REPORT TO COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Title
Discussion and Approval of the Formation of a Community Advisory Committee to Support the Evaluation of Future City Hall Facility Options and Appointment of Committee Members
Report
BACKGROUND
The City Hall facility located at 1500 Warburton Avenue was originally constructed in 1958 and has served as the center of municipal government operations for nearly seven decades. While the facility has undergone modifications and improvements over time, many building systems, operational layouts, and public service functions reflect standards and requirements from a different era. As municipal service demands continue to evolve, the City must evaluate whether the existing facility can effectively support current and future operational needs, public accessibility requirements, customer service expectations, technology infrastructure, sustainability goals, and workplace standards.
The current discussion regarding the future of City Hall was initiated following a proposal from Valley Oak Partners regarding a potential City Hall opportunity at the current Oracle Campus located at 4220 Network Circle. The proposal generated discussion regarding the long-term needs of the City's administrative facilities and whether relocation, renovation, reconstruction, or adaptive reuse opportunities should be considered as part of a comprehensive evaluation process.
In response, the City Council directed staff to undertake a public process to evaluate all reasonable alternatives for the future of City Hall rather than focusing on a single site or proposal. Council emphasized the importance of conducting a transparent, community-driven evaluation process that considers the operational, financial, and community implications of multiple alternatives before any decisions are made regarding the future location or configuration of City Hall.
Consistent with that direction, staff is proposing a comprehensive City Hall evaluation process that will consider the following alternatives:
• Remodeling the existing City Hall facility;
• Rebuilding a new City Hall on the existing site;
• Constructing a new City Hall on City-owned property within the downtown area; and
• Acquiring and converting an existing building/campus within the City for use as City Hall.
The evaluation process will include technical, operational, financial, and community considerations. Staff anticipates retaining professional consultants to conduct a Space Needs Assessment and Fit Plan, Facility Condition Assessment, conceptual planning studies, feasibility analyses, and cost evaluations for the alternatives under consideration.
Recognizing that any future City Hall investment will have long-term impacts on residents, businesses, employees, and taxpayers, the City Council also directed staff to develop a framework for a Community Advisory Committee (CAC) to support the evaluation process. The proposed CAC represents an important component of the City's broader public engagement strategy and will help ensure that community values and priorities are considered alongside technical analyses and financial considerations as the City evaluates future City Hall facility options.
DISCUSSION
1. City Hall Evaluation Process Overview
To support the evaluation process, the City intends to retain professional consultants to perform technical analyses including:
• Space Needs Assessment and Fit Plan;
• Facility Condition Assessment;
• Operational and Functional Needs Analysis;
• Architectural and Site Feasibility Studies;
• Cost Estimating and Financial Analysis;
• Lifecycle Cost Analysis; and
• Public Outreach and Engagement Support.
The Space Needs Assessment and Fit Plan will evaluate current and future workspace requirements, customer service needs, public meeting space requirements, technology infrastructure, records storage needs, accessibility requirements, and operational efficiencies. The Facility Condition Assessment will evaluate building systems, structural conditions, deferred maintenance needs, code compliance issues, and facility deficiencies.
The alternatives City Hall options will be evaluated through a combination of technical analyses, financial review, and community engagement. The alternatives analysis will compare each option based on factors including:
• Ability to meet operational needs;
• Customer accessibility and service delivery;
• Sustainability opportunities;
• Capital and lifecycle costs;
• Downtown and community impacts;
• Construction feasibility and implementation risks;
• Schedule considerations; and
• Community priorities identified through public outreach.
2. Community Advisory Committee Purpose and Scope
The CAC will serve as an advisory body to the City Council throughout the City Hall evaluation process. The purpose of the CAC is to promote transparency, facilitate community participation, and provide a structured forum for public input regarding future City Hall facility options.
The CAC's responsibilities shall include:
• Reviewing information and studies prepared by City staff and consultants;
• Providing community perspectives regarding City Hall alternatives;
• Assisting with outreach and engagement within the community;
• Gathering input from residents, businesses, and stakeholders;
• Identifying community priorities, concerns, and opportunities; and
• Providing recommendations and feedback to the City Council.
The CAC will not possess decision-making authority. All policy decisions regarding City Hall planning, site selection, project alternatives, financing, and implementation will remain the responsibility of the City Council.
Community Advisory Committee Membership and Appointment Process
To ensure broad geographic representation and citywide participation, staff recommends a seven-member Committee consisting of:
• One representative appointed by each Councilmember (six district representatives); and
• One citywide representative appointed by the Mayor.
This structure provides district-based representation while ensuring citywide interests are considered throughout the evaluation process.
Committee members are expected to:
• Attend and actively participate in scheduled CAC meetings;
• Review materials provided by staff and consultants;
• Serve as liaisons to their respective districts and community networks;
• Encourage public participation and engagement; and
• Provide objective feedback and recommendations throughout the evaluation process.
The CAC is expected to remain active for approximately nine to twelve months or until completion of its advisory responsibilities.
3. Proposed Community Advisory Committee Work Plan and Schedule
The CAC's work is anticipated to occur over approximately nine months and generally align with consultant studies, public outreach activities, and City Council milestones.
Phase 1 - Committee Organization and Project Orientation (Months 1-2)
The CAC will receive orientation and background information regarding the City Hall evaluation process.
Information that the Committee will receive include:
• Committee roles and responsibilities;
• City Hall history and existing conditions;
• Project goals, evaluation criteria, and schedule;
• Existing facility conditions and operational challenges;
• Consultant studies and public engagement plans.
Phase 2 - Space Needs Assessment and Community Priorities (Months 2-4)
The CAC will review analyses related to current and future municipal facility needs and assist in identifying community priorities.
Information that the Committee will receive include:
• Space Needs Assessment and Fit Plan;
• Current and future staffing and service delivery requirements;
• Accessibility, technology, customer service, and operational needs;
• Community outreach strategies;
• Plan for public workshops, surveys, and stakeholder engagement activities.
Phase 3 - Alternatives Development and Evaluation (Months 3-5)
The CAC will review and provide feedback regarding alternatives for the future of City Hall.
Information that the Committee will receive include:
• Conceptual alternatives and feasibility analyses;
• Operational functionality and public accessibility;
• Sustainability opportunities and community impacts;
• Discussion of implementation considerations and project risks.
Phase 4 - Financial Analysis and Comparative Evaluation (Months 6-7)
The CAC will review consultant analyses regarding the financial implications of each alternative.
Information that the Committee will receive include:
• Preliminary capital cost estimates;
• Estimated lifecycle and maintenance costs;
• Funding options, financing considerations, and project risks;
• Comparative evaluation of alternatives based upon technical findings and community priorities.
Phase 5 - Advisory Findings and Recommendations (Months 8-9)
The CAC will develop advisory findings and recommendations for consideration by the City Council.
During this phase, the Committee will:
• Review community outreach results;
• Discussion of strengths and challenges associated with each alternative;
• Development of advisory findings and recommendations;
• Review a presentation of a final advisory report to the City Council.
The schedule may be adjusted based upon consultant timelines, public outreach efforts, and City Council direction. The work plan is intended to provide a general framework for Committee activities and may be refined as the project progresses to ensure alignment with technical analyses, community engagement outcomes, and Council direction. Any adjustments will be made to support an effective and informed evaluation process.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed action to establish a Community Advisory Committee is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 because it is an organizational and administrative activity that will not result in a direct or indirect physical change to the environment.
Any future City Hall project or facility improvements resulting from subsequent Council actions will be subject to separate environmental review in accordance with CEQA.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funding for consultant services to support the CAC’s work is currently budgeted in the Civic Center Campus Future Needs appropriation in the Public Buildings Capital Fund. Existing City staff time associated with project coordination, review, and administration will be absorbed within existing departmental operating budgets.
COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Manager's Office, City Attorney's Office, and Finance Department.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email clerk@santaclaraca.gov or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation
Approve the formation of a Community Advisory Committee consisting of one representative appointed by each City Councilmember and one at-large representative appointed by the Mayor to provide advisory input regarding the evaluation of the future of City Hall.
Staff
Reviewed by: Elizabeth Klotz, Assistant City Manager
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. City Hall Workplan Overview