The URL can be used to link to this page

WLC Architects ., JAN 1 6 2001 AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES This AGREEMENT made this 15 day of December. 2000, between: CITY: City of Gilroy, having a principal place of business at 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, California and CONSULTANT: WLC Architects, having. a principal place of business at 10470 Foothill Boulevard. Rancho Cucamon2a. CA 91730 ARTICLE 1. TERM OF AGREEMENT This Agreement will become effective on December 15.2000 and will continue in effect through AU2ust 31. 2001 unless terminated in accordance with the provisions of Article 7 of this Agreement. ARTICLE 2. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS It is the express intention of the parties that CONSULTANT is an independent contractor and not an employee, agent, joint venturer or partner of CITY. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed as creating or establishing the relationship of employer and employee between CITY and CONSULTANT or any employee or agent of CONSULTANT. Both parties acknowledge that CONSULTANT is not an employee for state or federal tax purposes. CONSULT ANT shall not be entitled to any of the rights or benefits afforded to CITY'S employees, including, without limitation, disability or unemployment insurance, workers' compensation, medical insurance, sick leave, retirement benefits or any other employment benefits. CONSULTANT shall retain the right to perform services for others during the term of this Agreement. ARTICLE 3. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY CONSULTANT Specific Services CONSULTANT agrees to: Perform the services as outlined in Exhibit "A" ("Specific Provisions") and Exhibit "B" ("Scope of Services"), within the time periods described in Exhibit "c" ("Payment Schedule") and Exhibit "D" ("Milestone Schedule"). Method of Performing Services CONSULTANT shall determine the method, details and means of performing the above- described services. CITY shall have no right to, and shall not, control the manner or determine the method of accomplishing CONSULTANT'S services. \LAC\322432.04 85-072904706002 -1- Employment of Assistants CONSULTANT may, at the CONSULTANT'S own expense, employ such assistants as CONSULT ANT deems necessary to perform the services required of CONSULT ANT by this Agreement, subject to the prohibition against assignment and subcontracting contained in Article 5 below. CITY may not control, direct, or supervise CONSULTANT'S assistants in the performance of those services. CONSULTANT assumes full and sole responsibility for the payment of all compensation and expenses of th~se assistants and for all state and federal income tax, unemployment insurance, Social Security, disability insurance and other applicable withholding. Place of Work CONSULTANT shall perform the services required by this Agreement at any place or location and at such times as CONSULTANT shall determine is necessary to properly and timely perform CONSULTANT'S services. ARTICLE 4. COMPENSATION In consideration for the services to be performed by CONSULTANT, CITY agrees to pay CONSULTANT: [as provided for in Exhibit "C", "Payment Schedule"]. Invoices CONSULTANT shall submit invoices for all services rendered. Payment Payment shall be due within thirty (30) days after receipt of invoice describing the work performed and approved direct expenses as provided for in Exhibit "A!' I.V. incurred during the preceding period. If CITY objects to all or any portion of any invoice, CITY shall notifY CONSULTANT of the objection within thirty (30) days from receipt of the invoice, give reasons for the objection, and pay that portion of the invoice not in dispute. It shall not constitute a default or breach of this Agreement for CITY not to pay any invoiced amounts to which it has objected until the objection has been resolved by mutual agreement of the parties. Expenses CONSULTANT shall be responsible for all costs and expenses incident to the performance of services for CITY, including but not limited to, all costs of equipment used or provided by CONSULTANT, all fees, fines, licenses, bonds or taxes required of or imposed against CONSULTANT and all other of CONSULT ANT'S costs of doing business. CITY shall not be responsible for. any expenses incurred by CONSULTANT in performing services for CITY, except for those expenses constituting "direct expenses" referenced on Exhibit "A." \LAC\322432.04 85-072904706002 -2- ARTICLE 5. OBLIGA nONS OF CONSULTANT Tools and Instrumentalities CONSULTANT shall supply all tools and instrumentalities required to perform the services under this Agreement at its sole cost and expense. CONSULT ANT is not required to purchase or rent any tools, equipment or services from CITY. Workers' Compensation CONSULTANT agrees to. provide workers' compensation insurance for CONSULT ANT'S employees and agents and agrees to hold harmless, defend with counsel acceptable to CITY and indemnifY CITY, its officers, representatives, agents and employees from and against any and all claims, suits, damages, costs, fees, demands, causes of action, losses, liabilities and expenses, including without limitation attorneys' fees, arising out of any injury, disability, or death of any of CONSULT ANT'S employees. Indemnification of Liability, Duty to Defend A. As Respects Professional Liability: To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall defend through counsel approved by CITY (which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld), indemnifY and hold harmless CITY, its officers, representatives, agents and employees against any and all suits, damages, costs, fees, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, liabilities and expenses, including without limitation attorneys' fees, to the extent arising or resulting directly or indirectly from any willful or negligent acts, errors or omissions of CONSULTANT or CONSULTANT'S assistants, employees or agents, including all claims relating to the injury or death of any person or damage to any property. B. the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall defend through counsel y CITY (which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld), indemnifY and hold TY, its officers, representatives, agents and employees against any and a 11 suits dama s, costs, fees, claims, demands, causes of action, losses, liabilities and expenses, including without limitation attorneys' fees, to the extent arising or resulting directly or indirectly from any act or omission of CONSULT ANT or CONSULTANT'S assistants, employees or agents, including all claims relating to the injury or death of any person or damage to any property. .; Insurance In addition to any other obligations under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall, at no cost to CITY, obtain and maintain throughout the term of this Agreement: (a) Comprehensive Liability Insurance, including coverage for owned and non-owned automobiles, with a minimum \LAC\322432.04 85-072904706002 -3- combined single limit coverage of $1,000,000 per occurrence for all damages due to bodily injury, sickness or disease, or death to any person, and damage to property, including the loss of use thereof; and (b) Professional Liability Insurance (Errors & Omissions) with a minimum coverage of $1,000,000 per occurrence and aggregate. As a condition precedent to CITY'S obligations under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall furnish evidence of such coverage (naming CITY, its officers and employees as additional insureds on the Comprehensive Liability insurance policy referred to in (a) immediately above) and requiring thirty (30) days written notice of policy lapse or cancellation, or of a material change in policy. terms. Assignment Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, neither this Agreement nor any duties or obligations of CONSULTANT under this Agreement may be assigned or subcontracted by CONSULTANT without the prior written consent of CITY, which CITY may withhold in its sole and absolute discretion. State and Federal Taxes As CONSULTANT is not CITY'S employee, CONSULT ANT shall be responsible for paying all required state and federal taxes. Without limiting the foregoing, CONSULTANT acknowledges and agrees that: *CITY will not withhold FICA (Social Security) from CONSULTANT'S payments; *CITY will not make state or federal unemployment insurance contributions on CONSULT ANT'S behalf; *CITY will not withhold state or federal income tax from payment to CONSULTANT; *CITY will not make disability insurance contributions on behalf of CONSULTANT; *CITY will not obtain workers' compensation insurance on behalf of CONSULTANT. ARTICLE 6. OBLIGA nONS OF CITY Cooperation of City CITY agrees to respond to all reasonable requests of CONSULT ANT and provide access, at reasonable times following receipt by CITY of reasonable notice, to all documents reasonably necessary to the performance of CONSULT ANT'S duties under this Agreement. Assignment CITY may assign this Agreement or any duties or obligations thereunder to a successor governmental entity without the consent of CONSULTANT. Such assignment shall not release CONSULT ANT from any of CONSULTANT'S duties or obligations under this Agreement. \LAC\322432.04 85-072904706002 -4- ARTICLE 7. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT Termination on Occurrence of Stated Events This Agreement shall terminate automatically on the occurrence of any of the following events: 1. Bankruptcy or insolvency of eith~r party; 2. Sale of the business of either party; 3. Death of either party. Termination by City for Default of Consultant Should CONSULTANT default in the performance of this Agreement or materially breach any of its provisions, CITY, at CITY'S option, may terminate this Agreement by giving written notification to CONSULTANT. For the purposes of this section, material breach of this Agreement shall include, but not be limited to the following: 1. CONSULTANT'S failure to professionally and/or timely perform any of the services contemplated by this Agreement. 2. CONSULTANT'S breach of any of its representations. warranties or covenants contained in this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to payment only for work satisfactorily completed through the date of the termination notice, as reasonably determined by CITY, provided that such payment shall not exceed the amounts set forth in this Agreement for the tasks described on Exhibit C" which have been fully, competently and timely rendered by CONSULTANT. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if CITY terminates this Agreement due to CONSULTANT'S default in the performance of this Agreement or material breach by CONSULTANT of any of its provisions, then in addition to any other rights and remedies CITY may have, CONSULTANT shall reimburse CITY, within ten (10) days after demand, for any and all costs and expenses incurred by CITY in order to complete the tasks constituting the scope of work as described in this Agreement, to the extent such costs and expenses exceed the amounts CITY would have been obligated to pay CONSULTANT for the performance of that task pursuant to this Agreement. Termination for Failure to Make Agreed-Upon Payments Should CITY fail to pay CONSULTANT all or any part of the compensation set forth in Article 4 of this Agreement on the date due, then if and only if such nonpayment constitutes a default under this Agreement, CONSULTANT, at the CONSULTANT'S option, may terminate this Agreement if such default is not remedied by CITY within thirty (30) days after demand for such payment is given by CONSULTANT to CITY. \LAC\32243204 85-072904706002 -5- Transition After Termination Upon termination, CONSULT ANT shall immediately stop work, unless cessation could potentially cause any damage or harm to person or property, in which case CONSULTANT shall cease such work as soon as it is safe to do so. CONSULTANT shall incur no further expenses in connection with this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall promptly deliver to CITY all work done toward completion of its services, and shall act in such a manner as to facilitate any new CONSULTANT'S assumption of duties. ARTICLE 8. GENERAL PROVISIONS Amendment & Modification No amendments, modifications, alterations or changes to the terms of this Agreement shall be effective unless and until made in a writing signed by both parties hereto. Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 Throughout the term of this Agreement, the CONSULTANT shall comply fully with all applicable provisions of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 ("the Act") in its current form and as it may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall also require such compliance of all subcontractors performing work under this Agreement, subject to the prohibition against assignment and subcontracting contained in Article 5 above. The CONSULT ANT shall defend with counsel acceptable to CITY, indemnifY and hold harmless the CITY OF GILROY, its officers, employees, agents and representatives from and against all suits, claims, demands, damages, costs, causes of action, losses, liabilities, expenses and fees, including without limitation attorneys' fees, that may arise out of any violations of the Act by the CONSULT ANT, its subcontractors, or the officers, employees, agents or representatives of either. Attorneys' Fees If any action at law or in equity, including an action for declaratory relief, is brought to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party will be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees, which may be set by the court in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose, in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. Captions The captions and headings of the various sections, paragraphs and subparagraphs of the Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be considered nor referred to for resolving questions of interpretation. \LAC\322432.04 85-072904706002 -6- Compliance With Laws The CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of all State and National laws and all municipal ordinances and regulations of the CITY which in any manner affect those engaged or employed in the. work, or the materials used in the work, or which in any way affect the conduct of the work, and of all such orders and decrees of bodies or tribunals having any jurisdiction or authority over the same. Without limiting the foregoing, CONSULTANT agrees to observe the provisions of the Municipal Code of the CITY OF GILROY, obligating every contractor or subcontractor under a contract or subcontract to the CITY OF GILROY for public works or for goods or services to refrain from discriminatory employment or subcontracting practices on the basis of the race, color, sex, religious creed, national origin or ancestry of any employee, applicant for employment, or any potential subcontractor. Conflict of Interest CONSULTANT certifies that to the best of its knowledge, no CITY employee or office of any public agency interested in this Agreement has any pecuniary interest in the business of CONSULTANT and that no person associated with CONSULTANT has any interest that would constitute a conflict of interest in any manner or degree as to the execution or performance of this Agreement. Entire Agreement This Agreement supersedes any and all prior agreements, whether oral or written, between the parties hereto with respect to the rendering of services by CONSULT ANT for CITY and contains all the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to the rendering of such services in any manner whatsoever. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein, and that no other agreement, statement or promise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid or binding. No other agreements or conversation with any officer, agent or employee of CITY prior to execution of this Agreement shall affect or modifY any of the terms or obligations contained in any documents comprising this Agreement. Such other agreements or conversations shall be considered as unofficial information and in no way binding upon CITY. Governing Law This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Notices Any notice to be given hereunder by either party to the other may be effected either by personal delivery in writing or by mail, registered or certified, postage prepaid with return receipt \LAC\322432.04 85-072904706002 -7- requested. Mailed notices shall be addressed to the parties at the addresses appearing in Exhibit "N', Section V.I. Notices, but each party may change the address by written notice in accordance with this paragraph. Notices delivered personally will be deemed delivered as of actual receipt; mailed notices will be deemed delivered as of three (3) days after mailing. Partial Invalidity If any provision in this Agreement is l1eld by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way. Time of the Essence All dates and times referred to in this Agreement are of the essence. Waiver CONSULTANT agrees that waiver by CITY of anyone or more of the conditions of performance under this Agreement shall not be construed as waiver(s) of any other condition of performance under this Agreement. . Executed at Gilroy, California, on the date and year first above written. CONSULT ANT: CITY: By: /111/~/ Soc. u .ty or Taxpayer Identificati n Number 952983869 Approved as to Form ATTEST: #~ City Attorney \LAC\322432.04 85-072904706002 -8- EXHffiIT "A" SPECIFIC PROVISIONS I. PROJECT MANAGER CONSULT ANT shall provide the services indicated on the attached Exhibit "B" - Scope of Services. (All exhibits referenced are incorporated herein by reference.) To accomplish that end, CONSULT ANT agrees to assign Larrv WoUT, who will act in the capacity of Project Manager, and who will personally direct such services. Except as may be specified elsewhere in this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall furnish all technical and professional services including labor, material, equipment, transportation, supervision and expertise to perform all operations necessary and required to satisfactorily complete the services required herein. II. NOTICE TO PROCEED/COMPLETION OF SERVICE A NOTICE TO PROCEED CONSULTANT shall commence services upon delivery to CONSULTANT of written Notice to Proceed. Notice shall be deemed to have been delivered as provided in the Section in Article 8 entitled "Notices." B. COMPLETION OF SERVICES When CITY determines that CONSULT ANT has satisfactorily completed all of the services defined under this Agreement, CITY shall give CONSULTANT written Notice of Final Acceptance, and CONSULTANT shall not incur any further costs hereunder. CONSULTANT may request this determination of completion when, in its opinion, it has satisfactorily completed all of the services under this Agreement, and if so requested, CITY shall make this determination within two (2) weeks of such request, or if CITY determines that CONSULTANT has not satisfactorily completed all of such services, CITY shall so inform CONSULTANT within this two (2) week period. III. PROGRESS SCHEDULE The Progress Schedule will be as set forth in the attached Exhibit "D" entitled "Milestone Schedule. " IV. PAYMENT OF FEES AND DIRECT EXPENSES Payments shall be made to CONSULTANT as provided for in Article 4 "Payment" and based on Exhibit C, "Payment Schedule." \LAC\322432.04 85-072904706002 -1- Direct expenses are charges and fees not included in Exhibit B, "Scope of Services." CITY shall be obligated to pay only for those direct expenses which have been previously approved in writing by CITY. CONSULTANT shall obtain written approval from CITY prior to incurring or billing of direct expenses. Copies of pertinent financial records, including mVOlces, will be included with the submission of billing( s) for all direct expenses. V. OTHER PROVISIONS A CONSULTANT' S SERVICES TO BE APPROVED BY A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER All reports, costs estimates, plans and other documents which may be submitted or furnished by CONSULTANT shall be approved and signed by a qualified registered professional architect in the State of California. The title sheet for specifications and reports, and each sheet of plans, shall bear the professional seal, certificate number, registration classification, expiration date of certificate and signature of the professional engineer responsible for their preparation. B. STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP CONSULTANT represents and warrants that it has the qualifications, skills and licenses necessary to perform the services, and its duties and obligations, expressed and implied, contained herein, and CITY expressly relies upon CONSULTANT'S representations and warranties regarding its skills, qualifications and licenses. CONSULTANT shall perform such services and duties in conformance to and consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. The plans, designs, specifications, estimates, calculations, reports and other documents furnished under this Agreement shall be of a quality acceptable to CITY. The minimum criteria for acceptance shall be a product of neat appearance, well-organized, technically and grammatically correct, checked and having the maker and checker identified. The minimum standard of appearance, organization and content of the drawings shall be that used by CITY for similar purposes. C. RESPONSffiILITY OF CONSULTANT CONSULTANT shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy, and the coordination of the services furnished by it under this Agreement. The CITY'S review, acceptance or payment for any of the services required under this Agreement shall not be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights under this Agreement or of any cause of action arising out of the performance of this Agreement, and CONSULTANT shall be and remain liable to CITY in accordance with applicable law for all damages to CITY caused by CONSULTANT'S negligent performance of any of the services furnished under this Agreement. \LAC\32243204 85-072904706002 -2- D. RIGHT OF CITY TO INSPECT RECORDS OF CONSULTANT CITY, through its authorized employees, representatives or agents, shall have the right, at any and all reasonable times, to audit the books and records (including, but not limited to, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, time cards, etc.) of CONSULTANT for the purpose of verifYing any and all charges made by CONSULTANT in connection with this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall maintain for a minimum period of three (3) years (from the date of final payment to CONSULT ANT), or for any longer period required by law, sufficient books and records in accordance with standard California accounting practices to establish the correctness of all charges submitted to CITY by CONSULT ANT, all of which shall be made available to CITY at the CITY's offices within five (5) business days after CITY's request. E. CONFIDENTIALITY OF MATERIAL All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, manufacturing procedures, data (including, but not limited to, computer data and source code), drawings, descriptions, documents, discussions or other information developed or received by or for CONSULTANT and all other written and oral information developed or received by or for CONSULTANT and all other written and oral information submitted to CONSULTANT in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by CONSULT ANT and shall not, without the prior written consent of CITY, be used for any purposes other than the performance of the PROJECT services, nor be disclosed to an entity not connected with the performance of the PROJECT services. Nothing furnished to CONSULTANT which is otherwise known to CONSULTANT or is or becomes generally known to the related industry (other than that which becomes generally known as the result of CONSULTANT'S disclosure thereof) shall be deemed confidential. CONSULTANT shall not use CITY'S name or insignia, or distribute publicity pertaining to the services rendered under this Agreement in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper or other medium without the express written consent of CITY. F. NO PLEDGING OF CITY'S CREDIT. Under no circumstances shall CONSULTANT have the authority or power to pledge the credit of CITY or incur any obligation in the name of CITY. G. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIAL. All material including, but not limited to, computer information, data and source code, sketches, tracings, drawings, plans, diagrams, quantities, estimates, specifications, proposals, tests, maps, calculations, photographs, reports and other material developed, collected, prepared (or caused to be prepared) under this Agreement shall be the property of CITY, but CONSULTANT may retain and use copies thereof subject to Paragraph E immediately above. CITY shall not be limited in any way in its use of said material at any time for any work, whether or not associated with PROJECT. However, CONSULTANT shall not be responsible \LAC\322432.04 85-072904706002 -3- for damages resulting from the use of said material for work other than PROJECT, including, but not limited to, the release of this material to third parties for work other than on PROJECT. H. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY. This Agreement shall not be construed or deemed to be an agreement for the benefit of any third party or parties, and no third party or parties shall have any chum or right of action hereunder for any cause whatsoever. I. NOTICES. Notices are to be sent as follows: CITY: Rick Smelser, City Engineer City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanna Street Gilroy, CA 95020 Phone: (408) 846-0450 Phone: (408) 846-0500 CONSULT ANT: Larry WoUT, Principal WLC Architects 10470 Foothill Boulevard Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Phone: (909) 987-0909 Fax: (909) 980-9980 1. FEDER.,\L FUNDING REQUlREl\ffiNTS. 1. DBE Program CONSULTANT shall comply '/lith the requiremeflts of Title 19, Part 23, Code of Federal Regulations (49 CPR 23) and the City adopted Disadvantaged Business Enterprise programs, and agrees to subcofltract designated portions of the work to Caltrans' certified DEE's (see Local Program Manual Vol. I, Section 11, page 27, attaohed). 2. Cost Prinoiples Federal Acquisition Regulations in Title 18, CPR 31, shall be used to determifle the allo.....lable oost for individual items. 3. Covenant Against Contingent Fees The CONSULTANT warrants that he/she has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for the CONSULTANT, to solicit or secure this Agreement, and that he/she has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or any other consideration, contingent \LAC\322432.04 85-072904706002 -4- \LAC\322432.04 85-072904706002 upon or resulting from the award or formation of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, the Local Agency shall have the right to annul this Agreement without liability, or at its discretion to deduct from the agreement price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or contingent fee. -5- Exhibit "B" Scope of Services New Gilroy Police Facility Phase 1.0 - Pre-Design Services A. Updated Needs Assessment U sing the City's current Needs Assessment and Architectural Program prepared in 1997, an updated Needs Assessment shall be prepared to define and confirm all staff projections, space allocations, site and building components, support areas, and parking requirements for all Police Facility spaces and functions projected to the year 2023. WLC shall identify the method and basis for identifying City and Police Department project goals, establish City and Police Department relationships, presentation formats and milestones, and develop final critical path schedule for the project. The future use of the entire Civic Center site shall be reviewed with the City to determine development opportunities and constraints. Initial needs assessment services establish general requirements for the project, and provide a basis for the architectural program, conceptual master planning, and schematic design. Work Tasks 1. Identify design objectives, limitations and criteria. 2. Prepare and review Police Department questionnaires. 3. Detail project goals. 4. Review and update prior needs assessment. 5. Complete site analysis to include preparation of base map, geotechnical, and soils investigation. 6. Prepare site environmental review support for expanded initial study. 7. Evaluate best future use of site. 8. Prepare project schedule. 9. Prepare conceptual project cost estimate. 10. Confirm project milestones and project phases. 11. Conduct Executive Design Team meetings. 12. Conduct Police Design Team meetings. 13. Conduct Community Design workshop. Work Products ~ Needs Assessment Report. ~ Site Analysis Report. ~ Expanded Initial Study. ~ (3) Site Study Development Options. ~ Project Schedule. ~ Conceptual Project Cost Estimate. ~ Police Department questionnaire analysis. ~ Police Department Workshop Meeting Minutes. ~ Community Design Workshop Report. ~ Monthly Status Report in Newsletter Format -1- B. Updated Architectural Program The updated Architectural Program shall be developed based upon the updated Needs Assessment to identify all project elements and spaces to be designed and constructed based upon the City approved conceptual cost estimate. Architectural program elements shall be prioritized based upon direct City and Police Department consultation and decision making. Where total space requirements and development recommendations may exceed available budget requirements for the project, the Architectural Program shall identify options and alternatives to include future phases and expansion, deferred development to other City facilities, value engineering, interim government/tenant space for lease-back, and shared space options. The updated Architectural Program shall include the following work and task components. Work Tasks 1. Identify optimum development strategy based upon City/Police design objectives, limitations and criteria 2. Prepare analysis of operating functions. 3. Determine final space requirements and allocations. 4. Prepare area diagrams to identify required space relationships and adjacencies. 5. Finalize number and functional requirements of end user personnel. 6. Explore program functional relationships 7. Identify user, vehicular and material flow patterns. 8. Identify flexibility & expansion requirements. 9. Identify special equipment and systems. 10. Document site development requirements. 11. Conduct Executive Design Team meetings. 12. Conduct Police Design Team meetings. 13. Conduct Community Design workshop. Work Products ~ Final Architectural Program. ~ Basis of Design Report. ~ Floor plan area diagrams. ~ Staffing and organizational profile. ~ Circulation and flow diagrams. ~ Conceptual Site Development Plan. C. Facility Schemes Three alternate facility site schemes for the proposed Police Facility shall be determined based upon the City's proposed site characteristics and development opportunities. To the level of detail possible, potential facility configurations and building plan arrangements shall be developed to create different design schemes. Sketch studies shall be prepared depicting relationships of functional areas, building utilization, and the primary interior activity relationships related to the building and program adjacencies. Based upon direct review, consultation, and evaluation by the Project Team, optimum relationships and resulting configurations shall be established and selected for further refinement. The best direction for project development shall be established. A conceptual plan study shall be prepared for each option with sketches, alternati ves for phasing, and cost estimates required for implementation. Requirements for future expansion and alteration of existing -2- improvements shall be defined. The site options shall establish the basic size, needs, and amenities of each design scheme. 1. Confirm presentation and coordination methods. 2. Prepare site scheme options. 3. Determine architectural style and character. 4. Complete final traffic, parking, and circulation studies. 5. Complete utilities systems research and assessment. 6. Identify soils and geotechnical conditions. 7. Identify environmental mitigation requirements. 8. Identify zoning and land use conditions for approval. 9. Develop landscape concepts and forms. 10. Prepare building floor level configuration and massing studies. 11. Determine phasing requirements of the project. 12. Update conceptual cost estimate and development schedule. 13. Conduct Executive Design Team meetings. 14. Conduct Police Design Team meetings. 15. Conduct Community Design workshop. Work Products ~ (3) Site Scheme Options. ~ Traffic, Parking, and Circulation Studies. ~ Topographical and Boundary Survey. ~ Soils and Geotechnical Study. ~ Conceptual Master Plan. ~ Conceptual Facility Site Plan. ~ Conceptual Floor Plans. ~ Architectural Concept Sketches. ~ Massing Model. ~ Conceptual Project Cost Estimate. ~ Project Schedule. D. Preliminary Design & Master Planning Phase Preliminary Design studies shall be developed based upon the results of the Architectural Program and the preferred Facility Scheme selected for development and refinement. Community input shall affect the preparation of the Final Civic Center and Police Facility Master Plan, while Police Department workshops will guide the development of the building architecture. Schematic site and floor plans, building elevations, building sections, and preliminary landscape plans shall be prepared. Schematic site studies shall also be prepared in order to create schematic plans to indicate functional site requirements, vehicle/pedestrian circulation, utilities, security considerations, and signage. A master plan for the project shall be prepared for the project indicating all major program elements for a completed project with any requirements for future phasing and/or expansion. Specific schematic studies shall be prepared to define parking concepts, alternatives, and efficiencies related to the best layout for circulation, access, and parking. -3- The Preliminary Design documents shall be evaluated for the purposes of value engineering and to explore cost efficiency options. Criteria shall be established for all major engineering systems, and shall be compared to consider architectonic, security, environmental, programmatic, and operational/maintenance characteristics. Reviews shall be established with the immediate Project Team and with applicable City departments and outside governing agencies. A preliminary building code analysis shall be reviewed at this time. A preliminary estimate of construction costs shall be prepared based upon costs per square foot methodology. At the conclusion of the Preliminary Design Phase, a final design concept shall be presented for aOpproval. Completion of preliminary design documents, sketches, studies, and analysis shall occur. A preliminary exterior color board shall be prepared based upon the final design concept. Schematic design documents shall be submitted for formal City review and approval at 100% completion. Work Tasks I. Prepare final master plan. 2. Prepare schematic landscape plan. 3. Prepare schematic floor plans.. 4. Prepare schematic exterior elevations.. 5. Prepare schematic building and site sections.. 6. Prepare interior design concepts and furniture plan.. 7. Identify basic engineering and environmental systems. 8. Identify preliminary color and material concepts.. 9. Prepare schematic equipment schedule. 10. Prepare schematic parking facility plans. 11. Prepare schematic basis of design manual. 12. Prepare and submit California Environmental Quality Act initial assessment. 13. Prepare and submit documentation for City Planning Department review and approval. 14. Identify value engineering options. 15. Prepare schematic design cost estimate. 16. Update project schedule. 17. Conduct Executive Design Team meetings. 18. Conduct Police Design Team meetings. 19. Conduct Community Design Team meeting. Work Products · Master Site Plan. · Landscape Plan. · Floor Plans. . Exterior Building Elevations. . Building and Site Sections. . Interior Design and Furniture Plan. . Schematic Cost Estimate. · Development Schedule. · Preliminary Color and Material Board. . Primary Equipment and Systems Schedule. . Parking Facility Plan. . Schematic Structural plans -4- . Schematic Mechanical, Plumbing and Electrical plans . Schematic Telecommunications and Technology Systems plans. . Preliminary Civil Engineering plans. . Preliminary Landscape plans. . Preliminary Furniture plans. -5- Exhibit "C" Fee Proposal for New Gilroy Police Facility Fee Proposal WLC Project Team Members/ Hours Participation New Gilroy Police Station Wolff Coumo Louie Ingels! Zafra Wassink Hunter Totals 1.0 Pre-Design Services Principal Project Project VonHelf Project Project Word WLC Task ltem/Description Architect Architect Manager Technical Team Team Process Team A. Updated Needs Assessment Identify design objectives. and criteria. 4 0 0 0 0 0 I 5 Prepare & review Police Dept. questionnaires. 2 0 0 32 0 0 -I- 38 Review & update previous needs assessment. 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 " -'.... Prepare site analysis I 0 -I- 0 0 8 2 15 Prepare site planning base map. I 0 4 0 12 0 0 17 Review geotechnical and soils investigation. I I I 0 0 0 I 4 Prepare environmental review & initial study. I 8 2 0 0 0 I 12 Evaluate best approach to future use of site. 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 6 Update Project Pchedule. 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 -I- Prepare Conceptual Project Cost Estimate. 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 Prepare Needs Assessment Report. 8 0 0 0 0 0 4 12 Prepare Site Analysis Report. 8 0 0 0 -1-' -I- 8 2-1- Conduct Executive Design Team meetings. 8 8 8 0 0 0 0 24 Conduct Police Design Team meetings. 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 18 Plan & Conduct Community Design Workshops. 12 4 4 0 4 -I- 4 " J_ Prepare Meeting Minutes (all meetings). 4 8 8 0 0 0 12 32 Publish Monthly Status ReportlNewsletter. 8 0 0 0 0 18 4 30 Subtotal Hours 106 37 39 32 20 34 43 311 WLC Standard Hourly Rates $165.00 $95.00 $115.00 $95.00 575.00 $65.00 $45.00 Subtotal Fees $17.490 $3,515 $4.485 $3,040 51.500 $2.210 $1.935 Total Updated Needs Assessment $34,175 B. Architectural Program Identify City/Police development strategies. 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Prepare analysis of operating functions. 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Determine final space requirements & allocations. 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Prepare area diagrams for space relationships. 2 4 0 0 32 0 0 38 Finalize functional requirements of end users. 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Explore program functional relationships 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Prepare circulation and flow diagrams. I 4 0 0 8 0 0 13 Identify flexibility & expansion requirements. 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Identify special equipment & systems. 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Document site development requirements. 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Prepare final Architectural Program. 12 0 0 0 0 0 8 20 Prepare Basis of Design Report. 8 0 0 0 0 0 4 12 Complete final floor plan area diagrams. I 8 0 0 16 16 0 41 Prepare staffing & organizational profiles. I 0 0 0 0 0 0 I Prepare Concep Site Development Plans. 4 8 16 0 40 40 0 108 Conduct Executive Design Team meetings. 8 8 8 0 0 0 0 24 Conduct Police Design Team meetings. 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 18 Plan & Conduct Community Design Workshops. 12 4 4 0 4 -I- 4 32 Prepare Meeting Minutes (all meetings). 4 8 8 0 0 0 0 20 Publish Monthly Status ReportlNewsletter. 6 0 0 0 0 12 4 22 Subtotal Hours 101 50 42 0 100 72 20 385 WLC Standard Hourly Rates $165.00 $95.00 $115.00 $95.00 $75.00 $65.00 $45.00 Subtotal Fees $16.665 $4.750 $4.830 $0 $7.500 $4,680 $900 Total Architectural Program $39,325 Page 1 C. Facility Schemes Confirm presentation and coordination methods. 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 6 Determine architectural style & character. .+ 16 16 0 0 0 0 36 Complete final traffic & parking studies. 2 0 2 0 0 16 0 20 Complete utilities systems research & assessment. 2 0 12 0 0 0 0 14 Identify soils & geotechnical conditions. 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 6 Identify environmental mitigation requirements. 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 6 Identify zoning & land use conditions. 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 6 Develop landscape concepts & forms. 2 0 8 0 16 16 0 42 Prepare building configuration & massing studies. .+ 32 8 0 24 24 0 92 Determine phasing requirements of the project. 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 6 Prepare (3) Site Scheme Options. 2 .+ 4 0 72 72 0 154 Complete project Master Plan. 2 2 0 0 32 0 37 Complete Facility Site Plan. 2 2 0 0 40 0 45 Prepare Floor Plans. 2 8 2 0 .+8 0 0 60 Prepare Architectural Concept Sketches. 31- 0 0 0 0 2.+ 0 56 Prepare Massing ModeL 0 0 0 0 '') 0 0 32 J_ Update Project Cost Estimate. 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Update Project Schedule. .+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Conduct Executive Design Team meetings. 8 8 8 0 0' 0 0 24 Conduct Police Design Team meetings. 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 18 Plan & Conduct Community Design Workshops. 12 4 4 0 .+ .+ 4 32 Prepare Meeting Minutes (all meetings). .+ 8 8 0 0 0 16 36 Publish Monthly Status ReportlNewsletter. 6 0 0 0 0 12 4 22 Subtotal Hours 98 78 64 0 196 224 24 684 WLC Standard Hourly Rates 5]65.00 595.00 5] ]5.00 595.00 575.00 565.00 545.00 Subtotal Fees 516,170 57.410 $7,360 $0 $]4,700 $] 4,560 $],080 Total Facility Schemes $61,280 Page 2 D. Preliminary Design & Master Planning Phase Prepare final Master Plan. 2 0 8 0 15 25 0 50 Prepare schematic Floor Plans. 6 34- 0 0 58 0 0 98 Prepare schematic Exterior Elevations. 16 40 0 0 24 0 0 80 Prepare schematic Building and Site Sections. 4- 16 0 0 16 18 0 54 Prepare Interior Design and Furniture Plan. 2 0 0 0 16 0 0 18 Preliminary Color and Material Board. 2 0 0 0 0 8 0 10 Identify basic engineering & enviro. systems. 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 6 Prepare schematic equipment schedule. 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 6 Prepare schematic Basis of Design Manual. 8 0 0 0 0 0 5 I' .) Prepare CEQA initial assessment. 1 0 4- 0 0 0 2 7 Submittal for Planning Dept. review & approval. I 0 4- 0 0 0 0 5 Identify Value Engineering options. 2 2 2 0 0 0 I i Prepare Schematic Cost Estimate. 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Update Project Schedule. 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Prepare schematic Parking Facility Plans. 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 100 Prepare schematic Structural plans. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 Prepare schematic MPE plans. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 180 Prepare Telecom. & Technology plans. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 Prepare preliminary Civil Engineering plans. 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 64 Prepare Preliminary Landscape plans. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 Prepare Preliminary Furniture plans. 2 2 0 0 20 0 0 24- Conduct Executive Design Team meetings. 12 12 12 0 0 0 0 36 Conduct Police Design Team meetings. 8 8 8 0 0 0 0 24- Plan & Conduct Community Design Workshops. 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 12 Prepare Meeting Minutes (all meetings). 8 16 16 0 0 0 18 58 Publish Monthly Status Report/Newsletter. 6 0 0 0 0 12 4- 22 Subtotal Hours 102 138 74 0 149 63 30 1,076 WLC Standard Hourly Rates $165.00 S95.00 $115.00 S95.00 $75.00 $65.00 $45.00 $90.00 Subtotal Fees $16.830 $13.110 $8.510 $0 $11.175 $4.095 $1,350 $48,24D Total Fee Pre-Design Phase 1.0 $103,310 PRE-DESIGN PHASE TOTAL BASI SERVICES $238,090 WLC Standard Hourly Rates Principal Architect, Larry Wolff, AlA $165.00 Associate Principal, Bill Louie. AIA $115.00 Project ArchitectlManager, Frank Coumo AlA $95.00 Project Team, Intern 1, Rowell Zafra $75.00 Project Team, Intern 2, Bernhard Wassink $65.00 Word ProcessingfTechnical Resources, Jeanette Hunter $45.00 WLC Consulting Team Hourly Rates Principal Design or Engineering Professional $135.00 Associate/Senior Design or Engineering Professional $115.00 Licensed Design or Engineering Professional $90.00 Project Manager $85.00 Project Team, Intern 1 $75.00 Project Team, Intern 2 $65.00 Word ProcessingfTechnical Resources $45.00 Page 3 Estimated Reimbursable Expenses Reimbursbale expenses shall be billed at direct cost without any mark-up. expendi tures. 1. Topographical Survey 2. Geotechnical and Soils Investigation 3. Airfare 4 .Paper Copy 5. Photography and Reprographics 6. Computer Plotting 7. Express Mail 8. Courier Services 9. Architectural Models 10. Computer Animation & 3D Modeling II. Renderings These consist typicall of the following (Use available City aerial survey for this phase of work.) 50.00 55.750.00 56.750.00 51.750.00 56.500.00 51.600.00 52.350.00 51.000.00 57.500.00 $17.500.00 <;;4 ') ()() ()() $55,200.00 Expenses Normally Included Within Overhead The following exspenses shall be included as part of the Architect's overhead and shall not be billed to the project. I. Meals and Lodging 2. Car Rental 3. Telephone Services 4. Standard Postal Services 5. Standard Insurance Coverage Overhead Rate WLC's current overhead rate is approximately 2.95 times direct salary and payroll amount. \VLC standard hourly rates identified in this proposal include all overhead factors. Overhead is charged when compensation is based upon direct hourly plus cost times negotiated multiple amount for profit and overhead. Total Cost~:$293,290.00 Page 4 Exhibit "D" Project Schedule Gilroy Police Facility 12/15/00 Friday Pre-Agreement Coordination Meeting. 1 :00 - 3:30 p.m. WLC/City 01/08/01 Monday Approve WLC Professional Services Agreement. City Council 01/09/01 Tuesday Begin Needs Assessment Update scope of work. WLC 01/12/01 Friday Update Needs Assessment matrix, send to WLC.. 5:00 p.m. PD 01/17/01 Wednesday Executive Design Team Meeting. Noon - 3:00 p.m. WLC/City/PD 02/07/01 Wednesday Executive Design Team Meeting. Noon - 3:00 p.m. WLC/City/PD 02/16/01 Friday Complete Needs Assessment. 5:00 p.m. WLC 02/19/01 Monday Begin Architectural Programming. WLC 02/21/01 Wednesday Executive Design Team Meeting. Noon - 3:00 p.m. WLC/City/PD 02/24/01 Saturday Community Design Workshop Session No.1 9:30 a.m. - noon WLC/City/PD 03/07/01 Wednesday Executive Design Team Meeting. Noon - 3:00 p.m. WLC/City/PD 03/21/01 Wednesday Executive Design Team Meeting. Noon - 3:00 p.m. WLC/City/PD 03/21/01 Wednesday Community Design Workshop Session No.2 5:30 p.m. - 8:00 WLC/City/PD p.m. 03/23/01 Friday Complete Architectural Programming. 5:00 p.m. 03/26/01 Monday Begin Facility Schemes. WLC 04/04/01 Wednesday Executive Design Team Meeting. Noon - 3:00 p.m. WLC/City/PD 04/18/01 Wednesday Executive Design Team Meeting. Noon - 3:00 p.m. WLC/City/PD 04/27/01 Friday Complete Facility Schemes. 5 :00 p.m. 04/30/01 Monday Begin Preliminary Design & Master Planning. WLC 05/02/01 Wednesday Executive Design Team Meeting. Noon - 3:00 p.m. WLC/City/PD 05/16/01 Wednesday Executive Design Team Meeting. Noon - 3:00 p.m. WLC/City/PD 06/06/01 Wednesday Executive Design Team Meeting. Noon - 3:00 p.m. WLC/City/PD 06/08/01 Friday Complete Preliminary Design & Master Planning. 5:00 p.m. WLC 06/18/01 Monday Approve Phase 1.0 Pre-Design work and City Council authorize WLC to proceed with Phase 2.0 Design and Construction Drawings. 30 '- City of Gilroy COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division Engineering Division Building, Life & Environmental Safety Housing & Community Development (408) 846-0440; fax (408) 846-0429 (408) 846-0450; fax (408) 846-0429 (408) 846-0430; fax (408) 846-0429 (408) 846-0290; fax (408) 846-0429 ADDENDUM #3 Agreement for PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR A NEW POLICE STATION Consultant: WLC ARCHITECTS Agreement Date: December 15, 2000 This contract addendum shall become effective when the City Administrator, City Engineer, Project Engineer and Consultant have signed it. All copies forwarded to Consultant for signature shall be returned to the City of Gilroy properly filled out. Upon acceptance by the City, the Consultant's copy will be returned to him as his authority to proceed with work. DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Provide additional Professional Architectural Design Services per attached proposal dated November 17,2003 for the New Police Station. All requirements of the original Agreement Document shall apply to the above work except as specifically modified by this addendum. The contract time shall be extended to final project completion set at January, 2006. ADDENDUM SUMMARY 1. Design and preparation of separate bid packages I and 2 $ 81,250.00 2. Security System re-design (50% of total cost) 35,250.00 3. Additional Project Scheduling 18,000.00 4. Phase 2 and 3 reimbursable cost (Design Development and Construction Documents) 96,250.00 TOTAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES $ 230,750.00 lof2 '. f- WLC hereby agrees to make the above Changes subject to the terms of this Addendum for the NET INCREASE OF $230.750.00. Consultant: WLC Architects - Date ~ Ity gineer Date (d/~~f21/~o/ Project Engineer Date Addendum (Change Order) #3 ORIGINALS City Clerk Consultant 20f2 W L C City of Gilroy Police Facility - Synopsis of Construction Cost Estimate /) February 18, 2003 ~ Project No. 00-244.02 Introduction During June 2001, at the completion of the Needs Assessment and Conceptual Design Phase, the City Council authorized the development of a 48,574 square foot Police Facility featuring two levels of below-grade parking at an estimated cost of $19,544,153.00. Projected costs were limited to the primary Police Facility project boundaty, and did not include costs for the demolition of adjacent residential properties, off-site street improvements, or surrounding off-site utility infrastructure because the scope of these improvements were unknown until completion of the Civic Center Master Plan which occurred approximately a year later. Current Construction Market Disparity During 2000 and 2001, the California construction market experienced significant upward-increasing cost activity, primarily due to rising fuel and energy costs. Regional and national constnIction cost data, used for cost estimating purposes, contain a large disparity between "book" and "actual" market conditions. Although current construction cost levels now appear stable (February 2003, Engineering News Record), significant increases in "core" construction materials and components like concrete, masonry, stnIctural steel, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical building systems have occurred during the last several years. Energy and Fuel Cost Impacts After the summer of 2001, escalating energy and fuel costs resulted in large increases in the cost of structural steel, concrete, and masonry. Since the time of conceptual design, the difference in stnIctural steel costs results from an estimated 20% increase during the fall of 2000, and an estimated 32% increase by end of 2001. Higher energy and fuel costs impact both the production of core materials like structural steel, and effect costs for transportation, detailing, fabrication, and placement. Local & Statewide Public Bonds Effect Labor and Material Costs The passage this November of $3.45 billion in public bonds for the construction of public schools, community colleges, and public safety facilities creates an abundance of public works construction projects, thus causing shortages in primary building products and the availability of skilled labor. This added surge in the construction market, when combined with a backlog of $2.9 billion in public school construction, material shortages, and increased fuel and energy cost, drastically affects the cost of new building projects. Status of Current Project Costs The current cost estimate of $25,160,377.00 is higher than the original funding allocation established by the City Council. The primary factors causing increased cost estimates results from an economic shift in the regional construction market caused by the increased cost for the production and fabrication of core building materials, increased labor costs, rising energy and fuel expenditures, and the magnitude of current and future public works projects occurring within California. Greater costs have also been incurred because of the addition of off-site improvements not included within the original conceptual cost estimate which. includes site demolition of residential properties, utility infrastructure, and street improvements. Project Cost Management and Benefits To meet these budget challenges, the project team initiated cost benefit analysis early in the design and reduced structural, security, electrical, and mechanical system costs by $902,475.00. Further value engineering efforts during the final design Virginia Dare Tower · 10470 Foothill Boulevard · Rancho Cucamonoa. California 91730 - 3754 . oh: 909 9117 0909 fm,' 909 QRO QQRI'l reflect an additional cost savings of $1,042,110.00. With these savings, the project still meets year 2023 Police Department space needs, provides parking and utility infrastructure for Library and future Civic Center growth, and includes energy- efficient design features estimated to further save approximately $2.0 to $2.5 million in reduced energy and operational costs for the next twenty years. WLC Architects February 18,2003 Project No. 00-244.02 Police Facility Final Construction Documents Cost Estimate Project Costs Presented to Council Current Project Costs June 2001 Novmn~2002 Construction Costs 1.0 Foundations 2.0 Vertical Structure 3.0 Floor & Roof Structures 4.0 Exterior Cladding 5.0 Roofing & Waterproofing 6.0 Interior Partitions, Doors & Glazing 7.0 Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes 8.0 Functional Equipment & Specialties 9.0 Stairs & Vertical Transportation 10.0 Plumbing Systems 11.0 Heating, Ventilating & Air Conditioning 12.0 Electric Lighting, Power & Communications 13.0 Fire Protection S stems Total Building Construction (Items 1.0 - 13.0) 14. Site Paving, Structures & Landscaping 15. Utilities on Site Total Site Construction (Items 14.0 - 16.0) $2,300,100 $695,000 $2,258,900 $1,120,000 $449,125 $1,199,780 $575,000 $795,600 $223,130 $244,850 $1,417,216 $1,392,915 $135,000 $12,806,616 $812,225 $200,150 $1,012,375 $2,715,939 $765,700 $3,185,984 $1,312,958 $552,461 $1,410,083 $656,995 $934,766 $292,100 $420,667 $1,790,734 $1,628,510 $182,216 $15,849,112 1,161,956 244,730 $1,406,686 Estimated Architectural & Engineering Services project ea actual $1,024,662 $1,127,348 Extended Construction Support Services project ea allowance $157,229 $187,000 Estimated Reimbursable Expenses project ea actual $82,500 $101,216 Tests & Inspections project ea 2.00% $275,152 $379,400 Plancheck Consultant, Permits & Fees project ea 1.50% $196,537 $284,550 Furniture & Equipment 38,875 sf $7 $340,018 $272,125 Reprographics - Construction Documentation project ea allowance $30,000 $21,500 Telephone Systems 82 ea $1,115 $125,000 $91,430 Open Office Work Stations 58 ea $4,800 $352,000 $278,400 Jail Furnishings project ea allowance $12,500 $18,780 Construction Manager project ea allowance $721,729 $1,707,301 Commissioning Building Systems & Staff Training project ea allowance $75,000 $0 Legal Expenses project ea allowance $0 $0 Movin E nses ro . ect ea allowance $50,000 $100,000 GRAND TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 1l),s~~,153 S25,I('H,J77 WLC Architects Gilroy Police Facility V~ueEn~n~ringSmmmary February 18,2003 Project No. 00-244.02 Pending \'alue Engineering Cost Reductions 1. Simplify Communications TowerlUse - Delete masonry and use plaster 2. Reduce Bullet-Resistant Glazing by approximately 80% 3. Eliminate Tube Steel Roof Trellis at HV AC Roof well 4. Increase High Roof Slopes to 3:12 slope and delete Class "C' built-up underlayment 5. Delete Building Management System/use Dedicated Controllers & Programmable T -stats 6. Delete Emergency Telephones with Strobe Lights in Below-grade Parking Structure 7. Reduce Security Access Card Readers by approximately 50% 8. Simplify Jail Security Lighting 9. Eliminate Independent Fiber Optic Security Network and Combine with City LAN 10. Reduce Security CCTV Cameras by approximately 50% 11. Eliminate Conduit & Use Approved Plenum Cable in all non-Jail areas 12. Eliminate Remote Controlled Jail Door Operators and Use manual Locking Devices 13. Simplify Jail Management Systems 14. Provide (2) and Delete (1) DNA Storage Freezer Units 15. Eliminate Kevlar protected column framing where Bullet -Resistant Glazing is deleted 16. Delete Built-in Gas BBQ and Use Police Association funding 17. Delete Central Vacuum System 18. Delete Pneumatic Tube System 19. Eliminate Folding Wall System 20. Decrease Patrol & Investigations Lockers to meet 10-year needs 21. Delete Elevator Oil-filtration System 22. Delete HV AC Sound Traps at Ductwork greater than 25'-0" 23. Change from Brick Pavers to Stamped Concrete at Hanna Street 24. Delete Resilient Running Track and Use Conventional AC Paving 62,750 147,200 90,000 40,000 125,000 7,000 38,000 15,700 20,000 31,500 25,000 120,000 95,000 20,000 30,900 5,000 10,700 60,000 6,600 15,000 10,000 12,500 31,500 22,760 Prior Yalue Engineering Cost Reductions l:ndertaken During Design De\Clopment 1. Delete Analog and use simplified Digital Security System devices 2. Use Hybrid Braced!Moment Resistant Structural Frame instead of conventional 100% Moment Resistant 3. Make Emergency Power System 100% Building Power 4. Use Packaged Variable Air Volume (V A V) instead of Central Plant 5. Maximize Use of Standard Grade Carpet and Vinyl Flooring 6. Delete conventional Shoring System and Use Auger-driven piles $150,000 $175,000 $42,000 $244,850 $65,625 $225,000 Total Estimated Value Engineering Cost Reductions $1,9"",585 Date 6-24-96 5-21-97 Nov-97 12-10-97 4-13-98 4-27-98 6-15-98 Oct-98 to Feb-99 5-24-99 4-17-00 5-3-00 5-24-00 11-20-00 1-9-01 2-21-01 3-21-01 4-4-01 5-30-01 6-18-01 8-6-01 City of Gilroy New Police Station Chronology of Design Development Process February 7, 2003 Proiect Action Council Authorizes Police CIB (Capital Improvement Budget) for PO (Police Department) Facility Study Master Plan Task Force Starts (Harris & Assoc. & Eward Gee Consultants) Police Facility Master Plan Published (Facility Needs Analysis to meet needs to year 2020) Council Study Session (Council Tour of PO & Master Plan Report Presentation) Council Study Session (Council Review of Facility & Site Recommendation) Council Approves PO Facility Master Plan & Site (Council also approves Civic Ctr Master Plan) Council Approves CIB Acquisition Funds. Various Council Land Acquisition Actions Council Study Session on Bonds (Various public vote bond measures considered, including New PO) Council Approves CIS for PO Design and Construction Community Outreach Meeting for New Police Station, Library, and Civic Center Master Plans 2nd Community Outreach Meeting for New PO & Library Council Approves New PO Architect -WLC Architects Design Team Starts Phase 1 Design Services Community Design Workshop NO.1 Community Design Workshop NO.2 Community Design Workshop NO.3 Community Design Workshop No.4 (Review of the four design options for New PO) Council Conceptual Design Presentation for New PO Station Council Approves Design Option # 4 (New PO facility to meet needs to yr. 2023 - four level building) City of Gilroy New Police Station Chronology of Design Development Process February 7,2003, Page 2 Q!!!! 8-7-01 12-17-01 2-12-02 5-15-02 5-20-02 5-23-02 6-3-02 9-3-02 9-4-02 9-26-02 10-3-02 10-7-02 11-5-02 12-1-02 1-13-03 2-24-03 Proiect Action Design Team Begins New PD Design Development Process Design Team Begins Construction Plans & Documents Environmental Consultant Begins CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) Process Community CEQA Outreach Meeting 100% Construction Cost Est. by WLC Architects Planning Commission CEQA Hearing Council Adopts Negative Declaration (Includes PD & Civic Ctr. CEQA Mitigations Conditions) PD I Contract Site Work Starts for House Demolitions & HAZMA T Removals Design Team Meets on Value Engineer Project Cuts for PD Design Harris Buildability I Constructability & Value Engineering Report Planning Commission Approves Architectural & Site Review Council Approves PD Architectural & Site Review WLC Architects Submits Final Project Cost Est. Project Cost Est. Submitted to 2003 CIB PD II Contract Off -Site Street Utility & Street Improvements Start of PDIII New Police Station Bid Process for New Station G:\COMDEV\ENG\BILLH\Police Station - New\General Design\Chronology Of New PO Design Dev Process 2-7-03.doc ., WLC Architects June 4,2003 Mr. Jay Baksa City Administrator City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanne Street Gilroy, CA 95020 re: Post-Bid Assessment & Recommendations Gilroy Police Facility Project No. 00-244.40 Dear Mr. Baksa, For your review and consideration, I am submitting Post-Bid Assessment & Recommendation reports prepared by Harris and Associates and WLC Architects. Both Harris and WLC, with Design Team concurrence, recommend rejection of all bids and redesign of the project to meet the proposed project budget presented to the City Council in February 2003. To meet this need, the Design Team proposes the following three-step process. 1. Develop a scope of work outlining the redesign process. 2. Evaluate all available options to understand the cause and effect of potential redesign impacts upon the Police Facility project and the Civic Center Master Plan. 3. Prepare revised contract documents, project schedule, and cost estimates for rebidding the project based upon the approved redesign option. The first step will be completed for City Council review and endorsement before the Council's summer break in August. Please accept my assurances that all reasonable expediency will be employed in the redesign process, and that the City has the full commitment of all Design Team members. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Larry Wolff, AlA Principal WLC Architects, Inc. WLC Architects POST BID EXECUTIVE SUMMARY GILROY POLICE FACILITY JUNE 4, 2003 Project 0024400.40 WLC intends full accountability for the project cost estimating and related decision making pertaining to the disappointing bid results for the Gilroy Police Facility. The purpose of this narrative is to provide City leaders and the Gilroy community an honest assessment of the potential causes for the nature of bids received, and recommendations for future action. BID RESULTS Approximately 105 sets of construction documents were printed and distributed to various plan rooms and construction related bidder support organizations. There were 93 plan holders that include 12 builder exchanges. A pre-bid conference, advertisements in two local newspapers, and direct invitation to contractors who had expressed previous interest - were all used to facilitate maximum contractor exposure for the project. Four addendums were issued during the bidding period. Although a total of fifteen general contractors ultimately pulled plans, only three general contractors actually submitted bids. S.J. Amoroso Construction Nibbi Brothers Construction K.B. Construction $26,137,000 (low bidder) $26,700,000 (second) $26,792,000 (third) As the design professional of record, WLC is responsible to detennine the opinion of construction cost for the project. and is responsible for redesign costs to bring the project within 15% of their construction cost estimate. BACKGROUND The final cost estimate presented to the City Council on February 24,2003, was $18,231,057.00. WLC's estimate was based upon industry recognized cost indexes and historical cost data developed from similar police and public safety projects completed over the last five years. Due to the complexity of the project and WLC's predominance of Southern California experience, Davis Langdon Adamson (DLA) was retained by WLC to provide an independent cost estimate based upon recommendations from Harris and Associates. DLA's construction cost for the project was $25,182,000.00. Attempts by WLC to reconcile the difference of approximately $7.0 million between their estimate and DLA's estimate proved unsuccessful. WLC requested to proceed with the bidding phase of the project based upon their greater belief in their own historical costs in order to determine the actual cost of construction, and to eliminate the uncertainty about estimated costs. FINDINGS After an evaluation of the bids received, WLC believes that the greatest added cost factors result from a miscalculation of historical project costs. Telephone interviews were conducted by WLC to further determine the greatest area of cost impacts to the project. The following summary reflects considerations for potential cost savings. 1. The City requirement that the general contractor directly provide 25% of the work limited the number of general contractors ultimately bidding on the project. After the City confirmed a 25% contractor work force requirement, eight bidders dropped out of the project. creating a significant impact on the competitive process. Although the three final bids were very close, the specified work percentage resulted in increased bid cost due to elimination of more competitive subcontractors. WLC believes that the requirement to perform 25% of the work by the general contractor may have increased bid costs by $250,000.00 to $500,000. 2. Although the City increased the allowable time for basic construction from 16 to 19 months, those contractors interviewed stated that a minimum of 20 to 22 months should be anticipated on the project due to the overall scope of the project. Therefore, the time allowed for construction may also be a contributing factor to the high bid cost submitted. WLC believes that additional monies for delay assessment and extended overhead cost may have increased bid costs from $400,000.00 to $500,000.00. -1- \, . 3. During plan check, the building was changed from a less restrictive Type II construction type to Type I construction. These changes were not anticipated or accounted for in WLC's final estimate. WLC believes that Type I construction requirements did increase bid costs from $700,000.00 to $750,000.00. 4. During the bid process, an extensive number of requests for information (RFI's), were required to answer structural and technical questions submitted to the project team. Approximately 300 pre-bid RFI's and bid inquiries were received which indicates the complexity of the project. A multitude of clarifications were related to the two-level parking structure. WLC employed two full-time staff during the bid process to answer RFI's. WLC's responses are documented and are reflected within the four addendum issued during the bidding period. Due to the extensive addendum information issued, uncertainty in the bid process may produce higher bids. However, WLC does not believe that the condition of the construction documents significantly contributed to higher bid cost because of the relatively tight spread within the three final bids received. WLC believes that rebidding the project with consolidated documents could decrease bid costs by $200,000.00 to $350,000.00. 5. Concrete was the highest sub graded cost, estimated at $4.0 million, with an additional $1.5 million required for the auger- driven concrete pile system. Consequently almost 20% of the total project costs are attributable to concrete work involving footings, foundations, basement walls, and the auger-driven pile system. Elimination of the second lower parking level to effect one level of below grade parking will significantly simplify overall engineering requirements, and greatly reduce concrete, grading, structural steel, and mechanical systems costs. This modification also allows for the reinstatement of less restrictive Type II construction. WLC believes that elimination of the second lower level of the parking structure will reduce bid costs by $4,000,000.00 to $4,500,000.00. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. WLC believes that the act of rebidding the project with consolidated construction documents could lower construction cost by $200,000.00 to $350,000.00. This opinion was shared by interviewed general contractors. 2. WLC believes that the minimum direct work requirement for general contractors should be reduced to a minimum requirement of 15%, and lower if possible. 3. WLC believes that an increase of an additional month of construction should be extended to the total time of completion of 20 months for the project. 4. Elimination of the lowest parking level is anticipated to yield a cost savings of$4.0 million or greater. The simplification and/or elimination of related auger-driven piles, mechanically exhausted vehicle emission systems, structural steel, and primary concrete work will result. 5. Elimination of the upper floor, relocation of the communications center to the main floor level, and simplification of the roof is anticipated to yield a cost savings of$2.0 million or greater. 6. Elimination of the lowest level of the parking garage will allow the project to convert back to a Type II structure. This will result in cost reduction and/or elimination of added construction fire-rated assemblies and related system infrastructures. WLC anticipates an additional $700,000.00 reduction can be achieved by re-engineering to Type II construction. 7. WLC believes that the implementation of Recommendation Items 1 through 3 may reduce project costs by as much as $1.25 to $2.0 million. 8. WLC recommends that the City reject all bids and direct WLC to re-engineer the project as identified in WLC's recommendations and as determined by subsequent Project Team recommendations. These costs to redesign the project as stipulated herein will be borne by WLC at no additional cost to the City as established by WLC's Professional Services Agreement. Prepared by, Larry Wolff, AlA, Principal WLC Architects, Inc. -2- W L C Architects Larry Wolff, AlA · George M. Wiens, AlA · Robert J. Hensley, AlA · James P. DiCamillo, AlA · Robert M. Simons, AlA Glenn Ueda, AlA · Max Medina, AlA June 10,2003 Mr. Jay Baksa City Administrator City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanna Street Gilroy, CA 95020 Re: Open Letter to the City Administrator and City Council Gilroy Police Facility Project 0024400.40 Dear Mr. Baksa and Honorable City Council Members: I am writing this letter personally to you because I feel I have caused you great disappointment and concern over the devastating bid results regarding the Gilroy Police Facility. Please accept my deep regret and sincerest apology for any blame, criticism, or lack of appreciation you may have experienced for all of your support and hard work expended on this project. WLC intends full accountability for project cost estimating and related decision making, and will provide City leaders and the Gilroy community an honest public assessment of the potential causes for the nature of bids received, and recommendations for future action. Our post-bid study session with the City Council is scheduled for 6:00 p.m., Monday, June 16,2003. Now that the actual project costs are known, we will redesign the project to meet the proposed project budget presented to the City Council in February 2003. WLC understands and is committed to both meeting the City's budget for this project and to meeting the long term needs of the Police Department and Civic Center Master Plan. Because of my professional respect and personal regard for you, I wanted to at least convey these thoughts to you beforehand. I am anxious to address the issues at hand and to discuss redesign opportunities. Please know that I do have a plan to get this project back on track. Recent meetings and conversations with Project Team members are encouraging. Though significant impacts to the present design will be necessary to reduce project costs, I am confident that a quality, functional, and distinctive Police Facility is still achievable. In the meantime, please accept my personal commitment that all reasonable expediency will be employed in the redesign process, that the City has the full support of all Design Team members, and that we will ultimately prevail. Virginia Dare Tower' 10470 Foothill Boulevard · Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 - 3754 · ph: 909 987 0909 fax: 909 980 9980 1110 Iron Point Road · Suite 200 · Folsom, California 95630 - 8301 . ph: 916 355 9922 fax: 916 355 9950 1250 45th Street · Suite 150 · Emeryville, California 94608 - 2901 . ph: 510450 1999 fax: 5104502525 , Mr. Jay Baksa Open Letter to the City Administrator and City Council Gilroy Police Facility Project 0024400.40 June 10, 2003 Page 2 If you should have any questions or comments on this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time. LW:fw/P402440031-ltr cc: Gregg Giusiana, Chief of Police, City of Gilroy Police Department Wendy R. Rooney, Director of Community Development Department, City of Gilroy W L C Architects Larry Wolff, AlA . George M. Wiens, AlA · Robert J. Hensley, AlA · James P. DiCamillo, AlA · Robert M. Simons, AlA Glenn Ueda, AlA · Max Medina, AlA June 10,2003 Mr. Jay Baksa City Administrator City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanna Street Gilroy, CA 95020 Re: Post-Bid Assessment and Recommendations Gilroy Police Facility Project 0024400.40 Dear Mr. Baksa: For your review and consideration, I am submitting Post-Bid Assessment and Recommendation reports prepared by Harris and Associates and WLC Architects. Both Harris and WLC, with Design Team concurrence, recommend rejection of all bids and redesign of the project to meet the proposed project budget presented to the City Council in February 2003. To meet this need, the Design Team proposes the following three-step process. 1. Develop a scope of work outlining the redesign process. 2. Evaluate all available options to understand the cause and effect of potential redesign impacts upon the Police Facility project and the Civic Center Master Plan. 3. Prepare revised contract documents, project schedule, and cost estimates for rebidding the project based upon the approved redesign option. The first step will be completed for City Council review and endorsement before the Council's summer break in August. Please accept my assurances that all reasonable expediency will be employed in the redesign process, and that the City has the full commitment of all Design Team members. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. L W:fw/P402440032-ltr Virginia Dare Tower' 10470 Foothill Boulevard' Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 - 3754 · ph: 9099870909 fax: 9099809980 1110 Iron Point Road. Suite 200' Folsom, California 95630 - 8301 · ph: 916 355 9922 fax: 916 355 9950 l?~n A~th <;t,,,,,t. <;";t,, 1 'i0. FmMvvill" Cnlifmnin 9460R - 2901. oh: 5104501999 fax: 5104502525 " ~. ~" ~lt J .~~ L ~ ~ .... ~ IS it . = . 1 " ~ . . .. ".. J . .~ I J 'I I I ~ ~; ~ ~ ~ " ,* ~ ~ . & . /II ~ ~ . I.... . .... . ... I I ~ , ... 8 . . .J I 41~ I ' t . ~ '1 .. ~ I i 1 .., ~ I f r ~ (" I . Ij I I ~ J I. I . .. ... : f r - -- .:/- I I I 4 .J ~.. . (1 t! . " ~---. .,.. .... -- ---.: -..--., r-r "'Y" - ... .,.......-- .' ,,:., . ~iII .. ',II' , f. . . .. .. -~. .~.Y'.'. ... ^ -:- ., .~,.- ""'~ . - - Jb' I ., .;-". :~ '~4j' . l~:'+""'. ........ _."'.''''''...;....''''.~.... .~ .,.-. ,- . . . . . -il'~.. I . t '<t". - j . .- - .. ~ ~.. -.........."...",..,.. .~.~., .-; ! I t --' .' . j -~. · i';... '-'-~4". /00-1<- """ .,;l I' I '''t~ ~' ;t:#& ~A~.1'. .... fl.' ~. . .1 ,_ ... , 1 ~ AI. q'. .~ J""'i I :~... t --.:/ I I I ~ i I I r t*'" I I I I ~;o .. . . .p I ~- . ',. . "~<f"""" I i. ....."....... of I ~ , . _. "tf",1t . ~.. .,' .>' .. . .;.... " . ... .':. .'_ ,", ",- ,C-. ....~.: ,. jo; ..,., ,," ..", ,.-4: . .... . . ',Ii ~ · ~"'. ... .,., ~ . .. . I I . '. ~~. If.: .... . '~VIf.;t~..._" ,., .J~ .. <.,:" ~,~, f/~. : '_ .... ,. '; " '" l ..... ''',. . .. .. .'.~~ I 1"-,*4-. ,. ~l ." ,".. - .... .. .....~.;.. *", . -.- .- , ..,...~L.... .___ ,<< ,... -.. "~ -.. ao .. ~ I .. ... _. = =~ = .=7 ~ii aJoo i::~ OO~ C~ == ~ = ~ " r.J"'j ~1 d 0 .t-. ; . .~ .. 1\1 ;> tj) ~ ~ ~ 0 · !""-4 ~ .. (]) ~ ~ ;~ I ..~ I. .; I , , " .j .~ 'lI\, .... . . '. ( ~ .. . . , " ~... rJJ. ~ b . ......: td ;>- (J) ,......( ~ ~ o . ...... ~ OJ ~ ~ ~ " i.- I' .!. I" -' ~' . ! l:~ ~ . Jt r~' .; J .. .. t I ~ . ,.;1. ,.:~ -:". \. ~ 1.-1'. ~. g Z :w '0 :Z !~ nf~ ;i 1.1 'I ... =~!C e' r~ ~,~.._~~- -..- --..=:.:.:......:..=~ &-_. \-~ .~ . I I h' .1 ~:' . - ,I . ~.I ~='1 ~ ex: ffi ~i i :;j( ~ '1 !. 1M 0 ~ j' CI) F- I , I N . I: I: /'"'1- I I, /' ._......, ii . ", 1 ", i; r. l . "- I I' I' I 1 I I .; " \. l.' "... _ . t '~_...L._J/ ~ , J I I I i I I ! l .~ ~ , 4 .. ,. ~f"'il- . p J - . ~-..:. _ .. _':i. " " ... ". \. -:=-- : I~' -> I V "';';-'~'? j- . C.... (,.~ ., 1 0 (":. I ,,) ~'f .'- "I ~ t=l! :(0<> ,. ,_.0- J ~ .~ .-"~ I ,e ':Jk ' -E I ~03 EE o 0)'. Qfj , t f ' -- -- -------- -.. ---;,,{ ,/..:".." ~ : (t " ,," J' : I ! . , ." -.... ,. - /...----- ,~.... -" ,r i ., '-:.--_.. P..... .,. : \.... J ..... , :........ ~...;{. ....# I //'" -:" " "~..:.-,.' . .,' "';",j .....__.~.~. ". .', / .~l' III -rf ~.. 1. ''\'' .....l, .\.~ . / --t I ." ..." '...~.. : r , . .;' .. ......... .......\.. " ' '..1 i '::::'."',:.i.... I I I~ A. ~ I , , I : / 1 .r'" 1 /' I .,' 1,/" . ) !'-. = -~- ~:-- .:. ::"J , ' : ~-- -------'; ,.I ... ..i . I r"<..~,:_-:~;;::- -.' -.:- -~ : ........... ........ 1 ...... ..... : '<.,''.. I ...... .... 1 ';.. . --_.--~) , "';..' - -- I, ~ 'F i I: . I . I. ! ,:0" ", --I-l ., II ! 1 , I -'\. ....! i'-' --i* t ./~ ,V" I i ! 7"U~ / ( ...J W ~ ,...1 ...l + II ........ """ ''':... co u .- c: ro ...c u <],) :2 -"'1 . t I .. .. !- .. .. !Ie r o z g 0':1 I I J I I I J ! I I :j , , I 1 1 : .:.,.._r ./ / ........ ~_:::__..a .' " .', \.., .. " .', ..... \, .. .... "'- ~,. .\, ----.. t'.... .. .. ... ". .... r - 4 /' :/ ....I'..'.~ ., ". '. .::''':.: .:_:.._:~_:.r---- ..... ., - ~____I>, -~ -- , i I! I 01 1 dl . ! j :l . " LiLli' . . . . ~ J I: ______._. I I I j ! ~ - (' 1:::\1 ~.. r'j ",i !: i :..... , r i I I I I I I I '1 ij :\ ~ .,----:-. '"I. .... i I -"( C "...~ ~:::. I- I _._..____ -V~.?p;~;~~~n-- ~~~'" )<~>(-~.~ o 0 j ._--~ 1: Ii 1 ':~-,~ ::::::...:: , I , I 0<.)<.. ''Y'" .. ',.~:/.""'." ....~ -, -f ~,..... ........::.'-'y:".:..:.-.... '.. Ii'- --.--.---U x"'.<~'o(":.D I ;..- 'Y~ :~ 1 :.~. X~;.~:..~'=. ---.;--t - -- - ~ .. -... '. - ~ . :1 ~ ;1 ;1 'I " ., I ~ I I _. , , . I. f I i 1 I I \ 1 ~ 1 I j I i j I ! I ! l I 1 oi I .i J I I ~'Z'! ~ ~. . Q. : a::i '0 10. I~ :;1 tit '.... I... om I a;: ~G: I 1 I \ I I I I , i I I .1 i i ,. .0 ii ~ i ~ i i: I i II. ., :1 I t . J i I I I N 11 SI 1 D DODD Dill en ,~ 8 .~ 5 ~ e g 0 ~ >. t:: Cl) C) .. ~ () trl c: .!! Cl) (1) c.. cu ~ ~ c: :2 0.. ...' ~ ~ Jj :2 ~ 0 ~ G 0 UJ 0) Q. (3 ~ (~} e fE' '$0 I , I Ie -- I I ! Ie I fel- .._. __ ~ L ...\ /J~ ,. '.' ". I~_- l/'~' "...... .... f\.. 1..Jl& I I '...~ '-....-... : '.LJ.J. l - ! t i I .1 I ,le_ I I i ,e I i I , \\ ~ t ~ I I I ' e I I. I I, 0 i ~. . B ; I ! I I G).-... I .__ .'=~~.__~_________ 1 e C? (;)@~' ~ l' l-~.:-~ . . . .===;;;:-:;:;... ! i~! .- ,'...v. '..;~ ..........,. "'.-'" r1, .I...'/.J_... ._._. ..._,":-"'.1.' . ___ -1' I !. I I ..p. '>~ ,I .1-1: I frill ~\ nlll=t ~.. '1 .t ..J \ --"1" ~I . jjji_..J / I ,. tT"'[- JTt _ ~ t- f - , - t'I' ~~ I'. a6elo\S __ j- \.. "'.' ~~ ".' . . , I ,.... ...11 '" ~'-'.:' ~ - . ...1~ I 1 .h__ _ ...-, ~', D,f, --- "'I " ~ " -" i t?,n . "";~'< .~. I I I ~ II '."--- ,.... ~. L~," . .' ,.. ' '--... : z 10 .. -~I" R .~.~, "fl. ,. .;, ...~/ ~"l!' ~ .' " . .. I~ J ;. ,. '- .. I .. .. I' .~ n' - - ,.~ ~ i"'!' ._ f.o L.--T .- r , '\:,N...,; ."......"~.. .....".'.~:'''''.... ' . I- ~,"" I' I a: , " i'~~~~:~~~ :-:por. ~~".:,' c, t;t~:tr~ 18 " ";\, '" ~ ~ ' "a ~'J; ; i':;'::, :.!, '. Jft.-~. "]~r-..'.- . ~ d. c;~ . ~\.~ '-'1~. jL c.hl "U' It:: ,c<~l:~:;;'~ i~'-~'~ ~~~"'Lj' "1 ,~ _. ~ r~ "-'!E . ,,("! , ~ _ _' ~.' ". ~~~., " \. ~ ., .. ", -.. rl) ~I !. ;"" w' .J::'..r~/ . ,..... ; ';.,-.:.:-. .t- I ',,~ '( ~""x''''' ~\ ,...' ~ o;i ',f,;~{t.}: J:' '? ,~,~~ ; ....".... : .k:,,,rf ',I I""""-'~ &&I 1,' ~v:::.;, /- .... .,. .:;..:, '"' ~..;I ..... ; ~'~, ,; ~ j;' .';' ". ~,.. ............ .. _. .~~:>> ..\~ ~_ -.... co! . roC' ~ L-..., Jr -b.:t ~~ J" . .. ..' ~ ~ I ~ ~\ ~. ai; :"l ~~. :~ ih:f" r~l ~t : ~~ .1.......' "~, . .t" ~j> i .~~" ',' ,~; ~~'0 f ~rJ1jID:...'~t= ' id : :;.' i'-o<,., \ ~.'11 -11 \,"1~ ..... ,',:,1 m 'm:L:.,~ ~ ~ ..... :=I ...tr ~ ~:::;-~ "'-,......' . .". ~ . ~. .. . ~ I F rl ~. x. - I ~""'~~",,' .. >>' '. ..i .' _ ~. ~ -"';L.7.~ ~"\:'~) '" _... _.. , . ,.IIi.! L. _ _ _ ,... .. -~ Vl:f,i ,rqfl;;J:' ; ,~: ' ~ ' .f;'" 111!t~ ,', L - ;! g ~~~, I I~ ft, "~ U. 4> ~*l~ ff;J l. ." - - ~-I r i": ~ I s.,~'& t ~.; 1C5: ~,>H ..c. :l~lZ) I . ,o. w , _ ~~ ~ .:1.. ~ , ~t..., .'. '", ."~.. ~ _ t ~J: d. "~," ~ ~ ~lb~~ : '::;:~~~f:t;it - til-jl~ , _ ~ .' ;,"]~~I'm~~y~:", - tJ'~ _ _~>-O~-~ ~\' ~ '- :.~ :"".':\~V.'. ~t ~.''''(.~~:.M1I; "~"l'" .~'.;~~~;~,.": -~: f1;: =~_,.._~l.. " ~~ ''''~ .... :;'1 ;ci '''.. ~~ - ~ .'".....:--~,..;-..:,; g I J, 1{ ~. ;? ~'" ~ f ..0IlJ. ~ \.J -=-'tJ.'-(I r,,-~ ~ '. ..' &;'ij I ~i W- ; ",:;.~~ ' i I!:l~~!::' ~~ .-:::.~ . - ~"':--"~' .~-, ~- rili I .', ~.\:,; h-? ~~~-!~1'.~}~ .---~ w .~. :l e.. o,...~ ',; Ii'. Ii I ..f :"l- 'I :I .._ _ ':: .~ _ .... \ I ,;;;::..-.--..l.... . ...----\0.1 - Of, - . . w.....,.- · , 1 -m -:.~;: I !I, -~-,I .:~_" ~.,L.'__:I" · I Il' ,4r]r=J]:.I! - - · I .'" :.:] 1'-- ; IT r:-J.Iti-9. ~__~ __~ITlIl-iI":' ... ' . , , I '., I I Ii, i ,1" :Tf/~ I ~ I i .. e . '3 -) E) I _._ ___ "h~' .._ .' ] I l' ~ ----- . . --~~.~4D----~ i CU r:;.. i j '[. "'~'" C1J ....,. ..... .. ........-..1 0 _ . . . ~---_. liS. . - L.^J . uS.: - - il E~,.... ~.>. ~" ~ ~~ p~ k r: ~ l:t1~ 1<_'>' ~" ~:;'~" ",c,.,. ,. ..".,;:" " . .. 5: ~ _,..' t;= ?; '?-" ~.\; A ~\ 0,. -..- ., !'.'Ii-:r .... ;"~ ,<1-, ':" , ~:. : r ..~ ,: ';;!. ~ I ~j U i. I r :!:,... .. II ~_ c~. _ _~~. ,Q. ..... a e o " T. ! I i i II II II ! I . I II i I II' ...!-1.L tIt ~! ;J'"7'"'J; If';:' ~. ,ntH. a! i1l7~":.. (!1 : l~",iJ Z ;I"'" 52 F.!.;~} i: IN Go; , DO ~J ./~.I-"\, . I I . ....-- -i '. I ' ... . '----1--/ e o ... m 'S ~ o C') ~ ~ ~ ,~ t!) IS , 1 , e o o I r e o .~ i I I ~ I o I i j I s' I I~ Q. a: go &I. ,3 :<.:: ~ w ~ l~ dd I~ '0 1% lid 'W I I I , ! I 8...-...-..-...-. I , Sa-- .g-.-.-.----.... S .J:\'?' x. ,.." " ,.... "----- . ~---- c...:::::: ..._ I" I f . J" ..t~ l ~-L1-~ -1-1- , j ~ i I i I ! I, U June 18,2001 Executive Summary Basis of Design Needs Assessment and Preliminary Design Gilroy Police Station City of Gilroy WLC Architects, Inc. 10470 Foothill Boulevard Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 wolffie@wlc-architects.com (909)987 -0909 phone (909)980-9980 fax Project No. 0024400.60 ;. Table of Contents City of Gilroy Police Station Needs Assessment and Preliminary Design Page 1.0 Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1 Gilroy's Development Challenge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2 Project Scope ...................................................... 3 1.3 Opportunities and Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.4 Special Planning and Design Considerations .............................. 4 1.5 Previous Needs Assessment and Facilities Master Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.6 Facility Needs ...................................................... 5 1.7 Building Size. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.8 Site Analysis .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.9 Police Department Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.10 Community Participation ............................................. 8 1.11 Development Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1.12 Conceptual Design ................................................. 13 1.13 Proj ect Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 1.14 Project Schedule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 1.15 Consequences..................................................... 14 1.16 Recommendations.................................................. 14 Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 Page i Introduction and Acknowledgments This document is dedicated to the City Council, Police Department personnel, commissioners, City staff members, and residents of the City of Gilroy who contributed significant knowledge, experience, and technical assistance to the master planning and conceptual design of a new Police Station. The quality of study and final work effort was made possible by their dedication and participation. With great admiration and sincere appreciation, WLC Architects recognizes these individuals. City of Gilroy City Council Thomas W. Springer, Mayor* Guadalupe Arellano, Mayor Pro Tem* Dr. Peter Arellano, Council Member Charles S. Morales, Council Member* Al Pinheiro, Council Member Anthony C. Sudol III, Council Member* Roland Velasco, Council Member * was a City Council Member in 1997 City Staff Jay Baksa, City Administrator Bill Headley, Facilities and Parks Development Manager Kristi Abrams, Traffic Engineer Rick Brandini, Facility Maintenance Supervisor Joe Kline, Public Information Officer Nancy McDonald, Senior Plan Check Technician Don Nunes, Senior Civil Engineer Gregg Polubinski, Planner I Police Department Staff Gregg Giusiana, Police Chief Lanny Brown, Captain Debbie Moore, Lieutenant Scot Smithee, Lieutenant Kim Jenkins, Support Services Manager Kurt Ashley, Corporal Nita Basham, Support Services Pat Cooper, Senior Records Technician Jim Gillio, Patrol Officer Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 Page 1 Police Department Staff (continued) Don Kludt, Sergeant Sandy Lee, Records Supervisor Noel Provost, Corporal Dan Renville, Corporal Jack Robinson, Sergeant Nina Sheleman, Property/Evidence Technician Kim Sullivan, MSO Kurt Svardal, Corporal Phyllis Ward, Crime Analyst Steve Ynzunza, Communications Supervisor Gilroy Citizens Bruce Akagi, Resident Al Awtry, Resident Patrick Balfe, Resident Harlan Breneman, Resident Rose Marie Calabro, Resident John Ceballos, Resident Pat Cooper, Resident Amy Gartman, Resident Craig Gartman, Resident Fred Ahmad Khani, Resident Robin Ahmad Khani, Resident Charlotte Noriega, Resident Steve Noriega Sr., Resident Len Pugh, Resident Pat Sheppard, Resident Don Stamps, Resident Betty Wilkins, Resident Bill Wilkins, Resident Manley Willis, Resident WLC Architects, Inc. Planning and Conceptual Design Team Larry Wolff, AlA, Principal Architect Bill Louie, AlA, Associate Architect Frank Cuomo, Project Architect Xavier Adrian, Project Manager Margaret Ambrosavage, Project Manager Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 Page 2 1.0 Executive Summary 1.1 Gilroy's Development Challenge Changes in Gilroy's community structure, growing population needs, shifting demographic profiles, the rapid pace of emerging technologies, and continuing concerns for a safe, secure, and prosperous future effect community contentment, quality of life, and expectations for premium law enforcement services. Realizing that remarkable opportunities exist for those cities who can lead their citizens and shape their households successfully into a community that values healthy children, builds strong families, and offers safe schools, quality housing, and desirable workplace environments, the Gilroy City Council began the planning process for a new Police Station in 1997. During this time, a needs assessment was completed, methods for implementation were determined, and budgets were set based upon City's goals and objectives. This work effort was extensive and credible. This is a critical moment for the City. Change has occurred since the time of initial deliberations and decision making. The purpose of this study is to determine the significance of change which has occurred, and to measure the impact upon three critical success factors. ~ Quality ofthe Police Department's twenty-year needs assessment and space requirements. ~ Quality of the Police Station design regarding neighborhood and civic center compatibility. ~ Quality of project cost estimate and compliance with City's prior authorized funding level. Gilroy's development challenge requires an updated Needs Assessment and Preliminary Design Study to ensure its critical success factors meet the vision for the community as seen by City Council, the Police Department, and community stakeholders. 1.2 Project Scope This Needs Assessment and Preliminary Design report provides the basis for planning, design, and development of a new Police Station - enabling Gilroy decision makers and stakeholders to receive full value from their future land and building investment. The basis for the development of premiere law enforcement facilities resulting from the expert management of design opportunities that exist within the project is identified in this document. A twenty-year space needs assessment, site analysis, conceptual design, and master plan have been completed to provide the necessary tools for implementation. Employment ofWLC's Community Design Process provided significant public participation during the creation of the design, and resulted in four community design workshop sessions that influenced, shaped, and inspired the architectural vision proposed within the master plan. With the application of this document, the City of Gilroy will be able to: ~ Update and confirm the City's growth projections and strategies for the most effective Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 Page 3 employment of space at the proposed site location. ~ Respond with creative site planning and building design features to best support future Police Station and related law enforcement facility needs. ~ IdentifY neighborhood and civic center priorities for site planning and related land use, and create a responsive Police Station to meet diverse City and community expectations, preferences, and needs. ~ Build vital law enforcement facilities that celebrate community identity and provide rewarding public and municipal services. ~ Enable the City to best provide law enforcement services through the year 2023 and provide expansion capability for police facilities through General Plan build-out to 2033. The planning, design, and construction of the new Gilroy Police Station offers significant opportunities and challenges. The project requires an accurate assessment of the proposed 1.89 acre site and its potential for development of a new Police Station and related civic center improvements. The objective of this report is to provide the information necessary to initiate the formal design and construction processes. The basis of this report provides City decision makers and future design and construction team members a valuable tool - enabling the City Council to best provide law enforcement services through the year 2023. 1.3 Opportunities and Challenges The City of Gilroy is a special community, having a quality lifestyle dedicated to the prosperity, safety, and security of all citizens. The importance of community-based public service concepts depends upon stimulating, challenging, and rewarding work place environments for Police Department personnel. One of the critical success factors in the planning process is to understand and resolve the organizational management policies and functional relationships to be employed within Police Department work environments, and then to determine optimum space and interior configurations to best serve intended law enforcement operations. Gilroy Police Department's staffing is uniquely different from most other municipal departments because there are less police officers per resident population served, and due to the greater use of multi-performance departmental teams within Police Department structures. These special organizational qualities suggest that a great degree of flexibility will be necessary within future Police Station work environments. Significant effort has been expended in this study to develop the most reliable space projections and site assessments possible for the next 20 years, and to identifY design concepts which best leverage the $14.65 million currently authorized by the City Council. The primary purpose of this document is to identifY which development strategy for a new Police Station best meets long-range City needs from the spectrum of opportunities that exist in the project. 1.4 Special Planning and Design Considerations Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 Page 4 This Needs Assessment and Master Plan incorporates staffing projections and provides space allocations based upon a 20-year projection. A primary concern of City decision-makers is to ensure that the planning effort results in a facility capable of meeting long-term, future needs. A 20-year projection represents an aggressive commitment to satisfying Police Station and related public service needs for a long time to come. To insure confidence and to achieve reliable staffing and space forecasts, a large investment of time and study was devoted to the study and analysis of previous growth, current demographics, and population forecasts contained in the City of Gilroy General Plan, County of Santa Clara General Plan, and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Economic and Population Index. From these sources, it is believed that the City of Gilroy will likely grow by approximately 78% from a current population of 40,153 to 69,018 people by the year 2023, which will require a combination of 195 sworn and non-sworn Police Department employees. Statistical records obtained from national law-enforcement agencies, International Society of Police Chiefs, and the United States Department of Justice, support an average space standard for police facilities of 273 square feet per person. The recommendations of this report propose a future police facility resulting in 245 square feet per person. Because these national averages often include both custody holding facilities or fully-devoted Type I jail facilities, some variance does exist within the average 273 square feet per person. However, comparative studies show that a variance of no more than four to six percent is likely. Because of the thoroughness of the planning process and detail provided by the preliminary design proposals derived from this study, Project Team members view staffmg projections and space allocations presented in this report with confidence. 1.5 Previous Needs Assessment and Facilities Master Plan During November 1997, the City of Gilroy completed a detailed Needs Assessment and Police Facilities Master Plan prepared by Harris and Associates and Edward J. Gee and Associates. The Harris/Gee study projected space needs for the Gilroy Police Department up to the year 2017 based upon projected staffing of 167 combined sworn and non-sworn personnel. This study established the need at year 2017 for 40,141 gross square feet of building area, to be supported by 186 parking spaces. Various site development options were evaluated and new construction was compared to the renovation and expansion of the existing Police Station. Ultimately, the Harris/Gee report concluded that new construction within a site immediate to the Gilroy Civic Center was optimum. In December of 2000, the Gilroy City Council approved the proposed 1.89 acre site bordered by Dowdy Street, Seventh Street, Hanna Street, and the City's existing Senior Center based upon the results and recommendations of the Harris/Gee study. 1.6 Current Facility Needs After site selection, the City retained WLC Architects, Inc. in February 2001 to prepare an updated needs assessment and preliminary design for the new Police Station. Because three and a half years expired from the time of the initial needs assessment, an updated needs assessment and architectural program was prepared by WLC. This process began with Police Department reviews and updates of combined sworn and non-sworn staffing projections up to the year 2023. Current staff projections Page 5 Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 are detailed in the updated Planning Matrix included in Section 5.10fthis report which show 108 sworn and 87 non-sworn positions - an increase of 28 persons since 1997. Based upon these future staffing projections, an updated needs assessment was prepared to identifY all required space allocations, building components, support areas, and technology requirements for anticipated Police Station functions. Ongoing Police Department reviews and work sessions provided the basis for programming and related space projections, and established the final space requirements for the project. Immediate and future requirements for all facility components were further identified. Section 5.7 of this document provides a detailed inventory of the updated Space Needs Assessment. 1. 7 Building Size This report shows a total building size of 47,781 square feet will be required to meet the needs of the City over the next 20 years. Staffing projections determine building size, and the General Plan build-out population forecast, combined with Police Department staffing estimates, determines required staffing in the future. The current staffing level is 103 persons, which reflects the total of combined sworn and non-sworn personnel in the Police Department. To meet the needs of the size ofthe current Police Department, a building of 42,975 square feet is required. The existing police building size is 17,665 square feet, which results in a ratio of 171 square feet per employee - which is significantly less than the State average of 273 square feet per person. Based upon the City's population estimated to be 69,018 residents in 2023, total future estimated staffing is projected to be 195 total sworn and non-sworn personnel. A future facility size of245 square feet per employee results, which reasonably measures up to the California average of273 square feet per employee. Current Space Needs o Current Staffing Level: 103 combined sworn and non-sworn personnel. o Current Space Provided: 17,665 square feet or 171 square feet per employee o Current Space Needs Projection: 42,975 square feet to meet year 2003 requirements. Future Space Needs o Future Projected Staffing Level: 195 combined sworn and non-sworn to the year 2023. o Future Space Needs Projection: 47,781 square feet or 245 square feet per employee to the year 2023. Further information about the proposed building size is discussed further in Section 5.3 of this report. Comparison of Existing Police Departments The original police facility was built in 1965, at a time when Gilroy's population was around 22,000. Since that time, the population has grown to about 40,500 people and the Police Department has grown accordingly in total employees. Even with the expansion and renovation of the existing building, the Police Department has simply outgrown available space, relying on temporary Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 Page 6 measures, such as off-site property and evidence facilities, to accommodate personnel and necessary support functions. A comparison of similar California Police Departments ranks Gilroy in the lowest space categories, and further illustrates the present level of overcrowding and general lack of space. Comparison of Existine; Police Departments 1997 Study Location Gross Sq. Ft Sworn Officers Non-Sworn Total EmDlovees EmDlovee Per Sq. Ft. INGLEWOOD 38,000 207 125 332 114 BREA 13,521 94 23 117 116 UNION CITY 13,000 64 43 107 121 ESCONDIDO 32,490 153 72 225 144 MADERA 7,500 35 15 50 150 GILROY 17,665 58 45 103 171 WALNUT CREEK 18,500 75 26 101 183 GLENDALE 57,000 200 82 282 202 SANTA ROSA 42,000 134 68 202 208 DOWNEY 29,000 107 28 135 215 BURLINGAME 14,000 45 20 65 215 TORRANCE 75,000 244 86 330 227 PASADENA 84,000 225 125 350 240 CHICO 18,500 50 25 75 247 ANAHEIM 120,000 319 146 465 258 NOV ATO 21,000 60 20 80 263 COVINA 24,000 53 36 89 270 FOSTER CITY 24,000 53 36 89 270 CLOVIS 28,000 72 32 103 270 IRVINE 54,000 126 74 200 270 BURBANK 78,000 178 110 288 271 PLEASANTON 24,000 60 28 88 273 EL SEGUNDO 24,600 61 29 90 273 VENTURA 50,000 117 60 177 282 UPLAND 30,000 78 24 102 294 FONTANA 58,243 121 74 195 299 ALHAMBRA 48,000 96 58 154 312 SAN FERNANDO 18,000 34 20 54 333 MILPIT AS 32,000 70 24 94 340 OROVILLE 12,000 24 10 34 353 PALM SPRINGS 48,000 80 45 125 384 CARLSBAD 41,700 70 29 99 421 BEVERLY HILLS 100,000 128 63 191 524 AVERAGE 40,592 107 52 158 273 1.8 Site Analysis The proposed site is viewed to offer adequate size and optimum location characteristics. Located on the south edge of the Gilroy Senior Center, and bordered by Dowdy Street, Seventh Street, and Hanna Street, the 1.89 acre property is a prime location within the Gilroy Civic Center - just west of the existing City Hall building. Ultimately, four site options were selected for final study and assessment. To meet future Police Station development requirements, the proposed site area can meet future Police Department needs through the year 2023, dependent upon which site development option is ultimately selected and employed. The future acquisition of the five remaining residential Page 7 Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 parcels due west of the existing Senior Center along the east side of Dowdy Street is necessary to meet both long term, future Police Department expansion, and to facilitate additional Senior Center parking - regardless of which site development option is selected for the Police Facility. The primary site factors of greatest importance include the following considerations: o Site availability and suitability. o Site safety and security. o Size and geometry. o Views and vistas. o Community recognition and familiarity. o Proximity to existing City Hall facilities. o Lack of environmental hazards. o Traffic, circulation, parking, and accessibility. o Site topography and drainage. o Allowable land use and zoning. o Expansion capability for General Plan build-out. o Utilities. 1.9 Police Department and City Staff Participation Much of the analysis and recommendations found within this report result from a good level of Police Department and City staff participation. A Project Team consisting of Police Department representatives and City staff was formed to provide assessment of department growth and staffmg, future operations, professional expertise, historical knowledge, technical assistance, and to identify Police Department preferences and expectations. Facility tours of twelve police stations located throughout southern California and the Bay area were first scheduled and conducted to facilitate comparative thinking about selective design features. Area studies were prepared to pictorially diagram the updated needs assessment and to illustrate optimum functional relationships. Three different area studies were prepared for review and discussion. During this time, a series of informal work sessions was created to foster Project Team participation and critical thinking, which involved hands-on problem solving and discussion. The response from participants was thoughtful and diligent. 1.10 Outreach and Community Participation Community Design Workshops, selectively scheduled throughout the conceptual design phase, were conducted to engage residents, community representatives, and City staff throughout the early planning stages of the project. Each workshop session was promoted and advertised by the City in local newspapers and on cable television. The goal of the Community Design Workshops was to build consensus among attendees, and to agree upon and understand the nature of opportunities and challenges that existed within the project. Each workshop encouraged both individual and group participation by using a charette format to foster common discussion and understanding. For the Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 Page 8 .. Police Station project, a series of three "hands-on" community design workshops was used to address community expectations, concerns, and preferences as follows: ~ Community Design Workshop No.1 - Initiating Site Awareness ~ Community Design Workshop No.2 - Exploring Development Options ~ Community Design Workshop No.3 - Seeking Architectural Character ~ Community Design Workshop No.4 - Preliminary Design Presentation Many thoughtful responses were obtained from the workshop process, and the collective opinions of the individuals attending the workshops were found to be very valuable. The workshop process led to a better understanding of site planning opportunities, identified options for design and master planning, and determined appropriate architectural forms and features. 1.11 Development Options Site studies were prepared to evaluate single-level construction to two-level and three-level construction schemes. Stacking plans were prepared and reviewed to compare the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Single level construction was found to be infeasible because of sufficient available site area. Two-level construction was found to be more favorable because it resulted in more compact, efficient, and functional configurations. Three-level construction was found to be most favorable because the custody facility could be centralized and placed strategically within the core of the building - thus optimizing safety and security features which is a critical concern of neighboring residents. Further site section studies showed that by stepping the building profile, combined with a "split-level" design concept, could effectively reduce the potential visual impact of a three-level facility. The split-level concept is obtained by locating the parking and custody level a half level below the existing street level, which places the main building level half a level above existing grade. Three primary strategies were used to determine the best stacking plan for the project: o The Watch Commander is the central core component of the facility and should be located strategically - with close, functional adjacency to all other facility components requiring close proximity. o The facility components requiring public access and those having the greatest level of use by the majority of police personnel shall be located on the main floor (mid-level) of the building, along with necessary support spaces. o The custody facility shall be centrally located within the lower parking level, and the communications center shall be centrally located on the upper building level. Development Strategies Four design concepts were evaluated by an Initial Study Phase, and illustrate the primary development options believed to exist within the project. Each site and building option was Page 9 Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 .. evaluated and compared based upon floor and site plan configurations, building area provided, ability to fulfill year 2023 needs, general program compliance, type of custody facility provided, energy efficiency, need for additional property acquisition, neighborhood and civic center compatibility, and initial and life cycle cost. From these basic considerations, the following site options were initially developed, evaluated, and compared as the during the initial study phases ofthe project. Initial Study Phase Original Option No.1: Two-Level Building and Two-Level Parking Structure with Surface Parking Minimum Option No.2: Three-Level Integrated Building & Parking Meeting Year 2015 Needs Recommended Option No.3: Three-Level Integrated Building & Parking Meeting Year 2023 Needs Maximum Option No.4: Four-Level Integrated Building with Parking Exceeding Year 2023 Needs Custody Facility Considerations A Type I Custody Facility is proposed in Options No.1, No.3, and No.4; whereas a smaller size Holding Facility is proposed in Option No.2 - primarily to save space and reduce initial cost. From the facility tours conducted by Project Team members, Type I Custody facilities were found to be advantageous because they provided potential income generation and greater independence from other agency use. Oftentimes, cities can offer their Type I facility to serve weekend offenders and less intensive law breakers who are willing to pay for alternative jail accommodations. Over a period of time, this revenue can be substantial and helps off-set related staffing and operations cost. Energy Efficiency Considerations High performance heating/ventilating/air-conditioning (HV AC) systems, lighting, and building enclosures to achieve 20% energy use reductions are proposed in Options No.3 and No.4; whereas basic systems which still meet minimum building code and energy standards are proposed in Options No.1 and No.2. Although high performance components increase initial cost, savings from life-cycle operations and maintenance, and energy efficiency are significant. Reduced energy use and savings often pay back initial cost expenditures within eight to twelve years, and then become added income revenue over the life ofthe project. Considering that Police Stations are expected to last for 25 t050 years, and that many endure for longer time spans, energy savings over the life of Gilroy's new Police Station can be significant. Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 Page 10 ... Original Option No.1 Option No.1 is based upon the City's "original" two-level building and parking structure concept used in several of the 1997 Harris/Gee site study options. Here in this scheme, surface parking is used with a conventional two-level building and two-level parking structure to produce a baseline comparison for other options. Although this approach meets year 2023 space requirements, the plan configuration is less efficient because the two-level concept requires more program components be placed on the second level to preserve available site area, less centralization occurs, and some key functional relationships are lost. Worse, this approach depends upon additional land acquisition to attempt to achieve required parking, which uses up all adjacent properties - thus precluding any available land area for either future Police Station or Senior Center expansion. Option No.1 is estimated to cost $15,461,915.00 and exceeds the current authorized project cost of$14.65 million by approximately $811,915.00. Minimum Option No.2 Option No.2 uses a three-level building concept that combines building and parking areas into an integrated structure, and attempts to build the most space and parking while meeting the current authorized project cost of $14.65 million. This limitation results in a building size of 42,318 square feet which is approximately 5,000 square feet less than all other options. The smaller building size is viewed to be a "minimum" approach because it meets the Police Department's space needs up to the year 2015. Likewise, this scheme provides 75% of the required parking which requires additional parking expansion after year 2015. Available land area for either future Police Station or Senior Center expansion is preserved by this option. Like Option No.1, this scheme provides basic design features, and complies with minimum Title 24 Energy Standards. Recommended Option No.3 Like Option No.2, this concept uses a three-level approach that combines building and parking areas into an integrated structure, but instead meets required year 2023 building space and parking area without attempting to meet the current authorized project cost of $14.65 million. This scheme results in a building size of 47,781 square feet, which allows for a Type I Custody Facility. Option No.3 also includes high performance energy systems. Revenue generation is believed to occur from both the custody and energy features built into this scheme. The estimated $16,869,534.00 cost of Option No.3 requires an additional $2.21 million funding increase, which can be mostly off-set by long term energy savings and custody facility income estimated at $1.795 million. Like Option No.2, this scheme meets only 75% ofthe projected parking, and requires additional parking expansion after year 2015. Available land for either future Police Station or Senior Center expansion is preserved by this option. Maximum Option No.4 Option No.4 uses the same building and parking design as Option No.3, but adds a second level of below grade parking to meet year 2023 parking needs. This scheme leverages the opportunity to maximize below grade parking for civic center use. The additional parking level provides 300 parking spaces, which creates a surplus of 110 spaces available for other civic center uses. This scheme has a building size of 47,781 square feet, provides a Type I Custody Facility, and includes high performance energy systems. An additional $4.89 million budget allocation is required for this Page 11 Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 option. Revenue generation from energy savings and custody facility income is also estimated at $ 'lr A'l bl I d fi fu p r S . .. . db hi . 1.795 ml Ion. Val a ean area or ture o Ice tatIon expansIOn IS not reqUIre )yt s optIOn. Development Option Matrix Original Minimum Recommended Maximum Option No.1 Option No.2 Option No.3 Option No.4 Two-Level Building and Three-Level Building Three-Level Building with Four-Level Building Two-Level Parking with (I) Below (I) Below Grade Parking with (2) Below Grade Structure with Surface Grade Parking Level Level Parking Levels Planning/Design Component Parking 1. Plan Configuration Less Efficient Building Minimum Floor Plan Recommended Floor Plan Recommended Floor and Greater Site Area with 75% Police with 75% Police Parking Plan with Added Civic Required Parking & 2nd Phase & 2nd Phase 100% Center Parking 100% Parking Parking 2. Building Area Provided 47,292 42,318 47,781 47,781 3. Needs Assessment Projection 2023 2015 2023 2023 4.Building Program Compliance 100% 91%* 100% 100% 5. Custody Facility** Type 1 Holding Type 1 Type 1 6. Energy Efficiency Basic systems to meet Basic systems to High perfonnance High perfonnance current Title 24 standards. meet current Title 24 systems to achieve 20% systems to achieve standards. energy savings. 20% energy savings. 7. Property Acquisition (5) more lots at Dowdy No property required No property required No property required now. No land now, (2) lots required now, (2) lots required for acquisition required. available for expansion. for future expansion. future expansion. 8. Neighborhood & Civic @ @@@ @@@ @@@@@ Center Compatibility POOR GOOD GOOD OPTIMUM 9. Project Cost Comparison Basic initial project cost $13,961,915.00 $14,579,821.00 $16,490,657.00 $19,165,276.000 Added cost for energy upgrades*** $0.00 $0.00 $378,877.00 $378,877.00 Additional property acquisition required to construct this option $1,500,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total Initial Cost $15,461,915.00 $14,579,821.00 $16,869,534.00 $19,544,153.00 Future property acquisition for Phase 2 parking & building expansion None available. $600,000.00 $600,000.00 None required Cost for 2nd Phase Building & Parking None available. $1,318,750.00 $118,750.00 None required. Projected 20 year energy savings beyond Title 24 requirements $0.00 $0.00 ($825,000.00) ($825,000.00) Custody Facility 20 year revenues ($970,000.00) $0.00 ($970,000.00) ($970,000.00) Total Life Cycle Cost at year 2023 $1,087,716.00 $973,314.00 $1,098,963.00 $1,098,963.00 Total Project Cost at year 2023 $17,519,631.00 $17,471,885.00 $16,892,247.00 $18,848,116.00 to.Overall Rating * ** **** ***** WORST POOR GOOD BEST * Missing Community Meeting, Tactical Training, 50% Conference Areas & reduced PropertylEvidence & Custody areas. ** Type 1 Custody Facility could produce $50,000 to $100,000 revenue for City. *** All options meet Title 24 Energy Efficiency code; Options No.3 & No.4 are upgraded for greater energy savings. Page 12 Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 . 1.12 Conceptual Design Conceptual Design studies were developed based upon the results of the needs assessment and site analysis phases. Sketch studies were provided depicting relationships of functional areas, building use, and the primary interior activity relationships related to the site and building program. Conceptual site and floor plans, building elevations, and a preliminary master plan were prepared. A master plan for the project was prepared indicating all major Police Station elements. Site concept studies were prepared to define structured parking areas, hard scape areas, plazas, terraces, and outdoor activity and landscape areas related to the project. Determination of an appropriate architectural style was a special component of the Conceptual Design Phase. Community image story-boards and descriptive photographs were used to present selected architectural forms, features, and images for consideration and selection by community workshop attendees. Using the Community Design Process, a decision-making tree was used to evaluate and assess distinctive architectural styles for the Police Station project. The challenge to creating architectural character is to determine what justified forms and features are most appropriate based upon the contextual relationships of site and program to the project. Previous planning by the City and community confirms the implementation of bold strategies and policy frameworks intended to improve the quality of life for residents, and to provide a positive climate in which Gilroy neighborhoods will grow and thrive. The architecture envisioned for the project seeks to reflect the unique geographical and contextual character of Gilroy while providing a timeless assemblage of distinctive images woven together to form a unique and expressive design statement. By using selected visual images like key words in an essay, the architecture speaks to the essence of Gilroy traditions and place. 1.13 Project Cost Depending upon which option is selected by the City for development and implementation, the total initial cost for the project is estimated to range from $14.58 to $19.54 million which includes the cost of building construction, parking, contingency for minor changes, indirect support costs, and on-site improvement costs. Project cost estimates were developed based on programming and scheduling studies. Programming requirements were converted and gross area space projections were used to establish primary construction costs for the proposed conceptual design to include general conditions, site preparation, new building construction, parking facilities, utility infrastructure, and landscaping. Primary construction cost estimates are based upon a cost per square foot basis which recognizes current market conditions for new construction. 1.14 Project Schedule The total time for the design and construction of the project is estimated to require approximately three years, which includes the time for final design, City and outside agency approvals, construction bidding, and the primary construction phases. Project completion is scheduled for July 4, 2004. The project schedule is based upon similar projects of size and scope. Page 13 Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60 1.15 Consequences Based upon the results oftms study, the choice to be made is whether the City wants to meet future twenty-year space needs, or meet the authorized budget based on the 1997 Police Facilities Master Plan. The updated needs assessment shows that changes have occurred since 1997, causing increases in required building space, which in turn, now cause an increase in required funding. Since the authorized budget for the project has not changed, a shortfall of space will occur in the construction of the new building without additional funding. Consequences exist for either decision. Decision "A" - Meet updated twenty year space needs and increase the authorized budget. Decision "B" - Meet the authorized budget and decrease space needs to the year 2015. 1.16 Recommendations Based upon the results of this Needs Assessment and Preliminary Design Study, it is recommended that the City choose Plan A and proceed with the development and implementation of Option No.3 - resulting in a new, three-level Police Station to be designed and constructed on the proposed 1.89 acre site. The new facility should be built at a size of approximately 47,781 square feet to meet the needs of the City of Gilroy for the next 20 years, and should include an integrated parking structure consisting of 150 below-grade parking spaces. A modified version of Construction Management as Agent is strongly suggested as the best project delivery method for constructing the project. The total cost of the project is estimated at $16.87 million and it will require approximately three years for completion. Completion ofthe following action items is essential for the implementation oftms recommendation: 1. Proceed with the development of Option No.3. 2. Authorize the completion of the next phase of professional design services. 3. Determine extent and type of funding sources to fund the project. Page 14 Gilroy Police Facility Basis of Design 0024400.60