Finance Committee Questions posed to the Architect
Police and Highway Project - Questions Asked
1) a. How is the project going to be paid for? b. What will be its impact on the tax rate? c. How will phasing the project change that answer? d. What is the timeline for the project phases of construction and payments?
1a. Obviously, the financing question is up to the Town and it is incumbent upon the Finance Committee and the Selectmen to set out a financing strategy to address the long term debt service and determine what impact that will have on the tax rate.
1b. Bonding, possible sale of up to 3 or more Town properties, and other revenue sources could off-set that rate.
1.c This phase of the project is the current article for $650,000 requested for architectural services for Design Development, Construction Documents and Bidding to determine the actual cost of the contrustion to be provided at future Town meeting. Phasing the project, moving forward with only one of the two building (i.e. Police Station now, Highway Garage at a later time) will reduce by only $100,000 the amount being sought at town meeting, but it will result in an overall increase in costs in the end can also be considered to delay the borrowing and reduce the impact on the tax rate.
1.d. No schedule for project phasing has been determined yet. The project is still in the concept and scoping phase. A program calendar is being developed that will lay out the permitting and approval process, which will help us better understand a construction, and therefore a bonding timeline.
2) a. General background on what were the programming needs for this project?
b. What is size-scope of each department's needs and how to do those requirements compare to current staffing/fleet size? c. What are the areas of growth anticipated? How much "growth", "growing room" is built into the buildings?
2.a The current programming began with a review of the preliminary programs developed as part of the 2011 Capital Building Needs Assessment and observation of operations at the existing facilities. The 2011 program for the police facility did not contemplate space needs for the Parking Department, Animal Control Office, Training or an Emergency Operations Center. The 2011 program for the DPW-HWY facility did not contemplate space needs for Buildings and Grounds operations and the garage accommodated fewer vehicles. We then met with department staff to review functions, adjacencies, equipment needs, etc. and, based on all of this information, developed a preliminary Space Needs Program for both facilities. The initial Space Needs Programs were then reviewed with department heads.
2.b.1 KBA’s assessment of the space needs for the Provincetown Police Department was projected originally to require a 17,118 square feet facility. This area had been revised down to 16,600 square feet as of March 19th, and based on the public comments provided at the Public Forum, staff has requested the facility be further reduced in size and that each program element be reconsidered. The existing facility is 5,608 square feet.
Within the proposed Police Station, individual workspaces are only provided for the following staff: Police Chief; Lieutenant; 4 existing Sergeants; 3 existing Detectives; 4 dispatch stations (summer staffing); 3 parking personnel; 2 police administrative; the animal control officer, and volunteer reception desk. Patrolmen and summer officers work out of the common Roll Call area and have lockers assigned.
2.b.2 Our needs assessment for the HWY, B&G, DPW Offices and Garage was projected to require a 20,226 square foot office-garage facility and a 4,800 square foot salt shed. This area has been revised down to 18,365 square feet as of March 19th, and based on the public comments provided at the Public Forum, staff has requested the facility be further reduced in size and that each program element be reconsidered. The existing facilities include:
|DPW Highway Garage
|| 4096 sf
|| 16,152 sf
|Highway Garage Sheds
|| 853 sf
|Parking Meter Shed
|| 921 sf
|| 600 sf
|Water Meter Shed
|| 294 sf
|| 3200 sf
|| 4,800 sf
|DPW Admin Offices
|| 1500 sf
|| 600 sf
|| 208 sf
|| 12,272 sf
|| 20,952 sf
Within the proposed Highway Garage, individual workspaces are only provided for the following staff: Director, Deputy Director, Water Supernatant; Buildings and Grounds Forman; Highway Forman; and 5 administrative.
2.c The HWY,B&G, DPW Offices and Garage facility is programmed to adequately meet existing needs with no staff growth contemplated at this time. The salt shed has been programmed to grow by 50% from 3,200 square feet to 4,800 square feet to increase storage capacity.
The Provincetown Police Department is programmed to adequately house existing staff and incorporate the possibility of filling the need for a dedicated prosecutor and a single workspace for the National Park Service in the detention area.
2.d The HWY,B&G, DPW Offices and Garage facility has no additional area for staff growth. The Provincetown Police Department has about 200 square feet of additional space assigned to the dedicated prosecutor and National park Service.
3)a. What will be the anticipated maintenance costs related to the proposed structures? b. How much extra will be the utilities, janitorial, and similar expenses and how will those expenses impact operating budgets once the complex is operational.
3.a While projected maintenance costs have not yet been estimated because selections of systems and materials have not been made, comparative life cycle cost analysis will be developed during the design development phase enabling the Owner to make system selections prior to finalizing design documents. It is important to note, however, that the choices will be between types of high performing energy-efficient systems. We will also have a high performing building envelope and high efficiency lighting fixtures with daylight controls, so the energy use per square foot for heating and lighting will likely be lower per square foot then the existing facilities. Our goal is to design a LEED-certifiable project.
3.b See above
4) a. How did the architects arrive at the estimates for the price/sq ft for each of the buildings? b. Are they conservative or aggressive and why? c. Are the price per sq ft estimates keeping in line with "green guidelines" and building on the Cape?
4.a At the Schematic design level KBA uses adjusted historical square foot cost numbers as the basis of our Opinion of Probable Construction Cost. Historical references are also the basis of our Opinion of Probable Owner’s costs.
4.b The cost numbers are our best estimation of the real cost. Perhaps the contingencies included might be considered a bit conservative based on project histories we are familiar with but we consider them to be prudent.
4.c We believe they are, yes.
5) a. Could certain functions reporting into the Chief of Police be housed in other Town owned real estate less expensively than building a larger building to accommodate them. b. Could the current station be renovated to house some function (as an example, renovate the current station for parking and animal control, or dispatch housed in another building like a fire station?)
5.a Some functions could theoretically be housed in separate facilities and this would presumably lower the capital cost but there are several supervisory issues that would lead to operational inefficiencies.
5.b Renovation of the existing police facility would likely be expensive as it is not handicapped accessible and would require other Code upgrades as well. In addition to the renovation costs, the Town would lose possible sources of project funding and future tax revenues from the properties. Furthermore current inefficient building systems’ utility and maintenance costs would likely eat up the capital cost savings quickly.
6)a. What is included in the site work? b. Does it include an acoustical plan? c. What is being done to mitigate impact on neighbors.? d. What other property exists that could be used (renovate or build new?) to house some of the DPW functions planned for this site?
6.a The sitework includes demolition, site preparation, stormwater drainage control and utilities, material bins, paving, fencing and landscaping.
6.b The general design is intended to reflect sound up and away from the neighbors and to move certain functions now performed our-of-doors inside. We are also proposing a berm at the north end of the site with a 4’high reflective fence and vegetation at the top to cut down on yard sound leaving the site horizontally towards White Pines Condominium. The placement of the salt shed is also intended to mitigate yard noise.
6.c See above.
6.d We are unaware of any.
7) a. Can we renovate rather than replace the current Salt Shed? b. What are the cost implications?
7.a Renovating the salt shed would be less expensive than building new but the existing capacity is inadequate and more importantly does not have the adequate ceiling clearance for the trucks to load the sand and salt, which requires the materials to be delivered outside and manually moved into the shed. It would be very difficult to access it with larger vehicles delivering salt. Also, its current location limits flexibility on the site for vehicle circulation.
7.b We have not evaluated the durability of the shed or developed a “renovation” plan for it because of the “capacity” issue.. have located the proposed Office/Garage facility in the most efficient location on the site – and that conflicts with the current location of the salt shed, we cannot, without further study, answer that question accurately.
8)a. What would be the costs to renovate the current police station building? b. Can current site be used for an all new police building? c. Can we do a study to understand the specifics? d. Why are the footprint elevations for the current site (and various alternatives) using a two story building when the proposal is building a three story building? (e. should the foot print be 33% of the square footage?). f. If so does that change the answer on the viability of any other sight?
8.a This option has not been studied but KBA as our contract reflects Town Meeting approval and authorization to proceed as follows:
April 4, 2011 Annual Town Meeting Article 22. Design and Project Management Services for the Construction of a New Highway Maintenance Facility and Police Station. To see if the Town will vote to amend the action taken under Article 5 of the April 2010 Annual Town Meeting, Capital Improvement Plan, under the category of Building Assessment, by authorizing the expenditure of the remaining appropriation, which was from free cash for design and project management services in connection with the demolition of the existing highway garage and the construction of a new highway maintenance facility and a new police station to be located at the existing highway garage site; or to take any other action relative thereto.
However, KBA does not believe it is practical or economically feasible to either renovate and add on to the existing building. An adequately-sized facility addition simply would not fit on the site and leave enough room for handicapped access, vehicular circulation, parking or the separate, secure access points required for a police facility.
8.b Again, the above-noted comments apply but if, as suggested Monday evening, a large amount of the site were left for open for parking, there would likely not be enough space left at ground level for necessary functions and adequate public and secure access. Also this would require making the building taller and if a height variance were to be granted to do that granted we would likely be looking at significantly higher square foot construction costs.
8.c It could be done, but it is not currently within the scope of work anticipated.
8.d There are many functions in a police facility that work more efficiently at ground level. Some are public access issues and some due to security considerations. A few are; the sally port, prisoner processing, detention, patrol operations, animal control, dispatch, records public interview. At the propose site and because of the grades, we are able to meet all of these ground level access requirements on the lower and main levels and the footprint is still 50% of the total area. We believe that is the minimum footprint area even with three stories. If the building were only two stories, we would estimate the footprint to be about 67% of the total area.
8.e No. See above. Also, note that zoning prohibits anything over a 2 ½ story building. Half story means that any dormering that occurs over the second story is limited to 50% of the footprint below.
8.f We don’t believe so.
9) a. Have we done a similar look at renovating existing DPW buildings? b. And/or building on other land with existing facilities?
9.a That has not been done because of the age, condition and layout of the existing building. It is also in the middle of the site and it would be complicated to add onto it and maintain efficient circulation.
9.b We are unaware of any other site(s).
10) Can we build a fully plumbed bathroom for the DPW at their current location to use until a new building is ready?
10 Obviously, this could be done although the cost and cost-benefit ratio of installing a Title 5 septic system on the property needs to be considered.
11) a. If the DPW/Police buildings were built as a single building could certain functions be combined to save expense (HVAC, Conference rooms, break rooms, showers etc). b. Could certain of the police functions be built at the lower cost per sq/ft used for the DPW offices?
11.a Theoretically, perhaps, but the building would be so much bigger a footprint that it would take up considerably more flat, or prime, area and there would be a multitude of circulation and security issues to resolve by mixing the two very different uses plus the public and vehicles of all sizes. It appears that there would not be enough space left for lay down area or material bins.
11.b This option would create serious operational supervisory and support issues, with the possible exception of the Parking Department. But that would bring an unwanted floe of private vehicles into the site and potentially create circulation gridlock