Loading...
7.5. Public Safety Addition: Authorize Site Plan Submittal and Budget/Floor Plan.MEMORANDUM d CITY OF Zs- CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager DATE: March 7, 1996 SUBJ: Authorization to formally Submit Site Plan to the Planning Commission and Approve Budget/Floor Plan for the Public Safety Addition I was disappointed that the second part of this item, Apps Safety Addition" was tabled Monday evening. Iwas disal down as 1 had challenged them to keep costs down during new addition and existing city hall, i.e. do not biow up exi currently exist, and when furniture has currently been cust in place. In addition, department heads have agreed that n leave the current furniture in place, albeit one of the two d also feel that I let Todd Christopherson down on Monday answer questions which were beyond his control. Finally, city council in that a clear picture was not presented as to where we need to go. Hopefully,' the remainder of this me Where We've B ove Budget/Floor Plan for the Public pointed in that I felt I let our city staff the finalization of the floor plan for the Sting walls, use as many corridors as :)mized for a particular room, leave it iany of the dual shared offices will lsks will not be immediately used. I tight in that I left him attempting to I feel as though I have let down the vhere we have been, where we are, and morandum will speak to those issues. Monies have been°'put aside'e every year for'the past 5 -6 years anticipating that a future addition to city hall would be required „ The amount totaled $1,894,000. Anticipating accrued interest, a general amount available of $2 million was seen as a reasonable number. The number also recognized the necessity to purchase the lands in front of city hall ($750,000) and the necessity for the HRA to pay costs associated with parking lots, library expansion, senior citizen expansion. As we continued to review both the�exansion to the front as well as the proposed Public Safety addition, the budget for the additi started to grow from $2M to $2.1M, to $2.2M, and finally $2:3M. This all occurred during the same time frame that the HRA's ability to pay for cost items considered as their responsibility changed from being acceptable, to being questionable, to not before 1 999. During the "questionable" time frame, the council grappled with the issue of how much risk do we want to take in terms of building a building with 1 Mayor and City Council March 7, 1996 Page 2 "questionable" funds vs. the cost savings that would be achieved by building both additions vs. ' just building the Public Safety addition. Todd Christopherson was challenged to answer the question of what would be achieved if the Public Safety Addition were built as a combined project versus a stand alone facility. Todd presented detailed calculations which showed that if ' the Public Safety Addition were built as a part of a larger project, its cost elements would be right around $800,000. If it were built as a stand alone facility, the costs would be roughly $1M. What nobody asked was the question of, "If we drop off the front half of the building, can we ' still survive with the same size foot print for the Public Safety Addition ?" "Is it logical that you could accommodate your very basic, basic needs with one -half of the sized facility that had originally been presented ?" It is not logical to believe that the city council said that the budget ' for this project would be $800,000 or $1M when no floor plans had been prepared, no code requirements had been reviewed, and no analysis had been completed as to costs associated with furnishings. In light of the above, it's amazing to me that the current budget of $1,225,000 is as ' close to the generalized numbers used this past fall in that those original numbers did not include an elevator, furnishings for the council chambers, or a slightly larger footprint. ' Where We Are As noted earlier, department heads have done an excellent job in developing a floor plan which can effectively serve the citizens of our community. They additionally have developed a floor plan which is cost effective. Many of the issues presented Monday evening are, in my own mind, , not issues. In fact, if I were a council member, I would be questioning why it is that we are putting in a smaller freight elevator and not looking to the future when the primary access to the lower level will be via that elevator which is adjacent to a 70 -car parking lot. Assuming that one ' of the future Community Development Block Grant allocations will be to remodel a portion of the lower area for a "craft room," it's only logical that that elevator will in fact be used and will be the primary access for getting to that craft room. In the meantime, I'm sure our staff will use ' the elevator to get file cabinets /files /etc. to and from the storage room. The issue of using the courtyard for additional offices is also moot in my mind. Attached please ' find a plan which would move my office and conference room into the courtyard area. This plan had been drafted by myself nearly two months ago recognizing that the one function within city hall which will get zero additional space as a part of the expansion is general administration. The ' existing copy room is a sham. It's totally impossible to get in and out of that room during any packet time frames and is totally inefficient. Paper deliveries are often two to three times per ' week simply because we do not have a place to store paper. However, the attached plan was rejected because it is totally cost prohibitive. The cost to develop the space as I've shown it in the attached plan would be a minimum of $100 per square foot if not $150 per square foot. It , would be far cheaper to build that additional square footage on the west or north side of the new addition, but that would force a total reconfiguration of the entire plan to ensure each of our departments were functioning in a coordinated fashion while being as efficient as possible for the ' general public. The point is that we did look at ways to better utilize the courtyard which was paid for by the HRA. I Mayor and City Council March 7, 1996 Page 3 Finally, the issue of conference rooms in the lower level should also be a non - issue. To get a perspective for what the lower level will look like, you would need to walk down the corridor to the current custodial office downstairs. When you walk into that room, the walls aren't finished, ' all of the rafters are fully exposed, the floor is unpainted concrete, and there is not a speck of light. I am sure that Councilman Senn will disagree with my point noting that it is much cheaper to finish off lower level space versus building totally new space. I would agree that the cost is ' half as much; however, do you really want to finish off the corridors and restrooms to get to that room? In addition, what do you do with a 300 sq. ft. hole left by moving the conference room? ' You don't just take 6' x 50' off the north wall. The plan would require total reconfiguration which will probably increase bids, increase building costs, architectural fees, etc. A final point is that the plan does not have seven conference rooms. The plan includes one more conference ' room than existed in 1979; i.e. in 1979 planning and engineering jointly used the conference room that is now Dave Hempel's office. The current plan has a conference room adjacent to the planning offices and another in the engineering wing. The issue of adding an additional $50,000 to redo the council chambers should also be a moot issue. The city council has never taken care of themselves in any of the updates that have ' occurred to city hall. The carpet is nearly fifteen years old, the existing curtains tear apart when you pull on them, and someone is going to get physically hurt running into one the television sets that was inappropriately mounted. Where We Should Be Going ' I am sure that I will be accused of trying to build a building around a budget, i.e. subtracting the $750,000 for land acquisition from the $2 million in the bank produces a balance of $1,250,000. The budget as presented by Todd Christopherson is $1,225,000. The fact is that the numbers simply match, but not by intention. If it was really my intention to try to pad the budget to add an elevator, council chambers remodeling, or additional square footage, why would I not have told Todd six months ago to raise his estimate to $1,250,000? That never happened. In fact, when Todd had completed his final budgetary estimates, he came to me hat in hand saying that he had tried everything he could to reduce the budget, but that he did not see how we could build the structure for less than the $1,225,000 without giving up things such as remodeling the council ' chambers. ' I would hope that this item could be voted on Monday evening and that we could finalize the budget and move ahead with completing the plans and specifications for the structure. I sincerely believe that if we go through some additional process to re- evaluate the floor plans, we will ' simply lose an additional year of construction and will significantly increase our architectural/ construction management fees. The plan is a good one which considers today's needs while attempting to ensure that we do not incur additional costs when we go through another ' transformation around the turn of the century. Authorization to formally submit the site plan to the Planing Commission and approval of the ' budget and floor plan for the Public Safety Addition is recommended. ' r Amcon CM/Christopherson *9 612 - 890 -9508 E&3/6/96 04:17 PM D 1/3 AMCCN CM FAX PLEASE DELIVER T0: Don Ashworth, City Of Chanhassen FAX: 612 937 -5739 N0. OF PAGES: 3 DATE: Wednesda March 6 1996 Don TODD CHRISTOPHEPSON P, E. 612 - 890 - 1217 VOICE 612- 890 -9508 FA,'' amconcm@usrntemet corn E -MAIL Here is a cost analysis of the options cussed for scaling back the expansion. 1 have not quantified the fee increase with KKE, however, there would be some increase for making these type of changes \(Our fee would not change for this type of a change.) If it looks lik we will be proceeding with this change, then I will review these with Rich P. a d Ron E. Call me to review any of the assumptions that I ave made here or if I can add any other information for Mpnday. Anything you can do to get us early on the Agenda w4�1 be most appreciated! Thanks t°rofesslonal Censtructnn Canaaer r�e,r it Amcon CM /Christopherson 1 9 612 - 890 -9508 ME 3/6/96 Design Options for City Hall Expansion (J4:42 PM D12/2 3/6/96 Option 1. Eliminate Elevato , Equipment room, and associated floor area. 200 SF of floor area (per floor) @ $40 /SF (8,000.00) Elevator Equipment, wiring, shaft vent., etc. (50,000.00) . �� ✓�r�1 �y C Total (58,000.00) Verify with Building Official the implications of leaving the elevator out. Option 2 Locate Mgr's office and conference in Ex. Courtyard Reduce size of expansion by 450 SF (x two floors) @ $40 /SF (36,000.00) Demo planters, new retaining wall, hydraulic lift, new mech. zone 45,000.00 new wiring, new lighting Total 9,000.00 Option 3 Move conference rooms (2) downstairs and reduce footprint of expansion 600 SF x 2 floors @$40 /SF (48,000.00) Add finishes, mechanical, elect. for 600 SF in lower level to be finished 26,400.00 Total (21,600.00) Consider inefficiency of using conference rooms on lower level. Also, Any chance of eliminating the elevator would go away if the conf. rooms were installed downstairs. Notes: 1 Building Exp. cost per square foot is approx. $47 /SF Ave. 2 incremental cost of square footage is approx. $40/ SF, Ave. 3 Cost for upper floor is about $69 /SF (finished) 4 Cost for lower floor is about $25 /SF (unfinished) 5 Architectural Fees increase with redesign options I CONE I , OFF IC EXPANSION - I 9 YRTYARD — I r I M I i I 1 �♦ ir� = = __ sim I I I I I I L I II I II � II I I __- , I ry J� II A EXISTING ,r - -- — = — I 478 SF h I II I I I - - -- - -- J I II II I 1 _ I I u I II II II I II p II II I II II II II II - -_ - - -- - - - T - I I it � II I I I II I If II II ly I II ih it I