Loading...
04-12-12IN ATTENDANCE: Chairman Jack Varney Mr. Arthur Corsano Mr. Don Ford Ms. Juliette Hagist Mr. Stephen Kallao Mr. Louis Keith Ms. Darlene Kelley MINUTES POLICE BUILDING AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING April 12, 2012 — Week 8 COMMISSION CHAMBER, 800 SEMINOLE ROAD Mr. Steve Lindorff Mr. Mitch Reeves Mr. Chris Rule Mr. Jim Smith Mr. William Whittington Facilitator Tiffany Busby Chief of Police/Liaison Mike Classey HANDOUTS (Week 8): A memorandum from COAB City Attorney Alan Jenson, Agenda, Minutes from 4/05/12 (Week 7), Expansion SNA Process 4/12/2012 PowerPoint, Answer to Appraisal Question email from Mr. Lindorff, Atlantic Beach Police Facility Space Needs Analysis by Mr. Lindorff, Written Motion made and distributed by Mr. Lindorff (Attachment B) WELCOME AND CALL TO ORDER (Jack Varney) Chairman Jack Varney called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. He advised twelve members were present. There was a quorum. Chairman Varney stated a lot of emails were exchanged between members prior to tonight's meeting. While he expressed appreciation for everyone's interest, concerns and opinions, he cautioned the members they are stepping on violating the Sunshine Law with the emails. Chairman Varney read an email (Attachment A) he received from Alan Jensen, City Attorney for the City of Atlantic Beach. A legal opinion submitted by Mr. Alan Jensen, City Attorney for the City of Atlantic Beach, addressed to the Mayor and the City Commissioners dated April 12, 2012 regarding the Public Safety Building Review Committee "conflict of interest" [handout] was read by Chairman Varney to the members. Chairman Varney asked if any member wanted to declare a conflict of interest in serving on this building committee; no members declared a conflict of interest. Chairman Varney turned the meeting over to the facilitator, Tiffany Busby. Business Items (Tiffany Busby) Facilitator Busby read the Ground Rules to the Committee. Facilitator Busby advised there were minutes from April 5, 2012 to be considered. She asked if anyone had comments on the minutes from April 5, 2012. Mr. Keith pointed out the minutes had numerous errors, consisting of erroneous comments, misquotes, inaccuracies and omissions. Mr. Keith requested to have added to the handout list in the minutes on April 5, 2012 a letter and a two page analysis for Arrest and Holding Cells data submitted by him that was omitted on the handout list. Chairman Varney advised if the handouts submitted by Mr. Keith were not recorded in the April 12, 2012 Police Building Ad Committee Meeting Page 2 Week 8 minutes, then the handouts should be added to the handout list. The errors in the minutes from April 5, 2012 pointed out by Mr. Keith were noted. Chairman Varney asked if there were any more comments. Hearing no more discussion, he asked all those in favor of tabling the minutes until the next meeting to signify by saying aye. Chairman Varney advised it was unanimous to table the minutes until the next meeting. Discussion of Building Options Facilitator Busby advised the bulk of the agenda for tonight is to talk about building options. Considerations for future expansion and spatial analysis review process (Commander Gualillo) [handout] The object of Commander Gualillo's presentation was to assist the committee members with their final report to address question number five in the Charge to the committee by the Commission. Question number 5 reads as follows: "Should future expansion be considered in plans for new facilities?" In response to the question, Commander Gualillo acknowledged in his presentation, causes for future expansion may not always be known or forecasted at the time the building is designed. Commander Gualillo discussed some unknown considerations, such as the Navy and possible annexation of Mayport and Mayport Village, could influence the future expansion of the police department. He briefed the members regarding the history of proposed expansion of the police building. Commander Gualillo advised the idea of building east of Sherman Creek was brought up on multiple occasions. After multiple reviews, the City Commission elected not to pursue options to build or expand on the east side of the creek due to limitations associated with easements, existing buildings, construction site limitations, parking, relocation of the police department during renovation. Commander Gualillo advised Mr. Whittington provided him with a copy of the I.A.C.P. (International Association of Chiefs of Police) "Guidelines for Building a Police Building". The topics, future expansion and spatial analysis, were addressed in the guidelines. Commander Gualillo advised the guideline stated that since the new facility may be in use for a life span of twenty to fifty or more years, projecting future growth is an essential part of the space planning stage. Commander Gualillo pointed out unforeseen needs for technological growth, legal mandates or community desires need to be factored into consideration Commander Gualillo relayed the I.A.C.P. guideline addressed space needs analysis. The guideline stated, "Conducting a formal Space Needs Analysis is an important step towards defining the scope of a facility project and developing accurate preliminary cost estimates. Hiring an experienced architect/consultant, familiar with law enforcement needs is crucial to obtaining a detailed analysis addressing current and projected space needs." Commander Gualillo conveyed this guideline was addressed when the police staff contracted with Architects Design Group (ADG). Commander Gualillo stated Step 15 of the I.A.C.P guidelines, addresses the selection of an architect. In November, 2008 RFP (Request for Proposals) 09-01 was advertised and eighteen firms responded. The Competitive Consultants Negotiation Act, which is a Florida State Statute, was applied as appropriate. In 2009 the Commission approved ADG to design a police facility. In May, 2009, a spatial needs analysis was conducted, as part of those suggestions by ADG and I.A.C.P. guidelines by a planning team composed of: the Assistant City Manager, at the time, (who April 12, 2012 Police Building Ad Committee Meeting Page 3 Week 8 functioned as the project manager), Chief of Police, staff, line officers and civilian staff; the analysis occurred over a period of several weeks. I.A.C.P. guidelines consist of eighteen steps and most of the steps were followed by ABPD. The Chief of Police, City Manager, City Council, Finance Department, Building and Public Works, police staff, and a professional architectural firm were involved in the planning process. The process began in 2005 and was studied, reviewed, and evaluated at many levels and by multiple Commissions. IACP guidelines advise the process could take generally three to five years. Facilitator Busby explained the reason the future expansion topic is part of the agenda is because it is one of the bullets listed in the committee's Charge. She asked the members if there was any discussion, questions, comments or any items that they would like to see included in the report that will go to the Commission. Mr. Keith asked Commander Gualillo if he had read in the local publications that six frigates assigned to Mayport Naval Station will be decommissioned by 2015. Commander Gualillo advised there was some mention of that and the Navy expects to replace them with another type of ship. Mr. Keith requested that to be reflected in the record. Mr. Keith advised in the 2002 to 2010 census the population of Atlantic Beach decreased 5.5 percent and their projection, again the census bureau, is another 5.5 percent decrease in population by 2015. Regarding the annexation of Mayport Village, Mr. Keith asked if there was any documentation or report to that effect. Mr. Keith advised he has lived in Atlantic Beach for 28 years and it has been rumored and Commander Gualillo advised it was a consideration. Mr. Ford mentioned if you look in the interlocal agreement, the City of Atlantic Beach has an agreement with the County that the City will not annex any more property and that agreement was signed approximately eight years ago. Mr. Keith stated that he believed earlier in the discussion, Chief Classey made the statement to this committee that Atlantic Beach was built out. Mr. Kallao advised the one thing that bothers him is a lack of objectivity in the presentations and items concerning the construction of the police building. Mr. Kallao continued by saying the planning team did not include one outside person on that team, other than ADG. He thought the spatial analysis should have been conducted by an outside objective consultant who would have evaluated the police department's operation, the number of arrests, the number of calls for service, the number of patrol officers and would have made a recommendation. As far as the future is concerned, he recommended remodeling the existing building, utilizing the plans from Fleet, and then later, if needed, consideration should be given to build on the west side of the creek. Chief Classey pointed out that ADG, with expertise in public safety building and construction, served as an independent consultant to the City for almost three years prior to the RFP going out to select an architectural firm and at the Commission's direction reviewed Fleet and Associates' plan. The Commission decided the proposed plans did not adequately meet the needs at the time, much less take into consideration potential future expansion needs. ADG designed a building utilizing the spatial needs analysis work from the two and a half, almost three years, of the independent consultant work with the City. Mr. Reeves noted Mr. Ford's comment regarding, that under the interlocal agreement the City of Atlantic Beach cannot annex, stating it does not mean that Mayport or the subdivisions the City provides services to cannot petition to the City of Jacksonville to be annexed by Atlantic Beach. Atlantic Beach can't be the aggressor, but the subdivisions and Mayport and those people could ask April 12, 2012 Police Building Ad Committee Meeting Page 4 Week 8 for that. Mr. Reeves suggested any member could go on-line to the International Association of Chief of Police (IACP) website. The documents for police facilities are public information. Facilitator Busby summarized the committee's potential future expansion discussion as follows: additional space is available on the opposite side of the creek depending on the direction east or west, adding a second story to the existing building, extensive renovations, future renovations, and that it would be beneficial to know the existing Building Code violations on the existing building. Facilitator Busby advised that Mr. Lindorff indicated he compiled a spreadsheet of square footage comparisons of the space in ADG's design and Art's plan. Atlantic Beach Police Facility Space Needs Analysis (Steve Lindorff) [handout] Mr. Lindorff explained how he developed his Space Needs Analysis spreadsheet. He stated he initially used a handout compiled by the police staff listing which components could be in a new building versus a renovated building, ADC's spatial analysis list, and then he added a column with the figures in Art's plan. The objective was to determine the square footage needed for a new building. Using the actual square footage of the rooms from Art's plan, he explained he calculated 7,500 square feet would be needed and the 2,700 square feet of things in the ADG space study that were not included in Art's plan could be accommodated in the renovated existing building. Mr. Lindorff calculated a total of 2,200 square feet was eliminated. Mr. Lindorff mentioned a copy of an email [handout] that addressed the answer to the question regarding the appraisal method. The information was provided to him by a member of the Appraisal Institute (MAI). The email stated that police stations would be considered special purpose properties which are, according to the Appraisal Institute, best appraised by the Cost Approach and the Cost Approach would result in an indication of market value. Discussion ensued regarding Mr. Lindorff's Atlantic Beach Police Facility Space Needs Analysis [handout]. Mr. Lindorff advised he used ADG's space study list with their square footages. He listed an efficiency factor on his spreadsheet which he explained is a term the architects use when they are working at a conceptual level dealing with stairways, hallways, elevator and things that are not specifically earmarked but are needed to make the building functional. He explained Art did not include an efficiency factor in his footprint, so he asked Lance (Wolfson) to provide a square footage of the hallways. Chief Classey asked if Mr. Lindorff was suggesting eliminating 2,196 square feet from the original total square feet allocation. Mr. Lindorff advised he was not suggesting the space be eliminated since there were some unusual square footages allocated around the records room. Discussion ensued regarding the square footage in the Art plan. Chief Classey stated he worked with Art and Lance on a proposed layout for Art's sketch and he was not aware, until he received Lance's drawing of Art's plans, that the square footage decreased the footprint of Art's plan for a new building from 9,300 or 9,400 square feet to about 8,800 or 8,900 square feet. Chief Classey stated that he agrees to 9,000 or possibly 10,000 square foot in a single -story new building on the west side of the creek and 5,000 square feet renovation of the existing building on the east of the creek for a total of 15,000 square feet, if that is the direction the committee recommends. Discussion on whether police building(s) could all be located on east side of Sherman Creek (Fleet & Associates plan, two single -story additions) (Stephen Kallao) April 12, 2012 Police Building Ad Committee Meeting Page 5 Week 8 Mr. Kallao found out from Ian, with ADG, that ADG's first proposal was to add a second floor to the existing building, with additions, for a total of 18,000 square feet. The plan originally was rejected for two reasons, the City did not have the foundation plan and the Commission thought the cost to remove the roof, the truss system, would be cost prohibited in order to add a second story addition to the existing building. Mr. Kallao advised he believes the Commission should be given some alternatives to consider. Mr. Kallao stated he believes the committee can offer two choices, build on the east side or the west side of the creek. The committee could recommend building a new building on the west side of the creek and remodeling the existing building or the committee could possibly revisit Fleet's Plan which included remodeling 3,985 square feet on this site (east side) with two one-story additions. Fleet and Associates advised him the size could be increased. He would like to see the Fleet and Associates plan submitted as a recommendation to be revisited, if for some reason, the new plan (construction of a new building on the west side of the creek and renovation of the existing building) is not considered. He advised the Fleet and Associates floor plans are drawn out, estimated construction cost of $1.5 million in 2005. Mr. Kallao admitted the 10,000 to 11,000 total square feet would not suit the Chief's needs, but advised it is something to consider at a cost of $1.5 million. Mr. Kallao advised he toured the Neptune Beach Police Department to observe their operation. The Neptune Beach Police Chief showed him the NBPD facility, comprised of 5,000 square feet. Mr. Kallao noted all arrestees go directly downtown. The facility does not have a holding cell or a Sally Port. The population of Neptune Beach is 7,000 in 2 square miles. The Neptune Beach Police Department has nineteen officers. Mr. Kallao noted it is not necessarily a fair analogy for comparison, but it is a police department in a neighboring city. Mr. Kallao suggested recommending the Commissioners examine the Atlantic Beach Police Department arrest procedure policy and possibly for them to adopt Neptune Beach's arrest procedure. He recommended remodeling the 6,000 square foot building and/or additions and eliminating the Sally Port and holding cells. The committee discussed Mr. Kallao's presentation. Chairman Varney conveyed the Commission has been wrestling with the police building for a long time and the Commissioners cannot make a decision. When he read the charge, he noted the second paragraph — where it says the committee's purpose, the purpose is to become familiar with the building -related problems, consider various alternatives to solve the problems, consider costs related to each alternative and make a recommendation. It goes on to say, in the form of a final report to the Mayor and the Commissioners, the best way to solve the building -related problems. Mr. Varney conveyed that he thinks the committee should provide the Commission with a reasonable solution that the whole committee agrees to, the right solution financially and for the use of the police department but he did not have any objection to evaluating this plan. He sees some things that are not solved with this plan. The members discussed the committee's completion of the eight weeks time frame allotted by the Commissioners, but the members expressed the need for additional time. Mr. Kallao's suggestion of recommending the Commissioners consider the arrest procedure to eliminate the need for the Sally Port and the holding cells was discussed. Mr. Corsano questioned Mr. Kallao since he read in the minutes the committee voted 6 to 4 to have a Sally Port and holding April 12, 2012 Police Building Ad Committee Meeting Page 6 Week 8 cells. (Mr. Corsano was not in attendance during the discussion and vote last week.) Mr. Kallao responded that his option was to consider changing the arrest procedure. Chairman Varney confirmed and agreed the committee voted for the Sally Port and holding cells. Mr. Kallao made a motion that the committee proceed with a report that reflects Art's single -story new building and remodel 4,999 square feet of the existing building as we have now, a preliminary drawing (of the single -story new building) with also (to include) the concept of remodeling 4,999 square feet (of the existing building), Seconded by Mr. Reeves. Mr. Kallao's motion was discussed regarding the name of the option and the limits in researching other options. The motion by Mr. Kallao was changed to read, that the committee proceed with a report that reflects the new single -story building and remodel 4,999 square feet of the existing building, as the committee has now, a preliminary drawing with also the concept of remodeling 4,999 square feet, seconded by Mr. Reeves. Mr. Varney asked if Mr. Kallao received a response from Ian, with ADG, of what the architectural fee would be to design the single -story building. Mr. Varney understood that Ian advised the estimated cost for the single -story building was 3.2 to 3.6 million dollars and the number ADG used for their footprint to do the ground work was included in that number. Mr. Kallao responded that Ian commented he thought the single -story building could be built for between $3.2 and $3.6 million. It was unclear if Ian was asked if the architectural fee was included. Mr. Lindorff distributed a substitute motion in writing he wanted to put on the table [handout]. Discussion ensued regarding Mr. LindorFf's substitute motion. Mr. Lindorff explained how the numbers were derived in the motion and advised he was not married to the numbers but he has a basis for plugging in those numbers. Mr. Lindorff defended the dollar per square foot figures when questioned about the total cost of $4.1 million. Facilitator Busby advised there was a motion on the table and a second. She advised she thinks the substitute motion is a substantial change to the motion on the table, so she asked if he wanted to amend the motion. Mr. Lindorff advised he preferred to offer the motion as a substitute motion. Facilitator Busby asked if the committee wanted to vote, if they wanted to table the motion or what the committee would like to do. Discussion ensued regarding the difference between the motion on the floor and the substitute motion submitted by Mr. Lindorff. Mr. Lindorff explained that Mr. Kallao's motion was to basically have the committee recommending a single -story new construction and remodeling up to a certain square footage of the old building. Essentially, the substitute motion does the same thing, but Mr. Lindorff's substitute motion adds in some of the other issues that the committee would ultimately have to add to Mr. Kallao's motion in order to get to something that can be handed over to the City Commission. Some of the committee members voiced concern regarding the figures in the substitute motion. A point of order was called. Facilitator Busby asked the members if they wanted to call the question on this or if Mr. Lindorff wanted to make a motion to amend Mr. Kallao's motion? Mr. Lindorff advised he will defer it to Mr. Kallao. Facilitator Busby questioned if Mr. Lindorff was going to make a motion to amend the motion? ATTACHMENT B For the purposes of discussion, I move that the Committee recommends that the City Commission proceed with resolving the floor space and functionality issues related to the present Police Department headquarters building by constructing a new single -story building at the same general location as the ADG-designed two-story building, and by remodeling a portion of the existing Police headquarters building, with the following additional recommendations: 1. The footprint of the new building shall not exceed 8,000 sq. feet and shall house the essential police functions as generally depicted in the floor plan concept proposed by Committee Member Corsano and rendered to scale for the Committee by Lance Wolfson, Architect Intern and volunteer to the Committee. 2. The existing Police headquarters building shall be remodeled to extent allowed based on the "fair market value" of the structure as determined by an appraisal prepared by a Member of the Appraisal Institute (MAI). The size of the remodeled space allocated for Police Department use shall not exceed 3,000 sq. feet, which may be increased for legitimate police operational purposes provided the budget established for the project is not exceeded. 3. The specific allocation and use of the various spaces in the new building and remodeled building shall be determined by the users of the space (i.e., Police Department personnel) in cooperation with the project architect and other City staff, subject to the final approval of the City Manager and City Commission. 4. The cost of the project shall not exceed $4,100,000, based on the following data derived from information provided to the Committee. These figures are presented for illustrative purposes only, and may vary depending on the design and construction method used. It is the intent of this recommendation that the "bottom line" be adhered to, but the specific distribution of the budgeted funds is up to City staff to determine. New Building (8,OOOsf @ $265 $2,120,000 Remodeled Building (3,OOOsf @ $140) $420,000 SUBTOTAL $2.540,000 Site Work $480,000 SUBTOTAL $3,020,000 A/E Fees $317,100 Furniture, fixtures, equipment $315,000 TOTAL $3,652,100 10% Contingency $365,210 GRAND TOTAL 4.017.310 (Rounded to $4.1 million) 5. The Committee strongly urges the City to capture the benefit of having a construction firm on board throughout the design phase and take advantage of obtaining a guaranteed maximum price for delivering the new and remodeled buildings by utilizing the design -build method of managing the designing and construction of these facilities.