Seattle Design Commission
Minutes of the Meeting
28 October 1999
Convened: 9:00am
Adjourned: 4:00pm(This is an excerpt from the full minutes and deals only with the Central Library portion of the meeting.)
Projects Reviewed
Central Library (See below)Project discussions not included in this excerpt:
John C. Cannon Retirement Facility
Roxhill Park
Lincoln Reservoir
Royal Brougham Pedestrian Bridge
Commissioners Present Staff Present Rick Sundberg
Moe Batra
Ralph Cipriani
Gail Dubrow
Robert Foley
Jeff Girvin
Nora Jaso
Jon Layzer
Peter Miller
Cary MoonJohn Rahaim
Layne Cubell
Kelly Rodriguez Walker
Rebecca Walls
102899.1 Project: Central Library
Phase: Scope Briefing
Presenters:
Jim Brown, Loschky Marquardt Nesholm
Alex Harris, Seattle Public Library
Deborah Jacobs, City Librarian
Joshua Ramus, Office of Metropolitan Architecture
Dan Wood, Office of Metropolitan Architecture
Bob Zimmer, Loschky Marquardt Nesholm
Attendees: See list following discussion.Time: 2.0 hr. (SDC Ref. # DC00116)
The design of the new Seattle Central Library is in the pre-schematic design phase. Construction of the new 355,000 square foot facility is expected to begin in 2001 and be completed in mid-2003. The Central Library will be relocated to a temporary facility for the two year construction period. The new building is expected to accommodate the library collection through 2025. The project team intends to involve the public and library staff extensively in the design process, beginning with the first public meeting in December. The Central Library is the service hub for new books, services and technology for the entire Seattle Libraries system. A significant aspect of the new program will be to provide some public meeting space. There will also be expanded children and adult programs, technology training, and customer parking. The Library will be a prominent community and cultural anchor within the city that will provide a forum for engaging citizens in civic dialogue. It will be an important activity center in the downtown area and will provide a link to others in the community. These include: City Hall and the new Municipal Center to the south, the Convention Center to the northeast; Benaroya Hall and the Art Museum; the New Aquarium; the sports stadiums to the south, and the Experience Music Project at the Seattle Center. Important resources and functions of the library will be visible from the outside. Further, providing a sustainable building is an important goal. The public art budget is $900,000 and the project team hopes to have an art manager on board by mid-schematic design.
The project architects, Office of Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) of Rotterdam, and Loschky Marquardt & Nesholm Architects (LMN) of Seattle, have formed a joint venture to work closely on the project. The last three months have been dedicated to researching the library of the future. A six-month schematic design period will be facilitated in Rotterdam, ending in April 2000. This will be followed by a public review period, six-months of design development, and then a nine-month construction document period.
The team began their project analysis with the interior program and is currently focusing on how libraries work and related urban design issues. As a point of departure, members of the design and project team visited libraries in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Phoenix and Denver, and held three days of meetings in Seattle with experts in the field of library and general technology.
The team believes that the classic image of the library of antiquity is a place of high morals and expresses the power of the book. In the last twenty years, the private sector has appropriated the public realm. As such, the library will have to compete with a high level of commercialism. Further, due to the proliferation and quality of the on-line and physical bookstores, some people with economic means have moved away from libraries. An important goal of the project team is to bring people back to the library by "stealing back" the aura that was stolen from the library by the bookstores.
The team is looking for ways to extend an urban design component inside the building. They feel that the traditional American library held a space for books and space for public life and that over time, the space for books became greater, while the space for the public became smaller. Another goal for the new library is to place books within a hierarchy of other information resources, as the needs and functions of the library have increased with the addition of new types of media. The team believes that due to the quality and proliferation of computer technology, that this is an interesting and complex time to design a library. They are trying to come to terms with the current and future status of the book. Further, they feel that public spaces within the library may become more important over time and accordingly, the team wants to guarantee the place of the book and public space.
The complex program demands a flexible building design and the team has identified five operation & containment "platforms" that organize the requirements. The first platform is the headquarters, where staff will be able to work creatively. The second is the book platform, which will include the entire main collection. The electronics and assembly platform will provide technology and meeting rooms. The retail store platform will be located at the entrances on Fourth and Fifth Avenues, and will provide a place where people will first arrive at the library. The fifth platform is parking and operations. The in between or interstitial spaces will offer flexible public reading rooms, an information center, and a living room off of Fifth Avenue with a café. And, as the variety of media resources grows, the number of required public amenities will grow. As such, it is important to the team to make the interstitial spaces of the library "staff centric" as opposed to "information centric."
Although many people questioned the choice of the new library site because of its slope and size, the project architect, Rem Koolhaas, was inspired by it and feels that it will positively contribute to the design. The team is looking to extend the hillclimb and is looking at the site’s relationship with the plazas that exist on three sides. The team is also looking for ways that the building will be able to relate to the surrounding context. They believe there are opportunities to make strong connections between Fourth and Fifth Avenues and are looking forward to seeing the design strategies for the new City Hall and Aquarium, as they will be under design and construction concurrent with the library. One potential problematic area for the new Central Library is the loading dock. The design team is considering the concept of a "one Address" facility that will include several entrances and the possibility of off-site loading.
Discussion:
Batra: Seattle strives for a high level of diversity and I feel that the design of the library should celebrate this. The image you presented of the commercial center does not reflect this intention.
Woods: We were trying to say that this is the arena in which the library must exist and compete.
Dubrow: Despite our well intentioned ideals of creating spaces with civic character, public access and programmatic requirements such as loading docks tend to drive the design and conflict with the intent.
Zimmer: Many buildings in Seattle are presented with the challenge of being sited on a slope.
Dubrow: I encourage you to explore the range of opportunities.
Sundberg: There is a lot of discussion about how to define the urban design connections to projects such as City Hall. Identifying the options of this rare opportunity is a big task. Perhaps there is a cultural commonality between the buildings. It may be useful to touch upon the diversity of the community. These structures will strike deep roots in our society and will define government and intellect. As the design moves forward, I would like to hear how you will approach this. It would be worthwhile to have a discussion with the key players on the City Hall project.
Dubrow: I have a better understanding of how you are intellectually and creatively verifing the program, but I don’t have a sense for your method for analyzing the critical urban design issues.
Foley: It could be a discussion of the programmatic goals. You spoke about the entrances, but where will they actually be? How will the building respond to the surrounding context? What are the key influences?
Ramus: We mentioned our desire to respond to the surrounding plazas, existing and new buildings, and the ability of the public to use the services or circulation elements such as the hillclimb. As we begin to develop a building proposal, all of these components will come into play.
Woods: Today, we wanted to present our thoughts on the interior spaces. Our initial reaction to the urban fabric around the building is that it is gray and staid. Also, because the city grid is so strong in the area, we may want to respond in a more edgy and exciting way. Light is also a very important component.
Dubrow: Do you want to hug the sidewalk, or plaza?
Zimmer: Both, but we also have zoning and street frontage requirements to adhere to.
Dubrow: I would like to hear more about your response to these issues at the next presentation because there are a number of ways you can deal with them.
Jacobs: The architects and staff have been working on general research and internal operations to date, so this discussion may be premature today.
Dubrow: As the program begins to meet the public realm, we are concerned that it also addresses the surrounding context.
Zimmer: We have a lot of work to do between now and December when we will be able to have this dialog on a deeper level. Hearing your concerns today is an extension of our research period.
Jacobs: When Alex Harris and I first came before the Design Commission, we talked about the urban context and the dreariness of the site. We would now like to hear from the Design Commission on these issues.
Moon: The diagrams you’ve shown are extremely inventive, but I would like to see more experiential diagrams that illustrate how the public will interact with the library.
Jaso: Seattle is experiencing a time of richness and development and I encourage you to analyze the city for us, and with us, in terms of viewing the library as the last real public place that isn’t trying to sell you something.
Layzer: I appreciate your analysis of the program and see the logic of some of the adjacencies. I hope that what you "steal back," enriches the area. I don’t understand the siting of the children’s area between the store and operations, and the living room between the store and public assembly. In an effort to ease any safety concerns that parents may have, perhaps the children’s area should be located closer to the living room.
Jacobs: The library has not yet officially responded to the location of the program components. This was just one option.
Layzer: I’m not suggesting integration with the living room but maybe a closer relationship. If the spaces are completely separated, then you force a choice.
Cipriani: The library has a variety of access needs. Since many of the users of the library drive from the suburbs, and because the city has its share of mobility and access impaired, I feel that the parking allowance for 200 vehicles is too restrictive to accommodate all users. There needs to be more design consideration for a variety of transportation modes and vehicles.
Jacobs: Diversity of parking, drop-off and arrival is also important to us. We’re also planning to address these issues at our upcoming meeting with the public.
Ramus: Part of our research included a demographic study. While we are designing the Central Library, we realize that the patrons will come from the larger region and will have a variety of needs.
Dubrow: I’ve only heard one controversial statement regarding the shift in perspective of what public space is or should be. The Carnegie era libraries expressed a clear idea that public space was non-commercialized. You opened your discussion with a strong statement of principle that for civic space to compete with the market in the next two decades, it needs to integrate architectural, spatial, and other devices that the marketplace uses.
Jacobs: I think what we’re talking about are issues of open hours, lighting and display and that the principle you were hearing is a desire to "steal back" what was taken by retail.
Dubrow: I agree that you need to compete, but it sounded to me like you were taking cues from retail spaces in order to add character and vitality.
Ramus: It was an observation. Our second diagram defined our new form of flexibility. Our strategy is to be able to confidently design exciting, definitive and characteristic spaces that appeal to the public.
Dubrow: In the future, I would like to hear what the character and vitality generating elements are that you are drawing from the retail sector to incorporate into civic space. And, where you draw the line and protect it from becoming a place of the market.
Ramus: At this point, we haven’t come to an agreement of what those elements are, but we have identified some that we think may be valuable to include.
Jacobs: A concept for a stronger Seattle presence is what we’re talking about.
Stadler: I would welcome the relationship between commercial and public as an intellectual position, and an articulate exploration of where they come into conflict. When we speak of "stealing back" patrons, I think it’s important to look at the metaphors of commerce we have accepted.
Jacobs: Rem Koolhaas has asked many people, including the board members, "Do you currently use the downtown library and if so, why? If not, why? What would make you change?" I would ask you the same question. It’s not up to OMA or me. We need to hear what will bring you back into the library.
Miller: The current library is poorly packaged. The product is essentially the book, or a version of the book. When we visited the library, I discovered that it holds a wonderful architecture collection that few people know exists because it’s hidden away. If you were to complete the new library today, you’d have a difficult time generating excitement based on the existing collection. The library needs to generate excitement based on its product.
Jacobs: I agree. Because the library has so many social functions it has lost sight of its book collection.
Binns: I am thinking of one of the users being the city itself; an administrative arm with City Hall four blocks away. A great way to open up the library would be to see officials walking back and forth, using the library for business. Has this been explored?
Jacobs: Yes. This week I had briefing on the Municipal Center and when Rick Sundberg asked what civic commonality is, I wrote down ‘transparency of democracy.’ We need to have more wiring between the city offices.
Binns: I work at the Dexter Horton Building and I am always walking back and forth to the Municipal Center. It forces me to get out of my office and I wonder if maybe we’re too wired.
Layzer: You’re looking at how to not let loading and parking dominate the site. Alternatively, you should look at how you insure that the pedestrian and commuter access is primary and how the building can become a wayfinding device. These and other issues of orientation should happen early on in the design process.
Gale: We are challenging the Civic Center to become an international example of sustainable design and it would be great if you could also start thinking about the library in this way.
Harris: The building may be a marker in the skyline and will have a definitive presence on the sidewalk. We’re learning from the context but are also looking to give something back to the city.
Jaso: When Rem Koolhaas made the initial presentation proposal, his comments on how art will be integrated into the project were more thoughtful than I had heard in a long time. As such, I’m very interested in how you will be collaborating with the Arts Commission and what the process, principles and priorities are that you will use to bring an artist in.
Goldstein: OMA and LMN are keeping an open mind and we don’t want to limit our direction at this stage. There are a number of ways that this can go and we want to keep the process open ended and flexible.
Jaso: I would just like to see it integrated into all aspects of the project.
Dubrow: I hope you will have a broad sense of what forms the art will take. I also hope you will take a long-term view that will allow the art budget to work over time rather than just for the opening; art that unfolds over a period of years.
Jacobs: The foundation has a fund that could be used for an on-going program. Also, we have not discussed the possibility of keeping any of the existing art funding in reserve. In terms of current art, some will be used and some of it may go to branch libraries, neighborhood organizations, or the general city archive.
Taylor: One thing I like about the library is that it’s not gentrifying the community. I think this is a critical component of the public space.
Jacobs: We acknowledge the diversity of our staff and patrons and want to recognize this in all aspects of the design. We also want to make sure that all users are safe and that no one is excluded. We anticipate that the staff and public groups that will be working with the designers will speak to these issues. We’ve also been trying to work with the Municipal Center and the mayor’s office to design a downtown hygiene center that is closer to where people gather, but we don’t necessarily want it to be located in the library.
Dubrow: The Design Commission could help with this point. We asked the architect for City Hall for his thoughts on the issue of the homeless and he wasn’t sure how to respond. The key players in the city need to get together and discuss the relevant issues of how to find a balance between public space and amenities. People are uncomfortable talking about it and therefore, a joint discussion could take the burden off of the individual. I encourage the Commission to take the lead and have this dialog with the appropriate parties.
Moon: At the initial presentation, the public loved Rem Koolhaas’s poking fun at Seattle and I encourage you to maintain a similar sense of humor and playfulness.
Action: The Design Commission appreciates the presentation and makes the following comments and recommendations.
The Commission appreciates hearing a statement of the general principles that will inform future meetings;
would like the design team to focus on the deeper issues of context; and
- encourages the project team to call upon the Design Center and Commission for help with facilitating dialogues with other city agencies.
Attendees:
Andrea Addison, Seattle Public Library
Jamie Aisford, Gilbane
MaryBeth Binns, Design Construction and Land Use
Jerry Chihara
David Della
Roland Falb
Tony Gale, Executive Services Department
Barbara Goldstein, Seattle Arts Commission
Barb Gregory
Jess Harris, Design Construction and Land Use
Rich Jensen
Steve Kay
Kristian Kofoed, Design Construction and Land Use
Cliff Marks, Design Construction and Land Use
Jeff Miller
Cher Ravagni
Linda Saunto
Robert Scully, Design Center
Denni Shefrin, Design Construction and Land Use
Karen Sherwood, Design Center
Matthew Stadler
David Sucher
Jon Taylor, Callison Architecture
Steve Trainer, Seneca Group
Gordon Walker, Gordon Walker Architecture and Planning
Return to Seattle Public Library capital program Libraries for All, Central Library
Content Modified:8 December 1999
12/30/2005
© 1999-2006 - The Seattle Public Library