Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12091986 - T.4 f _, TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: Phil Batchelor S} County Administrator Costa DATE: December 9, 1986 County SUBJECT: Approval of Schematic Phase Design West County Justice Center Project SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 . ACCEPT Report from the County Administrator on design and construction cost issues relating to the West County Justice Center Project . 2 . APPROVE The Schematic Phase of Design . REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS/BACKGROUND: A. HISTORY OF PROJECT DEVELOPMENT As a result of overcrowding at the County' s adult detention facilities in Mari.inez , Richmond and Clayton, the County made application for a $36 , 570 , 521 grant to the California Board of Corrections on November 17 , 1983 . This grant was approved for the development of a 560-bed minimum- medium correctional facility in accordance with the County Jail Capital t Expenditure Bond Act . From the creation of the Correctional Facility Planning Task Force in December 1982 until December 1985 , the County conducted a comprehensive site selection process in which 29 sites were seriously studied prior to the selection of the preferred location for the West County Justice Cente-l- ('WCJC ) . In November 1984 , the architectural/planning firm of Design Partnership began predesign programming studies . The selection of the project Architect began on January 4 , 1935 , followed by the Board ' s selecting the joint venture firm of Dworsky/Design Partnership on April- 9 , 1985 . The contract was awarded December 17 , 1985 . The Project/Construction Management selection process began on Seotarnber 10 , 1985 . The Board selected O' Brien-Kreitzberg and Associates on March 3 , 1986' and awarded a. contract for management services three months late__. The Architect ' s Notice to Proceed was issued on July 7 , 1986 , thus begin- ning the three months Schematic Phase of design. On July 8 , the Board approved the Architectural Predesign Program. During Schematic Design phase , the Architect conducted four design workshops for County project team members representing the Sheriff-Coroner, County Administrator and General Services Department . CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT:X YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOM ENDATIO F BOAR COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) .2 ACTION OF BOARD ON D2CeIClbeT 9, 1986 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS i _X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN, CC: CAO-Justice System Programs ATTESTED Sheriff-Coroner nil UWhelor, eFk of the Watd Members , WCJC Advisory Group &Ip6Mm adCollatyAdminl*dv M382/7-83 8Y DEPUTY Approval of Schematic Phase Design December 9 , 1986 West CountylJustice Center Page Two On October 15 , the County received the Architect ' s formal . Schematic Design submittal, which included drawings , a project description and outline specification, an integrated security plan , and a control and communications systems plan. The construction cost estimate was received on October 27 . A set of the submittal documents was delivered to the Board. of Corrections on October 21 for their review and comment . B. DESIGN CONCEPTS The project design developed in response to a well defined security concept . The integrated security plan calls for a secure perimeter consisting of a landscaped buffer zone, a perimeter patrol road, a double security fence with two independent electronic detection systems , and an open buffer zone separating the fences from the buildings and recreation areas . This strong perimeter security system will allow for buildings of more conventional construction, and controlled but independent movement of inmates within the compound. Access to and from this area will be through a tunnel going under the patrol road and perimeter fences into a secure building located outside the fence line. This outside building will contain the public lobby, administra- tive and staff areas , operations , and services including kitchen and laundry facilities . The area within the fenced compound is divided into three areas : housing, inmate services and recreation. There are four two-story general population housing buildings , each. with 128 beds . In addition, there is a 48 bed housing module for unclassified inmates . The intake housing building is part of a complex of buildings situated around a quadrangle that house central visiting, an outpatient client , library, classrooms , religious offices , staff dining, commissary/clothing exchange, and space for multi-purpose activities . This compound is designed for future expansion without change to the perimeter security system. The project is a departure from standard county jail design as it per- tains to the general population housing buildings . Given a well devel- oped inmate classification system in combination with the maximum secu- rity facilities at the Martinez Detention Facility, the County developed a medium security housing concept using dry inmate rooms and centralized toilets . This concept precludes long term lockdown within the indivi- dual rooms ; however, the housing buildings themselves can be locked down for an extended period if necessary. This concept is not consis- tent with Title 15 of the California Administrative Code and will require a variance from the Board of Corrections . This approval would eliminate a toilet and sink in 480 rooms resulting in a significant cost savings ( see next section for planned action ) . C. DESIGN REVIEW Throughout the three month Schematic Design period, the Architect parti- cipated in several County and public design workshops . The County' s project team participated in four workshops and a number of informal review meetings . In addition, the Architect participated in eight WCJC Advisory Group Design Committee meetings . The meeting topics included program requirements , security concept , design aesthetics , functional layouts , future expansion and mitigation of potentially adverse impacts . The Advisory Group Design Committee ' s major concerns during this first phase of design generally pertained to the project ' s impact on the surrounding area, i.e . , Point Pinole Regional Shoreline Park, Parchester Village , Richmond Country Club, Pinole Point Properties and the Chevron Hilltop development . These concerns focused on site design. The Com- mittee was primarily concerned with landscaping, perimeter security, proximity of the buildings to the park entrance, building height and design, parking and traffic, noise , and night lighting. Given the Approval of Schematic Phase Design December 9 , 1986 West County Justice Center Page,. 'Three project ' s close proximity to the Regional Shoreline Park entrance , the Design Committee is supporting the Park District ' s interest in establishing a new park entry at a more central point . Access to this new entry would be along the north edge of the site. Representatives from the County and the Architect met with the Board of Corrections ' staff on November 26 to present the project design revisions and discuss their review comments . The project is generally consistent with corrections and fire safety standards ; however, the general population housing buildings are non-conforming and will require a variance from the Board . of Corrections . On December 10 , the Board of Corrections will be asked to grant this facility status as a pilot project which would allow a departure of the building regulations for the purposes of experimenting with a new design concept . This pilot project will develop these housing buildings without toilets and sinks in most inmate rooms and with non-confirming glazed openings . The remaining 3oard comments will be addressed during the next phase of design . Any Richmond Fire Marshal' s concerns , resulting from the December 4 meeting, will also be responded to in this next design phase. D. BUDGET The project has a total budget of $48 , 760 , 085 . The target construction contract award is $33 , 152 , 220 . The Schematic Design Phase cost estimate totaled several million dollars above the project budget , thus resulting in major architectural and . engineering changes during the design review period. Since receipt of the submittal on October 15 , the County staff and Architects have met four times in scope and budget reducing work- shops . As a result of this value engineering effort , the project ' s construction estimate is within budget . The value engineering effort has kept the predesign program intact . The majority of the cost reduc- tions was the result of design changes , including simplified designs , more 'efficient layout of space , and changes in building materials . The revised cost estimate includes a loo design contingency, thus main- taining a reserve fund for cost changes during the future design phases . The target construction contract remains $33 , 152 , 000 . Adding a 5% bidding contingency to this amount , the Fixed Limit of Initial Construc- tion Contract Cost ( FLICCC ) is $34 , 810 , 000. E. DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE Approval of the project ' s Schematic Design submittal, as revised, ini- tiates the four month Design Development Phase of design. Design during this phase will continue to develop and refine the schematic designs , reflecting the County' s design review comments and mitigation measures described in the environmental impact report . These comments include the questions and concerns of the State and Richmond Fire Marshals , County operating personnel, the Project Manager and the WCJC Advisory Group. During Design Development , the Architect will continue to conduct design workshops for the County' s Project Team. The emphasis for this phase will include the refinement of the various building systems , including structural, mechanical, electrical ( including security) , exterior wall and roof. The Architect and his consultants will evaluate environmental control and energy conservation systems , methods of construction, faci- lity staffing and operations , and building maintenance . Alternative system solutions will be evaluated using life-cycle cost analysis models . Working together, the County' s Project Team will continue to refine the design, including layout modifications , selection of finish materials and evaluation of construction methods . Currently the project is on schedule for construction contract award in May 1988 . The Design Development Phase submission will be due April 10 , 1987 and will be presented next to the Board for their action in May. TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: Phil Batchelor County Administrator Costa DATE: December 9, 1986 `"rity SUBJECT: Report Submitted by West County Justice Center Advisory Group SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR,RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1 . ACCEPT Report from the West County Justice Center Advisory Group and REFER Recommendations to the County Administrator for a report back to the Board by February 15 , 1987 . 2 . DIRECT The County Administrator to cooperate with the City of Richmond as they develop the Richmond Shoreline Strategy for the Point Pinole area. BACKGROUND: The West County Justice Center Advisory Group was established by the Board of Supervisors on April 1 , 1986 , to provide advice to the Board regarding the design and construction of the new Justice Center. The Advisory Group has been meeting regularly and discussing the community issues related to the planning and operation of the Justice Center. The Advisory Group is submitting three recommendations for the Board' s consideration at this stage of the process : 1 . Develop a Minority and Women ,Business Enterprise Program Policy. 2 . Explore with the West County Justice Center Architect and Project Management Contractor the hiring of local MBE/WBE subconsultants during the project ' s design phase. 3. Accept the design resolution asking for the public endorsement of a new northern entrance to the Point Pinole Regional Shoreline and related design and site issues . CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDA,7 OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURES) ACTION OF,BOARD ON December 9, 1986 APPROVEDAS RECOMMENDED X OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD- OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: CAO - Justice System Programs ATTESTED Sheriff-Coroner nil eor, L;Ierk of Me bam of Members , WCJC Advisory Group &VeMm adCoNyAdmuli*dw, ` M3e2/7•ea BY � � ✓ DEPUTY j: ..