center blocks charrette final
DESCRIPTION
Town Center Master Plan Los Alamos, NM Michael Winstanley Architects Planners Washington DC New York June 12 - 14 2005 Sponsors June 12 - 14 2005 Los Alamos Planning Charrette Sponsorship Michael Winstanley Architects Planners 2 Los Alamos, New Mexico Washington DC New YorkTRANSCRIPT
Los Alamos Planning Charrette
Town Center Master Plan Los Alamos, NM June 12 - 14 2005
Michael Winstanley Architects Planners Washington DC New York
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
2
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Sponsorship
Los Alamos Planning Charrette
Town Center Master Plan Los Alamos, NM June 12 - 14 2005
Sponsors Los Alamos National BankLos Alamos Commerce and Development CorporationLos Alamos Main Street BUILD New Mexico
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Los Alamos Design Charrette
04-05 Executive Summary
06 The Charrette
07 Agenda
08 List of Participants
09 Charrette Photos
10-12 Flip Chart Notes 13 Existing Conditions
14 Development Principles/Sketches
15-17 Three Options
18 Final Option 19 Phase One
20 Model Photos
21 Implementation
22-28 Recommendations Framework Diagrams
29-31 Recommendations Financial Analysis
Contents
Contents
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
4
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Executive Summary
Executiv
e S
ummary
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
5
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
These parking and traffic issues can be viewed in a positive perspective as indicators of a population density that downtown development can begin to capture and nurture toward the creation of an enriched city cen-ter.
Very rough calculations of the study area indicated that in the Central Business District (bounded on the north and south by Central and Trinity Avenues and on the east and west by Wall Street and 20th Street) the potential development rights with 4 and 6 story structures as outlined in our framework plan can yield approximately 2.4 million square feet. After applying a 40% reduction to this number to accommodate for building dimensions in housing (60’ widths) for the upper floors, we estimate an overall potential development of approximately 1.4 million square feet in the study area.
Applying a rule of thumb percentages for retail, commercial office and residential, we calculate that the available space for each of these pro-grams is as follows: Retail – 280,000 sf Commercial office- 420,000 sf Residential- 700,000 sf (770 units)
While these numbers may seem large in relation to what exists today, the numbers are completely compatible with a Central Business District of a municipality the size of Los Alamos. Additionally, based on the discus-sion at the charrette demand seems to be there if not readily apparent at this moment.
It would appear that demand for additional development is indicated in the fully leased condition of most existing downtown commercial build-ings. While rents have not increased this may be a function of quality of space available or the flatness of viable alternatives to prospective com-mercial tenants. It is generally acknowledged that at this point in time, businesses must look outside the city to accommodate either growth or new office needs.
Today, it is estimated that 9,000 employees of businesses and organi-zations located in Los Alamos commute out of the city for a variety of reasons including the lack of housing in amenable environments and ser-vices in the downtown area. Most of these people make a 30 to 60 min-ute commute to homes in the Santa Fe and Espanola areas. Capturing a small percentage of this population would seem to be a realistic possibil-ity. Census data indicate a median family income of $90,000 per year in Los Alamos, which further reflects a healthy market that can support pro-posed development downtown in housing and associated services and businesses.
Executive summary
Executiv
e S
ummary
A master planning charrette was undertaken to specifically address the redevelopment of the center blocks of downtown Los Alamos. The two-day workshop, sponsored by Los Alamos National Bank, Los Alamos Commerce and Development Corporation, Los Alamos Main Street and Build New Mexico and conducted by the team of Michael Winstanley Architects Planners (MWAP), engaged the property owners to create scenarios for redevelopment in the area. The scope of work considered market realities and the critical positioning of these blocks in the overall redevelopment of the downtown as well as addressing the Los Alamos County strategic objectives for investment.
Goals
The efforts of the sessions were focused on three goals:
• Define a plan for growth and/or expansion in center downtown without jeopardizing current occupancies and revenue of existing buildings • Unlock the issue of meeting the zoning and utilization demand for downtown parking in such a manner to facilitate rather than thwart commercial/retail expansion in the center blocks area. • Provide a specific phasing plan and probable timeline for implementing the foundations of the accepted master plan.
Methodology Our methodology to accomplish these goals entailed the inten-sive two-day charrette followed by the refinement of the direction re-sulting from these sessions and summation for implementation:
• INFORMATION GATHERING
• ANALYSIS OF THE EXISTING DOWNTOWN STRUCTURE and ISSUES was generated from the\ charrette process and discussion
• MODELING AND SCENARIO DEVELOPMENT
• REFINEMENT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF A SCENARIO
Conclusion
The primary issue of the Los Alamos downtown is parking. Currently sur-face parking located around the business properties is filling the demand. The parking, maximized in surface lots, has precluded new development due to the need to accommodate parking requirements for the new devel-opment. The resulting lack of space has impacted the emergence of resi-dential development, amenities and services that are critical for a thriving downtown. It is clear that some form of structured parking is pivotal to increase the density of development. It is also clear that phasing the new development will require “sister” sites to provide above grade parking to make up for parking lost on the development. Additional parking can be found by providing on street parking on every downtown street. Parallel parking makes for good urban activity and vibrant retail districts. Spurred by the revenue from this parking configuration, this modification to parking modes should be explored.
Our work illustrates how to accomplish new development without effect-ing existing leases and properties - a key goal of the charrette for the owners, investors and the county to unlock this issue.
Surface parking conditions, i.e. parking exclusively serving the adjacent retail destination, and lack of continuous urban street walkways have dramatically impacted the pedestrian environments that are critical to an economically healthy downtown. An integral aspect of our work is to in-troduce the means to reinvigorate the pedestrian connectivity within the two-block area. The implementation of these concepts will facilitate and promote a pedestrian environment that further strengthens the cityscape. Tree-lined, landscaped streets and pedestrian environments will provide new open spaces centrally located in the two-block sector and connect pedestrian routes to the major population centers, i.e. the bank and the prominent recreation center.
Trinity Road, the primary commuter route to Los Alamos National Laboratory campus runs along the south side of the downtown as a broad four lane expressway, with designated turning lanes, that is neither ame-nable to pedestrian crossing nor development on the south side of Trinity Road. Commuters are unencumbered in their drive through town. By providing parking on both sides of streets and a series of stoplights, pe-destrians can cross at intervening locations along the route; slowing traffic increases the opportunities to draw off commuters to enter into the city center for retail errands etc.
Previous comprehensive master plans, including the Master Plan for Downtown Los Alamos, December 2000 and for the Civic Center Complex prepared in November 2003, were stud-ied to understand ongoing issues and proposed resolutions.The Los Alamos County Development Code were also re-viewed and interviews with city agents were conducted to un-derstand the status of implementation and current activity as it relates to the city of Los Alamos and this effort particularly.
The two-day/two week summary exercise has provided impetus and a specific model for where and how to direct new development. The findings would appear to justify additional investment of time and effort to detail these steps. The consensus of the charrette par-ticipants was that the Downtown Committee should solicit the services of a master devel-oper whose role would be to prepare detailed development plans toward implementation of the first phase of change.
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
The C
harrette
The Charrette
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Agenda
The C
harrette
Los Alamos Planning Charrette
June 12th-14th, Los Alamos, New Mexico
Sunday, June 12th Attendees2 – 4pm Site visit and walk around Planning team (KH, JT, SD, MW+team)4 – 6pm Pre-charrette meeting Planning team (KH, JT, SD, MW+team)7 – 9pm Design Team Preparation and set-up (MW+team)
Monday, June 1�th7:30 – 8am Breakfast/Introductions Open to all
8 – 10 am Presentation of Previous Master Plans (TBD) and Real Estate professionals on demand and program mix.10 – 12 am Property Owner’s comments and Goals (TBD) 12 – 4 pm Working Lunch – Workshop Charrette Planning Team and selected members4 – 5:30 pm Presentation of planning diagrams Open to all
6:30 - ???pm Planning team option development Planning team Financial model framework Tuesday, June 14th8:30 – 9 am Presentation of Planning option(s) Open to all
9 – 9:30 am Presentation of Financial Model Open to all
9:30 – 11 am Open discussion Open to all
11 – 12 pm Establishment of project goals Open to all and success criteria
12 – 4 pm Working Lunch - Workshop Charrette Planning Team and selected members4 – 5 pm Presentation of planning option(s) Open to all and open discussion
5 – 5:30 pm Wrap –up and closing comments Open to all Next Steps
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
List of Participants
Participants
Rick Bohn Los Alamos County / representing Property Owner
Kevin Holsapple LACDC / Los Alamos Main Street
Jim Trump BNM / UDC
Toni Ponic BNM / UDC
Andy Fox CBFox / Property Owner
Dave Fox CBFox / Property Owner
Lewis Muir Property Owner
Denise Lane Lane Prestige Group / Property Owner
Jill Cook Los Alamos National Bank / Property Owner
Poe Corn CB Richard Ellis / Property Owner
Bart Davis JB Henderson Construction
Shad James Jaynes Corp.
Gary Jeppson LACCo. CDD
Anthony Johnson Sedberry’s Associates
Don Power Jaynes Corp.
Steven Shaw Mosaic Architectural solutions, P.A.
Paul Stanford LMC
Don Wiviott The Lofts
Fred Brueggeman Self
Charrette Team
Michael Winstanley, AIA, AICP Michael Winstanley Architects & Planners
Christen J Robbins Michael Winstanley Architects & Planners
Steve Dixon The Peninsula Group
The C
harrette
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Charrette photos
The Charrette was held in a community room at Fuller Lodge. Participants and the Charrette Team presented and discussed previous mas-ter plans, The County Development Code, market/demands, and their goals and ideas. All meetings, presentations and design de-velopment took place at this location. Master plans illustrations and models were created by the charrette team and presented to the par-ticipants.
The C
harrette
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
10
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Flip Charts Notes
Goals of the County Development Code
1. Denser Development w/ Efficient Land Use Dealing w/ the Asphalt/ Building Ratio 2. Mixed Use development / diversifying the Downtown and facilitate the property owners to develop. 3. County participation 4. More people downtown 5. New Urbanism Plan
County Council/ Strategic Plan - Goals
Resources · $6,500,000 spent toward redevelopment · Funding will be provided $1 to every private $5 spent Los Alamos Development · Uses – infrastructure · The County is looking to spark projects that will provide community benefit.
The New Urbanism Plan
Zoning radiates out from the town center.Town center: 20th – 15th St Neighborhood Center small scale buildings i.e. service stations
Parking survey is needed to identify the available spaces and use at dif-ferent times of the day to identify the current parking loads.This information will be available at the end of JuneFinalizing zone locations on the map / Public hearing in July and goes to the council in August for final approval
As county property Deacon St amounts to several acres of land that is not currently being utilized effectively. Districts – Overlay Ordinance - Requires Parking · Right of Way – for the trail on Inn Property along the canyon rim
· New Streets south of Trinity Drive
Lab Participation In flux/ December 1st a final selection of the New Contractor
Trinity · intolerant speed for pedestrian Traffic/ crossing The current speed limit 35 mph
Utility / Infrastructure: Concerns about the future capacity / Location
The development code was written to limit re-strictions and provide flexibility to fill market needs and demand. Liberal height limits, re-duced set backs, reduced minimum parking and zoning the downtown center as a mixed use are in the development code to foster de-velopment within the downtown district.
All punitive responses to property owners who were not interested in development were opposed, to protect the owners and the cur-rent state of their properties. This code is ready to be overlaid onto the zones that are seen as the best location for the Los Alamos City Center Block. The Planning and Zoning Commission is holding a public hearing in July and the council will convene in August for Final Approval Ruling of the districts.
Town Center Concept:
1. Allow height to 75’ 2. Designation not yet established Public hearing in July 3. Town Center + Neighborhood Center 4. Will need Traffic Study 5. Parking Study Underway
Development Code: 1. Reduced min.- parking Requirements 2. Market driven 3. Existing Conditions Acceptance 4. Special Plan Overlay District 5. Town center up to 75’
The C
harrette
Diagram 1: Diagram of Los Alamos Existing Buildings
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
11
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Development and RestructuringExisting Proposals
1 Inn Site – Redevelopment mixed use residential/ retail 12th – 15th retail
2 Central Site Plan The Caves – Additional Residential on 9th – 15th St.
� Trinity / County land
17 acres of land owned partially by the County and partially by the Los Alamos Public Schools. Possibly available for redevelopment on the south side of Trinity Drive. Plan is for the removal of all the existing stor-age buildings to make way for new development. (20 acres) adjoining?
4 Historic District - Designation as a National Park - Marketing Los Alamos - 10 years Possibility
Designation as a National Park: This designation would be good for the increase of tourism. The National Park Service would give the property to be managed by the County. This designation would put Los Alamos on the map for tourists. The houses would be linked to a larger meeting place and provide high end accommodations i.e. VIP housing and month long seminars will be some of its anchoring uses.
5. Canyon School
- Lab leases property from the Los Alamos Public Schools - Office Retail Development - Canyon School development is on the plan Located at Town Entry
Flip Charts Notes
� Civic Center/Referendum
- Concession Space - Performing Arts Center - Parking Question - need garage - ($6 million) ( ~ 400 cars) - Multi Purpose space
The County has proposed developing a Civic
/ Performing Arts Center on the east side of
Ashley Pond. A Referendum Vote will be con-
ducted in September 2005 on the $23 million
project that will result in additional taxes for
the residents. $3 million of the project funds
are allocated for the concession building that
is proposed to be leased.
The weakness of the project is that the parking
issues have not been addressed. The building
is for multi use and possibly used daily creat-
ing parking demand greater than a facility that
would be mainly used in the evenings.
The C
harrette
Diagram 2: Aerial Photo of Los Alamos
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
12
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Flip Charts Notes
Market and Demand:
surrounding areas & Los Alamos
Housing – urban areas
1. On going Demand for Housing -Urban Downtown goods and services 200K (190K – 225K) Young professionals single -Housing market soft over 300K
2. Lab effect on housing -December 1 determination of contract
�. New Construction
4. Post Doc Median Rate -$240K Dwelling 1150-1250 sq. ft.
5. Amenities - Not offered at this time - Parking and storage - Spouses amenities - Basic Services - Safety and Security - mid range rentals - Storage - Community Center - Pool - Cover Parking - < $200,000 (Range $190,00 - 225,00000) strong despite a soft market
People are more apt to rent due to the National Lab being in flux and the amount of two year employees, i.e. post docs at the lab.
Median 2 income household $92,000Post Doc’s salary ………$ 60,000?
Housing Product
New Houses$187 - $213 sq ft
Resale$150 - $180 sq ft
Rentals$1 sq ft
Santa Fe$.89 - $1.20 sq ftno mid range
Commercial Real Estate
Lease Rates Construction Costs
Retail Commercial $12 - $15 sq ft Core $168 sq ft Warm Shell $148 sq ftSpecialty Retail $18 - $25 sq ft Multi Family Condos $ 130 sq ftOffice$14 - $22 sq ft Parking Above grade $15,000 per space Below grade $20-25,000 Land Cost Relative to the cost of parking Genral Comments: - There is no space available - No zone able land available - Short term leases are an issue - LANL Work Centers - These numbers will rise with quality Commercial Products: - Standard Office Spaces - Power redundancy - IT compatible
Short Term LeasesConsistencyProviding stable leasesGSA – 10 –15 yrsResearch park one yr leasesFinancing – Bank LoansPre LeasingLong term viability work centers 200 person Environmental standards and sustainability Benefits in economic growth
The C
harrette
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
1�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Existing Conditions
The primary issue of the Los Alamos down-town is parking, currently the demand is being filled with vast amounts of surface park-ing located around the business properties Illustrated by the model of existing site plan. The surface parking strategy has prevented the open space from being developed to cre-ate an urban infill in the downtown area.
The model was made to demonstrate the build-ing to asphalt ratio it provides a visual compar-ison with the final development model.
Diagram 3: Model of Existing Conditions
The C
harrette
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
14
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Development Principles / Sketches
Plaza / Park Scheme
Perimeter Scheme
Four Corners Scheme
Taking into consideration the information pre-sented and discussed by the charrette partici-pants, the design team prepared three diagrams to address the parking needs and development of the town center. Each option works within the framework of the Development Principles (listed below).
The Perimeter Scheme locates structured park-ing in the blocks core providing one central loc-tion for shared parking.
The Four Corner Scheme divides the block up into smaller blocks of development.
The Park /Plaza Scheme opens up the core of the block further dividing the block and providing open space at the core of the block.
Development Principles
1. No Demolition in Phase I of existing Buildings
2. No forced lease terminations
3. Create new development sites by shared parking Scenarios
4. All streets to have on street Parking A. Metering
5. Let market forces / demand determine fate if existing properties
6. Goal is to increase value of existing land / properties
P
The C
harrette
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
15
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Option I / Perimeter Scheme
This Scheme organizes the area into large block units locating retail / office access at the perimeter of the blocks with parking consoli-dated to a few central locations.
By consolidating the parking at the block core the design provides the town center with a large parking structure that becomes the shared parking for the businesses developed around the structure.
The benefits of this scheme are that each block contains one primary location for park-ing that supports the surrounding buildings. This structure would release the current sur-face parking around the perimeter for devel-opment. Additional street parking is created around the perimeter of each block.
The drawbacks is that the town center block already large in scale, becomes larger and denser the scale may not be appropriate for Los Alamos town center.
The C
harrette
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
1�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Option II / Park / Plaza Scheme
This separates the existing core city block it into a set of smaller blocks. A plaza in cen-tral location, creates an open place the town center the can fill programmatic needs of the surrounding businesses. As well as create an attractive area for pedestrian circulation and relaxation.
The benifits of the plan up create more street frontage area, which provides an increased amount of store frontage as well as additional street parking. Functionally it increases acces-sibility to the surrounding buildings and acti-vates the use of Deacon Street as a dominant town center circulation road for both automo-biles and pedestrians.
The C
harrette
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
1�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Option III / Four Corners Scheme
This scheme focuses on Main Street, continu-ing it through the Town Center block connect-ing Central Avenue to Trinity Drive, thus mak-ing Main Street, as its name suggest, a main thoroughfare.
At the streets crossroads of Main and Deacon the buildings are set back to mark the location creating the “four corners”.
This scheme provides many of the same ben-efits as the Park/Plaza Scheme such as in-creased street parking, division of the larger block into smaller units and activating Deacon St. as a dominate road for circulation through the center of town. Parking structures intro-duced as part of the scheme, are smaller and are located throughout the blocks. This incor-porates them into the developed sites.
The C
harrette
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
1�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Final Option
After presentation and discussion of the pro-posed options the charrette participants fa-vored of the Four Corners Scheme and the Plaza Park Scheme.
This final master plan is a consolidation of key elements of the two options. It also addresses the issues discussed with the charrette par-ticipants.
The scheme provides a smaller park/ plaza located on the northeast corner of a “Four Corners” intersection at Main and Deacon streets. A more intimate open space was de-veloped within the town center. “Four Corners” defines the location of the park; the intersec-tion provides circulation to and around the town center park/plaza.
The commercial zone on the south side of Trinity Drive was further developed. Existing buildings were retained in conjunction with the addition of residential zones facing the canyon rim. Trinity Drive provides access to the new expanded zones.
The C
harrette
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
1�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Case One: Retail Plus Residential
Income / sq.ft. = Retail Rent $25 = $4.1 (9% cap) Residential Sale $225 = 11.0 Parking Income = TBD $15.1 m
Construction Cost Retail $2.2 m Residential $6.4 m Parking $0.62 m “ “(2 stories) $1.1 m $10.3 mCase Two: Retail Plus Office
Income $10.4 m Cost $9.2 m Net $1.2 m
Case Three: Add Retail to Garage
Income $3.0 m Cost $1.8 m Net $1.2 m
Recommended Approach: Sister Site Plan
Total Development per model site = 1.2 m sq. ft.
Retail = 20% = 240,000 sq ft Residential = 600 units Office = 30% = 360,000 sq ft
Model Site: Area Program17,250 s.f. grossRetail = 14,600 (85%)Residential = 12,300 (by plan)Office = 10,500
Support Garage Site:14,400 s.f. Assume: One Level Below41 Spaces per floor Grade = 50 spaces= $616,000.00 Displaced spaces = 62 Less 50 = 12 Plus Required by Use
Phase One
Phase One takes a look at a concept of “Sister Sites” to relieve parking and provide a struc-tured parking base for new development. A preliminary financial analysis indicates a cost of relocation of parking is acceptable since this really becomes land cost.
The C
harrette
Diagram 4: Sister Site Phase One
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
20
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
The final discussion produced a series of Development Goals by the participants. These goals reflect the series of issues relevant to this group and should be a foundation of all future decisions.
Project Goals
1. Represent work as two block development - To speak as One Voice - All Property Owners2. Have representatives or group with expertise to run the project. (Master Developer, Design Consultants)3. Engage County Staff and councilmen to help development a. The Plan b. LACDC c. LANL Contractors4. Localize the project use, resources to develop the plan and development5. Illustrate path forward as a Work Plan6. Identify funding sources for development costs7. Recommendations on zoning to county a. (Parking + height + setbacks + uses) b. Create zoning overlay for the two block area8. Improve the quality of the environment of the downtown district9. Increase the value of the property the CBD10. Develop plan consistent with previous plans + approved plans ( Seeks to further develop the work)11. Explore and encourage sustainable principles in the development plan12. Develop financial Pro-Ferma to illustrate to the County how they can participate. Develop Case Study
Model Photos
The C
harrette
During the charrette process two models were produced for the participants to get a better understanding of the master plan and a denser town center.
The model is representative of the final scheme presented demonstrating the buildings of various heights and the de-velopment of the open spaces along Deacon Street and within the residential neighborhood on the south side of Trinity Drive.
Diagram 4-6: Model Photos
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
21
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Estimated Fees for Six Months
Development Team Fee $8,000.00 a month $48,000.00
Arch. Planner (including this week) $75,000.00Financial Planning $30,000.00 $153,000.00
Legal * (not going in this direction) $10,000.00Eng. & Utilities $30,000.00Soft Cost (misc.) $20,000.00Studies – Market $15,000.00 Traffic $40,000.00 Environmental $30,000.00Plus out expense & taxes $298,000.00
Implementation
Implementation Scope for Master Development 1. All Related Parties: a. Education a. Owners b. Support b. County Staff c. Agreements c. Tenants d. Public/Associations d. Community
2. Development Work Plan a. Focused by Flux b. Build on today with reports
�. Financing – Capitol/Long Term a. County/TIF’s/Bond’s b. Commercial/other/GAP/County c. Education
4. Picking Lead Project a. Financial Studies on each project b. Identify other studies needed, i.e., traffic, etc. c. Conduct demand/market studies = Contractors, Market, Financing, Soft Cost
5. Zoning/Master Plan/Arch Cont All stake holders, decision makers inform/educate
�. Outline Process for a project to go from concept to construction.
�. Make Sites available
8. Master Developer can purchase property or will in the future a. Joint Venture b. Financing c. Any and all above
�. This is not a listing a. No fee’s in this agreement for selling or leasing– that is done by each owner
A strong conclusion of this exercise is that more work should be performed to ready sites for development. Based on the Association’s interest in joint development, a single master developer should be selected and engaged to prepare more detailed plans and make sites marketable for the development community.
Estimated fees and a Scope of work for the next steps were defined to conclude the char-rette
The C
harrette
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
22
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Recommendations
Framework Diagram
Recommendatio
ns
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
2�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
This diagram shows the boundaries of the proj-ect area in downtown Los Alamos. The aerial photo displays the existing layout of the down town. The properties within the boundary are owned by multiple parties: corporations, pri-vate and county land. The area was the basis for the charrette.
Project Area
Recommendatio
ns
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
24
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
One of the most important aspects of any town center is circulation. The inherent conflicts between the necessity of the automobile and character of a pedestrian environment need to be managed to find the critical balance.
Pedestrian circulation is normally a product of “desire lines” between programs. A town that focuses the pedestrian activities along these desire lines creates active and vibrant environments for all its users. The circulation framework diagram illustrates a proposal to accomplish the proper balance of a pedestri-an friendly town and to provide convenient ac-cess to the town center for automobiles. The basic principle of the framework is to provide four types of roads though the town center.
The primary roads, Trinity Drive and Central Avenue provide circulation through the town and out toward the National Lab. The second-ary roads run perpendicular to the primary routes connecting them and provide direct ac-cess to the town center.
Deacon Street, parallel to the primary roads, is the spine of the town center making it the dom-inant pedestrian path. Establishing this strong pedestrian spine and focusing major move-ment and population into one area strength-ens the access to the town center connects the largest work center to the Ashley Pond Park area.
The fourth type of road is along the Los Alamos canyon rim on the south side of Trinity Drive. It is a scenic route with access to the residen-tial neighborhoods and a hiking trail along the canyon rim.
Circulation Framework
Recommendatio
ns
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
25
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Based on the existing block organization and the town center circulation diagram, we have established open spaces formed by a com-bination of existing and future building sites. Each of the paths have been located to rein-force the town organizational grids and to cre-ate new open spaces of various scale. The width and length of the new footprints are cre-ated by dividing up the existing blocks and therein creating open space.
The Park/Plaza Space is created by the cross roads of Deacon and Main Streets and two pe-destrian paths located the large open space in the center of town. Additional green space is developed at the termination of Deacon Street at the foot of the Los Alamos National Bank. At the opposite of this route Deacon Street con-nects to the existing Ashley Pond Park. It is our expectation that in the following phases of master planning the open spaces will be pro-grammed and furthered developed with the addition of landscape architecture.
Open Space Framework
Recommendatio
ns
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
2�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
The Land Use Diagram illustrates the uses proposed for each of the areas where we indicate new development. Building on the existing conditions of the land use, per the Development Code classifications of zones, new building infill and open space develop-ment are by grouped together by similar use.
The groupings provide distinct zones within the Los Alamos project area. Three classifica-tions have been show here:
The town center is zoned mixed-use allowing any combination of residential, office, and re-tail.
Along the road on the south side of Trinity Drive a commercial zone has been designated
And beyond that toward the canyon rim a resi-dential zone has been defined.
The diagram illustrates how the blocks have been divided up to create an urbanized scale to the town development.
Land Use Framework
Recommendatio
ns
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
2�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Building HeightFramework
The Los Alamos County Development Code specifies a maximum building height of 75’ within the town center mixed-use zone. The building height frame work diagram illustrates two areas in the town center: the maximum allowed height can be built within the core of the block (shown as the darker orange color); a 45’ height limit is shown in the lighter orange color at street/block perimeters
This concept of having the elevations change within the town center block creates diversity within the block and responds to the smaller-scale of surrounding neighborhoods of Los Alamos.
( 25’ )
( 45’ )
( �5’ )
Recommendatio
ns
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
2�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Phase One Development
The first steps of implementing the Town Center Master Plan:Identifying the sites that are available for development based on the Development Principles.
The Phase One Diagram shows all the exist-ing conditions in Los Alamos and illustrates land that can be developed without any distur-bance to the existing buildings. Provided that they supplement the consumed surface park-ing with new structured parking.
Circulation in this phase illustrates functional access to the new sites with no interference to the existing conditions.
( 25’ )
( 45’ )
( �5’ )
Recommendatio
ns
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
2�
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Recommendations Financial Analysis
Recommendatio
ns
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
�0
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Financial Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations:
Recommendatio
ns
Diagram 6: Phase One “Sister Sites”
During the workshop process as well as through other sources, a great deal was discovered about the financial makeup of the Los Alamos down-town area. This included rental rates, ownership structures, expected land values, construction costs, parking, etc. This section summarizes those findings and draws conclusions and recommendations from them.
The existing and potential rental and selling rates for various classes of space within the target area are probably the most important financial considerations in the future plan viability. The consensus within the work-shop group was that rates generally fell into the following categories:
Retail Rates $15.00 per square foot Specialty Retail $18.00 to $20.00 per square foot Big Box – National $10.00 to $16.00 per square foot Office Rates $14.00 to $22.00 per square foot Residential Rates $187.00 to $213.00 per square foot – Purchase Residential Rates $1 per square foot per month – Leased Hospitality $90.00 per night Parking No existing charges for parking
The group felt that with an improved CBD commercial and residential environment, rates could be increased. However, the first stages of that redevelopment would need to be at rate levels similar to what is being achieved and then the rates could be increased across later stages. This was not true for residential, where supply was so tight that reasonable asking rate levels above the current rates should be tested immediately.
It was also noted that office and residential offerings were well below class A levels and that better quality and more efficient spaces could also achieve a higher rate. They were all willing to test this position. The case study following this section will illustrate the assumptions we have made in rates on a first phase step into the new plan.
Construction costs related to these same categories of use were sug-gested as follows:
Retail Costs $160.00 per square foot Specialty Retail Costs $170.00 per square foot Office Costs $193.00 per square foot Residential Costs $150.00 per square foot Parking Costs 350 sf per space at a cost of $12,500 per space in a structured facility and the same for the first level for below grade, then $25,000 per space below that first level.
These costs include hard costs for construction and a 15% uplift for soft costs, but do not include land costs. They are based on similar projects completed in the Los Alamos area in recent months. Case Studies
This section takes the work from the various earlier sections and creates possible scenarios for next step development. The case studies are di-vided into two categories:
1. Residential and Retail Development with Parking 2. Office and Retail Development with Parking
The first scenario or case study uses the northwest corner property today occupied by a surface parking lot and owned by the association, and a portion of the central parking lot to the south and east of that area for a structured parking facility. See map below.
The scenario makes the following assumptions:
· The retail and residential building is four stories with the first floor as retail· The footprint is 17,250 sf.· The dimensions of the upper floors, residential area, are excellent for efficient use as residences· Surface parking is maintained around the building · The building is setback from the existing Washington Capital Building by 40 feet· The retail area is 14,600 sf or 85% of the gross building area. This loss is for mechanical areas and lobby/elevator area for the upper floor residences.· The residential floors are 12,300 sf· The supporting garage is 14,400 sf with 41 spaces per floor.· The garage is assumed to be two floors plus retail.· Total parking displaced is 62 and required from expanded development is 96, a total of 158. New parking provides for 170 spaces.
The resultant cost and income model is shown below:
Case One: Residential with Retail and Parking SF/Units Unit Cost TotalCost to Develop: Retail 14,600 sf $160.00 per sf $2,336,000 Residential 36,900 sf $150.00 per sf $5,535,000 Parking 50 below residential $12,500.00 per space $625,000 building 82 structured $12,500.00 per space $1,025,000 38 surface $5,000.00 per space $190,000 170 Total Parking $9,711,000
Income per SF Cap Rate Total Income from Development: Retail 14,600 sf $25.00 9.00% $4,055,556 Residential 36,900 sf $225.00 9.00% $8,302,500 Parking 50 below residential TBD building 82 structured TBD 38 surface 170 Total Parking $12,358,056 Gain: $2,647,056 Percentage Gain over Cost if All Cash: 27.26%
L
os A
lamos P
lannin
g C
harrette
Los A
lamos, N
ew
Mexic
o
�1
Mic
hael W
instanley A
rchit
ects
Planners
W
ashin
gton D
C
New
York
Financial Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations:
Recommendatio
ns
Diagram 7: Phase One “Sister Sites”
The second case utilizes the site on Central Avenue for office and retail. The parking for this expanded use is provided on the site underground at one level, on the street and in a structured garage to be developed. The scenario makes the following assumptions:
· The office and retail building is four stories with the first floor as retail· The footprint is 17,250 sf.· The dimensions of the upper floors, office area, are excellent for efficient use as office space· Surface parking is maintained around the building · The retail area is 14,600 sf or 85% of the gross building area. This loss is for mechanical areas and lobby/elevator area for the upper floor residences.· The office floors are 10,500 sf and require parking for 3:1000 sf.· The supporting garage is 14,400 sf with 41 spaces per floor.· The garage is assumed to be two floors plus retail.· Total parking displaced is 62 and required from expanded development is 96, a total of 158. New parking provides for 170 spaces.The resultant cost and income model is shown below:
Case Two: Office with Retail and Parking SF/Units Unit Cost TotalCost to Develop: Retail 14,600 sf $160.00 per sf $2,336,000 Office 42,000 sf $193.00 per sf $8,106,000 Parking 50 below office $12,500.00 per space $625,000 82 structured $12,500.00 per space $1,025,000 50 surface $5,000.00 per space $250,000 182 Total Parking $12,342,000 Income per SF Cap Rate Total Income from Development: Retail 14,600 sf $25.00 9.00% $4,055,556 Office 42,000 sf $22.00 9.00% $10,266,667 Parking 50 below residential TBD 82 structured TBD 38 surface 170 Total Parking $14,322,222 Gain: $1,980,222 Percentage Gain over Cost if All Cash: 16.04%
Michael Winstanley Architects Planners Washington DC New York
2� Broadway Suite 1�00New York NY 1000�
T 212 201 45��F 212 �52 11�0
121� First StreetAlexandria VA 22�14
T �0� 51� �0�1F �0� 51� �0�2