HomeMy WebLinkAbout10B - New City Hall / PD Report
AGENDA ITEM
DISCUSSION
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
July 19, 2004
10B
City Council Downtown Redevelopment Subcommittee
(Mayor Haugen, Councilmember LeMair, Police Chief O'Rourke, City
Attorney Pace, City Manager Boyles)
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF REPORT ON THE POLICE STATION I CITY HALL
CONSTRUCTION PROJECT.
Historv: In 1993, eleven years ago, the Prior Lake City Council and staff initiated a
Comprehensive Space Needs Analysis. That analysis was initiated because it had become
apparent to City officials that, even then, the existing facilities were not adequate to serve
the City's needs, and certainly would be insufficient to serve a community whose ultimate
population could be in the range of 45,000 people.
Because an objective study was desired, and because the necessary expertise was not
available on staff, the Boarman, Kroos, Vogel Group was retained to conduct the Space
Needs Analysis. The conclusions of that study were that the City's existing building
facilities were inadequate to serve our growing City. The Study recommended the
construction of four facilities in the following order: Fire Station, Maintenance Center,
Public Library, and Police Station I City Hall.
Since the completion of that Study in 1993, the community has proceeded to upgrade key
City facilities. In 1995, Fire Station NO.1 was built following a successful referendum. In
1997, the Maintenance Center was constructed, financed through a combination of reserve
funds, and the issuance of water revenue bonds. In 1999, the Library Resource Center
was completed through financing provided by the 1997 Park and Library Bond
Referendum.
As predicted by the 1993 Space Needs Analysis Study, and obvious to any observer, Prior
Lake continues to grow at an escalating rate as demonstrated by the 527 building permits
for 813 dwelling units in 2002, and 500 more permits issued in 2003. Prior Lake growth is
likely to continue considering that Scott County is the 15th fastest growing county in the
nation, and the fastest growing in the northern tier.
Recognizing that this decade old need for a new Police Station I City Hall is only becoming
greater with time, and in response to the May 2002 direction from the Long-Range
Planning Committee to build a new Police Station I City Hall, the staff asked the Boarman,
Kroos, Vogel Group (BKV) to update the Space Needs analysis in 2002. The 2002 Space
Needs Analysis was shared with the City Council in 2003.
The resulting report concluded that a building of 40,827 square feet would meet the City's
five-year need and in 15 years the need would increase to 48,221 square feet. The City
Council endorsed the revised Space Needs Analysis agreeing that the new Police Station I
City Hall would contain a Council Chambers, cable studio for the operation of the
www.cityofpriorlake.com
1:\CQUNCILIAGNRPTS\2004\CITY H*tn~ ~52~~7.iil~~0 / Fax 952.447.4245
government channel and public access, sally port, indoor police vehicle storage, and short-
term holding cells. The building would not house a firing range. This need is presently
being explored as a shared facility to be used by all Scott County governmental entities
partnering to build a facility.
The focus then turned to where the proposed City Hall / Police facility should be built.
Various ideas and site possibilities were presented with seven locations ultimately
evaluated by BKV Group and a Council committee made up of Mayor Haugen,
Councilmember Chad LeMair, City Manager Frank Boyles, and Police Chief Bill O'Rourke.
Those sites (Lakefront Park, the existing City Hall site, the CH Carpentar site, and a lot on
CSAH 21 between Duluth and West Avenues) were scored using weighted value criteria.
The process resulted in Lakefront Park being selected by the City Council as the site that
best met the criteria for a new facility.
Current Circumstances:
Site Selection - Since the selection of the Lakefront Park site, there has been a
significant opportunity for reflection and resident input. Questions about the suitability of
the Lakefront Park site have arisen due to the following:
. The removal of the Police Station / City Hall from the Downtown would undermine
the vitality of the Downtown by removing a key destination for Prior Lake residents
and employees as consumers of Downtown products and services.
. The completion of the School District strategic plan has increased the probability of a
community center with some form of water feature which would be more suitable
than a Police Station / City Hall on this site.
. The lifetime estate on the property prevents the establishment of a construction
timeline.
Realistically, the Police Station / City Hall project cannot proceed until a final site is agreed
upon. To complete the site selection process, we have requested an appraisal on one or
more downtown sites. Once the appraisals are completed and following consultation with
an owner's representative and architect, the subcommittee will return to the Council with a
site recommendation.
Design / Construction Process - The process for design, solicitation of bids, construction
observation and actual construction cannot be accomplished solely by City staff. The City
staff does not have the expertise or time to oversee and supervise a project of this
magnitude (estimated to be a $13 million project). Under state statutes, the City will be
required to prepare plans and specifications and receive bids for the construction of the
facility following official notice. The question is how and who will assist the City in the
supervision and oversight of this important and complex project.
There are three general approaches which cities may use: Design-Bid-Build,
Construction Manager, and Owner Representative. Each are described in more detail
below, together with the pros and cons of each.
(A.) Desian-Bid-Build (General Contractor): Design-Bid-Buiid has traditionally been the
most widely used method to accomplish construction of a public facility. After the
needs have been determined, the owner engages and contracts with an architect or
1:\COUNCILIAGNRPTS\2004\CITY HALL PO REPORT. DOC
team to develop contract documents, including drawings and specifications that
describe the owners contract expectations. During project construction, the owner
usually relies upon representatives from the design team (usually the architect) to
monitor the contractor's progress and to confirm that the contractor is following the
project design as reflecled in the drawings and specifications. A bidding process is
used to award construction to a general contractor who typically agrees to complete
the building within a specified timeframe and for a specified price. Any number of
subcontractors may be involved but the construction documents are between the
general contractor and the owner.
Lowest possible cost through the
com etitive bid rocess
No early commitment to any
contractor.
Contractor will provide a
performance and payment bond
protecting the owner from claims
arising from the construction
rocess.
No contractor input for the design team
throu h the desi n rocess.
By law, final selection of the conlractor is
based u on the lowest bidder.
Potential adversarial relationship to the
architect and owner through the lump sum
process.
(B.) Construction ManaQer: As an alternative to the traditional project delivery method of
general contracting, a construction manager is hired to represent the owner's interests.
The construction management agreement is drafted whereby the City remains
responsible and liable for the documents with all contracts. As an agent, the
construction manager would provide team leadership, subject to control by the owner,
but provides no guarantees that cost overruns or cost savings will occur.
Early involvement in the design
rocess.
Early identification of final budget
to aid design decisions.
Fees usually 3% to 5% of construction cost.
Owner is required to hold the contracts with
contractors and is directly at risk for
construction claims or liti ation.
CM may try to override the architect through
the desi n and construction rocess.
Fees associated with on-site supervision
and office.
No true basis for selection other than
strai ht fee ro osal.
Duplication of services provided by the
architect for review and approval of shop
drawin s, ro ress a ment and schedules.
(C.) Owner's Representative: Under owner's representative, a qualified individual or firm
is hired before retaining the architect. Typically the selected owner's representative
assists in the selection of the architect. This is an important aspect of this process
since much of the savings and expenses are incurred as a result of the decisions
made eariy in the process during conception, program articulation and approval of the
project. All of these steps precede actual design (see exhibit 3).
1:\COUNCILIAGNRPTS\2004\CITY HALL PD REPORT.DOC
Fee is 1 % to 2% of construction costs.
Involvement in design process at
onset.
Budget monitoring to aid design team
and owner decisions.
Monitoring of design process through
contract document hase.
Program identification and project
rioritization.
Provides independent representation to
owner during contractor selection bid
rocess.
Value engineering reviews provided
from Ihe start of design to insure
selection of best erformin s stems.
Difficult to find uaiified individuals.
Owner's represenlalive is usually not
re arded as a desi n team member.
Owner committed to individual for
Ion term ro'ect involvement.
Upon start of construction, "value" to
the ro'ect diminishes.
Ability 10 influence project outcome
diminishes as the ro'ect roceeds.
Conclusion: The subcommittee has spent significant time in exploring the options available
for a construction project of this type. We have also met with different individuals who
proform these types of construction management alternatives or options to understand the
parameters of each in order to better identify what management process will best serve our
particular project. The Council should evaluate the subcommittee recommendations in the
four areas shown below and consider whether the recommendation should be supported.
SUBCOMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATION The recommendations below are proposed in order of their occurrence in the construction
process.
1. Construction Process -
Recommendation: Owner Representative
The owner representative process involves less expense to the City than the
construction manager process. It also places an experienced construction person
providing input on the early phases of the project. Finally, it is the only process which
couples the liability of a general contractor with an on-going owner representative until
project completion. The owner's representative should be selected by the committee
based upon interviews of 2 to 4 owner's representatives in the area. Attention should
be given to those with experience with multi-purpose municipal and police facilities,
expertise in construction generally, cost, and reference checks of previous clients.
2. Architect -
Recommendation: Independent
The architect should be selected following interview of 2 to 4 architect firms. The
owner's representative should participate. Interviews should take place based upon an
RFP prepared by the committee and owner's representative.
3. Site Selection/Cost Implications -
Recommendation: Subcommittee Evaluation / City Council Approval
The subcommittee with the benefit of an appraisal and the assistance of the owner's
representative and architect should formulate a recommendations and submit it to the
entire Council for action.
1:\COUNCILIAGNRPTS\2004\CITY HALL PD REPORT DOC
ALTERNATIVES
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
4. Process and Timeline-
Recommendation: Subcommittee Preparation
The process and timeline is affected by the site selection and acquisition process.
Once both of these important pre-requisites is accomplished, the subcommittee, with
the help of the owner's representative and architect, should prepare a process and
timeline for City Council approval.
The subcommittee is seeking approval for the steps set forth in this report. If the Council
concurs, it would be appropriate to pass the following motions:
(1) Authorize the use of the Owner's Representative construction process, and approve
the process for selecting an Owner's Representative.
(2) Approve the process for selecting the architect.
(3) Approve the process for site selection.
(4) Direct the preparation of a final process and timeline following Step 3 above.
Alternatives (1) through (4) above.
1:\CQUNCILIAGNRPTS\2004\CITY HALL PO REPORT DOC