Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.b. Space Needs Study .^ ,r�' , . � t'ti E3C)X .SiE) � � �� � � � >fz r ��r�,rt�sr tiv � ��� t�t�f O � � t � 1�t ROSF�A.�t'!�+N1 �.AINNf�`-UI�A `;f;(tf;R �1` �f,�.,�T�*�i`�[.?���,Ii� F�"' 423-�t.tii July 27, 1989 Tfl: Mayor Hoke iTBM 5. b. Councilmemberss Napper Oxborough Wa1sh Wippermann /�� FROM: Stephan J�.lk, Administratar/C1erk .�f" �� f R�: Space N�eds Study ' Pureuan� �i�"`�"our epProv�i; reque�t for praposals were �ent to four firms to comple�e the spaee needs studq fox the fire station, maintenance garage, and the citp hal�.. PrQposals were reeeived from three of those firms. The firms subm�.tting ' proposals were TRDA, Bc►arman and Associate$ and Winsor/Faricy . The pxoposals were al1 we11 written and, I believe, reflected the firms understanding of the �cops of work. There were several reasons to have gone out�side citp staff to aceomplish thi� work. First, I had hoped that a 1on� range plan for the develogment of city facilities could be drafted. This tpge of pro�ect can take an extensive amount of time. Ta do such ` a task, in a timel� �ashion, requires more time than staff can dedicate. Secondlp, portions of the work to be accompllahad simply require� more expertise than we hsve in house. And third, I had hoged to take awap any feeJ.ing that staff would pre�udice the outcome for recomt�endations on the uae and location of anp �r all of the city faeilities. The cost associsted with the three proposals received r�nged from $25,000 to $35,OOQ with two of them very close in cost on the 1ow end. In budgeting for this work staff had expected the cc�st ta be in the $15,0�0 to $18,�00 range. Thtg i.s not to sep that atl three �r. oposals are aut c�f. tine f.�r what is pr.opc�r�ed. It ts r� l.m��1y �� say ths�L wc� nrr. w�q itn�ler bcictgPt Ln fttnding Lor tlti.s wark. ' In r�viewing these proposals and the entire process contempl.ated here the following recommendatian is brvught for qour eonsideration. 1) Reject alI proposals dne to the lack o£ a,dequate funding sources at this time. 2) Direct staff to develop a "needs assessment" and facilities ' development scheme £or cifip facil.ities. This would a�aount to having staff deveZoge, internallp, an asseesment on the future staffing needs and basic buildin� needs to house them. In the past several months many discussions have ' taken place in thi9 regard but no efforC has been put f�rth to develc�pe a fnrrttal plan to address those needs. _ __ _ . ___ _ _ _. s. M . • _ . � � � � . I'f> E3�X 51fl � t�t f�;� � � �n �, i����rt� �r w s,.: '. � �- 1 � �,�.,�, J r3t�sF h�r,��r��i �,�iNNr �-r,�n r,sse,r� � �� � �f;12'����`�l�'t f.�1.-�l t`t l � f+��� a2a-.,.,,, Julq 27, 1489 T0: Mapor Hoke iTEM 5. b. Councilmembers: N�gper Oxborough Walsh �ipP�rmann �` � FROM: Steghan J3.1k, Administrator/C1erk .��� . R�: Space Needs Study , Pursuan� �Y�1°�"our' apPraval; request for proposals were sent to four ffrms to camplete the space nead� studp for the fire station, maintenance garage, and the citp hal1. Proposals were received from three a€ thc►se firms. The €irms submitting proposals were TR.DA, Boarman and Associates and Winsor/Faricp. The progosals were all we11 written and, I believe, reflected the firms understanding of the scope of work. There were several reasons ta have gone autside city staf.f to aceamglish thia work. First, I had hoped tha� a long range glan for the development of city fscilities could be dratted. This type of pro�ect can take an extensive amount of time. To do such a task, in a timely fashi.on, requires more time than staff can dedicate. Secondlp, portions of the work to be accotnplished eimply requires more expertise than we have in house. And thixd, I had hoped to take away any feeling that staff would pre�udice the outcame for recommendations on the use and lbcatian of any ' or all of the citq facili,ties. The cost associated with the three proposals received rangecl from $25,OQ0 to $35,000 with two o£ them very close in cost on the low end, In budgsting far this wc�rk staff had expected the cost to be in the $15,0�0 to $18,�00 range. Tht� is not to �ay thr�t �11 three Pr. oposals are oat af. l.ine f.or what is �rop�sec�. It tg r�i.rnptq t� sey thsil: we z�c•c� wt�y itncter httcfiget t�t funding ('c�r t1�1.9 work. In reviewing these prop�sals and t}ie entire process eantempl.ated here the following recommendation is broaght for your consideration. 1) Reject al1 pxoposals due to the lack of adequate funding sources at this time. 2) Direct staff to develop a "needs assessment" and £acilities develvpment seheme £or city faci1'_ities. This would amount to having staff develope, internally, an assessment on the future sta£fing needs and basic building needs to house them. In the gast several months manq discussions have ' tak�n place in thts regard but no effort has been put f�rth to develope a formal plan to address those needs. � _ � • • As part of this �.ntern�l procees Rtaf. .E would �lso develope a pl.an far the use of the existing fire station and the publi.c works facilitp pending the outcome of the work suggested in item #3 below. If the ontcome of the process in item #3 is sueh that a new £ire station is constructed then there seems ta be a natural progression as tc� the use of the existing fire statian and the existing public works £acili.tp for other needs. These have been discussed but yet to be forma�.ly set out for review. 3) Ask that the same three firma submitting groposals at th3s time resubmit propasal8 to aceomplish the same taska only for the fire station facilities. This proces$ would laok at alternatives for addin� on the existing bu3lding, building a new facility, the location o£ a new facili.ty , schematic drawings far the floor plan for a remodeled or new £acility and the cost esti.mates to accomplish this. This process would take us to a point where a decision cauld be made as to whether ar not to go to a referendum, if necessary. By breaking the process down in this manner extensive expenditures would not have to be made at this time and yet �he overall facility planning cen continue. With your con€�ideration of this approach staff can reconfigure the RFP' S for consulting work and bring that back to pou on August �.St,�i kfor consideration. . : . , The requested council action would be: A) Re�ect a11 proposals for completion of the �pace needs s�udptdue t� laek of funding sources at �his tfm� � and; B) Direct staff to proceed �►3th in house space and staffing needs for city ha11 and public works £acilitp, ` C) Direct sta£f to recar�figure the RFP'S foar archit�ctural services to address the fire station f�cility on1y. 1,� � ..... .. . . � ... � � :: .,............... - O10-T0 r :: � _ . .l���k� .. � EXISTiNG DRIVEWAYS . � : ..... � �£�. ���i� t TYP.) , ... ... . .. .. . , . �:� . . . ................ . .�......... .. ....:...�........� ... .. ................ . :...........; ... #�� ��. . � .{�: .i:� ��. .:;;.;:. .. . ................ . :...:.... .. . . ... . {>;;;:;:.:..;.. � , .�:; .: ... r :�:..:'....: . ;:;;.:.:.:_:.:;:.:.:::.:.:.:::::.:.:.:::.:: . ...:.�.. ..�:�: ......:.. ...•..:.:.<�.: : � �; ...; ..,r r... :: : � ��.._ � '��� ...�`#����.��' . ..:: 4CATI0N .��:� ::r � .._... . .. .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. .�. .��. ..�: ........... ;:�. .. . .. ..:.:.:..... .:.: ... ......._. . _ ........... . . :.:. ��• il`.:•:�: .-.��.y . , .... ..... . �} � w. .��G:�:� .•1T/.i�. .t�' , ..�. �*� . �, .:.;' � : '� : ' REMOVE nr , , C.F. � ABANDOAp D � .. . . � . : _ RAtL RO � �� �"� � INDUSTRIES CROSSING. �; . ao-sa �� .�.f..: . ao-at ` r : � .. � . , . � _ro '� . . +O�f-�:M:::<::,;:> : ,;: .: pp 0�0 . ...,.....,.,. . ..... . , .� '. : : ' �:� . ' � � �: : CLEAR TREES a BRUSH ��: �.: �: : . . ,: � . :..�"' . .......: W ITH I N EASEM ENT. o��-�t �•::;. � � :� �. . ' . . : . . �..:....�:•. �'' : t���tt � �•'� ... ... . . � . . •: :., :. .'. : ` ao ss .t .f I.� i �:..:::....':..:: �q� �' p:t�r�'' :��••�It .., . . � O�G-ib tT '� �f��, ' ��� . ' ... ,. . �������� • .. .... . ` TSI HT E EMENT � : � �� : .: � � . ; - • : : �,�;� � ' rj �r:� � � . . � . . ' �f�E..-��.1 ��., .�+w--� ' . { •��, � . � . . . .:�>:�>::<�:-:� P RCEI.S SUBJECT TO " � ` . . . � A ESSMENTS. . �:� .... _,�- ,;r�� . . .. � j : � .:•:. � ...... . ....... .. _ . ; � ... . _ ' ,�• � ot� - �o � ao-sa � oa-� o�o-ta � - FILE N0. - PINE BEND TRAIL asz�3 ROS�MC�UNT, M�NNES4TA .i� PtAN vi�w oR�. No. � , ENCINEERS I ARCNfTECTS 1 PLAMNERS G ' ' ' � I REMOVE 3�� Of SH4ULQER MATERIAL ; PLACE S��CLASS 2 AGGREGATE SHOULDERING. � PROPOSED 2 '� BITUhAINOUS OVERLAY 2341 WEARING COURSE . ALTERNATE "A" ' , ,� �' ,u TACK COAT �"" 2 BIT. WEARING COURSE � ,o,b•,o o :•..L+: u . # . . . 3 CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BA3E � ; _ . , . . � . . .... .. __.... . . _ _. ..... _ . . , �.�, _... ...._.. ... .. ..... .__. ... , ...... ,._ .._ ...._..._ _.. . � . �.�. : .;.; � . : .,,,,�_.........,,_....... ._ .......,._.._ ......o..... . ...'h• .�........ . ..........r�........ . , ...: ... _........ ....,...... ..__ . ......._... �,.,�.4 . . . . . ; � � . . . ..'�" � . � . � . . . . �� . � � . . . . '_. £ �..,aEs.....Hr....... ...: ... _........,....�,........, :,,. ,.,..,..... �..M�.� . . _ .......... ..._ ..._. . . .... �.. ;�.�,;� ��.i;�' ';•l � _.... . . $ � � � { } ? e . . . . . < t � ,'c . . . . . . . \ . . . . . � . .. . . , � .. . ; . , . 3 � :� . . mx�acF x�, � . . . . . � . :......... ............ � . < �. `. �*�?x�w+ �, � . � . ��..< q. Y� .. �y '�`S' .. \ \ ♦ �'j� . . � Y . {� � '�b`fJw . .. . . , . . . �..�3 .. n.iw...k. ..n .,a w. J.., N.� at i.n � . �'� . . � . . .. ' �+.).. � . . . . .. ...reAt *a..�.�2. . . . . . . .. ... .... ..w .. ...)..w...t .�... . . .. ......... ..... . . ...... .. ... ..... .... . � / .Ld i.5.m.n.....c...n.tt.�. .... :N.. .......r:.w:-r,..a , .. � .. ..s. �,. ( ^�W. �� . "'4� .. `l'"� . . . �r�,6`..a.L.v.. i` �+t"�w...' ..�• r� , ���.. a.�...�.v.fF ' . t ,,.. ..w. . � �i. ; . � r� t .. . . . � � �i'%f�"'�"i . ,-� '�.:` , . .. ...... . ., �.,; �., �� . .. .� . � . . .e� ..,.. �.. � t . E i � . . �;^ . � .. .... :{ . . . . . �Y..r� � . � , , . ^.... .. .P � ... ._ -.._ _.. . ...,. _.. .... . ...., , . ._.. .. . .. ........... . .._....... . .. ....._.. ._ . ae , . . ... .. .......... ................... ... ..........�... ...._....... _.._........ ....3 ..5. �� . � 3 ...6.. i ....�... k ...� . ,y�� •' :.. ,..: ..... ..... ... .�� f� .. . . { .� . . . ... . ..s � � . . � . .� � . . . ; t t . . . . r ., ... ..[}+f;,,.. ..'�'.. . . . . . . . S � � . . . . . . � . - � . . � �' . � . . � � � � � � � � :.._.....�.,.. �� ..£ � �.� .�._ ....'. � ...._. ..�:.... .. . .. .. .... 2�Y ....,�.... . -.. .. . .._._ � . . . . f : m , � . � � , r ,, , ,. .. a �� . . � ; ... , i_. X _', .'? . . . � . . . . � � � . . . . .,,' ::. ... �_... .... ... • .... ... ......._. . . . � . ; ' � � : � . �._ .-, � -. '. >�.. . �_�... .. ..�.. ..�:.... ._,........ � � . . � � � . . . � � . �. . � ... � ��`�:, . . � . ,. ,.. .� ... . . -� .:,.. .. . .. ,... � . . �, � . � � . . . . _ � ... � . � . .. _.... . . .__ _._............... - �. . � .. . ._.... :: � " � k ., . ..,... .. .. � �,.3 . x< ..�� ,.:...�... t..��t :-... .:. :.... ... ..� � �� � , NO SCALE e - - . � � � FILE N0. , � P�I�E BEND TRAlL ss��s . ROS� EMOU�IT, MINNE�OTA ' � TYPI�AL SECTI(>N oRe. No. ENG/NEERS f ARCH/TECT51 PU�NNERS � � � � \ —mir� .`. � � � � \ . � . . . -� ao e. ` � , _=b OIO-It `\� � �'�.' � ( . . . . � . . � �. . . .. . . . . _ _���� � �� i����+� . �qTl.lOf 1q.2. ��� '_-- �'�'��� . , � � �� . � � . . . . . � . �0�.� ' � \ . � � �\��,_�J .. � � . 010-D0 � �O-M � `/ . � � � �� � � � �.��., , ,� �1 � �-�, �_p N pQ � I . . . �/ � . Q�J � CM•pp � .. � Qb �_�.. � ���00� y ~o � .v�' o%loT w0.� ao- � . � � � � . . � � . � �F�' O . , � � ow'n �_� oa-� � I aoo � I . ow-» ao-w �_� 0�0-00 M .— �,� PI N'E � °�-n PROJECT OCATION �� . . ��p� �A � .. � . . . . � . \� ao-si aa-�s , pl_Tf OIO-W OIO-!0 � Oq-1{ . ^\� . . . p0-�O ' . . � �\ �O � ��ow-w \` �� r� I�O aoie \� ao-a � � ai-r aos. oa-�o ae-os A I, �f b � N � '� on-x � ao-u I �• � ao aa � � . � I . � � . . . � . � , • .q �a► . aa-w aeo-��e #�'� � �,-,� ,� 4/ � i �' �' � p� � � � � «- oa_w A � � . , ao-. � . � � �� ,�•.�,�:. . � ow a �.E �.�r xrc� A l � �-m i . . . � . . . � • . . �-m i a� , � � a��-�o � � b op-� o�o-as oo-ss ao-ts . � . . . . . �_� . � � . � on u oo u . . � � qo-u op s s �� . //�/ d � ry �� 1� � . O 8 p0-3! . . . oe-n - bg � �. , � +� � d"'� oro-n . � . A � �� . .. . � . . ao x . . � � . qb�4 . . ao-o . . � . . 010-�0�� . � � . y . . . . � � . PO-/6 � � . <<` ' . . � � � . . . � . . . .. . . . . . . . . �`y � � � . . . , � . .-��._�� _ OW-R -_ . pp_fp . . . . . .. . . OD-!0 � . . � 06M0 �R.M{f1�M 1ML1t �O w�11KAtt) ����-�� . . . . . . . . . . p0-Tf . . . � O10-96 ♦ . . . � � � ... . . . � . FI LE N0: � � PtNE BEND TRAtl. ss27s RCJSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA �r ��oca-r�oN nnAP oR�. N�. � ENGINEERS I ARCHITECTS I PLANNERS �