, and throughout the Marin Center.
Pedestrian Orientation MapsA few strategically placed maps will give many visitors a helpful overview of the site. (Some people cannot make the association between a scaled representation and the physi-cal world. Wayfinding should therefore not rely exclusively on orientation maps.)
Potential map locations include the transit stop on Civic Cen-ter Drive, the Administration Building and Hall of Justice park-
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
65
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
ing lots, and key pedestrian nodes at the Marin Center. These maps should include only the destinations and information necessary to guide most visitors. The more complex a map, the more intimidating and confusing it can be.
Building Entry IdentificationIt will be critical to “label” each public entrance to the Ad-ministration Building and Hall of Justice conspicuously (i.e. - A/B/C or North/Central/South). Each label should be aug-mented by a directory of primary public destinations (Courts, Jury Assembly Room, Traffic Citations et al).
Public transit systems typically have their own, distinct signage and graphics, together with standards for their use, and this may be the case for SMART. However, because of the Civic Center’s unique, historic character, SMART signage should, if possible, have site-specific structural supports and/or “fram-ing.”
TypefaceThe typeface Futura is currently used throughout the Ad-ministration Building, Hall of Justice and Marin Veterans’ Me-morial Auditorium. Futura’s circular (or apparently circular) letterforms are uniquely appropriate to complement Wright’s use of circles and circular arcs as design motifs. Futura is therefore the recommended typeface for future signage.
Copy SizeThe cap height (the size of a capital letter measured verti-cally) for primary directional signs along Civic Center Drive should be 4” to 4.5.”
The cap height for directional signs along secondary road-ways and entry drives should be 2.5” to 3.5.” Because Futura has unusually extended (wide) letterforms, signs will be cor-respondingly wider to accommodate the typeface without reducing cap heights or digitally condensing the copy.
Amount of CopyWherever possible, directional signs should have a maximum of three listed destinations. Drivers don’t typically have time to process more information than that, and the more destinations displayed on a sign, the less attention each will get.
Overall SizeSize as necessary to display the copy at the indicated cap height and to provide an adequate border zone all around.
Sign panels should generally be wider than they are high to minimize multiline messages. 4’6” is an optimal overall height. The lowest copy on a sign panel should be 1’0” to 1’6” above finish grade to keep the copy within a driver’s line of vision and to prevent being blocked by ground cover.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
66 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
MaterialsAluminum is the industry standard for most sign fabrication. It is lighter and easier to work than steel, doesn’t rust, and is only moderately more expensive.
A spray applied paint finish is also standard; powder coat-ing and baked enamel are more durable and more costly. Porcelain enamel is most expensive, but non fading and es-sentially impervious to graffiti.
A primary sign can be a monolith or a sign panel on a base structure like precast concrete.
Secondary signs are usually post and panel signs.
ChangeabilityMost destinations at the Marin County Civic Center campus are unlikely to change over time. Where change is a possibil-ity, the use of modular directional signs which simplify copy updates should be considered.
PlacementVehicular directionals should be placed as close to the street as possible without disrupting sightlines or interfering with underground utilities.
Placement should also take into account adjacent trees, shrubs and ground cover.
Irrigation heads should be directed away from sign panels to avoid the buildup of alkaloids from repeated spraying.
LightingAll principal wayfinding features should have dedicated ex-ternal illumination unless ambient light levels are high enough to provide the necessary visibility.
Design ConsiderationsAll components of the hierarchy should employ the Futura typeface and utilize the Civic Center color palette – sandstone beige, blue and Taliesin Red – and all components should reflect a common design vocabulary.
That design vocabulary, however, should not mimic the Civic Center architecture. Instead, it should be compatible in a gen-eral way, using curved forms to soften massing, and horizontal rather than vertical proportions whenever possible.
If design motifs or details are incorporated into the signage, they should be placed on the edges of a sign panel and/or the support structure so that they don’t obtrude on the “live area” reserved for copy.
Borders between colors or materials should be articulated
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
67
Landscape and Site Elements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
by a reveal, a trim piece, a change in plane or some similar device.
The features which make the Marin County Civic Center campus so distinctive will impact a functional system of site signage and wayfinding. The long blue roof and gold-leafed spire serve as unmistakable landmarks at large scale, but the integration of the Administration Building and Hall of Justice into the hilly topogra-phy restricts view corridors from adjacent roadways, requiring wayfinding elements to guide visitors to the building entries.
Civic Center Drive divides the site into two distinct sections: hilly and partially treed to the southwest, and flat and more open to the northeast. There are existing directional signs along Civic Center Drive at the entry drives into the northeast section. These signs direct visitors to the Marin Veterans’ Memorial Auditorium, Exhibit Hall and related functions along straight, level roadways with essentially unimpeded sightlines. Most are generic “off the shelf” signs with white copy on blue backgrounds; the copy is generally smaller than it should be. These signs do not reflect the Marin County Civic Center design palette in any way. They are mounted haphazardly on posts, walls and fencing. There are also three original sign armatures on Civic Center Drive between the Post Office and the Marin Veterans’ Memorial Audi-torium, and one of them has attached directional signage. The armatures should be preserved for their historic significance, but relocated and used as pedestrian directionals, as their scale is more appropriate to this use.
There are essentially no existing wayfinding components on the southwest side of Civic Center Drive, or on Peter Behr Drive, Judge Haley Drive or Vera Schultz Drive.
The Marin Veterans’ Memorial Auditorium and Exhibit Hall com-plex is formally designated “Marin Center”. This term is easily confused with “Marin County Civic Center”, which complicates wayfinding. Improvements and the expansion of the Lagoon Park/Auditorium area present an opportunity to replace “Marin Center” with a distinctive and unambiguous term.
An updated, comprehensive site wayfinding system would sub-stantially improve visitor orientation and enhance the special character of the Marin County Civic Center campus.
Although these guidelines do not specifically include multilingual signage, it is important to note that signage in multiple languages at the Civic Center should be considered if warranted to fulfill some public service or is consistent with some other standard.
PRELIMINARY OVERALL SITE SIGNAGE AND WAYFINDING CONCEPTAs described above, existing wayfinding to the northeast of Civic Center Drive is functionally adequate, but should be upgraded (and expanded as necessary to include destinations set forth in
Existing Directional
Existing Directional
Original Armarture/Sign
68 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Landscape and Site Elements
these guidelines). The chief wayfinding task will be to identify clear paths of travel from Civic Center Drive, and, to a lesser extent, from secondary roadways, to the Administration Building and Hall of Justice public entrances. (It is assumed that wayfinding to the County Jail is unnecessary and/or undesirable.)
Along the Civic Center Drive approach, two principal issues come into play. First, each public entrance is tucked into a vehicular “underpass,” and is therefore difficult to see from Civic Center Drive. Second, wayfinding within the Administration Building and Hall of Justice is difficult because of the relationship to grade, inconsistencies in the room numbering sequences, and limited wall space for directional signs at major decision points. For these reasons, it is important to direct visitors to the public entrance closest (or most directly linked) to their destination. Similar issues come into play at the “back” of the Administration Building and Hall of Justice, but the scale is smaller and visitors will generally be walking rather than driving.
Sightline to Building Entry
69
Future Development Sites
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
6.1 Possible Future County Facility NeedsOVERVIEWThe Facilities Master Plan completed by Gensler in April 2002 identified significant overcrowding in the Hall of Justice and Ad-ministration Buildings. In addition, the Administration and Hall of Justice Buildings have significant security and public safety issues that are difficult to address without severely impacting the historic structures’ architectural character. Other public agencies have also identified facility needs on the Civic Center campus.
This section outlines the possible future facility needs of the County and provides site selection guidelines for possible future develop-ment at the Civic Center that will help to reduce adverse envi-ronmental effects.
PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDINGThe County has identified a need for additional and updated facilities to house their public safety departments. In concept, a new Public Safety Building could house some combination of the following departments and programs:
Office of Emergency Services911 Dispatch/Emergency Operations CenterCommunications Prime SiteMulti-Purpose Meeting RoomsInformation Services Data CenterCoroner’s OfficeMarin County Fire Dispatch and AdministrationChildcare Facility
The County hired Beverly Prior Architects in late 2005 to conduct a feasibility study for a new public safety facility. Further program details will be addressed in that study.
SONOMA MARIN AREA RAIL TRANSIT (SMART)As described previously in Section 3.3 of this document, the Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) project plans to provide passenger train service to Sonoma and Marin County residents along the Northwestern Pacific (NWP) rail corridor that lies next to Highway 101. A transit station is proposed at the northwest corner of the Civic Center campus between Highway 101 and Civic Center Drive.
The Civic Center station design parameters were outlined by Community Design + Architecture (CD + A) in a May 21, 2004 memorandum to the SMART Board of Directors. The current plan
••••••••
SECTION 6: POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITES
70 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Future Development Sites
Marin County Fair 2003 -- photo by C. Benton
Due to the extent of the security upgrades needed within the Administration Building and the Hall of Justice, and the extent of
confines auto access to the station from Civic Center Drive. Although revised ridership estimates are not yet available, the memo states that “the station is forecast to have a limited need for park and ride capacity, with initial ridership numbers predicting a demand for just over 60 spaces.” The concept plan dated May 13, 2004 shows 130 parking stalls which represents the “maximum site potential for park-and-ride use.” Initial reports indicate that the station’s impact on the site in this regard will be minimal if any. The parking study included in this document, section 3.3, gives further analysis on the SMART station’s potential parking and traffic impacts to the Civic Center site.
It should also be noted that visual impacts of the proposed station “will likely be minimal as the station is well below the grade of the freeway” and includes “no vertical features” aside from some landscaping. The proposed station will not adversely impact views to or from the Administration Building and Hall of Justice.
MARIN CENTER RENAISSANCE PARTNERSHIPThe Marin Center Renaissance Partnership is a public and private partnership formed in 2000 to complete the vision of creating a cultural center complex on the Marin Center site. When com-plete, the Marin Cultural Center Complex will host social gather-ings, cultural and performing events, and commercial activities. The master planning process led by consultants Mark Cavagnero Associates and Royston Hanamoto Alley & Abey is now under-way for the project. The following program elements are under consideration for the complex:
County LibraryConference Center & Meeting RoomsNew or Improved Exhibit HallVeteran’s Memorial Auditorium RenovationsOutdoor AmphitheaterFarmer’s Market Location and ImprovementsNew or Improved Mid-Size TheaterRestaurant
A preferred alternative was chosen by the Renaissance Partner-ship’s Steering Committee and presented to the Marin County Board of Supervisors in January 2004. The Board approved the broad concept for the master plan, and have now sent it back to the Steering Committee for phasing and financial feasibility analyses.
STATE COURTS MASTER PLANAs part of the Judicial Council of California’s Statewide Court Facilities Master Planning Project, Mark Cavagnero Associates was retained to develop a 20-year Court Facilities Master Plan for the Superior Court of California, County of Marin in July 2003. The process was overseen by the County of Marin Court Facilities Master Plan Steering Committee.
••••••••
71
Future Development Sites
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Overflow Parking Lot
Temporary Dog Park
East Parking Lot
public review needed to implement those upgrades, the steering committee decided that a new courthouse on the Civic Center campus should be constructed.
The Court Facilities Master Plan Steering Committee, working with County staff, identified the site of the existing General Services Building, located between Highway 101 and Peter Behr Drive, as the preferred location for a new courthouse facility. A new building on this site would require extensive public review and voter approval.
6.2 Overview of Site Analysis Report for Civic Center ExpansionREPORT OVERVIEW AND SYNOPSISIn March 2003 Heller Manus Architects provided the County of Marin with comprehensive analysis of five potential development sites originally identified in the April 2002 Facilities Master Plan by Gensler. This site analysis report was to assist the County in site selection for future development on the Civic Center campus based on the physical limitations of possible sites such as “build-able area versus new and displaced parking, proximity to the main building and sensitivity toward Frank Lloyd Wright’s master plan.”
The five sites originally identified by Gensler are identified in the Future Development Sites diagram as follows:
Site 1 - Civic Center Parking “Pit”Site 2 - Temporary Dog ParkSite 3 - East Parking Lot and ArmorySite 4 - Overflow Parking LotSite 5 - North San Pedro Road
Of these five sites, Heller Manus suggests that sites 2 and 3 would be better suited for future development. The report states that the sites are “currently under-utilized with a more generous size” than the alternative sites and that a new government facility would be easier to accommodate at a lower cost and with greater efficiency on sites 2 and 3. In addition, the report sug-gests that these sites offer the County “the opportunity to create a pedestrian-oriented government services center along Civic Center Drive.” Therefore development on sites 2 and/or 3 would help to improve vehicular and pedestrian connections along Civic Center Drive north to the Marin Center, which is the site of the County fairgrounds.
Heller Manus surmised that sites 1, 4 and 5 would require the ad-dition of a multi-story parking structure in order to accommodate parking needs of existing programs as well as new ones making these sites less desirable for cost reasons. In addition, sites 1 and 4 would require ballot initiative voter approval to construct any structure over 250 square feet. The report recommends that site 1 remain in its current use as surface parking. It recommends that
•••••
72 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Future Development Sites
3
5
2
1
6
4
7
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SITES
Site 1 - Civic Center Parking “Pit”Site 2 - Temporary Dog ParkSite 3 - East Parking Lot and ArmorySite 4 - Overflow Parking LotSite 5 - North San Pedro RoadSite 6 - General Services BuildingSite 7- Marin Center
6.3 Additional Analysis and Site Selection CriteriaTRAFFIC AND PARKING ISSUESAs described in section 3.3, Site Circulation and Parking Capacity, and the Appendices, there are two potential traffic and parking impacts associated with future development on the site. The intersection of Civic Center Drive at Peter Behr Road will oper-ate unacceptably with the development of the Marin Center project and the public safety building. The traffic consultant has suggested that the eastbound approach to Civic Center Drive
site 4 be studied for future building development as an alternate location for sites 2 and 3. Site 5 is recommended to remain in its current use.
73
Future Development Sites
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
on Peter Behr Drive be restriped to include a separate left-turn lane and a through/right-turn lane. The intersection should be signalized with the construction of a new Courts facility on the General Services Building site.
In addition, the parking supply on the campus is inadequate for simultaneous events at all facilities; it is recommended that the County coordinate events appropriately to ensure that the park-ing supply is not exceeded.
Neither issue outlined above greatly impacts future development on the site, nor does it suggest that one site is more appropriate for development than another.
VISUAL IMPACTSIt is recommended that care be taken to protect view corridors on the Civic Center site. The campus has a strong cultural history and significant natural setting that is central to its identity. New development must be sensitive to protecting the historic heritage and natural beauty of the site from every possible angle.
A multi-story structure on Site 3 could partially impede views from portions of the Marin Center site to the main Civic Center build-ings. It could also impact views from the Administration Building and Hall of Justice north and east toward the lagoon and bay. It appears that a structure on Site 3 would have fewer visual im-pacts on the site, but would be further removed from the other Civic Center structures. Frank Lloyd Wright was a strong propo-nent of clustering buildings on the campus in order to maximize efficiency and preserve open spaces. The County must weigh these potentially competing concerns carefully when choosing a site for development.
UTILITIESThe existing utilities capacities for the Civic Center campus, in-cluding electric power, natural gas, water, telecommunications, and sewer services, must be studied in detail prior to any new development on the site. Because of the possible costs involved, further study is recommended to ascertain which, if any, utilities would need to be upgraded, replaced or re-routed based on possible development.
Initial consultation with the Las Gallinas Sanitary District indicates that the Civic Center has adequate sanitary sewer capacity for a new public safety building. Regarding telecommunications, the County’s Information Services and Technology department has requested that all new development projects include the instal-lation of additional telecommunications facilities any time there is an opportunity to do so. More specifically, it is recommended that conduit be installed between all new buildings for data and voice telecommunications where feasible, and that redundancy in systems and networks be built-in. Any new development must also ensure that UPS (Uninterruptable Power Service) and back-up generators are in place and adequately maintained.
74 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Future Development Sites
6.4 General RecommendationsThe 2002 Facilities Master Plan Report and the 2003 Site Analysis Report for Civic Center Expansion provide analysis and recom-mendations for future development and expansion on the Civic Center site. These serve as a baseline analysis for future devel-opment but require further study as future building needs are identified.
As detailed program information for future buildings is developed, plans and program should be evaluated for impacts to traffic, parking, views, utilities and historic character. Without detailed program information, it is difficult to determine the suitability of specific uses for specific sites. It should be noted that sites selected for specific projects will be subject to environmental review in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Site 1, the Civic Center parking “pit,” while having inherent draw-backs to development as identified in the Site Analysis Report for Civic Center Expansion, is recommended to be further evaluated for future building use. Issues such as views, access, cost, arrival and voter approval would need to be addressed in the design of the structure. A low building tucked into the hillside at the southern part of the site would probably not significantly impact views from Highway 101 to the Civic Center.
Site 2, the temporary dog park, is currently actively used by the public. Relocation of the temporary dog park and petanque court and the proximity of the site to adjacent neighborhoods may generate significant public comment and will require a public process. However, the McInnis Park Master Plan Revision, approved by the Board of Supervisors in October 2001, provides for a permanent dog park located “between the creek pathway and the soccer fields.” Relocating the temporary dog park to McInnis Park is a viable option for the County that could make Site 2 available for other purposes. The location, flat terrain, oppor-tunities for outdoor space, ease of construction, adjacent open areas and lack of requirement for ballot approval make Site 2
The Marin Municipal Water District has indicated that the County is currently exceeding its water entitlements, which means that water service will need to be addressed with the District for any new development project on the Civic Center campus. The District has suggested that redistributing current entitlements may be of benefit to the County. In addition, Pacific Gas & Electric Company has indicated that natural gas and electric-ity capacity on the site can be increased as necessary for new development.
MARIN CENTERThe County has indicated that additional cultural facilities would best be located at Marin Center to create a cohesive cultural complex for the County of Marin.
75
Future Development Sites
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
desirable for future building development. It is recommended that this site remain in consideration for future building use.
Site 3, the east parking lot and the Armory, has many of the advantages of Site 2. The Armory is under a long term lease through 2059 and is unlikely to be developed in the near future. It does, however, have many advantages as a building site and should be evaluated for future development. Any build-ings located in the east parking lot should consider how future development of the Armory site would integrate with their design. Locating a building on the west side of the parking lot would allow continued use of the rear parking area for the park and Marin Center complex. It could be designed as part of a building complex associated with a new building on Site 2 and provides an opportunity for integration with the Civic Center. Locating a building on the east side of the parking lot allows it to be more isolated from the character of the Civic Center and can be integrated as part of a future complex with the Armory. It is recommended that this site remain in consideration for future building use.
Site 4, the Overflow Parking lot, is used seasonally for Christmas tree sales, but is otherwise used as an overflow parking lot. The site has high visibility from highway 101. A building on the site could significantly impact views to Marin Center and requires voter approval. A portion of the site is also being considered by the Sonoma Marin Area Rapid Transit program for a transit station and parking area. The site is currently underutilized and could be designed sensitively to accommodate future needs while addressing the visual impacts of development. Uses such as parking, farmers’ market and multi-purpose open space should remain in consideration. In addition, should develop-ment needs require additional building space, site 4 should be further evaluated for its building potential. It is recommended that this site remain in consideration for future development.
Site 5, North San Pedro Road, is outside the limits of this re-port.
Site 6, the site of the existing General Services Building, is being considered for development of a courts building as described in the Court Facilities Master Plan, July 2003. Although not identified in earlier studies for possible redevelopment, it is an important site as it has significant visual impacts both from the freeway to the Civic Center and from the Civic Center to the surrounding areas. As this process proceeds, it is critical that the design for any building follow strict design guidelines for the campus.
Development of site 7, the Marin Center, is described in detail in section 6.1. The County is committed to the vision of Frank Lloyd Wright in creating a cohesive civic and cultural campus. As such, the Marin Center is a critical to the achievement of this goal.
76 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Conclusion
Interior and Aerial Views of the Marin Civic Center
SECTION 7: CONCLUSION
The Marin County Civic Center Master Design Guidelines endeav-or to review and update previous studies of the Civic Center’s po-tential for possible future development. They equip Marin County with guidelines that incorporate environmental protection and land use planning considerations for future development on-site together with architectural and landscape design parameters.
New development at the Civic Center is anticipated which may include a new public safety building, a new passenger rail station, a new courthouse, and additional cultural facilities at the Marin Center. While this document does not specifically propose new development or authorize any new construction, it does provide recommendations for project proposals formulated elsewhere. Its purpose is to reevaluate and analyze potential sites for any pos-sible future projects at the Marin County Civic Center. In addition, it defines design parameters regarding architecture, landscape architecture, lighting, signage, and environmental protection.
Detailed environmental review and additional studies will be required for any proposed future projects. However, these guide-lines outline ways to reduce adverse environmental effects and provide a framework for the future development of high-quality projects. The County is committed to the enhancement of the Civic Center campus and to ensuring the protection of its natural resources and cultural assets.
77
Bibliography
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
BibliographyReports & Documents
Alta Transportation Consulting, Marin County Bicycle and Pedes-trian Master Plan, June 2000.
Alta Transportation Consulting, Marin County Unincorporated Area Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, June 2001.
Burks, Rocky, Disability Access Coordinator, County of Marin, Disability Access Compliance, email to RHAA, September 20, 2004.
City of San Rafael, General Plan 2020 Steering Committee, Draft General Plan 2020, January 9, 2004.
Community, Design + Architecture, SMART Station Planning Memorandum, Station Design Parameters: Civic Center Station, May 21, 2004.
County of Marin, Department of Public Works, Exterior Painting of Administration & Hall of Justice Buildings Specifications, October 2000.
County of Marin, Marin Countywide Plan, Public Review Draft, February 2004.
County of Marin, Real Property Lease with State of California, National Guard Armory Building, March, 1960.
DeCarlo, Lisa, Basic Program Details for a Potential Future Public Safety Building, email to RHAA, August 31, 2004.
DeCarlo, Lisa, Telecommunication & Utilities Commentary for the Master Design Guidelines, email to RHAA, September 20, 2004.
DeCarlo, Lisa, Utilities - Sewage & Water, email to RHAA, Sep-tember 20, 2004.
DeCarlo, Lisa, Marin Municipal Water District - Water Entitlements for the County, email to RHAA, October 12, 2004.
Department of Parks, Open Space & Cultural Services, Marin County, Marin County Civic Center Landscape Renovation: Inventory of Existing Plants, 1999.
EIP Associates, Marin County Correctional Facility Environmental Impact Report, Comments and Responses to the Draft EIR, Janu-ary 1990.
EIP Associates, Marin County Correctional Facility, Final Supple-mental Environmental Impact Report, Comments and Responses to the Draft Supplemental Environmental Report, January 1992.
78 MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Bibliography
Finnegan, Dennis, Undersheriff, Staffing and Vehicles for Proposed Public Safety Building, email to RHAA, August 18, 2004.
Gensler, County of Marin Facilities Master Plan, April 2002.
Heller-Manus Architects, Preliminary Site Analysis Report for Civic Center Expansion, County of Marin, March 11, 2003.
Herzog Associates, Geotechnical Investigation, Marin County Correctional Facility, San Rafael, CA, June 2, 1989.
Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board, 2000
Knutson, Arthur T., Subsurface Engineering, Geotechnical Recon-naissance Report for the Site Selection of the Proposed Marin County Jail, January 31, 1985.
Lee and Praszker, Inc., Geotechnical Investigation Marin County Correctional Facility, San Rafael, CA, August 1988.
Marin County Facilities Planning, Report to the Board of Supervi-sors, May 2003.
Mark Cavagnero Associates, Superior Court of California, County of Marin Court Facilities Master Plan, July 2003.
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, National Historic Landmark Nomination, Marin County Civic Center, pre-pared by Sally Woodbridge, 1991.
North San Rafael Vision Steering Committee, City of San Rafael, Vision North San Rafael, 1997.
Soil & Plant Laboratory, Inc., Marin County Civic Center Soil Analy-sis and Amendment Recommendations, November 15, 1999.
Taliesin Associated Architects of the Frank Lloyd Wright Associa-tion, Aaron G. Green, Associate Architect, Marin County Admin-istration Building Specifications, 1962.
Taliesin Associated Architects of the Frank Lloyd Wright Founda-tion, William Wesley Peters, Architect, Aaron G. Green, Architect Associated, Marin County Hall of Justice Specifications, 1969.
Taliesin Associated Architects of the Frank Lloyd Wright Founda-tion, William Wesley Peters, Chief Architect, Marin County Civic Center Master Plan: 1972-1990, September 1972.
Taliesin Associated Architects of the Frank Lloyd Wright Founda-tion, Preliminary Swim Complex Schematic Location and Design Study, Marin County Civic Center, September 7, 1973.
79
Bibliography
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES
Taliesin Associated Architects of the Frank Lloyd Wright Founda-tion, Grading, Utilities & Planting Schematic Master Plans, Marin County Civic Center, December 1974.
Trip Generation, 7th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc., Marin County Civic Center/Marin Center Event Capacity Analysis, January 8, 1996.
Whittenkeller & Associates, McInnis Park Master Plan Revision, October 2001.
Whittenkeller & Associates and Brian Powell & Associates, North San Rafael Vision Promenade Conceptual Plan, November 2002.
Woodward-Clyde-Sherard and Associates, Civil Engineers, Soil Investigation for the Proposed Marin County Civic Center, San Rafael, CA, December 1959.
Drawings
Conceptual Landscape Plan for Marin County Civic Center and Marin Center, Department of Parks, Open Space & Cultural Ser-vices, Marin County, drawn by Steve Petterle, August 2000.
Marin County Civic Center Original Contours, drawn by Ed Lud-ers, date unknown.
Civic Center Lighting, AutoCAD drawing provided by Kevin Pusser, date unknown.
Exterior Signs, digital image of original drawing, #000255, provided by Steve Petterle, 1962.
Fair Entrance Treatment, digital image of original drawing, #000313, provided by Steve Petterle, 1986.
Marin Center, digital image of original drawing, #000339, pro-vided by Steve Petterle, date unknown.
Water Conserving Garden, digital image of original drawing, #000266, provided by Steve Petterle, 1974.
Security Fence, digital image of original drawing, #000300, pro-vided by Steve Petterle, 1970.
Cross-section/Elevation of Civic Center Site (showing rockline), photocopy of drawing provided by Dept. of Public Works, date unknown.
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES80
Acknowledgements
Marin County Board of Supervisors
District 1, Susan L. Adams, Vice PresidentDistrict 2, Harold C. Brown Jr., PresidentDistrict 3, Charles McGlashanDistrict 4, Steve Kinsey, 2nd PresidentDistrict 5, Cynthia L. Murray
County of Marin Staff
Master Design Guidelines Project ManagementMatthew H. Hymel, County AdministratorMark J. Riesenfeld, County Administrator (Retired)Don Hunter, Deputy County AdministratorDavid Speer, Facilities Planning & Development ManagerLisa DeCarlo, Administrative Analyst
Marin County Technical Advisory CommitteeBob Beaumont, Chief Assistant Director of Public WorksJim Farley, Director of Cultural and Visitor ServicesDennis Finnegan, UndersheriffTom Lai, Principal PlannerSteve Petterle, Principal Park Planner
Consulting Organizations
Frank Lloyd Wright Civic Center ConservancyAnnette Rose, ChairMark CavagneroLynn DowneyNancy King HaydenSally HauserSupervisor Charles McGlashan Catherine H. MunsonJoan G. RobertsMark SchatzSuki Sennett
Marin Center Renaissance Partnership Steering CommitteeMaynard Willms, Committee Member
Superior Court of California, County of MarinKim Turner, Assistant Court Executive Officer
Credits & Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES 81
Project Consultants
Royston, Hanamoto, Alley & AbeyLead Consultant, Landscape Architecture & Environmental Plan-ningManuela King, PrincipalLisa Orr, Associate
Mark Cavagnero AssociatesArchitectureMark Cavagnero, PrincipalRoslyn Cole, Principal
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation Inc.Transportation PlanningDalene J. Whitlock, P.E., PTOE, Project ManagerDebbie Dunn, GraphicsScott Rhodes, Marks Traffic Data ServiceSteve Weinberger, P.E., PTOE, Project Review
Kate Keating Associates Inc.Architectural Graphics, Signage and WayfindingKate Keating, PrincipalStanton Klose, Project Manager
Horton Lees Brogden Lighting DesignConceptual Lighting DesignAngela McDonald, PrincipalLilian Rodriguez, Associate
MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTERMASTER DES IGN GU IDEL INES
R O Y S T O N H A N A M O T O A L L E Y & A B E Y
Mark Cavagnero Associates
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation Inc.
Horton Lees Brogden Lighting Design
Kate Keating Associates Inc.
FINAL REPORTDecember 20, 2005
Mas te r Des ign Gu ide l ines Summary Tab le
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
EG
UIDE
LIN
ESI
TE O
RGA
NIZ
ATIO
N
Th
is se
ctio
n id
entifi
es i
ssue
s tha
t rel
ate
to th
e ov
eral
l org
aniza
tion
of th
e sit
e to
incl
ude
view
co
rrid
ors;
ped
estri
an, b
icyc
le, a
nd v
ehic
ular
circ
ulat
ion;
and
par
king
cap
acity
. G
uid
elin
es
incl
ude
the
follo
win
g (S
ee S
ectio
n 3
for f
urth
er d
etai
ls):
A.
View
Cor
ridor
s1.
W
here
vie
ws f
rom
the
Civ
ic C
ente
r bui
ldin
gs to
the
east
and
sout
h ar
e ob
stru
cted
due
to
tall t
rees
, rep
laci
ng th
e tre
es w
ith sm
alle
r spe
cies
shou
ld b
e co
nsid
ered
. (T
his m
ust b
e ha
ndle
d
with
car
e; a
thor
ough
tree
pla
ntin
g m
aste
r pla
n is
requ
ired
.)2.
U
ndes
irabl
e vi
ews o
f Hig
hway
101
from
the
Civ
ic C
ente
r bui
ldin
gs sh
ould
be
miti
gate
d
with
buf
fer a
nd sc
reen
pla
ntin
g al
ong
the
site’
s wes
tern
ed
ge.
Car
e m
ust b
e ta
ken,
how
ever
, to
pro
tect
the
view
from
the
high
way
bac
k to
war
ds t
he b
uild
ings
.B.
Ped
estri
an C
ircul
atio
n1.
S
idew
alks
alo
ng p
rimar
y an
d se
cond
ary
stre
ets a
re p
refe
rred
site
-wid
e in
ord
er to
st
reng
then
con
nect
ions
bet
wee
n bu
ildin
gs a
nd re
crea
tiona
l fea
ture
s on
the
site.
Sig
nage
and
ni
ghtti
me
light
ing
shou
ld a
lso b
e in
clud
ed.
Sid
ewal
ks w
ill im
prov
e ov
eral
l ped
estri
an sa
fety
an
d a
cces
s to
alte
rnat
ive
park
ing
lots
for e
vent
s. 2.
A
pav
ed w
alkw
ay o
f a m
inim
um 1
2’ in
wid
th th
at c
ircle
s the
lago
on e
ntire
ly sh
ould
be
com
plet
ed p
er F
rank
Llo
yd W
right
’s o
rigin
al p
lan.
Sig
nage
and
nig
httim
e lig
htin
g sh
ould
also
be
incl
uded
. W
idth
and
mat
eria
l sho
uld
be
cons
isten
t.3.
P
edes
trian
acc
ess t
o th
e un
dev
elop
ed a
rea
in th
e no
rthea
st c
orne
r of t
he si
te is
enc
our-
aged
. Pa
ths s
houl
d b
e ad
equa
tely
sign
ed fo
r way
fi nd
ing
and
form
alize
d to
the
deg
ree
nec-
essa
ry to
pro
tect
sens
itive
hab
itats
. Ha
bita
t con
trol f
ence
s will
be n
eces
sary
to p
rote
ct se
nsi-
tive
wet
land
are
as.
Path
s sho
uld
typi
cally
be
appr
oxim
atel
y 4
- 6’ w
ide.
4.
Exis
ting
trails
on
the
site
may
or m
ay n
ot b
e fo
rmal
ized
, bas
ed o
n th
e ad
jace
nt n
atur
al
cond
ition
s at t
he d
iscre
tion
of th
e C
ount
y. I
f for
mal
ized
, tra
il wid
th a
nd m
ater
ials
shou
ld b
e co
nsist
ent a
nd d
eter
min
ed o
n a
case
by
case
bas
is.C
. Bi
cycl
e C
ircul
atio
n 1.
C
ivic
Cen
ter D
rive
and
oth
er p
rimar
y st
reet
s sho
uld
hav
e st
riped
bik
e la
nes a
nd sh
ould
m
eet a
ll City
, Cou
nty
and
Sta
te st
and
ard
s.2.
B
icyc
le a
cces
s via
bik
e pa
ths o
r mul
tiuse
pat
hs th
roug
hout
the
open
spac
e ar
eas i
s en-
cour
aged
. C
are
shou
ld b
e ta
ken
in d
esig
ning
thes
e pa
ths t
o av
oid
use
r con
fl icts
and
safe
ty
prob
lem
s. C
oord
inat
ion
with
rele
vant
Cou
nty
agen
cies
, City
of S
an R
afae
l pla
ns (i
nclu
din
g th
e N
orth
gate
Pro
men
ade)
, and
inte
rest
ed c
itize
n gr
oups
is e
ncou
rage
d.
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
1
GUI
DELI
NE
D. P
ublic
Tran
spor
tatio
n1.
Th
e C
ount
y is
com
mitt
ed to
enh
anci
ng p
ublic
and
alte
rnat
ive
mod
es o
f tra
nspo
rtatio
n to
an
d fr
om th
e C
ivic
Cen
ter.
Fut
ure
trans
porta
tion
plan
ning
effo
rts sh
ould
em
phas
ize o
ptio
ns
othe
r tha
n th
e us
e of
priv
ate
vehi
cles
.2.
Bu
s she
lters
are
enc
oura
ged
on
the
Civ
ic C
ente
r cam
pus a
nd sh
ould
be
des
igne
d sp
ecifi -
cally
for t
he si
te.
3.
Ad
diti
onal
bus
serv
ice
to th
e C
ivic
Cen
ter f
or c
ultu
ral e
vent
s (ev
enin
gs a
nd w
eeke
nds)
an
d a
cces
s to
the
libra
ry is
enc
oura
ged
. C
oord
inat
ion
with
and
supp
ort o
f the
SM
ART
pro
ject
an
d st
atio
n at
the
Civ
ic C
ente
r is e
ncou
rage
d.
BUIL
DIN
GS
AN
D A
RCHI
TEC
TURE
This
sect
ion
iden
tifi e
s iss
ues t
hat r
elat
e to
the
build
ings
and
arc
hite
ctur
e of
the
site
incl
udin
g gu
idel
ines
rela
ted
to c
onte
xt, f
unct
ion,
and
visu
al im
pact
. G
uid
elin
es in
clud
e th
e fo
llow
ing
(See
Sec
tion
4 fo
r fur
ther
det
ails)
:C
onte
xtA
. Si
ting
1.
Int
egra
te th
e bu
ildin
g w
ith th
e sit
e by
wor
king
with
the
topo
grap
hy to
cre
ate
an e
nviro
n-m
ent t
hat a
llow
s the
cam
pus t
o be
seen
as a
com
posit
e w
hole
.2.
S
ite th
e bu
ildin
g to
mai
ntai
n a
sens
e of
ope
n sp
ace
thro
ugho
ut th
e ca
mpu
s whi
le p
re-
serv
ing
as m
uch
cont
iguo
us o
utd
oor s
pace
as p
ossib
le.
3.
Whe
re p
arki
ng is
nec
essa
ry, i
t sho
uld
be
sited
with
sens
itivi
ty so
as n
ot to
obs
cure
the
sens
e of
ope
n sp
ace
or d
imin
ish th
e pr
esen
ce o
f the
bui
ldin
gs.
B. O
rient
atio
n 1.
I
nteg
rate
the
build
ing
with
the
site
by w
orki
ng w
ith th
e to
pogr
aphy
to c
reat
e an
env
iron-
men
t tha
t allo
ws t
he c
ampu
s to
be se
en a
s a c
ompo
site
who
le.
2.
Site
the
build
ing
to m
aint
ain
a se
nse
of o
pen
spac
e th
roug
hout
the
cam
pus w
hile
pre
-se
rvin
g as
muc
h co
ntig
uous
out
doo
r spa
ce a
s pos
sible
.3.
O
rient
bui
ldin
gs, w
here
ver p
ossib
le, t
o co
nfor
m to
LEE
D (L
ead
ersh
ip in
Ene
rgy
and
Env
iron-
men
tal D
esig
n) st
and
ard
s to
max
imize
eco
logi
cal d
esig
n ef
fi cie
ncy
and
min
imize
ene
rgy.
C.
Scal
e1.
S
cale
bui
ldin
gs so
as n
ot to
dim
inish
the
prom
inen
ce o
f the
Ad
min
istra
tion
Build
ing
and
Ha
ll of J
ustic
e on
the
site.
2.
With
resp
ect t
o ne
ighb
orin
g st
ruct
ures
, sca
le b
uild
ings
to a
void
larg
e-sc
ale
disc
repa
ncie
s.D.
Bui
ldin
g He
ight
1.
A n
ew b
uild
ing
shou
ld n
ot b
e so
tall a
s to
over
whe
lm th
e A
dm
inist
ratio
n Bu
ildin
g an
d H
all
of J
ustic
e. T
he h
eigh
t of a
new
bui
ldin
g (o
r por
tion
of a
bui
ldin
g) w
ill be
det
erm
ined
by
pro-
gram
mat
ic n
eed
s with
the
utm
ost c
are
and
sens
itivi
ty to
its s
urro
und
ings
.Fu
nctio
n A
. En
try O
rient
atio
n1.
W
here
pos
sible
, orie
nt m
ain
build
ing
entri
es to
war
d th
e ar
teria
l roa
dw
ays o
f the
site
to
prom
ote
circ
ulat
ion
effi c
ienc
y th
roug
hout
the
cam
pus.
2.
T
he si
ting
of th
e bu
ildin
g ta
kes p
rece
den
ce a
nd sh
ould
be
care
fully
con
sider
ed p
er th
e ‘c
onte
xt’ g
uid
elin
es b
efor
e un
der
taki
ng th
e pl
acem
ent o
f ent
ries.
3.
Mai
n bu
ildin
g en
tries
shou
ld b
e cl
early
dist
ingu
ished
from
the
rest
of t
he st
ruct
ure
to e
nsur
e re
cogn
ition
and
eas
e of
acc
ess.
4.
Org
anize
bui
ldin
g en
tries
to p
rom
ote
ped
estri
an c
ircul
atio
n be
twee
n bu
ildin
gs.
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
2
GUI
DELI
NE
B. B
uild
ing
Usag
e1.
B
uild
ings
shou
ld p
rom
ote
publ
ic a
ctiv
ity th
roug
hout
the
site.
2.
P
ublic
use
s sho
uld
be
mai
ntai
ned
on
the
grou
nd le
vel,
whe
reve
r pos
sible
, to
prom
ote
ac-
cess
ibilit
y an
d st
reet
leve
l act
ivity
.3.
L
ess a
ctiv
e fu
nctio
ns su
ch a
s ad
min
istra
tive,
ed
ucat
iona
l, no
n-pr
ofi t,
or s
imila
r use
s sho
uld
be
pla
ced
on
the
uppe
r lev
el w
here
ver p
ossib
le.
C.
Park
ing
App
roac
h1.
P
arki
ng sh
ould
be
on si
te a
nd e
asily
acc
essib
le, b
ut sh
ould
not
obs
cure
the
site’
s sen
se o
f op
en sp
ace
or d
imin
ish th
e pr
esen
ce o
f the
bui
ldin
gs.
Furth
er d
iscus
sion
on p
arki
ng lo
ts is
in
Sect
ion
5, L
and
scap
e an
d S
ite E
lem
ents
.2.
L
ong,
low
form
s are
pre
ferre
d in
acc
ord
ance
with
Fra
nk L
loyd
Wrig
ht’s
des
ign
prin
cipl
es
and
the
visu
al q
ualit
y of
the
Ad
min
istra
tion
Build
ing
and
Hal
l of J
ustic
e.3.
I
f req
uire
d, p
arki
ng st
ruct
ures
shou
ld b
e lin
ed w
ith p
rogr
am sp
ace,
den
se la
ndsc
apin
g,
or a
des
igne
d se
ries o
f ear
th b
erm
s with
pla
ntin
gs to
con
ceal
thei
r app
eara
nce
and
use
as
a no
n-oc
cupi
ed b
uild
ing.
The
feas
ibilit
y of
und
ergr
ound
par
king
stru
ctur
es, c
over
ed b
y la
nd-
scap
ed p
ark-
like
area
s or n
ew b
uild
ings
, sho
uld
be
expl
ored
.4.
P
arki
ng fi
eld
s and
par
king
stru
ctur
es sh
ould
be
des
igne
d to
be
envi
ronm
enta
lly se
nsiti
ve,
min
imizi
ng h
ard
scap
e an
d b
uilt
stru
ctur
es w
hile
max
imizi
ng o
pen
spac
e.Vi
sual
Impa
ct
A.
Form
1.
Use
few
er fo
rms t
o pr
esen
t a si
mpl
er a
nd “
quie
ter”
effe
ct to
enh
ance
the
beau
ty o
f the
su
rroun
din
gs.
2.
Lon
g, lo
w fo
rms a
re p
refe
rred
in a
ccor
dan
ce w
ith F
rank
Llo
yd W
right
’s d
esig
n pr
inci
ples
an
d th
e vi
sual
qua
lity
of th
e A
dm
inist
ratio
n Bu
ildin
g an
d H
all o
f Jus
tice.
3.
Do
not u
se fo
rms t
hat v
isual
ly c
halle
nge
the
topo
grap
hy b
ut ra
ther
allo
w th
e bu
ildin
g fo
rms t
o be
com
plem
enta
ry to
the
land
scap
e.4.
E
mph
asize
form
al c
larit
y of
the
build
ing
by m
aint
aini
ng a
sim
ple
pale
tte o
f mat
eria
ls.B.
Roo
f Tre
atm
ent
1.
Roo
f typ
es th
at a
re la
rger
, sim
pler
, visu
ally
qui
et, a
nd fo
rmal
ly c
ohes
ive
are
pref
erre
d.
2.
Avo
id ro
of ty
pes t
hat a
ppea
r sm
alle
r and
visu
ally
bus
y, a
nd m
ight
be
inte
rpre
ted
as r
esi-
den
tial in
scal
e.3.
R
oof t
ypes
shou
ld b
e d
iffer
entia
ted
from
the
exist
ing
land
mar
k bu
ildin
gs to
avo
id m
imic
ry
and
to p
rote
ct th
e hi
stor
ic in
tegr
ity o
f the
land
mar
k bu
ildin
gs.
Refe
r to
the
Secr
etar
y of
the
Inte
rior’s
Sta
ndar
ds f
or th
e Tr
eatm
ent o
f Hist
oric
Pro
perti
es.
4.
Roo
f tre
atm
ents
shou
ld b
e vi
sual
ly in
tegr
ated
into
the
over
all a
rchi
tect
ural
con
cept
.5.
I
ncor
pora
te th
e ne
ed fo
r mec
hani
cal a
nd e
lect
rical
equ
ipm
ent i
nto
the
build
ing
des
ign
to a
void
pla
cing
such
item
s ont
o th
e ro
of.
6.
Sus
tain
abilit
y iss
ues s
uch
as u
se o
f ren
ewab
le e
nerg
y an
d d
aylig
htin
g sh
ould
be
cons
id-
ered
and
inco
rpor
ated
into
the
des
ign
of th
e ro
of.
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
3
GUI
DELI
NE
C.
Wal
ls an
d O
peni
ngs
1.
Tre
at e
xter
ior w
alls
as lig
ht sc
reen
s, w
here
ver p
ossib
le, t
o ta
ke a
dva
ntag
e of
nat
ural
day
-lig
ht a
nd v
iew
s to
prov
ide
build
ing
occu
pant
s a c
onne
ctio
n be
twee
n th
e in
doo
r spa
ces a
nd
the
outd
oors
.2.
H
arm
onize
all n
eces
sary
ope
ning
s – d
oors
, pas
sage
s and
win
dow
s – w
ith g
ood
hum
an-
scal
ed p
ropo
rtion
s.3.
O
rgan
ize e
xter
ior w
all o
peni
ngs t
o ac
t sin
gly
or in
a se
ries,
typi
cally
as l
ight
scre
ens i
nste
ad
of so
lid w
alls.
4.
Ext
erio
r wal
ls sh
ould
not
mim
ic th
e A
dm
inist
ratio
n Bu
ildin
g an
d H
all o
f Jus
tice,
but
may
be
sym
path
etic
in it
s int
ent a
s a sc
reen
to m
odul
ate
day
light
. Re
fer t
o th
e Se
cret
ary
of th
e In
terio
r’s S
tand
ard
s for
the
Trea
tmen
t of H
istor
ic P
rope
rties
.5.
B
uild
ings
mus
t res
pect
any
priv
acy
issue
s with
rega
rd to
nea
rby
resid
entia
l stru
ctur
es.
6.
Sus
tain
abilit
y iss
ues s
uch
as o
ptim
izing
ene
rgy
effi c
ienc
y an
d u
se o
f day
light
ing
shou
ld b
e co
nsid
ered
and
inco
rpor
ated
into
the
des
ign
of th
e ex
terio
r env
elop
e.D.
Ext
erio
r Wal
kway
s/A
rcad
es1.
E
xter
ior w
alkw
ays a
nd a
rcad
es sh
ould
be
of g
ood
hum
an-s
cale
d p
ropo
rtion
s and
inte
-gr
ated
with
the
build
ings
.2.
I
f ext
erio
r wal
kway
s/ar
cad
es se
rve
no fu
nctio
nal a
nd p
rogr
am p
urpo
se, a
s the
Civ
ic C
en-
ter a
rcad
es d
o, d
o no
t int
egra
te th
em so
as t
o m
imic
, cop
y or
deg
rad
e th
e la
ndm
ark
stru
c-tu
re.
3.
An
arca
de
doe
s not
requ
ire a
rch
form
s, w
hich
in it
self
may
be
seen
as m
imic
king
. Re
fer t
o th
e Se
cret
ary
of th
e In
terio
r’s S
tand
ard
s for
the
Trea
tmen
t of H
istor
ic P
rope
rties
.E.
Mat
eria
ls 1.
E
limin
ate
the
com
bina
tion
of d
iffer
ent m
ater
ials
in fa
vor o
f uni
form
mat
eria
ls as
muc
h as
po
ssib
le to
em
phas
ize h
iera
rchy
and
cla
rity.
2.
Cho
ose
a sim
ple
mat
eria
l pal
ette
to e
xpre
ss b
uild
ing
cont
inui
ty.
3.
Mat
eria
ls sh
ould
con
vey
a se
nse
of su
bsta
nce
and
evo
ke a
civ
ic q
ualit
y.4.
U
se n
atur
al, n
on-re
fl ect
ive
mat
eria
ls w
here
pos
sible
to c
ompl
emen
t the
land
scap
e.5.
S
usta
inab
ility
issue
s suc
h as
recy
cled
con
tent
and
mat
eria
l orig
inat
ion
shou
ld b
e co
nsid
-er
ed in
mak
ing
mat
eria
l cho
ices
.
F. C
olor
1.
Bui
ldin
g co
lors
shou
ld n
ot c
ompe
te w
ith o
r oth
erw
ise d
imin
ish th
e vi
sual
cha
ract
er o
f the
Fr
ank
Lloyd
Wrig
ht A
dm
inist
rativ
e Bu
ildin
g an
d H
all o
f Jus
tice.
2.
Bui
ldin
g co
lors
shou
ld fo
llow
Fra
nk L
loyd
Wrig
ht’s
inte
nt o
f rel
atin
g th
e bu
ildin
g to
the
land
-sc
ape.
3.
A
void
brig
ht c
olor
s so
as n
ot to
cla
sh w
ith, c
ompe
te w
ith o
r oth
erw
ise d
imin
ish th
e ex
istin
g la
ndm
ark
stru
ctur
es.
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
4
GUI
DELI
NE
G.
Light
ing
1.
The
ove
rall f
eel o
f the
ope
n sp
ace,
as a
nat
ural
setti
ng sh
ould
be
resp
ecte
d, w
ith se
curit
y an
d w
ayfi n
din
g/or
ient
atio
n lig
htin
g gi
ven
prec
eden
ce.
Furth
er in
form
atio
n is
incl
uded
in S
ec-
tion
6, L
and
scap
e an
d S
ite E
lem
ents
.2.
B
uild
ings
shou
ld h
ave
visu
ally
rest
rain
ed a
nd e
lega
nt lig
htin
g, a
nd sh
ould
be
des
igne
d to
be
com
patib
le a
nd c
ompl
emen
tary
with
the
land
mar
k st
ruct
ures
.3.
E
xter
ior b
uild
ing
light
ing
shou
ld b
e d
esig
ned
and
shie
lded
as n
eces
sary
to a
void
off-
site
light
ing
and
nig
ht sk
y po
llutio
n.LA
NDS
CA
PE A
ND
SITE
ELE
MEN
TSTh
is se
ctio
n id
entifi
es i
ssue
s tha
t rel
ate
to th
e ov
eral
l land
scap
e an
d si
te e
lem
ents
, inc
lud
-in
g pl
antin
g an
d ir
rigat
ion,
pav
ing
and
surfa
ces,
site
furn
iture
, fen
ces a
nd sc
reen
ing,
ripa
rian
envi
ronm
ents
, par
k an
d re
crea
tion
area
s, st
reet
scap
es, p
arki
ng lo
ts, l
ight
ing,
sign
age
and
w
ayfi n
din
g. G
uid
elin
es in
clud
e th
e fo
llow
ing
(See
Sec
tion
5 fo
r mor
e fu
rther
det
ails)
:
A.
Plan
ting
and
Irrig
atio
n1.
T
he e
xistin
g O
ak tr
ees a
re to
be
augm
ente
d w
ith a
dd
ition
al O
aks w
hene
ver a
nd w
her-
ever
pos
sible
. O
aks w
ill se
rve
as th
e “s
igna
ture
tree
” fo
r thi
s lan
dsc
ape
as th
ey th
rive
on th
ese
hills
, are
long
-live
d, a
nd a
re a
ppro
pria
te to
the
site’
s cul
tura
l hist
ory.
2.
Non
-nat
ive
trees
and
shru
bs –
esp
ecia
lly th
ose
that
are
inva
sive,
uns
ight
ly, a
nd/o
r un-
heal
thy
– sh
ould
be
repl
aced
ove
r tim
e w
ith sp
ecie
s app
ropr
iate
to th
e O
ak w
ood
land
land
-sc
ape.
3.
Bot
h de
cidu
ous
and
ever
gree
n pl
antin
gs s
houl
d be
sel
ecte
d to
enh
ance
the
nativ
e O
ak
woo
dlan
d la
ndsc
ape
and
be a
ppro
pria
te in
size
and
sca
le w
ith re
spec
t to
any
adja
cent
his-
toric
stru
ctur
es.
For e
xam
ple,
new
pla
ntin
g sh
ould
not
inte
rfere
with
vie
ws t
o or
from
the
Civ
ic
Cen
ter b
uild
ings
whe
n th
ey re
ach
mat
urity
.4.
T
he p
rese
nt g
rass
y gr
ound
cov
er is
to b
e pr
eser
ved
and
aug
men
ted
with
ad
diti
onal
na-
tive
seed
ing
whe
n ne
cess
ary.
Stre
etsc
apes
Pla
ntin
g an
d Irr
igat
ion
1.
Prim
ary
stre
ets,
such
as C
ivic
Cen
ter D
rive,
Pet
er B
ehr D
rive
and
the
Ave
nue
of th
e Fl
ags,
shou
ld e
ach
have
a c
lear
and
con
siste
nt st
reet
scap
e pl
antin
g ap
proa
ch a
nd d
esig
n. P
lant
pa
lette
s, es
peci
ally
stre
et tr
ees,
shou
ld b
e d
evise
d fo
r eac
h pr
imar
y st
reet
. Fo
rmal
stre
et tr
ee
plan
ting
is en
cour
aged
whe
re a
ppro
pria
te. C
ohes
ion
and
cla
rity
in p
lant
ing
and
mat
eria
ls w
ill en
hanc
e th
e vi
sitor
s’ e
xper
ienc
e an
d im
prov
e w
ayfi n
din
g on
the
site.
Spe
cial
atte
ntio
n sh
ould
be
pai
d to
the
prot
ectio
n of
vie
w c
orrid
ors.
Whi
le u
nity
is d
esire
d, s
ome
brea
ks in
stre
et tr
ee
plan
tings
may
be
nece
ssar
y to
pre
serv
e vi
ews.
2.
Sec
ond
ary
stre
ets,
such
as J
udge
Hal
ey D
rive,
Arm
ory
Driv
e, a
nd V
era
Schu
ltz D
rive,
sh
ould
also
hav
e a
clea
r and
con
siste
nt st
reet
scap
e pl
antin
g ap
proa
ch a
nd d
esig
n. B
ecau
se
thes
e st
reet
s hav
e le
ss tr
affi c
and
impo
rtanc
e on
the
site,
the
stre
et tr
ee p
lant
ing
can
be le
ss
form
al th
an th
ose
for t
he p
rimar
y st
reet
s. H
owev
er, d
esig
ning
a p
lant
ing
pale
tte fo
r eac
h is
enco
urag
ed in
ord
er to
gui
de
futu
re im
prov
emen
ts.
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
5
GUI
DELI
NE
Build
ing
Entri
es, C
ourty
ards
and
Pat
ios
1.
As i
s cur
rent
ly th
e pr
actic
e, h
ighl
y or
nam
enta
l pla
ntin
gs a
re a
ppro
pria
te fo
r the
bui
ldin
g-re
late
d la
ndsc
apes
of t
he M
arin
Cou
nty
Civ
ic C
ente
r bui
ldin
gs in
clud
ing
inte
rior c
ourty
ard
s su
ch a
s the
pat
io a
dja
cent
to th
e ca
fete
ria a
nd th
e fo
rmer
exe
rcise
cou
rtyar
d o
f the
orig
inal
ja
il. Th
ese
land
scap
es s
houl
d re
fere
nce
Wrig
ht’s
hist
oric
pla
ns w
hene
ver p
ossib
le a
nd a
ppro
-pr
iate
and
sho
uld
incl
ude
a ba
lanc
e of
dec
iduo
us a
nd e
verg
reen
pla
nts.
Whe
re th
e ex
terio
r of
the
build
ing
mee
ts th
e na
tura
l gro
und
pla
ne, p
lant
ings
shou
ld b
e m
atur
e an
d a
ppea
r to
be
part
of th
e na
tura
l land
scap
e.2.
T
he e
ntry
land
scap
es o
f the
Vet
eran
’s M
emor
ial A
udito
rium
and
the
Exhi
bit H
all s
houl
d
be e
nhan
ced
and
impr
oved
with
ad
diti
onal
app
ropr
iate
ly sc
aled
pla
ntin
gs.
This
wou
ld a
lso
enha
nce
way
fi nd
ing
for v
isito
rs to
thes
e ve
nues
.3.
P
lant
ing
adja
cent
to a
ny fu
ture
dev
elop
men
t - a
t ent
ries,
in c
ourty
ard
s, et
c. -
shou
ld b
e co
ntem
pora
ry in
nat
ure
and
app
ropr
iate
in sc
ale,
col
or, a
nd te
xtur
e fo
r the
new
arc
hite
ctur
e.
It sh
ould
not
atte
mpt
to m
atch
or m
imic
exis
ting
plan
tings
on
site.
Park
Are
as1.
T
he ir
rigat
ion
in th
e La
goon
Par
k ar
ea sh
ould
be
upgr
aded
for e
ffi ci
ency
and
eas
e of
m
aint
enan
ce.
2.
Per
imet
er tr
ee p
lant
ing
to d
efi n
e th
e ed
ge o
f the
site
and
to sc
reen
the
park
from
ad
ja-
cent
nei
ghbo
rhoo
ds s
houl
d b
e m
aint
aine
d a
nd e
nhan
ced
. Re
plac
emen
t tre
es in
the
law
n ar
eas m
ust b
e ab
le to
tole
rate
law
n w
ater
ing
and
shou
ld p
rovi
de
as m
uch
shad
e as
pos
sible
. Tr
ees a
long
the
site’
s per
imet
er, a
way
from
the
law
n ar
ea, m
ay b
e O
aks o
r oth
er n
ativ
es th
at
do
not r
equi
re o
r tol
erat
e irr
igat
ion
or u
nder
stor
y pl
antin
g. A
bal
ance
of d
ecid
uous
and
eve
r-gr
een
spec
ies
is de
sired
.B.
Pav
ing
and
Surfa
ces
Prim
ary
Pede
stria
n C
onne
ctio
ns1.
E
xistin
g sid
ewal
ks sh
ould
be
mad
e as
con
siste
nt a
s pos
sible
in te
rms o
f des
ign,
mat
eria
l, co
lor a
nd fi
nish
.2.
T
he p
refe
rred
mat
eria
l for
prim
ary
ped
estri
an ro
utes
is st
and
ard
gra
y co
ncre
te w
ith a
co
nsist
ent m
ediu
m b
room
fi ni
sh.
Whe
re th
e ro
ute
is d
irect
ly a
dja
cent
to h
istor
ic st
ruct
ures
and
“T
alie
sin R
ed”
pain
t col
or h
as tr
aditi
onal
ly b
een
used
on
the
pavi
ng, i
t is r
ecom
men
ded
that
in
tegr
ally
col
ored
or s
tain
ed c
oncr
ete
be u
sed
in lie
u of
surfa
ce p
aint
.Se
cond
ary
Pede
stria
n C
onne
ctio
ns1.
C
ount
y-sa
nctio
ned
ped
estri
an p
aths
shou
ld b
e fo
rmal
ized
whe
re d
oing
so w
ould
not
con
-fl i
ct w
ith a
dja
cent
use
s. T
his w
ill in
crea
se a
cces
s to
vario
us si
te a
men
ities
.2.
F
or in
form
al p
athw
ays w
here
AD
A c
ompl
ianc
e is
not r
equi
red
, the
pre
ferre
d su
rface
m
ater
ial is
dec
ompo
sed
gra
nite
(with
or w
ithou
t sta
biliz
er) o
r sm
all d
iam
eter
gra
nula
r agg
re-
gate
. W
here
con
diti
ons r
equi
re a
dd
ition
al st
abilit
y an
d d
urab
ility,
con
cret
e or
asp
halt
may
be
appr
opria
te.
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
6
GUI
DELI
NE
Stre
et P
avin
g an
d Su
rface
s1.
A
spha
lt pa
ving
with
con
cret
e cu
rbs f
or p
rimar
y an
d se
cond
ary
stre
ets i
s pre
ferre
d.
2.
In p
artic
ular
, the
Ave
nue
of th
e Fl
ags s
houl
d b
e re
pave
d w
ith a
spha
lt. (
It is
und
erst
ood
th
at th
e M
arin
Cen
ter M
aste
r Pla
n w
ill ad
dre
ss fu
rther
des
ign
issue
s of t
he A
venu
e of
the
Flag
s.
Whi
le c
erta
in d
etai
ls on
the
Ave
nue
of th
e Fl
ags m
ay c
hang
e as
a re
sult
of th
e M
aste
r Pla
n, it
is
des
ired
that
the
over
all lo
ok a
nd fe
el o
f the
stre
et b
e co
nsist
ent w
ith th
at o
f oth
er st
reet
s on
the
Civ
ic C
ente
r cam
pus.)
Spec
ial L
ands
cape
Fea
ture
s1.
P
avin
g fo
r out
doo
r cou
rtyar
ds a
dja
cent
to h
istor
ic st
ruct
ures
shou
ld b
e hi
stor
ical
ly a
ppro
-pr
iate
and
of t
he h
ighe
st q
ualit
y av
aila
ble.
Pai
nted
or e
xpos
ed a
ggre
gate
con
cret
e su
rface
s sh
ould
be
repl
aced
ove
r tim
e w
ith in
tegr
ally
col
ored
con
cret
e. E
xam
ples
incl
ude
the
outd
oor
area
ad
jace
nt to
the
cafe
teria
and
the
outd
oor a
rea
at th
e so
uth
end
of t
he A
dm
inist
ratio
n Bu
ildin
g.2.
P
avin
g an
d su
rface
s of n
ew sp
ecia
l land
scap
e fe
atur
es a
dja
cent
to n
ew a
rchi
tect
ure
shou
ld m
atch
in sp
irit w
ith th
e ne
w b
uild
ing
and
be
site
appr
opria
te.
Pavi
ng m
ater
ials
shou
ld
be g
ener
ally
neu
tral a
nd o
f the
hig
hest
qua
lity.
Pav
ing
and
surfa
ces i
n th
ese
case
s sho
uld
su
ppor
t a u
nifi e
d v
iew
of t
he o
vera
ll cam
pus w
hene
ver p
ossib
le, b
ut m
ay b
e co
ntem
pora
ry
mat
eria
ls an
d tr
eatm
ents
as i
s app
ropr
iate
for n
ew d
evel
opm
ent.
3.
New
bui
ldin
gs o
n th
e ca
mpu
s with
rela
ted
out
doo
r are
as su
ch a
s cou
rtyar
ds o
r pat
ios
shou
ld u
se th
e C
ivic
Cen
ter’s
stan
dar
d fu
rnish
ings
whe
neve
r pos
sible
. W
hen
this
appr
oach
is
not a
ppro
pria
te, t
he n
ew b
uild
ing
shou
ld e
stab
lish
site
furn
iture
stan
dar
ds s
peci
fi c to
the
ar-
chite
ctur
e. T
hese
pie
ces s
houl
d a
lso b
e re
spec
tful o
f the
ove
rall s
ettin
g an
d c
hara
cter
of t
he
cam
pus.
C.
Site
Fur
nitu
re
Park
Are
as a
nd L
agoo
n Pe
rimet
er1.
I
t is r
ecom
men
ded
that
all s
ite fu
rnitu
re in
Lag
oon
Park
and
the
land
scap
e su
rroun
d-
ing
the
Lago
on b
e re
plac
ed w
ith h
igh
qual
ity, e
asy
to m
aint
ain,
dur
able
pie
ces c
onsis
tent
th
roug
hout
the
cam
pus.
The
se p
iece
s sho
uld
bec
ome
cam
pus s
tand
ard
s for
par
k-lik
e se
t-tin
gs.
2.
Ben
ches
, tab
les,
trash
rece
ptac
les a
nd a
ny o
ther
des
ired
site
furn
iture
shou
ld b
e of
sim
ilar
des
ign,
col
or, a
nd m
ater
ials.
Ple
ase
see
reco
mm
end
atio
ns b
elow
.3.
T
he d
esig
n of
the
furn
iture
shou
ld b
e sit
e ap
prop
riate
and
con
sider
ate
of th
e hi
stor
ic
build
ings
on
the
site.
The
use
of t
he “
Talie
sin R
ed”
as a
n ac
cent
col
or sh
ould
be
cons
ider
ed
dep
end
ing
on th
e fu
rnitu
re’s
loca
tion
but i
s not
requ
ired
.
Cou
rtyar
ds &
Pat
ios
1.
Out
doo
r fur
nitu
re fo
r spa
ces r
elat
ed to
the
Ad
min
istra
tion
Build
ing
and
the
Hall o
f Jus
tice
shou
ld b
e co
nsist
ent.
Fur
ther
stud
y on
hist
oric
info
rmat
ion
rega
rdin
g Fr
ank
Lloyd
Wrig
ht’s
orig
i-na
l inte
nt c
ould
be
don
e in
ord
er to
cho
ose
an a
ppro
pria
te st
and
ard
for t
hese
spac
es.
Oth
er-
wise
, the
cam
pus-
wid
e st
and
ard
site
furn
iture
shou
ld b
e us
ed.
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
7
GUI
DELI
NE
D. F
ence
s an
d Sc
reen
ing
1.
It
is pr
efer
red
that
per
man
ent c
hain
link
fenc
ing
be u
sed
as l
ittle
as p
ossib
le in
the
publ
ic
park
and
recr
eatio
n ar
eas o
f the
cam
pus.
Whe
n it
is ne
cess
ary,
bla
ck v
inyl
coa
ted
fenc
es a
re
pref
erre
d fo
r dur
abilit
y an
d a
esth
etic
s.2.
A
ll fen
ces s
houl
d b
e pl
ante
d w
ith sh
rubs
and
vin
es w
here
ver p
ossib
le.
3.
Pla
ntin
g ba
rrier
s inc
lud
ing
trees
may
be
appr
opria
te w
here
Civ
ic C
ente
r pro
perty
abu
ts
resid
entia
l nei
ghbo
rhoo
ds t
o pr
ovid
e a
visu
al sc
reen
(for
exa
mpl
e, a
s cur
rent
ly e
xists
alo
ng
Mad
ison
Ave
.). A
ny p
ossib
le fu
ture
dev
elop
men
t on
the
cam
pus s
houl
d c
onsid
er a
nd a
dd
ress
th
ese
issue
s.E.
Rip
aria
n En
viro
nmen
ts:
The
Cre
ek,
Wet
land
s an
d La
goon
1.
Enh
ance
, pro
tect
and
rest
ore
ripar
ian
habi
tats
on
the
Civ
ic C
ente
r site
to th
e hi
ghes
t d
egre
e po
ssib
le.
2.
Pro
vid
e as
man
y in
terp
retiv
e an
d e
duc
atio
nal o
ppor
tuni
ties f
or M
arin
resid
ents
in th
ese
ripar
ian
area
s as i
s fea
sible
.3.
I
mpr
ove
wat
er q
ualit
y of
the
lago
on; e
xplo
re su
stai
nabl
e so
lutio
ns fo
r wat
er fi
ltrat
ion.
F. P
ark
and
Recr
eatio
n A
reas
1.
The
pre
ferre
d a
ppro
ach
is to
com
plet
e th
e lo
op a
roun
d th
e en
tire
lago
on w
ith p
arkl
and
as
orig
inal
ly e
nvisi
oned
. Th
e pa
th a
long
the
lago
on sh
ould
be
cons
ider
ed a
prim
ary
ped
es-
trian
rout
e an
d e
nhan
ced
acc
ord
ingl
y. S
ite fu
rnish
ings
shou
ld b
e up
grad
ed p
er th
e gu
ide-
lines
abo
ve.
Light
ing
shou
ld b
e im
prov
ed fo
r saf
ety
and
nig
httim
e am
bian
ce.
Sign
age
and
w
ayfi n
din
g sh
ould
be
clea
r and
enc
oura
ge v
isito
rs.
2.
New
par
k ar
eas m
ay b
e d
evel
oped
on-
site
in th
e fu
ture
. Su
ch d
evel
opm
ent s
houl
d c
on-
nect
seam
less
ly w
ith th
e ex
istin
g pa
rk la
nds p
er W
right
’s o
rigin
al d
esig
n. W
hile
the
new
par
k ar
eas m
ay d
iffer
in c
hara
cter
from
Lag
oon
Park
, it i
s des
ired
that
new
par
ks h
ave
adeq
uate
tra
nsiti
onal
spac
e be
twee
n la
ndsc
ape
type
s in
ord
er to
enh
ance
the
cohe
sive
qual
ity o
f the
ca
mpu
s. F
or e
xam
ple,
the
open
spac
e in
the
north
east
cor
ner o
f the
site
may
be
enha
nced
w
ith im
prov
ed a
cces
s to
the
publ
ic.
The
acce
ss p
oint
s to
this
mor
e na
tura
l land
scap
e sh
ould
be
cle
arly
con
nect
ed to
the
exist
ing
park
are
as, b
ut th
ey d
o no
t nee
d to
mat
ch th
e pa
stor
al
des
ign
char
acte
r of L
agoo
n Pa
rk.
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
8
GUI
DELI
NE
G.
Stre
etsc
apes
1.
Con
cret
e sid
ewal
ks a
dja
cent
to p
rimar
y an
d se
cond
ary
stre
ets a
re p
refe
rred
. In
par
-tic
ular
, Civ
ic C
ente
r Driv
e be
twee
n A
rmor
y D
rive
and
the
Ave
nue
of th
e Fl
ags s
houl
d h
ave
a co
ncre
te si
dew
alk
alon
g its
eas
tern
ed
ge o
f no
less
than
6’ i
n w
idth
. Se
e se
ctio
n 5.
3 on
pav
-in
g ab
ove
for f
urth
er d
etai
ls.2.
S
treet
s sho
uld
hav
e ad
equa
te n
ight
light
ing
for v
ehic
les a
nd p
edes
trian
s to
enha
nce
safe
-ty
and
in o
rder
to im
prov
e th
e sit
e’s a
cces
sibilit
y d
urin
g ev
enin
g ev
ents
. C
ivic
Cen
ter D
rive,
th
e A
venu
e of
the
Flag
s and
Arm
ory
Driv
e ar
e of
par
ticul
ar c
once
rn.
Light
ing
fi xtu
res a
nd
des
ign
for s
treet
s sho
uld
be
cons
isten
t site
-wid
e. S
ee s
ectio
n 5.
10 o
n lig
htin
g fo
r fur
ther
det
ails.
3.
Site
sign
age
shou
ld b
e ea
sy to
see
and
und
erst
and
in o
rder
to e
nhan
ce w
ayfi n
din
g an
d
impr
ove
acce
ssib
ility.
See
sect
ion
5.11
on
signa
ge a
nd w
ayfi n
din
g be
low
for f
urth
er d
etai
ls.4.
A
ll int
erse
ctio
ns sh
ould
be
appr
opria
tely
strip
ed fo
r ped
estri
an c
ross
ings
; cur
b-cu
ts a
nd
othe
r app
ropr
iate
mea
sure
s sho
uld
be
take
n to
ens
ure
disa
bled
acc
ess.
5.
The
Cou
nty
shou
ld c
onsid
er st
riped
bik
e la
nes o
n pr
imar
y st
reet
s, pa
rticu
larly
Civ
ic C
ente
r D
rive,
in o
rder
to e
ncou
rage
cyc
ling.
See
sect
ion
3.3
for f
urth
er in
form
atio
n on
bic
ycle
circ
ula-
tion.
6.
Stre
et tr
ees a
re e
ncou
rage
d a
s the
y d
efi n
e ed
ges a
nd b
eaut
ify th
e sit
e. H
ighl
ight
ing
the
sam
e tre
e on
a si
ngle
stre
et is
also
pre
ferre
d in
ord
er to
ad
d o
rder
and
cla
rity
to th
e ca
mpu
s. Sp
ecia
l atte
ntio
n sh
ould
be
paid
, how
ever
, not
to o
bstru
ct v
iew
cor
ridor
s with
new
stre
et tr
ee
plan
ting.
See
sect
ion
5.2
on p
lant
ing
for f
urth
er d
etai
ls.
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
9
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
10
GUI
DELI
NE
H. P
arki
ng L
ots
1.
All e
xistin
g pa
rkin
g lo
ts o
n th
e C
ivic
Cen
ter c
ampu
s sho
uld
be
red
esig
ned
to in
corp
orat
e bi
osw
ales
to c
aptu
re a
nd tr
eat r
un-o
ff on
-site
whe
reve
r pos
sible
. Th
ese
swal
es sh
ould
run
in
betw
een
row
s of p
arke
d c
ars a
nd b
e pl
ante
d w
ith sp
ecie
s spe
cifi c
ally
cho
sen
for t
heir
wat
er
fi ltra
tion
abilit
ies.
2.
Exist
ing
park
ing
lots
shou
ld a
lso b
e d
ense
ly p
lant
ed w
ith sh
ade
trees
. So
il fer
tility
and
irrig
a-tio
n st
rate
gies
mus
t be
dev
ised
in o
rder
to p
rom
ote
sust
aine
d h
ealth
and
gro
wth
of t
rees
in
such
har
sh e
nviro
nmen
ts.
3.
The
terra
ced
par
king
are
as w
est o
f the
Ad
min
istra
tion
Build
ing
shou
ld b
e im
prov
ed b
y pl
antin
g vi
nes t
o co
ver t
he la
rge
expa
nses
of t
he c
oncr
ete
wal
ls.4.
P
lant
ing
for l
ots t
hat m
ay h
ost t
he fa
rmer
’s m
arke
t sho
uld
be
cont
rolle
d so
that
the
mar
ket
wou
ld n
ot b
e ne
gativ
ely
impa
cted
.5.
W
here
pos
sible
, exis
ting
lots
shou
ld b
e re
pave
d w
ith p
erm
eabl
e su
rface
s to
red
uce
stor
mw
ater
run-
off.
6.
Par
king
lot l
ight
ing
shou
ld b
e en
hanc
ed fo
r saf
ety.
See
sect
ion
5.10
on
light
ing
for f
urth
er
det
ails.
7. A
ll ne
w lo
ts o
n th
e sit
e sh
ould
stri
ctly
adh
ere
to th
e su
stai
nabl
e de
sign
prac
tices
list
ed
abov
e. T
he fe
asib
ility
of u
nder
grou
nd p
arki
ng, c
over
ed b
y la
ndsc
aped
par
k-lik
e ar
eas
or
new
bui
ldin
gs, s
houl
d be
exp
lore
d.8.
The
feas
ibili
ty o
f ins
talli
ng s
olar
pan
els
in s
hade
stru
ctur
es o
ver p
arki
ng a
reas
sho
uld
be
expl
ored
.I.
Lig
htin
g
Func
tiona
l Crit
eria
1.
Pro
vid
e ad
equa
te lig
ht fo
r saf
ety
and
secu
rity.
Tw
o m
ain
light
ing
fact
ors t
hat r
einf
orce
a
sens
e of
safe
ty a
nd se
curit
y ar
e ad
equa
te h
orizo
ntal
illum
inan
ce a
t the
gro
und
for n
avig
atio
n of
pat
hway
s, an
d a
deq
uate
ver
tical
lum
inan
ce a
t sur
face
s suc
h as
bui
ldin
g fo
rms,
build
ing
entri
es, p
eopl
e, si
gnag
e an
d p
lant
ing
to p
rovi
de
visu
al c
onte
xt.
2.
Cre
ate
a st
rong
nig
httim
e id
entit
y. E
stab
lish
a hi
erar
chy
of ill
umin
ated
site
feat
ures
, suc
h as
the
spire
on
the
Ad
min
istra
tion
Build
ing,
whe
re b
right
ness
, col
or, a
nd c
over
age
can
ind
i-ca
te d
egre
e of
sign
ifi ca
nce
and
focu
s.3.
U
se lig
htin
g to
pro
mot
e w
ayfi n
din
g. I
llum
inat
e ga
tew
ays a
nd v
ertic
al su
rface
s to
prov
ide
cont
ext f
or p
edes
trian
s and
driv
ers.
Inte
grat
e lig
htin
g sy
stem
s with
sign
age.
4.
Ad
dre
ss m
aint
enan
ce is
sues
such
as s
tand
ard
izing
lam
p ty
pes a
s muc
h as
pos
sible
, max
i-m
izing
acc
essib
ility
of fi
xtur
es fo
r eas
ier r
epai
r and
re-la
mpi
ng, o
ptim
izing
lam
p lif
e, c
ost,
and
en
ergy
effi
cien
cy, a
nd m
inim
izing
opp
ortu
nitie
s for
van
dal
ism.
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
11
GUI
DELI
NE
Desig
n C
riter
ia a
nd A
ppro
ach
1.
The
scal
e, fo
rm, c
olor
, and
spac
ing
of lig
htin
g el
emen
ts sh
ould
be
cohe
sive
cam
pus-
wid
e an
d c
ompa
tible
with
the
hist
oric
des
ign
prec
eden
ts a
nd w
ith th
e sim
ple,
and
tim
eles
s des
igns
of
oth
er si
te e
lem
ents
such
as p
lant
ing,
arc
hite
ctur
e, a
nd si
gnag
e.2.
S
ite lig
htin
g fi x
ture
s loc
ated
nea
r hist
oric
stru
ctur
es m
ust b
e re
spec
tful o
f the
hist
oric
styl
ed
des
igns
and
site
light
ing
fi xtu
res u
sed
else
whe
re sh
ould
be
simpl
e, ti
mel
ess,
and
coh
esiv
e th
roug
hout
pos
sible
futu
re d
evel
opm
ent a
reas
. Thi
s con
cept
of a
“fa
mily
of fi
xtu
res”
shou
ld b
e ap
plie
d to
the
maj
or o
pen
spac
es.
3.
The
col
or o
f lig
ht th
roug
hout
the
Mar
in C
ount
y C
ivic
Cen
ter s
houl
d b
e co
nsist
ent w
ith
only
slig
ht v
aria
tions
in th
e co
lor o
f the
light
sour
ce, w
hich
may
be
cons
ider
ed a
ppro
pria
te fo
r d
istin
guish
ing
adja
cent
are
as o
f diff
eren
t fun
ctio
ns.
To m
aint
ain
this
hist
oric
col
or v
aria
tion,
w
e re
com
men
d u
sing
war
m c
olor
ed 3
000
Kelv
in c
ompa
ct fl
uore
scen
t lig
ht so
urce
s. A
ll lig
ht
sour
ces s
houl
d h
ave
the
high
est c
olor
rend
erin
g pr
oper
ties a
vaila
ble
to e
nhan
ce th
e qu
ality
of
the
nigh
ttim
e ex
perie
nce.
4.
The
Are
a Br
ight
ness
Lig
htin
g D
iagr
am c
onta
ined
in th
is se
ctio
n su
mm
arize
s the
ove
rall d
e-sig
n ap
proa
ch.
Each
pos
sible
futu
re p
roje
ct sh
ould
pro
vid
e sm
ooth
tran
sitio
ns b
etw
een
zone
s of
diff
eren
t lig
ht in
tens
ities
. Zo
nes o
f var
ying
leve
ls of
brig
htne
ss b
ased
on
the
dia
gram
shou
ld
be im
plem
ente
d.
The
light
ing
solu
tion
shou
ld p
rovi
de
an a
ppro
pria
te b
alan
ce o
f lig
ht a
nd
leve
l of c
omfo
rt, w
ith th
e ac
tual
qua
ntity
of l
ight
(i.e
. num
ber o
f foo
tcan
dle
s) a
s a g
uid
elin
e.
Spec
ial a
ttent
ion
shou
ld b
e pa
id to
pro
vid
ing
a vi
sual
ly c
omfo
rtabl
e tra
nsiti
on fr
om o
ne a
rea
to th
e ne
xt.
5.
To
faci
litat
e se
ason
al lig
htin
g an
d sp
ecia
l eve
nts,
the
infra
stru
ctur
e of
eac
h po
ssib
le fu
ture
d
evel
opm
ent s
houl
d in
clud
e po
wer
for t
he in
stal
latio
n of
tem
pora
ry lig
htin
g.6.
T
he e
xistin
g hi
stor
ic h
at-s
hape
d fi
xtur
es, p
lace
d 6
0’ o
n ce
nter
, do
not p
rovi
de
a un
iform
co
vera
ge o
f the
pat
hway
s, w
here
ver
tical
illum
inat
ion
on p
edes
trian
s fal
ls of
f in
betw
een
light
fi x
ture
s. It
is re
com
men
ded
that
a h
ighe
r lig
ht p
ole
with
the
sam
e fi x
ture
hea
d st
yle
and
pro
-fi l
e be
con
sider
ed fo
r gre
ater
ver
tical
and
hor
izont
al ill
umin
atio
n co
vera
ge a
long
ped
estri
an
path
way
s.7.
A re
cons
truct
ed c
usto
m h
ybrid
fi xt
ure
des
ign
that
repr
esen
ts th
e or
igin
al h
istor
ic fi
xtur
e co
ncep
t and
ove
rall p
rofi l
e ye
t with
mod
erni
zed
fi xt
ure
optic
s and
lam
p te
chno
logy
is re
com
-m
end
ed.
The
use
of c
eram
ic m
etal
hal
ide
tech
nolo
gy is
pre
ferre
d fo
r roa
dw
ay a
nd st
reet
lig
htin
g.
J. S
igna
ge a
nd W
ayfi n
ding
Gat
eway
Fea
ture
1.
The
blu
e ro
of a
nd g
old
-leaf
ed sp
ire a
re so
dist
inct
ive
and
wel
l-kno
wn
that
gat
eway
en-
hanc
emen
ts a
re n
ot fu
nctio
nally
nec
essa
ry a
t the
inte
rsec
tions
of C
ivic
Cen
ter D
rive
with
San
Pe
dro
Roa
d a
nd th
e A
venu
e of
the
Flag
s.2.
G
atew
ay fe
atur
es w
ould
nev
erth
eles
s ad
d ri
chne
ss to
the
site
and
“an
noun
ce”
the
de-
sign
char
acte
r of t
he la
ndsc
ape
impr
ovem
ents
and
sign
age
that
visi
tors
will
enco
unte
r.3.
G
atew
ay fe
atur
es w
ould
likel
y co
mbi
ne si
gnag
e w
ith la
ndsc
ape
enha
ncem
ents
.
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
12
GUI
DELI
NE
Prim
ary
Vehi
cle
Dire
ctio
nal
1.
The
se sh
ould
be
sized
for r
ead
abilit
y at
the
nom
inal
25
mph
spee
d lim
it al
ong
Civ
ic C
en-
ter D
rive.
The
y w
ould
typi
cally
be
plac
ed a
t the
inte
rsec
tions
with
all p
ublic
road
way
s, an
d, i
n so
me
inst
ance
s, at
ad
vanc
e lo
catio
ns a
s wel
l.2.
U
pgra
des
to e
xistin
g d
irect
iona
l sig
ns to
the
Mar
in V
eter
ans’
Aud
itoriu
m a
nd E
xhib
it Ha
ll co
mpl
ex w
ould
ess
entia
lly re
plic
ate
exist
ing
sign
copy
.3.
N
ew d
irect
iona
l sig
ns a
t the
road
way
s to
the
Ad
min
istra
tion
Build
ing
and
Hal
l of J
ustic
e “o
verp
asse
s” w
ould
iden
tify
each
bui
ldin
g en
tranc
e an
d th
e pr
inci
pal p
ublic
des
tinat
ions
it
serv
es m
ost d
irect
ly.
Seco
ndar
y Ve
hicl
e Di
rect
iona
l1.
S
econ
dar
y d
irect
iona
ls ar
e us
ed w
here
slow
er sp
eed
s per
mit
read
abilit
y of
smal
ler c
opy.
G
ener
ally
, the
y al
so d
ispla
y fe
wer
des
tinat
ions
.2.
E
xistin
g se
cond
ary
signs
at t
he M
arin
Vet
eran
s’ M
emor
ial A
udito
rium
and
Exh
ibit
Hall c
om-
plex
shou
ld b
e up
grad
ed.
3.
New
sign
s sho
uld
be
plac
ed a
long
Pet
er B
ehr D
rive,
Jud
ge H
aley
Driv
e an
d V
era
Schu
ltz
Driv
e to
dire
ct v
isito
rs to
the
park
ing
zone
nea
rest
the
build
ing
entra
nce
that
lead
s mos
t di-
rect
ly to
thei
r des
tinat
ion.
Pede
stria
n Di
rect
iona
ls1.
P
edes
trian
-sca
le w
ayfi n
din
g sh
ould
be
prov
ided
alo
ng th
e pa
ths o
f tra
vel f
rom
the
Ad
min
-ist
ratio
n Bu
ildin
g an
d H
all o
f Jus
tice
and
eas
t par
king
lot t
o ap
prop
riate
bui
ldin
g en
tries
, and
th
roug
hout
the
Mar
in C
ente
r.
Pede
stria
n O
rient
atio
n M
aps
1.
A fe
w st
rate
gica
lly p
lace
d m
aps w
ill gi
ve m
any
visit
ors a
hel
pful
ove
rvie
w o
f the
site
. (S
ome
peop
le c
anno
t mak
e th
e as
soci
atio
n be
twee
n a
scal
ed re
pres
enta
tion
and
the
phys
i-ca
l wor
ld. W
ayfi n
din
g sh
ould
ther
efor
e no
t rel
y ex
clus
ivel
y on
orie
ntat
ion
map
s.)2.
P
oten
tial m
ap lo
catio
ns in
clud
e th
e tra
nsit
stop
on
Civ
ic C
ente
r Driv
e, th
e A
dm
inist
ratio
n Bu
ildin
g an
d H
all o
f Jus
tice
park
ing
lots
, and
key
ped
estri
an n
odes
at t
he M
arin
Cen
ter.
Thes
e m
aps s
houl
d in
clud
e on
ly th
e d
estin
atio
ns a
nd in
form
atio
n ne
cess
ary
to g
uid
e m
ost v
isito
rs.
The
mor
e co
mpl
ex a
map
, the
mor
e in
timid
atin
g an
d c
onfu
sing
it ca
n be
.
Build
ing
Entry
Iden
tifi c
atio
n1.
I
t will
be c
ritic
al to
“la
bel”
eac
h pu
blic
ent
ranc
e to
the
Ad
min
istra
tion
Build
ing
and
Hal
l of
Just
ice
cons
picu
ously
(i.e
. - A
/B/C
or N
orth
/Cen
tral/S
outh
). Ea
ch la
bel s
houl
d b
e au
gmen
ted
by
a d
irect
ory
of p
rimar
y pu
blic
des
tinat
ions
(Cou
rts, J
ury
Ass
embl
y Ro
om, T
raffi
c C
itatio
ns e
t al
).2.
P
ublic
tran
sit sy
stem
s typ
ical
ly h
ave
thei
r ow
n, d
istin
ct si
gnag
e an
d g
raph
ics,
toge
ther
w
ith st
and
ard
s for
thei
r use
, and
this
may
be
the
case
for S
MA
RT. H
owev
er, b
ecau
se o
f the
C
ivic
Cen
ter’s
uni
que,
hist
oric
cha
ract
er, S
MA
RT si
gnag
e sh
ould
, if p
ossib
le, h
ave
site-
spec
ifi c
stru
ctur
al su
ppor
ts a
nd/o
r “fra
min
g.”
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
GUI
DELI
NE
Type
face
1.
The
type
face
Fut
ura
is c
urre
ntly
use
d th
roug
hout
the
Ad
min
istra
tion
Build
ing,
Hal
l of
Just
ice
and
Mar
in V
eter
ans’
Mem
oria
l Aud
itoriu
m. F
utur
a’s c
ircul
ar (o
r app
aren
tly c
ircul
ar)
lette
rform
s are
uni
quel
y ap
prop
riate
to c
ompl
emen
t Wrig
ht’s
use
of c
ircle
s and
circ
ular
arc
s as
des
ign
mot
ifs. F
utur
a is
ther
efor
e th
e re
com
men
ded
type
face
for f
utur
e sig
nage
.C
opy
Size
1.
The
cap
hei
ght (
the
size
of a
cap
ital le
tter m
easu
red
ver
tical
ly) f
or p
rimar
y d
irect
iona
l sig
ns
alon
g C
ivic
Cen
ter D
rive
shou
ld b
e 4”
to 4
.5.”
2.
The
cap
hei
ght f
or d
irect
iona
l sig
ns a
long
seco
ndar
y ro
adw
ays a
nd e
ntry
driv
es sh
ould
be
2.5
” to
3.5
”.
Beca
use
Futu
ra h
as u
nusu
ally
ext
end
ed (w
ide)
lette
rform
s, sig
ns w
ill be
cor
-re
spon
din
gly
wid
er to
acc
omm
odat
e th
e ty
pefa
ce w
ithou
t red
ucin
g ca
p he
ight
s or d
igita
lly
cond
ensin
g th
e co
py.
Am
ount
of C
opy
1.
Whe
reve
r pos
sible
, dire
ctio
nal s
igns
shou
ld h
ave
a m
axim
um o
f thr
ee lis
ted
des
tinat
ions
. D
river
s don
’t ty
pica
lly h
ave
time
to p
roce
ss m
ore
info
rmat
ion
than
that
, and
the
mor
e d
estin
a-tio
ns d
ispla
yed
on
a sig
n, th
e le
ss a
ttent
ion
each
will
get.
Ove
rall
Size
1.
Size
as n
eces
sary
to d
ispla
y th
e co
py a
t the
ind
icat
ed c
ap h
eigh
t and
to p
rovi
de
an a
d-
equa
te b
ord
er z
one
all a
roun
d.
2.
Sig
n pa
nels
shou
ld g
ener
ally
be
wid
er th
an th
ey a
re h
igh
to m
inim
ize m
ultil
ine
mes
sage
s. 4’
6” is
an
optim
al o
vera
ll hei
ght.
The
low
est c
opy
on a
sign
pan
el sh
ould
be
1’0”
to 1
’6”
abov
e fi n
ish g
rad
e to
kee
p th
e co
py w
ithin
a d
river
’s lin
e of
visi
on a
nd to
pre
vent
bei
ng b
lock
ed b
y gr
ound
cov
er.
Cha
ngea
bilit
y1.
M
ost d
estin
atio
ns a
t the
Mar
in C
ount
y C
ivic
Cen
ter c
ampu
s are
unl
ikel
y to
cha
nge
over
tim
e. W
here
cha
nge
is a
poss
ibilit
y, th
e us
e of
mod
ular
dire
ctio
nal s
igns
whi
ch si
mpl
ify c
opy
upd
ates
shou
ld b
e co
nsid
ered
.
Plac
emen
t1.
V
ehic
ular
dire
ctio
nals
shou
ld b
e pl
aced
as c
lose
to th
e st
reet
as p
ossib
le w
ithou
t disr
upt-
ing
sight
lines
or i
nter
ferin
g w
ith u
nder
grou
nd u
tiliti
es.
2.
Pla
cem
ent s
houl
d a
lso ta
ke in
to a
ccou
nt a
dja
cent
tree
s, sh
rubs
and
gro
und
cov
er.
3.
Irr
igat
ion
head
s sho
uld
be
dire
cted
aw
ay fr
om si
gn p
anel
s to
avoi
d th
e bu
ildup
of a
lka-
loid
s fro
m re
peat
ed sp
rayi
ng.
Light
ing
1.
All p
rinci
pal w
ayfi n
din
g fe
atur
es sh
ould
hav
e d
edic
ated
ext
erna
l illu
min
atio
n un
less
am
bi-
ent l
ight
leve
ls ar
e hi
gh e
noug
h to
pro
vid
e th
e ne
cess
ary
visib
ility.
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
13
MA
RIN
CIV
IC C
ENTE
R M
AST
ER D
ESIG
N G
UIDE
LIN
ES S
UMM
ARY
TABL
E
Plea
se N
ote:
Thi
s tab
le o
nly
show
s gui
del
ines
. Pl
ease
refe
r to
the
rele
vant
sect
ion
for f
ull in
form
atio
n, b
ackg
roun
d a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e sp
ecifi c
gui
del
ine.
14
GUI
DELI
NE
Desig
n C
onsid
erat
ions
1.
All c
ompo
nent
s of t
he h
iera
rchy
shou
ld e
mpl
oy th
e Fu
tura
type
face
and
util
ize th
e C
ivic
C
ente
r col
or p
alet
te –
sand
ston
e be
ige,
blu
e an
d T
alie
sin R
ed –
and
all c
ompo
nent
s sho
uld
re
fl ect
a c
omm
on d
esig
n vo
cabu
lary
.2.
T
hat d
esig
n vo
cabu
lary
, how
ever
, sho
uld
not
mim
ic th
e C
ivic
Cen
ter a
rchi
tect
ure.
In-
stea
d, i
t sho
uld
be
com
patib
le in
a g
ener
al w
ay, u
sing
curv
ed fo
rms t
o so
ften
mas
sing,
and
ho
rizon
tal r
athe
r tha
n ve
rtica
l pro
porti
ons w
hene
ver p
ossib
le.
3.
If d
esig
n m
otifs
or d
etai
ls ar
e in
corp
orat
ed in
to th
e sig
nage
, the
y sh
ould
be
plac
ed o
n th
e ed
ges o
f a si
gn p
anel
and
/or t
he su
ppor
t stru
ctur
e so
that
they
don
’t o
btru
de
on th
e “l
ive
area
” re
serv
ed fo
r cop
y.4.
B
ord
ers b
etw
een
colo
rs o
r mat
eria
ls sh
ould
be
artic
ulat
ed b
y a
reve
al, a
trim
pie
ce, a
ch
ange
in p
lane
or s
ome
simila
r dev
ice.
Recommended