C. Public Works Facility: Update
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Administration
Phone: 952.227.1100
Fax: 952.227.1110
Building Inspections
Phone: 952.227.1180
Fax: 952.227.1190
Engineering
Phone: 952.227.1160
Fax: 952.227.1170
Finance
Phone: 952.227.1140
Fax: 952.227.1110
Park & Recreation
Phone: 952.227.1120
Fax: 952.227.1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone: 952.227.1400
Fax: 952.227.1404
Planning &
Natural Resources
Phone: 952.227.1130
Fax: 952.227.1110
Public Works
1591 Park Road
Phone: 952.227.1300
Fax: 952.227.1310
Senior Center
Phone: 952.227.1125
Fax: 952.227.1110
Web Site
www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
bl k IC' '7 CJ.
Paul Oehme, Director of Pu ic Wor s Ity Engineer (~
c
The City 01 Chanhassen · A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play.
FROM:
DATE:
May 27, 2008
~~
SUBJ:
Public Works Facility, Project No. 08-03: Update
BACKGROUND
At the December 10, 2007 work session, staff reviewed with Council a report which
identified options for public works facility improvements to meet current and future
needs of the department. Four options were reviewedJor possible public works
facility improvements. At that time, staff recommendation was to build a new facility
on Park Place site. Council directed staff to look at some other options for possible
public works improvements.
Staff has come up with an additional option for possible public works improvement.
Staff has reviewed the property to the east of the existing public works facility as an
additional option (IA). The property is currently occupied by Retail Tech warehouse
building. In order to get a better handle on the costs to possibly upgrade the
warehouse into a public works facility, staff enlisted the services of a construction
and development service professional, familiar with public works facility projects, to
gi ve an independent appraisal of staffs' needs study and opinion on renovation of the
Retail Tech warehouse and existing facility public works facility.
DISCUSSION
As a review; the purpose for the December study was to determine the cutrent and
future needs of public works. The current public works building is over capacity, has
numerous code violations and is in need of major repair. Since the City is over two-
thirds developed, it is recommended that whatever improvements are made, they are
for the final build out of the community.
A good public works infrastructure is essential to the health, safety, and well-being of
any community. The City of Chanhassen public works/covers thepr()acisJ?yctr'lllp of
activities needed for our community to function. Improved social well..:being<and
economic expansion will be severely hampered without a properly functioning public
works.
The City of Chanhassen public\\,orgsll.p.Cl.parks staff, housed at the public works
building, in general covers the following key services and responsibilities:
Todd Gerhardt
Public Works Facility Update
May 27, 2008
Page 2
. Maintenance of roads, bridges and related infrastructure
. Maintenance and replacement of street striping and signs
. Maintenance of street lights and signals
. Maintenance of storm water ponds and collection systems
. Emergency response
. Snowplowing and ice control operations
. Maintenance of over $8 Million worth of vehicles and equipment
. Maintenance of potable water system
. Maintenance of collection and disposal system for sanitary sewage
. Maintenance of parks, trails and recreation facilities
. Help organize, plan for and work at City special events
. Weed Control
A good public works operation is centrally located in the community and has
equipment and materials stored at one location. By having equipment and materials
stored at one central location, the public works operation is significantly more
efficient in day-to-day operations and during emergency operations such as
snowplowing, power outages or utility emergencies.
In order to determine the best cost effective solution to provide adequate space for the
public works facility now and into the future, the original study looked at five
options. The first option was to expand the building space on the existing site, the
second option was to build on the City-owned property on Park Place and sell the
existing public works building site, the third option was to lease an existing site on
Powers Boulevard and sell the other two public works properties, and the fourth
option was to buy a site along Powers Boulevard and sell the existing two City-owned
public works properties. The fifth option looked at purchasing an industrial building
in the city of Chaska and remodeling it for public works.
The property the current public works facility is on is too small for the current needs
of public works. If the existing public works facility is to be updated, additional
property would need to be acquired. Option 1A is to upgrade the existing public
works facility, buy the Retail Tech warehouse facility and make the necessary
upgrades at both facilities to meet the studies determined needs.
Option lA - Renovation of Existing Facility and ACQuisition of Retail Tech
Warehouse Building.
The Retail Tech warehouse building is approximately a 60,000 sq. ft. office
warehouse building which was built in 1980. The roof was replaced in 2002. The
column spacing is 40 x 30 and the available clearance is around 13 feet 6 inches. Due
to these constraints, the large vehicles would need to remain in the existing public
works facility. It is envisioned that the pickup trucks, lawn mowers and lower profile
equipment be stored in this facility.
g:\eng\public\_2008 projects\08-03 chanhassen maintenance (pw) facility\052708 ws update rev I.doc
T odd Gerhardt
Public Works Facility Update
May 27, 2008
Page 3
The office area in the Retail Tech warehouse building would become the new office
area for all of public works. This area is more than adequate and in good condition.
Some renovation would be needed to provide an employee lunch room, meeting
rooms and locker rooms. The office areas in the existing public works facility would
be modified to make room for shops and/or the maintenance department.
Fleet maintenance would remain in the existing public works facility, but would
require renovation to the existing maintenance areas along with an addition for
additional vehicle lifts. A new wash stall would be built on the existing public works
facility. Most of the existing walls in the Retail Tech building warehouse area would
need to be removed for vehicle storage and circulation.
Vehicle storage would be divided between the existing public works facility and the
Retail Tech building. Large vehicles would need to use the existing public works
facility. At this time, the existing public works facility would be able to
accommodate all the large vehicles in the fleet. As the community expands, a future
addition may be needed that could be built on the west side of the existing public
works facility. Light vehicle storage would be provided in the new facility.
Buying the Retail Tech building and making upgrades to the warehouse and existing
public works facility has both pros and cons when compared to building a new public
works facility.
Positives:
1. Provides additional outdoor storage area.
2. Keep the existing public works facility.
Negatives:
1. Due to column spacing, the warehouse is not an efficient designed for vehicle
parking and circulation.
2. The purchase of the Retail Tech warehouse facility would take away
commercial tax base from the City.
3. Vehicles and operations would be split between two facilities.
4. The City would pay a higher cost for the maintenance and utilities for two
buildings.
5. The City would own 8,000 sJ. more building then what is needed.
6. Remodeling of existing buildings has a lot of unknowns which could drive up
the cost during construction.
7. Public works operation is spread out over two buildings and is not efficient.
A construction management company was hired by the City of Chanhassen to
determine a cost estimate to update the current public works facility and change the
Retail Tech building into a public works facility. The estimated cost is $3,300,000.
The sale price of the Retail Tech warehouse facility is $4,000,000. Total cost for this
option is estimated at $7,300,000.
g:\eng\public\_2008 projects\08-03 chanhassen mai.ntenance (pw) facility\052708 ws update rev I.doc
Todd Gerhardt
Public Works Facility Update
May 27, 2008
Page 4
Option 2 - Park Place - Building a New Facilitv on City Owned Property.
Another option is to build a new public works facility at the end of Park Place and
sell the existing public works facility. This option would address the immediate and
long-term needs of public works. The City owns three parcels at this location that
total 18 acres. The site is encumbered with some steep slopes, wetlands, and a
Metropolitan Council sanitary sewer easement. Approximately 10 acres of the
property is thought to be buildable. Currently, the property is used for storing topsoil,
street sweepings, woodchips and backfill. The property also is used temporarily as a
stockpile area for trees that have been cut down and brush. The proposed facility on
Park Place enables the City to provide enough facility for th,e current and future
growth of the community. However, the site is tight for cold storage material but
most likely would be mitigated with good management. It is anticipated the site
would have to be raised a few feet, and wetlands may need to be mitigated. Soils in
this area may be poor and corrections may need to be made. The existing cul-de-sac
and a portion of the road would need to be removed and utilities relocated. Mature
trees would need to be removed for the site for it to develop.
Building a new facility on City-owned land has both positives and negatives over
Option 1A. Provided below is a condensed list.
Positives:
1. The building space is more efficiently. All operations would occur under one
roof.
2. Less energy and maintenance costs then having two buildings.
3. Added City tax base with sale of existing public works facility.
4. Public works facility is hidden from public view.
Negatives:
1. Cold storage area is smaller.
2. City staff would need to prep the site for construction.
3. Loss of boneyard for topsoil, woodchips, and backfill, etc.
A firm which is familiar with the costs to build a new public works facility
determined an estimate for the new facility. This estimate was based on construction
before February of 2008. A revision would be needed to determine the current cost of
construction. The estimate from last year was $8,060,000.
Funding for the Park Place Option is proposed to come from several sources.
The project was programmed in the 2008 CIP.
g:\eng\public\_2008 projects\08-03 chanhassen maintenance (pw) facility\052708 ws update rev I.doc
Todd Gerhardt
Public Works Facility Update
May 27, 2008
Page 5
FUNDING
Option lA - Renovation of Existing Facility and Acquisition
of Retail Tech Warehouse Building
GO Bonds
Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund
Storm Water Utility Fund
Current Project Estimate
$6,240,000
$700,000
$360,000
$7,300,000
Option 2 - Funding for new Public Works Facilitv
GO Bonds $5,300,000
Es~i~ated sale of existing public works $1 700000
bmldmg , ,
Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund $700,000
Storm Water Utility Fund $360,000
Current Project Estimate $8,060,000
Out of Pocket Expenses $6,360,000
Attachments: 1. Public Works Site Options
2. Existing Conditions Layout
3. Option lA Demolition Plan
4. Option lA Layout
5. Option 2A Layout - Park Place Site
6. Letter from CDS Group, LLC
7. CIF Page
g:\eng\public\_2008 projects\08-03 chanhassen maintenance (pw) facility\052708 ws update rev I.doc
City of Chanhassen
Public Works Facility Site Options
Y1\,(c)l
l<<~ \\r(9
;q: ~~:1.,.,
'\~
\\',.\9:-
'''.0
;;>\
July, 2007
j
c=:)
~
d
~
~
a
~
~
~
o 25 50
,
100
,
HORIZONTAL
SCALE IN
FEET
BUILDING
LOCATION
OFFICE
DEPARTMENT SHOPS
EQUIPMENT STORAGE
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
WASH BAY
WELDING BAY
TOTAL
SALT/SAND STORAGE
SQ.FT.
2,350
2,050
16,650
2,300
750
o
24,100
3,450
INTERIOR
ROOM DESCRIPTION SQ. FT.
101 WASH BAY 770
102 MAINTENANCE BAY 1690
103 PARTS ROOM 160
104 RECEPTIONIST 100
105 FLEET SUPERINTENDANT 170
106 PARK SUPERINTENDANT 190
107 UTILITY SUPERINTENDANT 210
108 LUBE ROOM 280
109 WOMENS BATHROOM 40
110 JANITOR CLOSET 50
111 MENS RESTROOM 130
112 LOCKER ROOM 80
113 UTILITY SHOP 290
114 UTILITY SHOP 260
115 LUNCH ROOM 580
116 ELECRICAL ROOM 80
117 STREET SUPERINTENDANT 270
118 LOCKER/RESTROOM 290
119 SIGN SHOP 730
119 CARPENTRY SHOP 730
PARKING
EXISTING
41
10
11
NEEDS
60
31
45
PARKING STALLS
PARKING LOT
HEAVY EQUIPMENT
VEHICLE STALLS
PARKING STALLS
PARKING LOT
HEAVY EQUIPMENT
VEHICLE STALLS
* Total Existing Campus = 5.27 Acres
o " ~
i~:~
.05 E ki
. O~
:;}(j;- 5
]E~S~ g
Co>, cov
~i]!~ u
::;
HUi ~
IV ~ III .... IV
il]i~
v.... GjUJ ~ i'!
~ij E:j~ <(
x 0
Ii!;
LL=I
O=~
~=I
u-=I
=
~
.
Z~
w-
(/)::::!
(/) (J >-
<(<(0
:c1.J...i=!
Z(/)U1
<(~~
:CO::::J
(JaiD
l.J...3:iii
a(J~
>-:J
I-m
o=>
a...
(/)
Z
a
F
CS
Z
a
(J
'"
Z
F
(/)
X
w
>-x
m~
Ul
Z
o
v;
5'
w
lie
I!!
<
<>
DESIGNED
PO JS
PROJECT,
08-03
SHEET f
1 5
~
115
120
119
118 117 ())
~
~
102
101
REMOVE MEZZANINE
REMOVE HOISTS
REMOVE GAS-.......... D
PUMPS 'U
EXISTING PARKING LOT
COLD STORAGE
(SALT/SAND)
o 10 20 40
, ,
HORIZONTAL
SCALE IN FEET
XXXXX - REMOVE 245LF WALL
< " ~
o "5
~~::5
'05 E ~
. O~
:it6- 5
]E~~~ g
a.>, Clll
.!!?.c]'g..~ 0
:5] ow::!: ::;
HHi ~
~~~~~
~15 ~-g_
! ;;jj ~ I!!
x ;'i
-
u..=1
O=~
~=I
0-=1
=
~
.
Z~
w-
(/):::!
(/)U
<(<(0
:r:lL.~
Z(/)ll::
<(~:I<:
:r: 0:: !1i
UOa.
lL. 3: c;;
OU~
~~
-:::l
Ull..
z
<(
<(([
.....
ZZ
00
1=1=
ll..-l
00
~
W
o
>-x
ID~
en
z
o
in
5
'"
'"
~
<C
Cl
DESIGNED DRAWN
PO JS
PRQ..ECT,
08-03
9-IEET,
2 Of 5
,l.l.) )
SCUPPER
il)' '1)')"
n
1'1' 1'1' 1'" l' l' l' l'YU
'rS4c::E1J1lGHEIGIfT
EXISTING PARKING LOT
REMOVE BITUMINOUS
RELOCATE SCUPPER
REMOVE CRANE
(dID
DIbl
XXXXX
o 10 20
I
HORIZONTAL
SCALE IN
40
,
FEET
REMOVE 1030LF WALL
c ~
.2 :;
~~::S
.~ 5 E ~
o....C1~
i~j:~
a.>, ell)
~i]g~
H1H
i!~~~
i~~l~
~ ~ E'~j
z>-
W!:::
cn~
cnc..>
<<0
IlJ..~
Zcn!t:
<~:l<:
Io:::!t:
c..>0~
lJ..3=~
o :5
c..>~
~::J
_lD
c..>=>
a.
}-X
mX
X
Ul
Z
o
Vi
5
w
0::
~
""
Cl
~
g
<J
:J
~
~ ~
Ii!;
u. ~i
ami
~-=~
_=1
0-=1
==
~
.
Z
<
<-I
......0.
ZZ
00
-F
1--1
0.0
O:;:E
W
Q
DRAWN
PO
JS
PROJECT I
08-03
SHEET ,
3 '" 5
c=:)
o 25 50 100
, ,
HORIZONTAL
SCALE IN FEET
BUILDING
LOCATION
OFFICE
DEPARTMENT SHOPS
EQUIPMENT STORAGE
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
WASH BAY
TOTAL
SALT/SAND STORAGE
, With Future Addition
INTERIOR
ROOM DESCRIPTION
201 CONFERENCE ROOM
202 PARK SUPERINTENDANT
203 STREET SUPERINTENDANT
204 UTILITY SUPERINTENDANT
205 FLEET SUPERINTENDANT
206 OPEN
207 OPEN
208 STORAGE
209 STORAGE
210 STORAGE
211 RECEPTIONIST
212 PRINTER/COPY ROOM
213 MENS RESTROOM
214 WOMENS RESTROOM
215 STORAGE
216 WOMENS RESTROOM
217 UTILITIES SHOP
218 LUNCH ROOM
219 CONFERENCE ROOM
220 WORKOUT ROOM
221 WOMENS RESTROOMS
222 WOMENS LOCKER ROOM
223 MENS RESTROOM
224 OPEN
225 MENS LOCKER ROOM
226 UTILITY SHOP
227 HEAVY DUTY LIFT AREA
228 WELDING BAY
229 LIGHT DUTY LIFT AREA
230 PARTS STORAGE
231 LUBE ROOM
232 WOMENS RESTROOM
233 JANITOR CLOSET
234 MENS RESTROOM
235 COMPRESSOR ROOM
236 SIGN SHOP
237 ELECTRICAL ROOM
238 CARPENTRY SHOP
PARKING
PROPOSED
124
24'
51
NEEDS
60
31
45
PARKING STALLS
PARKING LOT
HEAVY EQUIPMENT
VEHICLE STALLS
PARKING STALLS
PARKING LOT
HEAVY EQUIPMENT
VEH I CLE STALLS
, With Future Addition
TOTAL CAMPUS = 9.62 ACRES
SQ.FT.
10,800
4,100
65,800'
8,400
3,000
92,100
3,450
SQ.FT.
360
190
190
280
150
140
150
150
100
120
140
270
40
40
110
160
630
2440
520
400
150
250
160
190
1010
900
3850
780
1700
1420
360
40
50
130
290
1070
80
1450
c ~ ~
j~~~
Og 5 ~~
g-~- 5
!HU g
<J
:5-gow:::!!: :J
HUi ~
-:::O='O
Q):I;IIl"'Q)
u...._O-:5
>>...0-0
HiH ~ i"
'"
x 0
:Ii!;
U.=I
O:!~
~;;I
0-=1
=
~
.
z~
W:JO
V>-<
v>UO
<(<(~
J:lL.:.o:
ZV>~
<(~a.
J:a:::~
Uom
1L.3:;
OU~
>--0
-llO
I-co~
(3=>
a...
<(
z
o
F
a...
o
>-x
m~
Ul
Z
o
Vi
5
w
'"
I!!
<(
o
PO
JS
PRo...ECT ,
08-03
SHEET,
4 OF 5
~
~
~
~
a
~
;j--, ,
~ \\
~
~
<- ~-.........._~--.-_/-
i
c'
,./
- - - - --------
//
'...."
,,----...
~ ~
.,
~~~
. 5 E li>
~~~
t~~.~i g
lIl..Q"QQ>C
iHii <J
:J
~
w ~ VI.. III
i1i1j~:
0 25 50 100 ~ ;;~j x ~
, , x
x
HORIZONTAL
SCALE IN FEET
BUILDING
-
LL iii ~
0:;1
~=I
0<1
=
~
LOCA 11 ON SQ. FT.
OFFI CE 8,150
DEPARTMENT SHOPS 6,550
EQUIPMENT STORAGE 56,000
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 7,700
WASH BAY 2,900
WELDING BAY 2,900
SALT/SAND STORAGE 9,600
.
PARKING
PROVIDED PARKING STALLS
60 PARKING LOT
31 HEAVY EQUIPMENT
45 VEHICLE STALLS
Z~
~r;:!
(/)U>-
<<0
::cLLj:!
Z(/)Ul
<~~
::co::-
Uo15
LL3:Cii
ou~
>-:J
t:lD
u=>
a..
~
Vi
""w
zU
0<
F...J
a.. a..
o~
0::
<
a..
~~
Ul
Z
o
iii
5
w
'"
i=!
<(
o
PO JS
PROJECT'
08-03
SHEET'
5 5
eD S Group LLC
"Professional eonstruction & 'Development Services"
952-368-3248
November 27,2007
Mr. Paul Oehme
Public Works Director/City engineer
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Paul,
Thanks for the opportunity to discuss the potential Public Works Department project with
you. I just wanted to take a few minutes to comment on some of the key points of our
discussion.
First let me say that the program which you presented was very well articulated and
clear. Likewise the budget which you forecasted was extremely accurate. This was
refreshing to get involved with someone who has a focused grasp on the issues such as
your self.
Budaet:
As I stated above the proposed project budget which you forecast was very accurate.
As you know I do a lot of budget setting and forecasting for many regionally based
Architects and other professionals in the construction industry.
Your forecast was validated by recent files pulled from my data base and adapted to
your program. The two matched very closely. I am in agreement with you about the
proposed cost of the current program as it exists today. The estimate was done with
today's costs and I just wanted to remind you to adjust for traditional inflation factors of
about 3-4% per annum as you move forward.
Option 1:
Option 1, expansion of the current Public Works site does not in my opinion work for the
new program. The site is around 5 acres, I believe, and too small to accommodate
future needs. It would require extensive renovation and readjustment of the current
facility and the program would have design issues and costs which if feel would be
problematic and ineffective in an effort to fit the new program on this site.
It would also completely consume the site without regard to any further future needs.
The site would be congested and logistically difficult to use. Additionally, it may require
off-site storage of some of the fundamental "outside" elements of the Works department,
in order to facilitate Structure and Parking.
Option 2:
In my opinion, given the new program and looking beyond to future needs, this is the
best option for a new location. The property is currently owned by the City, at a very
reasonable cost basis, is large enough to accommodate the program fully and
importantly, a discreet location for your operations.
I make the last comment due to the nature of the works department and their need for
outside storage of Salts, Gravel, Equipment, stock piles of surplus parts and machinery,
and vehicles awaiting repair etc. Placing the new department here, away from obvious
public scrutiny will reduce the requirement for privacy fencing and in my opinion;
because of the "lay of the land" it will also assist with security issues.
I have made the assumption that the City would have the resources to prep the site at a
low or no cost basis, therefore further aiding the cost of the project.
Option 3:
This option would require acquisition of an existing facility and renovation of the same.
Unless the existing building came complete with structural floors, trench drains, clear
span bay capabilities, etc. it would be very expensive to remediate the building to a
suitable location.
Raw costs to strip and renovate start at the low end at around $35 per SF and go up
from there. When you get into structural issues, the renovated costs can be easily triple
that of new construction, i.e.: Structural concrete floors suitable to support plows etc.
New cost per SF would be around $4-4.50 per sf. all inclusive. To remove old concrete
would cost about $5-7$ per sf and then still cost the original new construction values of
$-4.50 per sf bringing the total to around $11 per sf. Renovating heating, fresh air
requirements, trench drains, site drainage, heavy metals and oil separation for sewage
also become almost cost prohibitive.
Another issue is the discernment of surrounding property owners and the public. To go
into an existing industrial park location may cause friction in the community and
potentially costly privacy screening of the site would more than likely be required in my
experience.
In Summary after review of your program, your budget and your site options, I think you
would be best served to build new on a City owned site which will accommodate the
program size and be suitably located for future growth and needs.
Again thank you for the discussion. I would sincerely appreciate an invitation to
participate in any opportunities which the pursuit of this project might present.
Sincerely,
Chuck Dennis
CDS Group LLC
Capital Improvement Program
City of Chanhassen, MN
MB-003
2008 thru 2012
Contact Unassigned
Department Municipal Buildings
Type Improvement
Useful Life Unassigned
Category Street Equipment
Priority nfa
Project #
Project Name Public Works Facility Improvements
Account # 1
Account #2
Account # 3
Total Project Cost $8,060,000
D~cripoon I
The existing Public Works facility is over capacity and is in need of major repairs. The City is expected to grow an additional 30% before ultimate
build out. The existing facility is located on a 5 acre site which is already cramped for storage and operation space. The City completed a facility
needs study that recommended moving the Public Works building because the existing site is too small for expansion.
Justifictdion I
The Operations and Maintenance Department needs additional space for repairs, meeting facilities, files, storage, supervisory offices and proper
equipment storage. In addition, the current facility does not meet many City building codes.
Expenditures
Planning/Design
2008
8,060,000
8,060,000
2009
2010
2011
2012
Total
8,060,000
8,060,000
Total
Funding Sources 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total
GO Bonds 7,000,000 7,000,000
Sewer Utility Fund 700,000 700,000
Surface Water Utility Fund 360,000 360,000
Total 8,060,000 8,060,000
Operational Impact/Other.1 .
This project would increase operational costs based on the percentage ofthe footprint expansion.