PORTOLA VALLEY TOWN CENTER
1295 59th Street Emeryville, CA 94608 Tel: 510/547-8092 Fax: 510/547-2604 e-mail: info@siegelstrain.com
Amanda Rowlee Cameron Wire Jeremy Hoffman Ashley Lapp Katie Mitchell

07
FIRM OVERVIEW
21
PROJECT ANALYSIS
37
DESIGN ANALYSIS
89
SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS
95
CONSTRUCTION ANALYSIS
105
PROJECT EVALUATION
FIRM OVERVIEW
DESCRIPTION PHILOSOPHY SIGNATURE PROJECTS
FIRM DESCRIPTION "Since 1985, Siegel & Strain Architects has championed sustainability as an integral part of the design process. Through leadership and a commitment to innovation in green design and historic preservation, the firm has created award-winning projects and an ecologically- based practice that has gained national attention. From its Emeryville office, located in the San Francisco Bay Area, Siegel & Strain provides building design and master planning services to a diverse client base on a wide range of civic, educational, and residential projects." Siegel & Strain Architects was formed in 1990 with a focus on designing residential and smaller projects. Within a decade, the firm grew from a small eight-person office with two principal architects to a peak of twenty people with five principal architects. The firm has since decreased in size and currently employs sixteen individuals, eight of which are licensed architects. Siegel & Strain Architects is named for Henry Siegel and Larry Strain. Henry Siegel graduated from the University of California Berkeley with a Masters of Architecture. He began his career working as an associate for William Turnbull Associates in San Francisco, before founding his own office, Henry Siegel Associates, in 1985. Larry Strain also has a Masters of Architecture from UC Berkeley and he began working for Henry Siegel Associates in 1988. He became a partner of the firm in 1990 and the name was then changed to Siegel & Strain Architects. During the early nineties the firm's work was primarily in remodeling. In 1993, they decided to change the mission of the firm to "Green Building". Their first green project in was a material specification handbook, which was included in the "GreenSpec Directory" in 1996. Their first built project was an affordable housing complex in Emeryville, which was made 30% more efficient than typical housing complexes of the time, simply by using more efficient materials and construction methods. The direction of their firm is now headed towards the design of camps and community-based projects. They were also just awarded their first Design-Build project for one of the California Universities.
FIRM SERVICES Architecture & Planning Architectural Design Feasibility Studies Master Planning Programming Site Planning & Site Selection Conceptual & Schematic Design Construction Documents Specifications Public Outreach Public Workshop Planning & Facilitation Code Review Facilities Inventory & Needs Assessment Construction Administration & Post Construction Surveys Construction Observation Post Construction Review Post Occupancy Evaluations
Sustainable Design Design/LEED Charrettes Sustainability Goal Setting Materials Consulting Green Building Evaluation LEED Consulting & Documentation Net-Zero Energy Design Carbon Calculations Site Sensitive Design Water Conservation Strategies Historic Preservation Cultural Resource Evaluation HABS Documentation Historic Preservation Certification (Tax Credit Application) Historic Preservation / Rehabilitation Historic Structures Reports Materials Conservation Paint Analysis Section 106 Compliance Documentation

FIRM DESCRIPTION CLIENTS Alameda County Waste Management Authority Berkeley Student Cooperative Bishop O'Dowd High School California Province of the Society of Jesus California State Parks Center for Early Intervention on Deafness (CEID) City of Emeryville City of Fremont City of Orinda Town of Portola Valley City of Richmond City of San Jose City of Santa Rosa City of Yountville County of Alameda The David & Lucille Packard Foundation Habitat for Humanity The Hamlin School East Bay Regional Park District Emeryville Redevelopment Agency Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Macau Cultural Center Mission San Jose Mono Lake Committee National Park Service NatureBridge The Oakland Strokes Pacific Crest Outward Bound School The Presidio Trust Seven Hills School Sunny Hills Services University of California at Berkeley University of California at Davis URJ Camp Newman-Swig The Walden Center & School West Contra Costa Unified School District Wilshire Boulevard Temple Camps Yosemite Institute
PROJECT LOCATIONS Orinda, CA Yountville, CA Yosemite National Park, CA Northern Mendocino County, CA Berkeley, CA Livermore, CA Santa Rosa, CA Lee Vining, CA Applegate, CA Pinnacles National Monument, CA San Francisco, CA Palo Alto, CA Healdsburg, CA San Jose, CA Walnut Creek, CA Napa, CA Oakland, CA Contra Costa Country, CA Altamont Pass, CA Richmond, CA Fremont, CA Tahoe City, CA Mojave National Preserve, CA Aptos, CA Sonoma County, CA
Reception Desk at Siegel & Strain
FIRM PHILOSOPHY After the completion of a sustainable affordable housing project, Siegel & Strain Architects became heavily involved in the green building industry. The firm strongly emphasizes the use of sustainable materials and passive design in all of their projects which has helped them achieve a well-regarded reputation within the sustainable design industry. They now find that most of their clients choose them for their expertise in this area. As such, the majority of their projects tend to be camps or community projects which serve to educate the public about green building techniques. Passive techniques used often include sustainable construction methods, proper building orientation, thermal massing, overhangs, natural ventilation, daylighting, and insulation. Active techniques include the use of energy efficient systems and appliances, and renewable energy systems. In addition to their commitment to sustainable design, the firm makes a large effort to balance good design, good performance, and good delivery in every project they take on. Recently the firm has been trying to do more renovations of existing structures. According to Larry Strain, it is almost always more sustainable to rehabilitate an existing building than building a new one. He believes there needs to be a shift in the profession towards rehabilitation and informing people of adaptive reuse as a way to combat climate change. However, the majority of their projects continue to be new construction. Of the 20 projects they are working on, only two or three are rehabilitations. Therefore, all of the new buildings they design must be made as efficient as possible to reduce that building's impact on the environment. One of their main goals is to make each project's environmental control systems as passive as possible. This can dramatically reduce energy used to mechanically manage the building. They often accomplish this through the use of thermal massing, night flush cooling, and control of solar gain. They are also using Building Management Systems, which guide the users in the proper operation of the building.
Siegel & Strain Architects currently operate as an S-Corporation but were previously run as a general partnership. The firm chose specifically to operate as an S-Corporation because this type of business structure is geared more for small businesses. Siegel & Strain do not have any plans for their firm to ever become larger than 30 or so people so an S-Corporation legal structure fits their needs nicely. Corporations and limited liability companies ("LLCs") are preferred business structures because, unlike sole proprietorships and partnerships, both offer some liability protection. However, because Architecture is considered a Professional Service Industry, no matter what form of legal structure the firm chooses, the Architect signing the plans can always be held personally liable.
SIEGEL
&
STRAIN
Architects
PROJECT PRINCIPAL PROJECT ARCHITECT
DESIGN TEAM MEMBER
DESIGN TEAM MEMBER
DESIGN TEAM MEMBER
Organizational Chart of Office Structure
The principals always have a hand in every project, but may not always be taking the lead on each one. A work chart is kept up to date each week on what projects are to be worked on and who is working on them. There are usually around 2-3 people working on each project, with each person working on a couple of different projects at a time.
FIRM PHILOSOPHY Siegel & Strain take pride in having no set style, according to Larry Strain. Their designs are driven by context, client, and energy performance. Although they have no signature style, there are common values and themes that run throughout their work. They value material honesty and exposure of the structure. Both Siegel & Strain are firm believers that a design is always evolving and can always be made better. As the building develops you may see new things that you’ d like to change to make your design even better. Unlike many other firms, Siegel & Strain are open to making changes right up until a project has been completed.
Book Library at Siegel & Strain
SIGNATURE PROJECTS CAMP ARROYO ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CENTER LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA CLIENT: SIZE: Dining Hall: Bathhouse: Cabins:
Camp Arroyo 7,600 SF 1,700 SF 1,400 SF
COST:
$8 M
COMPLETED:
2001
AWARDS: > Top Ten Green Projects, National AIA Committee on the Environment > Award of Honor, Savings By Design AIA California Council & PG&E > Excellence in Design, Environmental Design + Construction Magazine DESCRIPTION:
Camp Arroyo is a state-of-the-art environmental education camp. Students study environmental science during the school year, and in summer, the camp serves children with illnesses. The camp demonstrates building practices that reduce environmental impacts with simple means for climate based, resource efficient design. Each building type presents a different approach to resource-efficient construction: > The Dining Hall demonstrates resource efficiency using straw bale construction. The 7,600 sf building seats 200, and features a load-bearing steel frame with straw bale infill, wood from sustainably managed forests, renewable finish materials such as bamboo, wheat straw, and sunflower panels, and recycled products such as glass countertops and cellulose insulation. > The Bathhouses are constructed with earth taken from the site, demonstrating that the buildings grow from place. These durable, stabilized earth walls are combined with a roof structure that is made with wood from sustainably managed forests and durable metal roofing. The roofs are designed to collect rainwater and support solar collectors. The open air structures house restrooms, showers and changing rooms for the adjacent swimming pool. > The Cabins demonstrate techniques for optimizing wood frame construction. Each 1,440 sf building sleeps 24 campers and features efficient framing techniques, wood from sustainably managed forests, durable materials and recycled products.
YOSEMITE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION CENTER YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK, CALIFORNIA CLIENT:
National Park Service
SIZE:
40,000 sf
ESTIMATED COST:
$8 M
AWARDS:
Seeking LEED Platinum
DESCRIPTION: Each year over 13,000 students and teachers come to experience and learn from Yosemite National Park through the outdoor science programs offered by the Yosemite Institute. Siegel & Strain is designing a seventeen-building residential education center, including dining hall, cabins, bath houses, classrooms, a fire station and support facilities. The new buildings will wed the latest green design and energy concepts with the site's inherent attributes to provide an interactive model of sustainability in which program participants can engage firsthand. Extensive energy modeling and analysis of the materials and assemblies led to a project that is projected to be netzero energy; to save sixty percent over standard water use; and to minimize material waste through factory construction. This project will seek a LEED Platinum rating. Construction documents are complete and the project is slated to start construction in 2012.

SIGNATURE PROJECTS ORINDA CITY HALL ORINDA, CALIFORNIA CLIENT:
City of Orinda
SIZE:
14,000 sf
COST:
$8 M
COMPLETED:
2007
AWARDS: LEED Gold, USGBC > 2009 AIACC & Savings by Design Citation Award > 2008 Honor Award for Energy & Sustainability, AIA San Francisco > 2007 EPA Energy Star Challenge for Energy Efficiency An unusual agreement between the City of Orinda and a local church on the city's main street allowed for construction of a new city hall close to downtown and public transit - on a newly created infill site in the church's backyard. Sited on a steep hillside just above the church, Orinda City Hall is organized around an open-air atrium with a cascading stair that connects the residential neighborhoods above the site to the downtown below. Simple shapes and durable materials respond to the character and scale of the site and the city. This LEED Gold project demonstrates the city's commitment to environmental stewardship. Strong team collaboration led to the elimination of conventional compressor cooling, a rare occurrence for office buildings in this climate zone. An innovative mixed-mode mechanical system runs on natural ventilation whenever conditions allow, reducing anticipated energy use by 72% over Title 24 standards, and scoring 11 out of 10 possible points from LEED - the 11th point is an innovation point for exemplary energy performance.
YOUNTVILLE TOWN CENTER & LIBRARY YOUNTVILLE, CALIFORNIA CLIENT:
In 1998 the Town of Yountville embarked on a master planning process that envisioned a new sustainably designed center located in the middle of town where Yountville residents could meet, learn, play and celebrate. Through successful community participation and perseverance, construction began in 2008.
Town of Yountville
SIZE: New Facilities: Renovations: Additions:
11,500 sf 8,500 sf 1,000 sf
COST:
$9.6 M
COMPLETED:
2009
AWARDS: LEED Platinum, USGBC > Savings by Design Energy Efficiency Integration Award of Honor > AIA San Francisco Energy & Sustainability Citation Award > AIA East Bay Architecture Citation > California Woodworks Green Building Wood Design Award
The Yountville Town Center consists of a new 10,000 sf facility, renovation of an existing Community Hall and a Sheriff's Substation addition to the adjacent Post Office. These three civic buildings frame a new Yountville Town Square. The new building houses a branch library, multipurpose room, teen center, meeting and program spaces. Because sustainability was a priority of Yountville's leadership, a number of green features were integrated: a ground source heating and cooling system, a 38 kw photovoltaic array, low-flow plumbing fixtures, environmentally preferred building materials, efficient lighting and daylighting, natural ventilation, waterconserving landscape, and an innovative subsurface irrigation system.

PROJECT ANALYSIS
OVERVIEW HISTORY CLIENT SELECTION PROCESS PROJECT TEAM SCOPE OF SERVICES CONTRACTS
PROJECT OVERVIEW
LOCATION: Portola Valley,CA TYPE: Town Hall, Community Hall, Library, Sports Area CLIENT: Town of Portola Valley BUDGET: 15 Million
SERVICES AND SCOPE: Multiple Buildings SCHEDULING: Completed October 2008 SIZE: Buildings - 20,500 sq.ft. Paving -165,900 Fields - 96,000 Total Lot Size - 489,900
PROJECT HISTORY The buildings on the site have an interesting history.
1950's
1969
1975
1975
1995
1997
1998
2003
Historic schoolhouse building is constructed adjacent to site.
San Andreas Fault is mapped through the site.
The town of Portola Valley Purchases the site from the school district.
The town hall is relocated to this site.
Structural updates to the buildings were completed. They are still not up to ADA compliance.
Historic schoolhouse is completely renovated and brought up to code compliance.
Upper Alpine Road is damaged by El Nino, causing the town to forgo any more plans for the town center.
2001
Ad Hoc Town Center Facilitation Committee is formed, begins planning for a new facility.
Siegel & Strain Architects and Goring & Straja Architects are hired.
The Portola Valley Town Center replaced an old facility that consisted of a library and town hall complex in a converted elementary school. This original facility was built in the late 1950's and early 1960's, and sat directly atop the San Andreas Fault. It was determined that retrofitting them would not be enough, and they needed to be replaced. In 2003, the town decided to pursue this new facility. After a community-driven selection process, the town hired Siegel & Strain Architects, in collaboration with Goring & Straja Architects to design the new facility. The town citizens and architects also shared a common intention to make this a highly sustainable building. The site had to be completely reorganized. The first order of business was to position the buildings away from the fault line, and then to make room for the new athletic fields. The layout they arrived at now allows for the open space to be more continuous and natural, including re-exposing a creek that had been previously buried in a pipe. The natural landscape is now more exposed and more accessible than before.
Existing Buildings Library / Gallery Classroom Maintenance Town Hall Multi-Use Room Art Studios Historic Schoolhouse Total
square ftg 5,000sf. 4,700sf. 1,885sf. 2,125sf. 5,000sf. 4,275sf. 1,465sf. 24,460sf
The original buildings

CLIENT PROFILE The client for this project was the local town government of Portola Valley, California. Incorporated on July 20, 1964, Portola Valley is a community of approximately 4,407 people in San Mateo County. The nature of the business conducted at the Town Center is primarily public and community and government functions. The library, community hall, and surrounding open space areas are all designed to serve the citizens of the town directly. The Town Hall is designed to serve more private government functions, such as administration offices; building, planning, and engineering departments; and an emergency operations center. One of Portola Valley's most important values in their Master Plan is limiting the development of open space, so that the landscape's natural attributes "can be sustained over time." The community of Portola Valley not only desires to protect their natural landscape, but also the greater environment as a whole. The following six goals were of primary importance for this project:
Take advantage of the beautiful site while preserving open space Create civic and recreational spaces that are inviting to all ages Meet the civic, emergency and maintenance needs of the town Create friendly and service-oriented places that facilitate casual meetings Exemplify the town's rural design ideals that complement the landscape Be an extension of the town's low-key residences and become a "living room" for the town
The town included the building department, so the client had prior experience with the building process. According to Larry Strain, they were "more sophisticated than [other towns]" they have worked for in the past, and they were "smart business people."
SELECTION PROCESS The process of selecting a designer was unusually public in this particular project. Instead of contacting any firms about the project, the town had mentioned it on their website. Firms that were interested submitted proposals for the town council to review. Goring & Straja Architects discovered the project, but needed to partner with another firm due their small size. It was they who sought out Siegel & Strain to form a joint venture. Together, they submitted a proposal and made it onto the "short list" of possible designers. The final decision was made at a public town hall meeting, where citizens discussed their opinions of the designs right in front of the architects.
When Siegel & Strain chose consultants, they typically partner with those who have been a pleasant experience to work with in the past. For this project, they tried to keep the consultants as local as possible. Some of the components of the project required more specific and unusual consultants, such as a playground consultant and a hydrologist.
CONTRACTORS
Earthwork, Grading & Asphalt Paving Site Utilities Concrete & Reinforcing Steel Carpentry (Rough and Finish) Painting Doors, Frames & Hardware Electrical Systems Roofing & Waterproofing Structural Steel & Misc. Metal Acoustical Ceilings Drywall, Insulation & Metal Stud Framing Misc. Specialties Plumbing, HVAC Sheet Metal & Flashing Fire Suppression Piping Ceramic Tile Photovoltaic Systems Dumbwaiters Architectural Woodwork Tennis/Basketball Courts Softball Fields, Irrigation & Landscaping Play Area Grading & Paving @ Softball Field Site Concrete & Reinforcing Steel Site Earthwork, grading & Asphalt Paving Site Utilities Landscape & Irrigation Site Wood Framing
El Camino Paving, Inc. Preston Pipelines, Inc. Robert A. Bothman, Inc. Southwest Construction Bayview painting Minton Door Company Rosendin Electric, Inc. Pioneer Contractors Glazier Iron Works T-3, Inc. Daley's Drywall & Taping, Inc. Shellco Thermal Mechanical Walshcon Fire Protection, Inc. Reputable Tile Company, Inc. Regrid Power, Inc. Pacific Access Contractors, Inc. Y & D Cabinet Shop Top Grade Robert A. Bothman, Inc. Community Playgrounds Pavex Construction Jos. J. Albanese Jos. J. Albanese Sanco Pipelines Robert A. Bothman Southwest Construction

PROJECT TEAM The design team on this project consisted of a collaboration between Siegel & Strain and Goring & Straja Architects. Goring & Straja is listed as the Design Architect, while Siegel & Strain is the Architect of Record. Within the firms, the design team consisted of Larry Strain and Susi Marzuola, both from Siegel & Strain, and Jim Goring of Goring & Straja. The project architect was Michael Hayden of Siegel & Strain. Larry Strain's focus in the design process was the "green" aspect, which quickly became one of the most important parts of the design. He was also a project principal and manager throughout the construction process. Susi Marzuola was also a project principal, and a project manager through the design. Michael Hayden dealt with the contractor on behalf of Siegel & Strain.
SIEGEL
&
STRAIN
Architect of Record
LARRY STRAIN
Project Principal
SUSI MARZUOLA
Project Principal
MICHAEL HAYDEN
Project Architect
JULIA STOREK
Design Team
BRAIN PEARSON
Design Team
Organizational Chart of the Internal Design Team
CHRIS CHALMERS
Design Team
GORING
&
STRAJA
Design Architect
JIM GORING
Project Principal
TERESIA KURNADI
Design Team
SCOPE OF SERVICES The project began with a Request for Design Proposal (RFP) process. This is typical, and the client generally has a basic understanding of the scope of services before the architects are brought on board. Siegel & Strain will develop their detailed scope of services after hiring their consultants. Consultants will draft a basic scope of services for the work they are preparing to do, and then submit these to the architects. Siegel & Strain will then review and update these contracts into their final contract with the client. The scope of services attached to this contract includes the services of the consultants combined with those of the architects. The particular contract between the town of Portola Valley and the architects for this project is a modified AIA contract, "B170". The final scope of services includes times and locations of meetings and major project milestones, among other key work details. Defining this scope of work in great detail is very important to Siegel & Strain, and very beneficial to the client. It is important that the client has a realistic understanding of the capabilities of the architect or consultant. Siegel & Strain will also often specify that mediation be used as the preferred method of dispute resolution. Since there were no sub contractors on this project, there was a separate scope of services between each of the contractors and the town. The construction manager, TBI construction, wrote a highly detailed scope of services for the town. This allowed for the most accurate cost estimation, and helped keep the project under budget later on. There were 3 phases in this project, each with its own seperate contract. The first phase was for the general plan. The second phase was for the site work and demolition, and the third was for the new construction. Larry Strain met with the Portola Valley Town Attorney to clarify the details of the Division 1 agreements.
CONTRACTS The contract used between Siegel & Strain and the town of Portola Valley was a "B170" from the American Institute of Architects. It is a typical contract between owner and architect. Often, the architects will modify the contract to address issues that may arise later in the project. Often, they will specify that, should a dispute arise, mediation will be used as the negotiation process. With the Portola Valley project, Siegel & Strain added language to their contract noting that the town couldn't re-use any of their drawings for any other project. On this project, Larry Strain led the contract negotiation with the town attorney. Together, they laid out the Division 1 Requirement Specifications for the town. The contract lays out responsibilities of each party as well as what the consequences are when they are not followed or are violated.
COMMUNITY
TOWN SIEGEL
&
STRAIN
GORING
&
STRAJA
CONSULTANTS: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ATHLETIC LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SPECIFICATIONS CIVIL ENGINEER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER MECHANICAL ENGINEER ELECTRICAL ENGINEER ENVIRONMENTAL HYDROLOGY LIGHTING DESIGN ENERGY/PV INTERIOR DESIGN
OF
DONORS
PORTOLA VALLEY CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
The Portola Valley Town Center was completed as a multiple prime contract. This means that the city/client had multiple, separate contracts with all of the contractors. These multiple contracts were managed by the construction manager. The architects had separate contracts with consultants and interior designer. A project with so many contracts could have been difficult and complicated, but this project was a rare case where everyone worked together smoothly. Portola Valley was truly a "dream client." "The community really got involved with the project, even the small details". "Master Plan" phase, "Phase 1" and "Phase 2." The Master Plan was in order to help plan out and redesign the entire site. Phase 1 included site work, the demo of the existing buildings and the construction of the maintenance buildings. The last and final phase, Phase 2, included all of the new construction and finish work. Each of these phases was governed by a separate contract.
CONTRACTORS: ACOUSTICS RECLAIMED WOOD CARPENTRY MECHANICAL CABINETS ELECTRICAL CERAMIC TILE SOLAR CONCRETE FLOORING COURTS PAINTING DRYWALL DOORS GRADING WINDOWS LANDSCAPE ROOFING UTILITIES PARTITIONS PAVING FENCING STEEL PLAYGROUND STORM DRAINS Organizational Chart of the Contract Agreements and External Construction Team
DESIGN ANALYSIS
CONCEPT DESIGN PROCESS DECISION MAKING ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES SCHEDULE DOCUMENTATION
CONCEPT DESCRIPTION
Parkland Diagram
Athletics and Playground Diagram
View Diagram
Site Circulation and Parking Diagram
Trail Diagram
Maintenance Facility Diagram
ARCHITECT'S PROJECT GOALS Take advantage of the site, reinforcing access, views, conservation and beauty Become a gathering place for Town Residents and be inviting to all age ranges Service the civic, emergency and maintenance needs of the Town Create a friendly, approachable and service oriented Environment that encourages interaction and teamwork Become an example of the design ideals of the Town Become a symbolic extension of the Town Residences
SUSTAINABILITY GOALS Minimize site impacts. Preserve, restore and repair habitats. Minimize site run-off, site lighting, and landscape water use. Design climate responsive buildings. Integrate natural light and ventilation, thermal mass, shading, and insulation into the building design. Design energy efficient buildings. Minimize energy use. Utilize solar energy sources. Reduce life cycle impacts. Select durable low maintenance materials. Specify simple, low-tech systems. Design healthy buildings. Select healthy building materials, construction practices and building systems. Reduce offsite impacts. Select materials such as certified well-managed forest products, local materials, and materials with low embodied energy to minimize offsite impacts. Reduce, reuse, recycle.

CONCEPT DESCRIPTION The Portola Valley Town Center was built for the people of Portola Valley to come together as a community; and even before it was built, this project brought the people of Portola together to help in the design process. The people of the town didn't want the building to stand out, block the view of vast mountain scenery and be seen from the main road through the town; on the other hand, they wanted a building that wasn't typical, but not quite modern. So the architects, Siegel & Strain, had to design a building with their goals in mind, such as a green building, as well as the goals of the townspeople. They began with a design that used the traditional gable roof that they believed the townspeople would be happy with. On the side, they tried another approach using a gable roof mixed with a steep shed roof at the entrances. When they approached the people with their traditional idea, the people were happy, but when Siegel & Strain pulled out their new idea, the town's people were ecstatic about the new design. When you drive by the site, all you see are typical gable roofs, but when standing in the middle of the three buildings, the lifted corners at the entrance of each building allows for the structures to "talk" to each other and becomes a more interesting structure; also becoming on the most significant identifying features on the buildings. Because the town's people didn't want the building to really be seen from the road, not a lot of exterior lighting was used around the building except at the buildings' entries and to know where a small garden wall stands.
Models of the becoming idea of the upturned roofs
Proposed Gable End at Library
View of the Community Center from New Drive
View across new meadow through Town Center Plaza to hills beyond
View of Plaza and Library
DESIGN PROCESS
Town Hall Meeting Charette
Scale Model of the Town Plaza
Model of the Library
Model of the Progression of the Library
DESIGN PROCESS
This project involved a different way of designing for Siegel & Strain. They spent good deal of time in the beginning talking with 17 different volunteer groups in the town to find out what their needs and desires were for the new building complex. It was a learning process for both the architects and client, because although the client was the Portola Valley town government, the primary users of the building would be the community, so all project meetings were held as town hall meetings. People were notified of the meetings, and allowed any member of the community to have an opportunity to actively contribute and voice their opinions throughout the planning and design phases of the project. The architects had to get to know the opinions and attitudes of both the people and the town government, and act as a neutral party between the two. So Siegel & Strain would work in their office to figure out the architectural details of the building, then present all their work in front of the town during a town hall meeting. Some of the time, the community would be in support of new ideas, some times not, and even in the case of some donors, who came in during the later planning and didn't seem to like anything. The community's suggestions and opinions in regards to the architectural design were quite important to the town and, therefore, Siegel & Strain. The town insisted that the architecture take a "back seat" to its surroundings and "blend into the natural landscape." This became a driving force in the design of the structures as well as their placement on the site and surrounding areas. Siegel & Strain created low-height buildings and used high-quality natural materials to create this seamless connection with the natural surroundings while providing a community center that would last for years to come. There was some debate in terms of style (whether to go more modern or more traditional) so Siegel & Strain formulated a design that created a medley of the two. During the design process, the firm used a combination of the programs Vectorworks and Sketchup for their 3D modeling needs. For the most part, Siegel & Strain keep the level of technology in each project "low key" and used physical models, sketches, and watercolor as the primary means of design and presentation.

DECISION MAKING The relationship between the Owner, Architect, and the Contractor is the key to smooth project delivery. A smooth decision making process eliminates redundancy and unnecessary costs for the owner, and makes for a better experience for all parties involved. As the person with often the broadest understanding of all the trades, the architect's job is to make the most of all the knowledge and skills of the project team. Project decision-making always comes back to the owner, who, after all, is paying for the project. For any decision made, the owner is consulted, and when a necessary change must be made based on code or other necessity, the owner must be informed on the solution. In the process of design delivery, primary decisions are often made in design meetings with the client. Governing authorities also have an influence through codes, ADA and inspections. In an integrated delivery project, the contractor and would also have a much more measurable input on the design, based on cost and feasibility. Another important input on the design comes from those besides the owner who have contributed to funding the project. In the case of the Portola Valley Town Center, members of the community contributed a very large portion of the project's budget. Since the owner is not the sole contributor of funds in this case, the community has earned a heavy opinion in the outcome of the project. Selection of the architects and characteristics of the design were decisions made with the involvement of the townspeople.
GOVERNING AUTHORITIES
TOWN SIEGEL
&
STRAIN
GORING
&
OF
PORTOLA VALLEY
STRAJA
PROJECT PRINCIPAL Organizational Chart of the Design Decision Makers
COMMUNITY/DONORS
ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES Due to the fact that Siegel & Strain were in a joint venture with each other for this project, they split up the work accordingly. Due to the sizes of the office, Siegel & Strain took on two-thirds of the work and Goring & Straja had one-third; therefore making Siegel & Stain the Architects of Record and Goring & Straja the Design Architects. With this amount of work broken down for each office, Siegel & Strain were able to get more involved during the construction document and construction administration portion of the project. Larry Strain and Susi Marsuola from Siegel & Strain, and Jim Goring from Goring & Straja were all project principals for this project. Susi was the project manager through the design, and spent a lot of time over at the other office. Larry was the project manager for the construction, and worked with the project architect, Michael Hayden, to help communicate to all other fields during construction.
JOINT VENTURE CD & DD SIEGEL
&
SD
STRAIN
GORING
Architect of Record
LARRY STRAIN
Project Principal
&
STRAJA
Design Architect
SUSI MARZUOLA
JIM GORING
Project Principal
Project Principal
MICHAEL HAYDEN
Project Architect Organizational Chart of the Joint Venture Roles & Responsibilities
SIEGEL
&
STRAIN
Architect of Record
S.D.
D.D. GORING
&
C.D. STRAJA
Design Architect
C.A.
PROJECT SCHEDULE As previously stated, this project was divided into three phases, the Master Plan, Phase 1, and Phase 2. Master Plan: Planning of Entire Site Phase 1: Demolition of Existing Buildings, Site Work and the Construction of Maintenance Buildings Phase 2: Construction of all new buildings
MASTER PLAN PHASE 1 PHASE 2
12 MONTHS
6 MONTHS
0 MONTHS
The Design of the Master Plan took about 6 months to complete. When that was completed, Siegel & Strain had to submit paperwork for the Environmental Impact Study, to determine if a Environmental Impact Report would be required (which they did not need). During that time, they also began on the design of the demo plans and the new construction of the maintenance buildings, which took about 4 months. While Phase 1 was being permitted (1-2 months) and undergoing construction (1 months), the design for Phase 2 began. The design for the new construction took about 6 months. Construction of the main building was a 15 month process. If the creek had not been added during construction, the process would have been cut down to about 12 months. The project took a total of 2 years and 9 months to complete.
DESIGN
EIR STUDY DESIGN
PERMITTING & CONSTRUCTION
33 MONTHS
18 MONTHS DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION
Schedule
PROJECT SCHEDULE During the Master Planning, Siegel & Strain, Goring & Straja, the Town of Portola Valley, and the community members were the key players.
MASTER PLAN
START
DESIGN
EIR STUDY
Phase 1 included: Siegel & Strain, Goring & Straja, the Town of Portola Valley, and the community members during the design phase. During the permitting and construction, the construction manager, consultants and contractors were brought in.
PHASE
1
DESIGN
PERMITTING
CONSTRUCTION
Phase 2 included the same people as Phase 1.
PHASE
2
DESIGN
CONSTRUCTION
END
DESIGN DOCUMENTATION
From the outside looking in toward the buildings
From the inside courtyard
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
KEEP PAGES, BU
THESE PAGES N HERE FOR THE O BE INSERTED INTO MESSING UP PA
DON'T PRINT T
UT DO NOT USE
NEED TO STAY IN OTHER PAGES TO O BOOK, WITHOUT AGE NUMBERING
THESE PAGES
SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS
WATER USE ENERGY USE MATERIALS & RESOURCES RESULTS & FINDINGS
WATER USE The design team worked to reduce water usage on-site by using water efficient fixtures whenever possible. Waterless urinals and low-flow lavatory faucets, toilets, showerheads and kitchen faucets help reduce the domestic water usage by 53%. Wastewater is treated on site in a septic-tank leach-field system rather than tying into the town's sewer main. The Emergency Operations Center, located inside the Town Hall building, required 2,000 gallons of water storage for use in emergency situations. Rather than installing a separate storage tank that would require regular treatment or flushing every few months, the Town installed an in-line 24" diameter pipe within their incoming water line, building storage directly into the piping system. This means that fresh water will always be flowing through the storage pipe and therefore it will never need to be treated or flushed. Drought tolerant, native plant species were selected and grouped by landscape type and water use needs and irrigated with a combination of sprinklers and drip systems. Native plants only require irrigation during establishment. Additional water was saved by specifically enhancing and celebrating existing landscape features, which did not require any additional irrigation. The Town of Portola Valley highly discourages private lawns so the performance lawn, adjacent to the buildings, serves as the Town's event lawn. These techniques and others combine to reduce site water usage by 85%. A 289-foot section of buried creek, now exposed to daylight, defines the fourth side of the town center courtyard. This abandoned culvert has been transformed into a cistern that can store up to 40,000 gallons of rainwater. Roof runoff will also be collected in this abandoned creek culvert and used for irrigation. The use of planted swales instead of curbs and gutters will help mitigate storm water and site runoff while naturally filtering contaminates from the water before it enters the creek.
A portion of the abandoned culvert that has been day lit.
ENERGY USE The project team worked to make the building responsive to the site and its climate, minimizing heating, cooling, and ventilation needs. The buildings were orientated to reduce heat gain in the summer months and take advantage of solar gain in the winter months. Buildings incorporate daylighting as well as natural ventilation strategies, thermal massing, and exterior sunshades. Wood sunscreens to control solar heat gain and glare.
Clerestories opposite double hung windows allow for cross ventilation and allow the buildings to run a night time cooling cycle when appropriate to pre-chill the building mass. The wood-frame buildings are well insulated with blown-in cellulose insulation. Windows are glazed with high-performance glass. Metal standing seam roofs, with a solar reflectance index of 0.29, and metal clad windows help reduce solar heat gain. A variety of small simple systems were employed to heat, cool and ventilate the buildings. Low-temperature hot water heats the Library and Town Hall through in-slab radiant tubing. To heat the water, these buildings use high-efficiency, condensing gas boilers capable of 97% efficiency under typical operating conditions. The community center, on the other hand, with its sporadic use and high internal loads, is heated with an efficient quick-response gas fire furnace. All building have air handlers equipped with heat recovery units and are cooled with SEER 19, highly efficient, small-scale compressor cooling units that pre-chill the ventilation air. Night time ventilation and ceiling fans provide additional cooling. Ground-coupled slabs provide thermal mass and some areas have concrete stem walls for additional thermal mass to help moderate internal temperatures. Photovoltaic panels mounted on the roofs of the Library, Community Hall and Maintenance building supply the site with a total of 76 kilowatts of electricity. Energy models indicated that the PV system would provide a minimum of 25 percent of the Town Center's electrical power needs. In actual use, the PV system has blown away all predictions and is currently generating an average of 80 percent of the electrical power needs. Energy models also predicted that the buildings themselves would reduce energy use by more than 53 percent. These strategies make the buildings approximately 34% more efficient than a baseline building according to EPA's Target Finder and 47.8% more efficient by cost; the heating and cooling in the building are 57% more efficient than a baseline building.
Solar Panels covering the south face of the Library roof.

MATERIALS & RESOURCES: Siegel & Strain specifically chose structural materials and exterior finishes to maximize durability and minimize maintenance. Interior finish materials were selected to ensure the buildings would all have a very high indoor air quality. Additionally, improving the building performance was also considered when all materials were chosen. The existing on-site buildings were carefully dismantled and 90 percent of the materials were recovered for reuse in the new town center and roughly 95 percent of new construction waste was diverted from landfills. Concrete and masonry materials were ground up on site and used as a base rock for roads and building pads. Reinforcing steel and other metals were separated and recycled. The contractors continually exceeded the green requirements of the project: providing feedback on how to get the most salvaged wood out of the old buildings; taking apart packing crates that the metal roofing came in and milling it into window trim; and working with the concrete supplier to achieve 70% slag concrete. Fifty percent of the wood used in the project was FSC certified. All framing is certified to Forest Stewardship Council standards and glulam beams are composed of 40 percent FSC. Local Eucalyptus was used for flooring in the community hall - one of the first commercial applications, and four Alder trees, cleared during construction, were used to clad steel columns in the new buildings. Reclaimed wood was used extensivelyamounting to over 26,000 board feet, roughly 25% of the wood used in the project. 2x6 roof decking from the deconstructed buildings was remilled into 1x6 interior paneling and 1x3 ceiling slats and old glulam beams from those buildings were repurposed into countertops. Salvaged Redwood from Northern California was used as siding for the new buildings and was installed over a rainscreen that allows air to circulate behind the siding. Wood sunscreens are reclaimed Alaskan Yellow Cedar, chosen for durability and color. These sunscreens will weather to a light silvery gray, reflecting daylight into the buildings.
RESULTS & FINDINGS: Reclaimed wood saved about 32 tons of carbon dioxide emissions - 7 tons by eliminating kiln drying and 25 tons by keeping the wood out of landfills, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's WARM calculator. The reuse of onsite and local materials saved an additional 16 tons of carbon emissions associated with materials transportation. High-slag concrete (50% replacement of Portland cement) saved an estimated 55 tons of carbon emissions.
Percent of total building area that is day lit: 87% Percent of building that can be ventilated or cooled with operable windows: 87% Precipitation managed on site: 100% Percent total energy savings: 51% Lighting Load after Controls (W/sf): 0.912
The Portola Valley Town Center achieved Platinum certification, the highest rating available from the LEED for New Construction Green Building Rating System. Among the LEED credits it achieved were Materials and Resources (MR) 3.1 and 3.2, two resource reuse credit that are rarely attained by LEED certified buildings; the Town Center earned them thanks to its extensive use of reclaimed wood and other salvaged materials. At the time of completion, it was have known to be one of the first town centers in the country to receive LEED Platinum. It received 55 points of a total of 69 under the LEED NC 2.2

CONSTRUCTION ANALYSIS
DOCUMENTATION & BIDDING BUDGET/CONSTRUCTION COSTS DECISION MAKING ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES RELATED SERVICES
DOCUMENTATION & BIDDING: This project utilized a construction manager that oversaw the entire construction process from start to finish. He was in charge of coordinating all of the contractors and making sure they all stayed on track and within budget. The construction manager also handled processing and documenting all RFI's and change orders related to the construction process. From Siegel & Strain's office, the project principal was Larry Strain and the project manager was Michael Hayden. Throughout the schematic design, design development and construction document phases of the project Larry Strain and Michael Hayden managed and oversaw Reclaimed wood ceiling in Community Hall the scope of work, budget, schedule, and approvals process. This project was unique in that the architects worked very closely with both the client and the community as a whole through countless meetings and open town forums. Because of this, the architects were directly involved in managing and overseeing almost all aspects of the project. Once construction administration began on the project, the construction manger took over the majority of the oversight and management functions related to the scope of services, budget, schedule and approval process. While Siegel & Strain's office worked closely with the construction manager, he handled most of the day to day operations during the construction process.
A majority of the consultants were hired directly by Siegel & Strain Architects. Each of these consultants had to provide a written scope of services to Siegel & Strain's office which were then combined together and added to the final scope of services that were provided to the town. Additionally, the town of Portola Valley hired a few of its own speciality consultants directly, such as a children's playground consultant. The only issue that arose during the bidding process was that at the time of bidding the town did not fully know what the final project budget would be since the fundraising process was still in the works. Therefore, as more money was raised the scope of services desired by the town kept changing and growing larger. Contractor selection was handled directly by the town with assistance provided by their construction manager. All contracts with the each of the various contractors were directly between them and the town. Since this project utilized a 'Contractor Prime' system there were no sub-contractors. What would normally be a sub-contractor was actually consider a regular contractor because they had a direct contract with the town and not with the construction manager.
Reclaimed wood ceiling in Community Hall

BUDGET/CONSTRUCTION COSTS: For this project the budget started at around $12 million and slowly increased during the design process to end at about $15 million for the constructions costs only. This increase in budget was mainly due to the town's ability to raise more funds than originally expected and was needed when their plans for achieving LEED Gold eventually morphed into a desire to reach a LEED platinum rating instead. The original base funds for the project came from a reserve account the town had set up using funds gathered from a utility tax placed upon the residents of Portola Valley. Normally this money is used to buy additional open space land for the town, but in this instance they decided to designate $3 million from the reserve to kick start the funding of the Portola Valley Town Center project. However, because this money was considered public funding, the town made sure that this portion of the project funding went solely towards the library and community hall buildings but not the town hall building; which is used purely for administrative purposes and was paid for through private funding. The town raised the remaining $12 million from fundraising and private donations in order to avoid the use of a bond measure that the town would later have to pay back. Prior to the town's remarkable fundraising efforts, however, the budget did place a few constraints on the project. For example, the original plan for the project was to construct each new building one after the other, each in a different phase, to avoid going over budget. After giving it some thought, the town decided they wanted to avoid phase construction. This was one factor that convinced the town to push for fundraising and private donations. This allowed for less anxiety in regards to budget constraints throughout the remainder of the project. For this type of project the budget was quite reasonable at $320 - $450/sq. ft., especially considering the extensive use of high quality materials, finishes, and environmentally-friendly systems and appliances. The budget also included site work, which was an extensive component of the project totaling $3-4 million. Siegel & Strain Architects hired a consultant to perform cost estimates early on as well as throughout design development. After the construction documents were compiled, the construction manager came onboard and challenged the original estimate, stating that he could build the project for less. Rather than lowering the budget, however, the construction manager decided to earmark those surplus funds as a contingency in case anything went wrong with the project or any of the contracts went over budget. After joining the project, the construction manager created bidding packages and very detailed individual scopes for each of the prime contractors. This allowed the project to continue smoothly and stay within budget because each contractor was very aware of exactly what services they needed to provided and therefore they could estimate their costs more precisely. Reclaimed wood beam
The budget did not change once the new construction finally began. This was because of the contingency that the construction manager factored into the budget. Wherever one contractor went over budget there were other that would come in under budget, thus keeping the overall budget very well balanced. This was the case with the process of framing the three buildings, which included a significant amount of change orders, RFI's, and additional labor costs that all helped push the framing costs significantly over budget. The costs eventually evened out and the project continued without any major disputes. Whenever there was a change required that would require additional funds to be spent, the town, architect, and contractor would all get together to discuss the issue at had. In the end, however, the town would ultimately make the final decision. Luckily, most issues were agreed upon easily and no major problems arose during the construction process.
Community Hall Post
Fortunately, for this project value engineering did not have to be employed. In fact, quite the opposite occurred. When the town realized that they were within reach of a LEED Platinum certification they actually decided to pump more money into the project so that they could reach that new goal. Overall, the process of building the Portola Valley Town Center went surprisingly smooth for such a complex project. This was due to a number of factors. First, the town was able to raise enough money to secure a reasonable budget that both the architect and construction manager could adhere to. Second, the construction manager went above and beyond in his duties to ensure that all subcontractors covered the complete scope of the project while coming in on or under budget. And third, all parties (owner, architect, and contractors) worked well together so that all issues could be quickly solved and compromises could be made if necessary.

DECISION MAKING: During the construction process, the construction manager handle the majority of the decision making out in the field with regards to the contractors. If a questions arose that the construction manager was unable to answer, an RFI was created and submitted to the town or Siegel & Strain depending on the nature of the request. In the instance of an RFI, Siegel & Strain would then have the decision making ability to determine how to handle the request. At any point throughout the design and construction of the project, the town could, and often would, be consulted on these matters for a final decision. Acting as the owner, the town would have the ultimate final say in any circumstance that arose. Although, most RFI's were handled without having to consult the town. On the other hand, almost all change orders were presented to town the town for final approval. And, as always, the building code would always have to be followed and no decision could be made that violated the building code
GOVERNING AUTHORITIES
TOWN CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
CONTRACTORS
OF
PORTOLA VALLEY SIEGEL
&
STRAIN
GORING
PROJECT PRINCIPAL
Organizational Chart of the Construction Decision Makers
&
STRAJA
ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES: During construction administration the construction manager's role was to oversee all work preformed by the contractors. His main responsibility was to keep the contractors on schedule and within budget. He was in charge of keeping track of the weekly progress made by of each of the contractors as well tracking their percent completion of their scope of services. Additionally, the construction manager was responsible for keeping track of all RFI's and change orders. Finally, he was responsible for keeping track of the budget and making sure that the overall project as a whole did not go over budget anywhere.
GOVERNING AUTHORITIES
TOWN
OF
PORTOLA VALLEY
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
SIEGEL
&
STRAIN
GORING
&
STRAJA
CONTRACTORS
CONSULTANTS Organizational Chart of the External Roles and Responsibilities
RELATED SERVICES: During the construction process, there were several changes to the scope of work that were initiated by the town of Portola Valley. If there was any change would increase Siegel & Strain's scope of service then the firm would sit down with the town and talk them over in detail. For the most part, the town was pretty fair about giving additional compensation for changes that significantly increased Siegel & Strain's scope of services. An example of a pretty big change in scope for the Portola Valley Town Center included the transformation of an attic storage space in the Town Hall into additional office space for staff. This added a significant amount of work to the architect's, consultant's and contractor's scope of services. The largest change in scope was created when the town decided to daylight the creek culvert that ran through the site, which required the services of additional consultants and contractors. There were also a few changes that resulted in a reduction of services provided. The Emergency Operations Center was originally planned to be designed and constructed as part of the overall project, being that it was located inside the Town Hall building. However, part way through the project the town decided that they would prefer to take that project on themselves so that work was removed from Siegel & Strain's original scope. When change orders were initiated, everyone on the project was involved. In almost every case, change orders were negotiated between the contractor, engineer, architect, and the town. In some cases, Siegel & Strain suggested additions or changes (such as the use of rainwater harvesting), but the town denied the request or changed it slightly to their specific liking. As with any project, there were errors and omissions involved, especially in regards to the framing and finish work of the buildings. Because Siegel & Strain's design encompassed so many reclaimed and reused materials that were implemented in new and innovative ways there were many things that were not as thoroughly detailed in the plans as they needed to be for some of the contractors to understand exactly what was going on. This led, in part, to the project having over 470 RFI's, or Request for Information submissions. This was also due to the fact that the project's construction manager was very particular and liked to document everything, insisting that every change, no matter how small, be documented. Siegel & Strain, as well as the consultants and prime contractors on the project, often responded to these RFI's with additional detail drawings, while some resulted in change orders. In the end, Siegel & Strain ended up drawing a lot more details than they thought they would need to clarify how many different parts of the framing and finish work should go together.
Any disputes in regards to change orders or fee changes were eventually resolved, most directly by the construction manager. Most disputes were prevented by frequent meetings between the architect, construction manager, and the town to keep everyone up-to-date and in-the-loop with the project. Everyone seemed to get along and work very well together on this project and therefore there were no major delays such as work stoppage or leans issued. The various contractors were compensated monthly based on the percent completion of their original contract bid with additional change adjustments factored in. The construction manager kept a very detailed work log including all material costs to make sure the budget and service fees were kept accurate and on track throughout the project. The percent completion of the project was determined on a monthly basis by Siegel & Strain The project closeout consisted of a run-through or "punch list" of unfinished items at the end of the construction process. This was more of a visual checklist for the Siegel & Strain to ensure that they didn't see any major problems. An inspector also visited the site after completion to make sure all codes were met and no major violations were present. Although no major issues were found, there were small details that needed to be changed. One of the most frustrating findings required all the toilets to be replaced due to a half-inch intrusion into the minimum code-required dimension between the wall and toilet.
Construction of Creek (Left) Library Drain Chain City Hall Entrance (Right) Community Hall (Top)

PROJECT EVALUATION
PROJECT EVALUATION POST OCCUPANCY PROJECT CONCLUSIONS
PROJECT EVALUATION
The design process for the Town Center involved community administrators, citizens, and designers, all trying to find the best realization of their ideas. The final product has its share of breakthroughs, surprises, and a few minor drawbacks. A surprise success has been the day-lighting of the creek, which was previously channeled through an underground pipe. This feature was not added until midway through the design process, because it was thought more likely to be accepted at that point. Since its completion, it has gone on to have an enormous positive impact on the site and has been highly praised by members of the community. The use of reclaimed wood not only allowed a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, but has also provided some pleasant aesthetic qualities. The weathered and adhesive-stained boards add character to the shading devices and the interiors. The position of the buildings on the site has proven to be the best choice as well, as it allows maximum natural space and room for the sports fields. This location, combined with the arrangement of solar arrays, allows for maximum PV output. The buildings appear nestled comfortably against the tall redwood trees towering over them.
Reclaimed wood in the shading device
Ducks in the day-lit creek.
PROJECT EVALUATION
Children's Reading Area in Library
A major breakthrough was the tracking of carbon emissions from the construction process. This was a ground breaking feat that has rarely been done for an entire project. It has produced valuable data for sustainable design. In fact, Siegel & Strain have presented this at several seminars they have done about "green building". The drawbacks of the Town Center are few, and most were foreseen before opening. Although the new facilities attract more people than the previous ones, the number of parking spaces has remained the same. So on the occasion of a busy sporting event, space is at a premium. However, the rest of the time, the extra empty parking spaces would arguably be a greater detriment to the project. Another difficulty is simply due to the state of the green building industry, which is still working to develop more user friendly building management systems. Users must be continuously instructed how to use the hyper-efficient mechanical systems properly.
PV array
Vision at Entrance to Library
POST OCCUPANCY
Library
Although no formal post occupancy evaluation has been performed, the years since the official opening in September of 2008 have shed light on the real world performance of the Portola Valley Town Center. The occupants are quite pleased with the Center. For the most part, they feel that their collective goals for the project have been met or exceeded. The nature of the efficient HVAC means that temperatures can be slightly warm in the summer months, but the users have easily adjusted. The shading devices allow for pleasant and bright natural day-lighting, and at night the dim lighting scheme keeps the Town Center from standing out against the dark forest. It took about one year of fine tuning to get the mechanical systems running at optimum performance, and adjustments are required to maintain their high level of efficiency. Fortunately, system has been implemented called Building Dashboard by Lucidď‚Ž. The system tracks the output of the photovoltaic array, electricity and gas consumption, and water use. It also provides an energy comparison in different units, including gallons of gasoline, laptop computers, and even hamburgers. Building Dashboard can be accessed from a touch screen in the library, or by anyone on the town's website.
The Building Dashboard
Check Out Counter in Library
POST OCCUPANCY The PV array has been a surprise success. Originally projected to replenish 20% of the buildings' needs, they are now generating over 70%. In summer months, the PV system actually generates a surplus which goes back on the grid. The redwood cladding on the exterior was selected for its warm, natural appearance and excellent weathering. It requires no sealing, but after the opening, the users added a seal coat to one panel, The seal coat weathered differently than the untreated wood, and is now off-white. Value has certainly been added to the client, beginning with an improved sense of community. Not only did the citizens and officials cooperatively engage in the design process, but the new buildings provide them with a place to meet, perform, play, and spend time together. It has also become a symbol of sustainable design within and beyond the town. The community has become more united behind the idea of green building, and is now widely known for it.
Natural Weathered Redwood
Sealed Redwood
Control systems for the PV array
Path over the creek
PROJECT CONCLUSIONS Larry Strain says, "The ethical issue in architecture is serving the larger environment." This means that the building must be seen as more than just a product for the client/user, but as a part of the greater ecological and social community. The Portola Valley Town Center is able to do both: it is the best solution for the needs of the town, and has gone on to benefit architecture outside Portola Valley, CA. This project began with a simple need to replace an outdated and possibly unsafe facility. The needs of the town were fairly straightforward, and any inexpensive and simple buildings would probably have sufficed for their needs. However, the town desired more for what they called their "living room". The addition of a personally involved design team and community involvement ensured this project would be something greater. Design became a significant component of the project when Siegel & Strain and Goring & Straja were selected as the architects. By increasing the quality of the project, the town knew that more funding would be required to make the design a reality. The community was able to raise $12 million through donations, and in addition to the $3 million they already had they funded the $15 million project.
Siegel & Strain believe there are two sides to design excellence, the aesthetic and the technical. Having a joint venture between two firms helped to ensure quality on this project, as did the successful cooperation between the designers. The town envisioned buildings that would complement the landscape, consistent with the town's philosophy of keeping as much of the native environment as possible. They wanted buildings that acted like "a well worn sneaker", and weathered nicely. The abundance of wood, natural lighting, and weathering of the redwood cladding connects the buildings to their environment. The upward-sloping roofs and glass make these more than just generic buildings. The abundance of salvaged material, fly-ash concrete and passive building systems makes a powerful impact (or lack of impact) on the environment. The carbon footprint of the project was low during the construction process and remains low in its operation, and although originally targeting LEED Gold, it was able to achieve LEED Platinum Status. Since its opening, the Portola Valley Town Center has benefitted not only the town, but the community outside through experience and education.