Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04201999 - D2 Planning Related to New County Administrative and Justice Facilities in Martinez Tab I Chronology of Events and Board Actions to Date Tab II Department Space Needs and Adjacency Requirements Tab III Martinez Building Sites Under Evaluation by County Tab IV Project Timelines and Facility Planning Decisions for Board Consideration Tab V Update on Summit Center Space Allocations Tab VI Martinez Parking Plans and Deports Tab VII Board Orders Related to Planning for New Facilities Tab VIII Board Orders Related to Hiring of Consultants Tab IX Martinez Connection.Newsletters Chronology of Events and Board Actions to Date Chronology of Events Related to Planning for New County Administrative and Judicial Facilities in Martinez December 16, 1997 Board resolution approves Letter of Intent to purchase Summit Center. ➢ Staff report recommends facility used by Social Services and Health Services to meet pressing space needs of departments. A Board requests CAO also look at use of Summit Center for Board Chambers/County Administration. May 1, 1998 Rupture of cooling line on Yd Floor of North Wing at 651 Pine Street, causing extensive water damage and forcing closure of 2,d and P wings for two weeks. May 12, 1998 Board adopts Findings of report analyzing County facility deficiencies and space needs in Martinez. In addition,the Board takes the following actions: ➢ Directs staff to develop detailed study evaluating use of Summit Center as either a Health Services or Administrative Building. ➢ Clarifies that it intends to continue using 651 fine Street if the Board relocates County Administration to the Summit Center. ➢ Establishes an Ad-Hoc City/County Committee to work on - issues regarding the County's continued presence in downtown Martinez. ➢ Requests that Martinez take immediate steps to augment parking in downtown. Y Directs staff to explore possible locations for an employee childcare center. ➢ Reviews transportation resources for access to Summit Center. June 1998 Downtown Martinez business owners approve $1.5 million assessment district to address downtown flooding. These funds were needed to supplement $6.5 million in public funding for creek widening, railroad bridge replacement and other needed flood control improvements. 1 June 5, 1998 Initial meeting of the Ad-Hoc City/County Committee. Topics discussed at the meeting: > Update by City on Flood Control improvements in downtown Martinez. A Impact on parking of construction of Family Law Center in downtown Martinez. June 11, 1998 RFP released for building consultants to assist in developing financial and operational analysis of future use of 651 Pine Street and Summit Center. July 7, 1998 Meeting of the Ad-Hoc City/County Committee. Topics discussed at meeting: ➢ Update by County on RFP to hire consultants to assist with financial and operational analysis of future use of 651 Pine Street. ➢ Update by City on potential parking solutions to mitigate impact of construction of Family Law Center in downtown Martinez. ➢ Establishment of a periodic newsletter to beep County employees, residents and business owners of Martinez informed of planning and construction activity in downtown Martinez. August 7, 1998 Meeting of the Ad-Hoc City/County Committee. Topics discussed at meeting: > Update by City on potential parking solutions to mitigate _ impact of construction of Family Law Center in downtown Martinez. August 11, 1998 Board resolution approves contract hiring O Brien Kreitzberg and the Ratcliff Architects to conduct space needs study, develop stacking plans for Summit Center and 651 Pine Street, and conduct Building Evaluation for 651 Pine Street. September 14, 1998 Meeting of the Ad-Hoc City/County Committee. Topics discussed at meeting: Update by City on potential parking solutions to mitigate impact of construction of Family Law Center in downtown Martinez. 2 ➢ Update by County on Building Evaluation of 651 Pine Street being conducted by O'Brien Kreitzberg and the Ratcliff Architects. ➢ Selection of Inform Public Relations to prepare quarterly newsletter entitled "The Martinez Connection" and composition of first newsletter. November 24, 1998 Distribution of I'issue of"The Martinez Connection's to county employees, downtown Martinez business owners and residents. November 30, 1998 Meeting of the Ad-Hoc City/County Committee. Topics discussed at meeting: ➢ Update by County on findings of report by O'Brien Kreitzberg and Ratcliff Architects regarding the building deterioration found at 651 Fine Street. Update by City regarding its interim downtown parking solution to accommodate the construction of the Family Law Center. December 1998 City of Martinez and its parking consultants, International Parking Design, Inc. publish a parking management plan to address the interim parking impact of the Family Law Court project and the longer-term parking needs of downtown Martinez. December 1, 1998 Board adopts findings in report from O`Brien Kreitzberg and the Ratcliff Architects, which states that a significant level of repair work is required at 651 Pine Street. Based on this report,the Board takes the following actions: > Directs the County Administrator to close off the bridges between the North Wing and the Main Tower while seismic repairs are made to strengthen the connections between the buildings and the bridges. > Concludes that due to the costs of major remodeling work required to bring 651 Pine Street up to current building standards, it is not a sound business decision to invest further in the building and that it should be replaced and eventually demolished. > Directs the Ad-Hoc City/County Committed to report to the Board by December 31, 1999 on the feasibility of constructing a joint County/City facility and on long-term solutions to flooding and parking problems in downtown Martinez. 3 ➢ Directs the County Administrator to return to the Board with options for replacing 651 Pine Street,a timetable for location and construction of a new office building either in Martinez or elsewhere in the County. ➢ Expresses the Board's intention to exercise the option to purchase the Summit Center for use as a county office building. ➢ Authorizes staff to proceed with plans to build the Family Law Center in downtown Martinez. December 15, 1998 Board resolution approves the issuance of Contra Costa County Public Financing Authority Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 1999A, to achieve debt service savings and to finance: > Purchase of and improvements to the Summit Center ➢ Construction of Family Law Center December 15, 1998 Board resolution authorizes 1'a Amendment to O'Brien Kreitzberg contract related to additional services performed as part of Building Evaluation of 651 Pine Street and to coordinate seismic upgrade of bridges between towers at this location. December 18, 1998 RFP released for architect/engineering services for the new Family Law Center. January 26, 1999 Board resolution of intention to purchase the Summit Center and sets a public hearing for March 9, 1999 to consummate this purchase. January 26, 1999 Board resolution declaring an emergency to allow for a more speedy seismic upgrade of the bridges connecting the two towers at 651 Pine Street. February 22, 1999 Meeting of the Ad-Hoc City/County Committee. Topics discussed at meeting: Preliminary schedule for developing a proposal to build a city/county governmental center in downtown Martinez A Update from Martinez on the implementation of the interim parking plan presented to the County in December 1998. 4 February 23, 1999 Distribution of d issue of"'the Martinez Connection." March 4, 1999 Bonet closing for CCCPFA Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 1999A. March 9, 1999 Public bearing at which time the Board gives find approval to the purchase of the Summit Center. March 16, 1999 Board resolution authorizes staff to enter into negotiations with Rosso/Drulis Architects&Planners,Inc. for the new Family Law Center. March 23, 1999 Board resolution authorizes 2"Amendment to O'Brien Rreitzberg contract for project and construction management services related to building systems and tenant improvements at Summit Center. April 6, 1999 Beard resolution authorizes contract for Building Evaluation and design services with the Ratcliff Architects for Summit Center. April 6, 1999 Board resolution authorizes contract for project and construction services with O Brien Kreitzberg for the Family Law Center project. April 6, 1999 Board resolution authorizes contract with RosstDrulis Architects and Planners, Inc. for site evaluation, programming, and design services for the Family Law Center project. 5 Department Space Needs and Adjacency RequiremenLs Existing Space Allocations for County Departments Now Located in Downtown Martinez General Government Board of Supervisors 5,000 County Administrator 12,817 Clerk of the Board 2,400 County Counsel 7,970 Human Resources 5,807 Risk Management 4,993 Training Institute 6,484 Supervisor, District 2 Office 1,000 LAFCO 670 General Services-support svcs 1,100 Assessor 24,259 Clerk/Recorder/Elections 22,930 Subtotal-Gen Gov't 99,430 Law&Justke Court Administration 1,509 District Att'y - Spec Operations 3,232 Sheriff- Exec Office &Admin 4,534 Sheriff-Tech Svcs 3,128 Sheriff-Crime Lab/CIS 4,083 Sheriff-Custody Svcs 1650 Subtotal- Law& Justice 19,236 Growth Management Building Inspection 10,597 Community Development 12,809 CAI../EPA 600 Subtotal-Growth Mgm't 24,006 Total Square Feet 142,672 Note: Does not include departments housed in courthouses,finance building or 4 4 4 4 Ward Street. In some cases,the square footage indicated for departments in 651 Pine Street is estimated. Summary of Forecast Space Needs for County Departments Now Located in Downtown Martinez (1) ff m Ratcliff Architect Study, November 1998 Net Usuable Square Feet Gross Square Feet (Add 20% to Net) 1999 2003 1999 2003 General Government Board of Supervisors 8,327 9,587 County Administrator 8,541 8,606 Clerk of the Board 3,168 3,344 County Counsel 12,306 16,056 Human Resources 13,932 17,138 Risk Management 5,001 6,278 Training Institute 6,278 6,301 Supervisor, District 2 Office 1,546 1,936 LAFCO 715 738 General Services - support Svcs 3,826 6,848 Miscellaneous Splice 1,300 2,600 Assessor 29,752 30,763 Clerk/Recorder/Elections 28,679 31,617 Subtotal-Gen Gov't 123,371 140,812 148,045 168,974 Law&Justice Court Administration 10,415 13,387 District Att'y- Spec Operations 2,564 4,443 Sheriff- Exec Office 3,152 3,308 Sheriff-Administration 11,467 12,691 Sheriff-Tech Svcs 7,698 8,848 Sheriff-Crime Lab/CIS 38,629 41,784 Sheriff- Custody Svcs 2,9163 3,098 Subtotal - Law&Justice 76,888 87,559 92,266 105,071 Growth Management Building Inspection 16,723 18,468 Community Development 14,589 16,284 CAUEPA 807 943 Subtotal-Growth Mgm't 32,119 35,695 38,543 42,834 Total Square Feet Needed 232,378 264,066 278,854 316,879 (1)Space forecasts based on interviews of affected departments using standardized ecce configurations based on job assignmer Forecast of Parking Space Requirements for County Departments Housed in Downtown Martinez Based on Ratcliff Architects Study, November 1998 1999 2003 General Government at 4 per 1,000 sq ft 592 676 at 5 per 1,000 sq ft 740 845 at 6 per 1,000 sq ft 888 1,014 Law &Justice at 4 per 1,000 sq ft 369 4201 at 5 per 1,0300 sq ft 461 525 at 6 per 1,0030 sq ft 554 6303 Growth Management at 4 per 1,0003 sq ft 154 171 at 5 per 1,00303 sq ft 193 214 at 6 per 1,0100 sq It 231 257 Total at 4 per 1,000 sq ft 1,115 1,268 at 5 per 1,000 sq ft 1,394 1,584 at 6 per 1,0700 sq ft 1,673 1,901 �d m O s Cal I t Martinez Building Sites Under Evaluation by County vNvsns j ,1.s YNYSi s is �i�s !I i out }• Vwx sNMI MCI t� IN AO$ titt Lfxi 1888 1 XWd 1081 1.081 wt �. ` tat M -I It Lilt � 1181 0��D` Uzi Mi V3f�N34 =t-F owl v tcii CCid SV318N3H K � COLL VS .d�[ Oti1 f9i it Oct1 Lfti C) wt& wt q tfil LIL CL3L iIN cmOcti t�LtS � �L3i U&I Y *tit LLLL Oii1 .LS Sn'T13#N iLiLt t TOLL itti "f iPt VOL ms got � � UOi KOL � ni �►� � 1OGi �i 11001 i 0381 tOt 1M LU ml -" i�S}t I0001 CM Ltot �c t00i natewt-tioi cc wr Ow 1011 wow-�LODv 7i � !0018001 1 iddr300 N0Sdjg0H.. not q rs KS {..J.S OINOSY04 fit r towtLto tot-itt to e SIX its i 1t itsan y� Us Yw sm 086 f OCOL yt ® m 0t! �E a iC 1 9 tOW E tLt 4S N33so a _ IS N3380 3MAM ftv car r °Aw ta-i�1 mossmwsoMW uXr= vtr ttt vk LS-= '11Ltri" WORG"_ +i i 0 Ott me an IS clsvm IS asym W U01134M p p u 7lit�itii ICL V UM • w' � tLt � is� {!7 ,� �i c DliOL30�7 181. $U IS NIVA IS N" o � �M-11 tit 1 ' to $ttx�t 1cot 1w sit oto "0 tit Ld an SIs MYSODS3 tw R vo ii 1A VNjeyn V9 n Low-M —A—it; vu .r *ouwis M*WM cc Wfit err 'cl DID om 4Ar ger tL► • Ott dto !Nd iNOW83iVM Is Alum a00C=w i--IIYDS 000 3N�bJaHS d ; .,� �� � �&VOG'D$ 0 94-'x► ..■.� # 5&-T +�+ Project Timelines and Facility Planning Decisions for Board Consideration Near-term Facility Planning Decisions for Board Consideration . Tanning LecisionsBoardDate 1. Board consideration of staff recommendations as to May 25, 1999 which County functions should remain in downtown Martinez 2. Board consideration of staff recommendations as to .May 25, 1999 future location of other County functions now housed in downtown Martinez 3. Board consideration of preliminary recommendations May 25, 1999 of consultants regarding potential sites for Family Law Court and new Martinez Governmental Center 4. Board consideration of staff report on results of .Tune 15, 1999 market survey of ether potential sites in County for construction, acquisition, or lease of space for a County Governmental Center 5. Board consideration of presentation of Long-term June 15, 1999 Parking.Plan for downtown by City of Martinez d. Board consideration of consultant's recommendations June 15, 1999 regarding siting of Family.Law Court in Martinez 7. Board consideration of consultant's recommendations .Tune 15, 1999 regarding; siting of new Governmental Center in Martinez C p Ln I CL i IM LA i m- i c e� cr M ON LL �-- rs c� E ett Rt t� t8 rd � tLi J� � � �s ev to tB tti ro j r� � e4 � zss � stT E ro EC iC Ln im sn C of CS C3 Lm C ! LM It-4 iw ir+3 i EtYi i (tai t! !`. in s C4 2 E ; vim.•, ••' �J _ uLD > 72 m As 4- I" C1 +�+ ` .� i ep aria . 6, � � psi ci72 u � '� � `'ti� i� ''_ � �� to CY y c; i, o G its € # ; I.M tt 1 tt5 !. sC C71 C5 tV U, � r r� r� Update on Summit Center Space Allocations vs c d �i 06 0 C 0z E E m <�' A i i = i a9vrr < to WWWto � mm � � m aia � vi r P woo � c CL m O S � o 0 ' *0 c c d < Q rn Vf 0 � o 6 a� co W co m LaC3 as to 0 0 n e o s �U. �tm+ r' cr�0i P- c td?tV CO til tN N rte- iti co N � O CLz tj 0 to c �= g�yNe� � t+i LL LL [moi '° ✓ (!Zr� ;5 S� c{ Jill �i es 4 L LI y � » ✓f o ,L✓ Ju u� �o � t .�, 1 �.�. s � � � 6 $�$ M �� t � "�° � "4 � �� � � o � � l ° � �, � ®� t • � � 1 , �' � d 4 � � � � � �' ,ti � „ � � � � � � � �` �� �� y t� s � t 4 R o � 1 a � + 4 V y� i ffi ar 4 NO a � .Y H `ti Lai ♦ r r Y w 1 r yI�rt � W y, T�•j Martinez Parking Plans and Reports City Of Martinez 525 Henrietta Street,Martinez, CA 94553-2394 (925)372-3505 ` FAX(925)229-5012 Martinez Update April 7, 1999 Laura Lockwood Director-Capital Facilities and Debt Management CCC-Administration 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Ms. Lockwood: We have some more news we would like to share about the City's efforts to establish a combined City-County government center in Downtown Martinez. The Martinez Leadership Forurn, a group of City officials and interested business and community leaders met recently with Contra Costa County Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema. She noted that the City had responded handsomely to the issues of flooding and drainage, and that the County has authorized an evaluation of sites for a government center. Supervisor Uilkema also had a clear message: TB NK PARKING! The City has developed a parking plan. Phase One includes reconfiguring some streets in Downtown to one way, expanding parking meter zones, increasing meter rates, satellite parking, and a shuttle system. Martinez City Councilmember Rob Schroder recently had successful meetings with U.S. Representatives George Miller and Ellen Tauscher inWashington, D.C., about funding for the shuttles. Phase Two involves the construction of a parking structure in Downtown Martinez. .Phase One is critical for the new Family Law Center, proposed for Downtown, and Phase Two is essential for keeping the County Administration downtown. By next year you will enjoy a smoother ride on Alhambra Avenue. In two projects that are to begin this summer, the street will be repaved from Highway 4 to Marina Vista. The City is also proud to announce that, based on an annual report, tap water in the Martinez water system consistently meets or exceeds state and federal regulations, and it tastes good, too! Finally, we have a new City Treasurer. Carolyn L.Robinson, a 30-year Martinez resident, with an extensive background in the financial field,was unanimously appointed March 27, 1999. Sincerely, Marcia Raines City Manager Enclosures PROUDHosT T0C0N'm CosTA COunTSINCE 1831' MARCIA RA.INES,CITY MANAGER THE CONTRACT FOR THE PAVING OVERLAY PROJECT BETWEEN ARCH STREET AND MARINA VISTA IS TO BE AWARDED IN JULY AND THE WORK IS TO BE COMPLETED BY NOVEMBER. THIS PROJECT WILL BE PAID FOR WITH $600,000 FROM THE FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT, SIMILAR TO THE ISTEA PROGRAM, BUT WITH A NEW NAME, AND $170,000 IN LOCAL MEASURE C TRANSPORTATION FUNDS. ALTERNATE CONTACT: JIM ZUMI/WALT, CITY ENGINEER, (925) 372-3563 Page 3 of 3 M R -iWe 09.55 IPD 510 5,=02 P.0 ' OJU International Parking Desion,Inc. 3/3tSt8 JBUMET CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE CITY OF MARITNEZ LOT-4 PARCI STFt.'UC'1'VRE z � SCOPE OF WORK: A 4-Level prldag stuc=*an a 191'-ti"x 1-0"foo with approxbrAftly 3,9001 a.£ofyvtO space at Sround level and 317 pig xpa=• a AREAS-. Slab on Csradc- 44215&f.. Elmtati slat; - 13Q.M � TOTAL 177,012 s.f. , CC's: Slab,an Ci&de- $ 3740.0001 Elguted SIO P 2, SZ.9$6.0t}0 ' Mar its; Site IzvoVernents $ $3,00140 Two Elevators 130,0000 Sp nircls 270,0010 Elasomeric over Rte 13,0100 Retwi Ares.unbly Stubouts 30,000 P41mg Area Walls 11S,000 Parkatg Control Equipmmt 50,000 Sim dt Csraphics S '721,000 Sub Total 3,707,000 O.H.Coubmctm &Profit 297,000 � C9efwy 371,000 TOTAL C s ucfion Cost $4,375,000 $ Conn i oWs.L-$ 24.72/& ' Const,Cowatall-3 $,4671smu (includes Rood Shell&;*w) 9 *ne above constr=tion coat dors not include commotion ictus such silt:awry, sails nvmr�emvir�tal izW=t report,f coming cost,A" s,tesfu*arsd - invectIon,permit fens,etc. t e -04•-i99r3 09156 1pD Six! 51171 P.M SIUInternational DA J3W$ Parking PROJECT# 97-310 Resign,Inc. ECT. City Meftez Lot 4 BY. RNN PAMING SPACE 8 AREA SUMMARY Sm 8Z.9.01 90'wmle 0&f ark BAS.Size:2413`-0`x 1 g1'a s O# LADE ELEVATED $dUMMM OF 3PAC€B AREA #LAS(8Y.1 SLAB j$.1�� me moi. t OMPACro TOTAL A 3, 13 ! GA 12,165 3 4 i8 25 G8 4„221 120 12 GC 15,030 3 22 1i3 43 2A 16,1365 30 18 48 2S 10,899 4,221 5 22 1€4 45 2C 15,0313 30 Is 48 3A 15.480 30 Is 48 3B 16,120 28 18 45 3C 15,030 30 18 48 4A 15,480 30 is 48 48 15,120 28 #$ 46 4C 15,030 30 18 48 58 4,221 12 0 12 46,215 430,797 4e,215 C3mn Far Arm(SF)0 of 3 177,012 111 3081 517 Paricing Design Mldoncr.* 172,527 1 517 333.71 sq.fttstaii Perwt Compade of`!odd 38.3% Dm not indude 3,9W s.f.of reW on the ground floor and 595 x.f.of reap roof beyond rags fooVML i P"ot4ids 314198 i tM- -1998 e9.,S6 TPS 51e 5-53208 P.04 C17Y OF MARTINEZ � DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE FEASIBILr7Y STUDY LOT — 4 J°+ ` 1s'-o" a 114"-o* 2.8'—C - 8'--O[ V-0" FERRY STRE t 1 � t ' p j -- C � CCCCCCCccCCCCCCC 1111 1"mi 7""i I 1116 UP 4W i3J � i ovclwcicrcicicicicpc ccClAlcC CIC aW�c ffloicAcicl ICN + 4t , r +r LAS JUNTAS SIREEJ f =QL LEVEL PLAN n' b 3 WR-04-L998 =57 TPD 5532130 P.25 1 CITY OF MARTINEZ DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE 6SIBILrTY STUDY 7 LOT - 4 F t 5'- 0 iii+ a28'-0* S N--181-0* - 441-00 28'-0 81-0 50—V FERRY BEET rF � GC-43 .- 1clicicic c clflcl 4�tcol I c I c I c I c c .- -. Ga=12 UP 28 �.. C GiCiC C C G cic G AT ITN GA-25 REAL i CD LAS JUNTAS STREET T o GROUNDLCL .PLAN N I � ,i tc e E PD Ste 55=430 P.06 CITY OF NINE s DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE ASISILITY STuDy I LQ { 18` '28'-0" � 0 ��'—#�" � 144`-�0= 28'—•4'?38`-0" 5,-0. �sy � �•�y �p i syf�L ate. —{+ FSS[f S M i if cccccc'i cccccccccccc ' 411, � a.r�-rr J ? . i cicccccc�C�Wlctc c cc .t- . ` 0t t LAS JUNTAS STREEI` � � � e ROO . e F L --L PLANx"vw w �* c l �r4w,Inc -04-199E 09:Se sle 55m130 P.07 CITY CE MARTINEZ z DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE FEASIBli�DY LCA i s { i 3 i �}7► S t T T FOU (ROOF) M . THUM MC. SECOND LEVEL GWJND LM $ {q f 7 t}t 7 I e } t i f m �f f i rAR--04-1998 9P—:59 IPD _ 510 553 338 P.Oe Internatlonal Parking Design,Inc. 3f3198 BUDGET CONSTRCTC"1'1ON COST ESI' MATE for CITY OF MART TZ � Ltd"-8 _ P`ARKnqt1 STRUCTURE(Option 1) � SCOPE OF WORK: A&Iewl parking s4vcWre on an 1Tep1ar sbapo 1ct with iq rproximmly 419 Wee& AREAS: Slab an CIM& 32,227 sI. Elevated slab 156-111&L TOTAL an 188,608 St. COSTS: Elevated on Qmde i S 258,000 Sl�Slab ,�s �+� +111'L128,000 } 53,386,000 3${ Od i OM; Site linpTovements S 66,000 One Elevator 65,000 Spendrels 378,000 Puking Control Equipment 35,000 � Signs cot amphics S; 374,000 Sub Total 3.%0,000 Contractors O.H.a profit 317,000 ConfinllmcY MOM *TOTAL Cotsttuction Cast 54,673,000 � CORSL Costfs.f.=S 24.781s.L Const,Cowsta?1=S 11,1 S3fsta11 Mic above coon coat does not include coamwict indirects awh a 3 Ada E Fen, site sem,Wls report environmental impact rapm%testing tmd inspectiox plan chftk xad permit fees„blue printing and outer reimbutuble apenses. MR-04-1998 09- IPI) si0 5=130 P.09 International OAT. Am Parking PROACT# 97 Design,lnc. PRo.tem City i of tardmz Lot 8 Opdon-1 sY: PARKING SPACE$AREA SUMMARY I so 9.(r W angle of mm I #8r S rATW xtntes t oIR SPAM $LAS My.) OL"IS.F z me Wm. COMPACT i TWAL GA. 4;W 3 3 OB 11.050 25 25 GC 9,075 9 i6 2A 7.713 4,389 31 31 2B 11,050 25 25 2C 9,075 '$ 18 3A 12,102 31 ; 31 38 11,050 25 25 3C 9.075 18 18 1 4A, 12,102 31 1 31 4B 11,056 26 25 4C 9,075 i3 is BA 12,102 31 31 5S 11,050 25 25 5C 9,075 18 i8 6A 12,102 31 31 6B 11.050 25 25 6C 9,075 18 16 1 7A 2,959 32,227 158,381 t 32,227 ; Oman Fkwr Ars* of SpOOM 18€t Oe 91 4101 419 } Pa*Jng 06319m emciencya 188,608 ! 419 450.14 sq.rdstalt PSAIct t ol-4a 3MM i l��i59 ��SS IP3 Sla S'SM130 P.ie CITY OF MARTINEZ f DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE CEASIBUTY STUDY LOT -18 MUSEUM SfTE i i WSZA 49IR e In i N � ti 11 1 gn 3 i w t 20f-4 13/16' W 5TRE.1'i? D ��" L V rm OPT i CITY OF MARTINEZ DOWNTOWN PARKING SEAq BII.ITY STUBY LOT , MUSEUM SrTE sffjFj Y�Yr i} i 6 ii j���j�Jj i �V MTA 40 CN � ' 201'-4 13/15" ESWW STREEI j TYPICAL LBO. ELAN fl,,NOP C I b MSR-84-1 iia= IPD - 2£ 5=130 P.12 CrTY OF MARMNEZ 1 DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE IBILRY STUDY LOT -18 MUSEUM StTE s P i (t i i t K57A I Woo -- . L"V f �6 t i 2Dl'-4 13/le 3 7- stir f i RiQF 1. f LI � Q ` O 1 x _ i7Ri Y i MPR--04-199e 10:00 IPD 510 V3=130 P.0 CITY OF MARTINEZ ; DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE_FEASIB Y STUDY LCT --, 8 MUSEUM SITE ! t i i t d t 172`-8 t i 8 O 181-V - 14-e-o* V-4` ' k d r r�. (ROOF) i FbURTH i NW { SECTION OFMON-1 S (3 e$ 5 } s i 1 i �,IllC t fl*-04-OM MeZ SPD 510 5532132 P.14 oluInternational � Parkin#1 � Design,inc. 3131+38 i BEET C'ONMUCi TON OST WrI A'?E � for C=OF MARTNEZ Lt3T-8 { PARXMgG STRUC'T'URE(Option 2) SCOPE OF WORK: A 6.k-vel pang structurt on a 132W x 18514"footprasth fly 332 spw4L ! AREAS: Slab ext Grade- r 23,904 Lf.. Ekwated slab 11&211 st T9CITAL= 140,183 s.f � a COM: Slab on Braude- S 191,000 Elevated Slab 'E*2,517,000 Qjer Costs- Site Improvements S 87,000 1 one Elevator 65,000 � Spatudrels 319,000 Parking conA Equipment 35,000 Signs&Gtapbios I S 535,000 Sub TOW 3,052,000 Catc *TOTAL fiction Cost 53,601,000 3 Cant cosys f S 25.69fa.f. Comt Cbwstall-S 91186/$" f a above construction cost does not include deet indisccts aitch A dE E Ft es, silm swvey,soils impart,envir=mentsl impact report,tem and inspee ,p1ts check and per=t fees,blue pmting and other rem2bwjable expensm VAR-"-Ow 10:01 1pD 520 5=130 P.t5 ■# OAT nm I I mit tional P P�tt�t�"T ■ Design Inc. MWJEM- City 10 M1ednez Lot 8 Opdon-2 W. RNN PARKING SPACE S AREA SUMMARY fef 1 S#9.7 or mieam-GRA�yt� p�{�� Bldg,Stye. 132'-0* X i W4rIR CO SPAyy AREA l ,AD(M SLAB MF3 NC Sm OMPACTt TO#J L 12,197 1 31 t 32 038 4,378 10 10 2A 12,197 34 I 34 7,331 4,378 34 34 3A 12,197 34 ; 34 36 11,707 34 34 12,197 34 34 le 11,707 34 � SA 12,197 34 34 as 11,707 34 � 34 $A 12,1$7 34 34 da 11.707 34 (� 34 98 4 O02 10 I 10 23,904 118,281 , OMM FkWs AM($F)0 of Spame: 140,i SS 11 381 3 2 Parking Dmign Effkftrny. 140.185 ! 392 357.81 e<}.!llstell 1 t PSQoftpa ft 314198 4 t lPD 510 57 130 P.16 CITY OF MARTINEZ DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE 'FEASIBILITY STUDY LOT -0 8 MUSEUM S e I z 1 A 315 I s r ' 1410_UP fi2 5.4 •F� cv 10 CB-10 29-34 i t ' 201'-4 13/16* ! d a I �NU L EL LA OPTIONS-2 f 6 F i S t MCP-04-i%S 10.01 IPP r� 510i 55=130 P.17 . � CITY OF MARTINEZ lWNTO N PARKING STRUCTURE EASIBUTY STUDY LOT 8 MUSEUM Sa I s r s i P All �. lid, r .. .... b 201'-4 13/1 ' i ESCODR STREET _ owl am Va } MPA—e4-1998 10=02 IPD S10 553^c13la P.18 CrTY OF MARTINEZ DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE MASIB1L1TY STUDY LCT 8 MUSEUM SrrE i 4 i s 9 UPWilla r! 1 ... . 68=34 78.10 i r 201'-4 131le YY1VOBAR STREEr f _ r agOE { �L.�LN T Opp E f r --i9% 10:02 F IPD 510 9 130 P.19 CfTY OF MAR11NEZ F DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURE IBIkLY STUDY LOT, - S MUSEUM SITE f i t i t { ++gg /} t(} s { r7 T i 'r T TT ----------n s t f4 t 9 rtilRD LEM 5�20 LEVEL r OWN y i i f a s i x s P OPTION-2 sn�tic x F MTAL P.19 DOWNTOWN AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FACIL-I LARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN FCS R TIS E CITY OF MARTINEZ MARTINEZ, CA NovE:mBER 1995 + International Parking Design, Inc, �lrr►ltttaatrr�•�w�i��arl��•f3rwa�ltlw� SUMMARY: In order to maintain adequate parking supply during construction of the County Courts Facility and to develop long term parking solution for the downtown, the City of Martinez retained International Parking Design (IPI)) as well as Mark {quintana to develop a strategy. The primary focus for the attached report is to identify A. Possible short terra solutions to increase the parking supply in the downtown to meet present and anticipated demand I. Develop options to provide long-term parking solutions and . funding sources for the development costs. The near-term parking solutions include reconfiguring parking spaces and streets in the downtown, development of new lets in downtown as well as utilizing remote lots for employee parking with a shuttle system. A long-term goal is to increase the parking supply in the downtown by constructing a parking structure. In order to provide adequate funds to help pay for the construction of this parking facility and other interim improvements, parking meter rate increases and expanded parking meter area is necessary. The other funding sources include TBA 21, TFCA in conjunction with Bay Area Air Quality :Management District (BAAQMD) and BART for a remote intermodal transit oriented facility. NEAR-T"ERNI PARKINIG SOLUTIONS In order to meet the parking demand and loss of parking due to development of the new County Courts Building, the fallowing options are available. Increase on street parking capacity by converting some streets into "one-way" and diagonally striped parking stalls. Improve existing City owned vacant lots to add parking capacity. Qn Street PArkina In order to increase the number of on-street parking spaces in the Downtown Area, some of the streets could be converted to one-way allowing for diagonal parking on one side. This erne-way configuration would result in an increase of six (6) additional spaces per block. The streets that would be converted to one-way are listed below 1. Escobar one-way east between Court and Pine (6 spaces) 2. Pine one-way north between Main and Marina Vista (12 spaces) . Main erne-way west (downhill) between Grandview and Court (18 spaces) 4. Ward one-way east (uphill) between Court and Grandview (18 spaces) 5. Willow one-way south between Ward and Mellus (18 spaces) 6. Castro one way south between Marina. Vista and 'ward (18 spaces) Converting the above struts to one-way would result in approximately 90 additional spaces. The cost to re-stripe these streets is estimated to cost in the range of$15,000 to $?0,000. _Qf'f Street Parking (Qtv awned Rro,MM) Parking spaces ,generated from the conversion of City owned properties that are not currently available for downtown parking use are estimated to total 280. In order for these panting spaces to be viable, they should be supplemented with a shuttle service and if possible a pedestrian bridge crossing at Pine and the UPRR. These City owned properties are presented below. I. Intermodal Facility (100 spaces) 2. Area north of the UPRR tracks (180 spaces) It is estimated that it will cast in the range of$15,000 to $20,000 to prepare the existing City owned properties for downtown parking use. _}ffsStreet Parki ¢ (Next to Horse Arena Approximately 200 parking spaces are estimated to be provided at the area north of the UPRR tracks and next to the Morse Arena. Significant surface improvements are needed to snake this a viable parking area. At the very least, the area would have to be graveled and marked. Ballpark estimates for these surface improvements are in the range of$50,000 to $100,000. The cost of a pedestrian bridge crossing at fine and the UPRR, tracks may be estimated after further coordination with UPRR. Cuff-Street Parking Eacant Lots) Approximately 120 spaces could be generated from the use of vacant lots in the western end of the Downtown Area. Further research and discussions with the property owners of these lots are necessary to develop estimated costs for their conversion to parking lots. Off-Street Parking (Building Removal) It is estimated that 110 spaces could result from the removal of certain buildings within the Downtown Area. These buildings include the two buildings can Castro both north and south of Ward. The building on the north side of Escobar just east of Pine as well as the buildings located at the southwest corner of Court and Mellus could also be considered candidates for removal and conversion. The cost of building removal and parking lot conversion is unknown at this time. mtm Sby ie krad The City has initiated preliminary discussions with CCCTA regarding a shuttle service in downtown Martinez between the intermodal, near term parking areas and County facilities and an express bus service from N. Concord/Martinez DART to downtown Martinez. The estimated cost of the shuttle service is in the range of$95,000 to $125,000 per year, based on two vehicles with 15 minute headways during the peak hour period. The estimated cost of the express bus service is in the range of$200,00 to $230,000 per year, based on three vehicles with 30 minute headways during the peak hour period. Resuitine Additional Parking S"c Opportunities to enhance the number of parking spaces in the Downtown Area by converting some streets to one-way and using City-awned and vacant lots should result in an additional 800 spaces. These opportunities are summarized below: • tin-Street Parking 90 spaces tiff Street Parking (City-owned Property) 280 spaces • Cuff Street Parking (Next to Horse Arena) 200 spaces • Off-Street Parking (Vacant Lots) 120 spaces • tiff StreetParking lBuilding Removal) 110 spaces TOTAL 800 spaces D MY OF MARTZ REVIEW OF DOWNTOWN PAREINEi CONTROLS SUGGESTED MPROVEMOMM The present On-- Stmt and Off--Street Downtown parking is primarily controlled by pariting meters. The time limit varies from i hour to 10 hours and the setter rags vary from S 0.05/hr to$0.25/hr. In order to provide convenient short-term parking in downtown and increase parking revenue the following improvements are recommended. 1. Change all parking meter time limas to 2 hours. 2. Standardize meter rates for all meters to $ 0.5011r 3. Expand parking meter area to include Ferry Street to Willow Stmt, between Green and Henrietta Streets. 4. Install coin boxes in cur-controlled City parking lot Ness. 1, 2, S, &6. The detailed description of the interim parking control improvements and associated costs is as shown below. CITY OF MARTINEZ DOWNTOWN PARI NG CONTROLS INTERIM II�IPROVEMEN"TS I. On- Street Parking Prese 1 Hour.inter ISO 150 2 hour ureters' 2 Baur meters 344 Sarre 10 Hour meters 2 hoer meters Subtotal 719 372 Replace existing with 2 hour meters 4 B II. Cuff-Street Parldng Cky Lots #1 62 spaces (no meters) 62 space coin box #2 28 spaces (no meters) 28 space coin box #r3 26 spaces (10 hr. meters) 26 2 hour meters #4 64 spaces (2 hr meters She #5 38 spaces (no meters) 38 space coin box #6 31 spaces (16-10 hr meters 31 space coin box 15-permit parking) #7 95 spaces (10 hr meter) 95 2 hour meters M. Expand On - Street Metered Parking Approximately 100-2 hour meters with posts. I. On-Street Parking: 372 new 2 hour meters can existing post 372 x$180 $66,960 II. Off-Street Parking A. Lot#3 & 7, replace existing meters with new 2 hour meters 26+95 $21,780 = 121 meters x$180/meter Install new collection boxes in existing lots and installstall numbers, signs, etc. Lot leo. 1, 2, 5 & 6 with(62+28-X38+31) = 159 spate Marking stall numbers 159 x$5/each $ 795 _ 4 new collection boxes w/pasts m 4 x$2,500 10,000 2 signs each x 4 lots 0 $300 Subtotal $34,975 III. ,Expand On - Street Metered Parking 100 meters with post(D 558 ?/each $58,000 TOTAL R"ROVENWT COSTS Item I $66,960 Item II(24,200+13,195+9,91.5) 34,975 Item III Subtotal $159,935 Contingency (10%) 15,994 TOTAL $175,929 gra Ji, REGIONAL �. ° SHORELINE Lim � /sCA'LE: 30C talc MARTUNEZ WATERFRONT PA SUCKLEY ST favatok t, rr e03 410 rn >5 as Joe40 �3t1�gCGt(; L 434 � 1� � tts TtAlldtl swsa stf � so0 � � SiE arc ! ESCOSAR ST ESCOBAR ST sit E34 Vs ,rz 045 � $01 ` iQ4Cal, Eft maANNect c0twry + er fid! GO E37►d$7 E1E VAOM0. :t +• dN,tS stSz 3111111i,, iy MAIN ST :• w a # C w a�M A .� Gl � ��'1 PS��A �• Q a �M16 �® � fy «.4 .�+°.�.�` ':+.''I`�1 Sow= 739 "' 7aa r„x�aw ria c s Nam WARD ST z JIM on ! ata tic sa lcra xWMCIP L 0 NA 40totty COUNTS L . an—am .� , azs ASS&SURr u $u �`. 4 arxr artfsx GREEN ST ` nit s1 GREEN 57 r 9z 913mu m Ica i�1e saga x� taxa } #r2 Lm NA f3o air912 921 1 +► it z61 :: ` tags t` 42b MASONIC ST � •• 1021 ws � , sees 04ou=tori V1 1a33 TNCI.#PSON c 1r sxs ?lot 000 fats-1stat4 10as Calx 1013 taxa 1a2D t0a3 j t mi laz 3027 tarJt tri 900 l zs9i! ! fi�'2 a talo w t= f0rwi ai ta3lJ ttz24 ! 3t' ME1 tS ST g t Iasi f T - t y tfaal ff0$ zf04 5C �z s i J MELLUS f#i< �� 1274 aria �» ltts ( _ I tas 1 CITY 1 ' 11x. " to +�► 1112 m MALI., �' sIR � 112.3 ;C 1114 }tzs zzfE' 3 ri 6 fid70 1135 it= 112;1. ft2a Jl ► HENRIETIA ST 12NG1133 #Gi+lAC30 1206 11= itS"l 12G2 L...x "` RECONFIGURE: ' •_ 1215 S NEJV2FE'"}t A ST' fro tom' " f212 ONE—WAY A tx14 STREETS tt34 RAR z 124 1217 sit 113 SOY dt sal tri# 7tk7 lzty i NEW FAMILY SLSANA 51" StfaANA Sixxs ixm LAW CENSER .. $ a� 13W 13W E Si1S,ANA ' -TOO Y rr� Y y s � M Y /✓�+� s Vi SON M R $+ s r1 i yr 7T q p V * � M b11� t e AD lit lit lit 4S ro rA a e � � i s 00 w a a• � VO '' Q fill Baa asagilt � yy • a • • s s o • • ]f i � � # t t AS 316A r w AS _ As AS Is OULVO 3 fit J MEMORANDUM CTY COUNCIL AGENDA December 2,- 1998 DATE: November 25, 1998 To: MAYOR A.N"D CITY COUNCIL FROM: MARCIA RA:IN'ES, C'IT'Y M ANAAGERt� j�'�� SUBJEC D MULTI-USE GOVEI LNNMNT CEN ITR COMPLEX ACTION: Adapt resolution requesting a Joint Facility Master Plan between Contra Costa County and the City of Martinez for the development of a City/County Multi-Use Goverrunent Center in Downtown Martinez. BACKGROUND- The County is currently examining facilities in the downtown area to determine suitability for various departments' needs over the next decade. As a part of this, the City has been working with the County to determine levels of support services needed. Currently, the City is in the process of constructing an $8.4 million flood control and creek enhancement improvement project throughout the downtown area. Efforts are also being devoted to improve parking availability and to provide improved public transportadon to the downtown area. Several years ago the City and County discussed the concept of a joint City/Cownty Civic Center in the downtown area. It seems that current activities warrant re- exan- nation of that concept. Staff recommends the City adopt a resolution requesting the Board of Supervisors been a master plan process to determine feasibility of a Multi- Use Government Center (see Exhibit A). If we begin working together immediately, such a center will still be years in the future. But unless the two agencies begin working together at this point and time, decisions revolving around existing County facilities may take another turn over Lhe next several months. helm Attachments RESOLUTION NO. Requesting a joint Facility Master Plan Between Contra Costa. County and City of Martinez for the Development of a. City/County Multi-Use Government Center in Downtown Martinez WHEREAS, Contra. Costa County is currently evaluating a dsting facilities in the downtown arca; and WHEREAS, the City and County are working together to ensure the future of downtown Martinez as the County seat; and WHEREAS, the County evaluation of facilities has determined extensive repairs are necessary to their sting facilities; and WHEREAS, one component of planning for Counter facilities needs should be development of the long discussed Multi.-Usc Government Center. WHEREAS, a facility master plan: for the City of Martin= and the County should be part of the examination of options regarding existing facilities; and WHEREAS, the need=<ists to make a request to the Board of Supervisors that the two agencies begin worl.ing together immediately to develop such a plan; and 1rTtJ'4d1T, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Nlartirez requests the County Board of Supervisors work.with the City to develop the concept of a Multi-Lise Goverrxnent Center for downtown Martinez as a part of the current evaluation of existing facilities. I HEREBY CER=that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Martinez at an Adjourned Regular fleeting of said Council held on the 2nd day of December, 1995, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT 7: Richard G. Hernandez City Clerk. By; Mercv G. Cabral Deputy City Clerk.Pro `fern City of Martinez MultiUse.Res i %y �r,. RLG++t3riEAC. � :Q SHOREPARKNE 3So /sCALZ t% 5 ?riA R-I'll N Er WATERFRONT SUCXLEy ST ACUTY +caP 410 3 JCs 32 43.E Ct 414AUMAX S . _ 413 ++mow cwt. l�fA{FI 5 PA FAS f A R td"S 3111 m 'C7'ire(,t=Y C) •� ..+irn escow ST aooi rn. I ao1 Cswu 1 { art 1104 af3 ars COW" -C Cain f sir ark ait+rnir4 � �a�ncn w $w u r 4. .s. ...,., ala ut ai7$13-dY7 aiai St7a..*c �ttu:04 gy� OU4 aat MAIN � N1 a2� � i sw i '.�; s $ o ab /1 117;! = + - 721 czu" ti+ ;og 733 P~ 7to alftr sum. relSum= 7Zs 721st 7311 Tao LMIN s11'' � a Ct3+Rt1+a'tt WARM' ST Qq W RD ST 1104. 4} « { dt3 #`�C sSJP it14R "Imu- rm. ` (i 83ffi dbt #1113 lisj CGttttt9' CsYli C 5C:i4TS 6 . « vRr { sa3 w g GREEN ST -dp s Jl13 � 1Y ± r tM 14.4 j ass 906 lot #r!r 1100 I # 11yo y Su 1124 11�S d sJw 1117 112 low { 1421 lug !1 MASONIC ST 1- 1127 a 1123 � S M u • li': ii" rJ'Y w t=1004 :r4o2»106 0t SON ST :au. iroli—tm1014 ioms 1412 lots 1000 1141 rc2o 94 tot 9 ta27 ICU tows ix sw 1004 01 hlLLJS ST b toSii Ina I ` 110+« } 11111 tt24q s[2 LS 1124 t{A W5 rt33 14,2 CITY �. � �s1123 % rtr w ' !1111 G3} HALL irta 1f34 17cJo a #l:S 112 11:3 "2 Q, •� Lt1 1203 > HENRI—I �+ � 1133 1i3c4 1137 I= IGNACIG r:cs �J.C2 t°t,.a'�t"3,�t°`i'i'A S` 1} ! i#1 s 12 ' �d511 121 7#+ t2fs t 72111 1.14 1111 14 1731 wwo { i t3PAeK 1 23scre a :mss } SUSANA ST Cu.i Of SUSANA ST ...s S SANA w.rt.r r.AWA 'AN CITY QE MARTINEZ MULTI—USE GOVERNMENT CENTER COMPLEX EXHIBIT "A Board Orders Related to Hiring of Consultants _ .... p.. t✓� l.+1 .111t1 FRO#* PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _ COSTA DATE: APRIL 6, 1999 COUNTY SUBJECT: APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE A CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR BUILDING EVALUATION AND DESIGN SERVICES AT SUMMIT CENTRE, 2530 ARNOLD DRIVE, MARTINEZ(WH4148) SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)3 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION REC(MIKt ix�" Ty TION 1. APPROVE the issuance of a Consulting Services Agreement to The Ratcliff Architects for building evaluation and design services, and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator or his designee to execute the contract. 2. AUTHORIZE the County Administrator or his designee to issue written authorizations for extra work, including the contract option for programming services, provided that the cumulative total cost for all such extra worm shall not exceed $25,000. FEYA,NCIALDRACT: The contract value is $100,000, which includes a $9,000 reimbursable expense allowance. Bond funds were budgeted for this expense and are available. BACKGROLM AM REA 4N FO RECC3N MENI'DATIONI (S): On December 1, 1998, the Board of Supervisors reviewed and acknowledged a report prepared by The Ratcliff Architects on the viability of the Summit Centre for long term occupancy by County administrative departments. This contract provides for necessary repairs and alterations to the Summit Centre to ensure that the facility meets the County's minimum operational requirements. The Ratcliff Architects is familiar with the building and is the most qualified firm to provide the proposed services. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: Y YES SIGNATURE: 7�) RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVE OTHER -RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE SIGNATURE(S): ,t ZA ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER_ APPROVED a ove recommendations;REFERRED to the Internal Operations Committee. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A AYES*MI T(ABSENT 3 TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: I I Z T I I NOES: Y V Y ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ABSENT: none ABSTAIN: none ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED APRIL E+ 1999 PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOA SUP RVJSORS BYDEPUTY 671— cc: See Page 2 BACKCItOL ASM REASON MR R CONDEYI>A3 ON(S)-(Continued): This initial phase of design work includes an upgrade to the building's mechanical, fire alarm and energy management systems. These systems have remained 'largely unimproved since initial construction was completed in 1988. Improvements to these systems will increase energy efficiency, correct operational deficiencies, and insure compliance with Y2K requirements. In addition to these building system improvements, the addition sof a new freight elevator will be evaluated; the front entrance will be modified to provide handicap access from the parking lot; a penthouse will be provided for the storage of air conditioning maintenance supplies and future microwave installation; and a consolidated computer room will be constructed on the V floor. Contact: Laura Lockwood, CAO cc: CAO Finance Auditor/Controller G80 (Accounting) O'Brien Kreitzberg (via CAO) Consultant(via CAO) CONTRA FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _.-;� ' CCS$A DATE: APRIL 6, 1999 COUNTY SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE A DESIGN CONTRACT WITH MICHAEL ROSS/ CHARLES DRULIS FOR THE FAMILY LAW CENTER AND COUNTY FACILITIES MASTER PLAN (4033 4408 0928 WH4088) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)S BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECO.MMENDATION(S): 1. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator,or his designee, to execute a design contract with Michael Ross/Charles Drulis Architects & Planners Inc., for the new Family Law Center and associated county facilities master plan. 2. AUTHORIZE the County Administrator or his designee to issue 'written authorizations for extra work, provided that the cumulative total extra cost for all such authorizations shall not exceed $25,000. FINANCIAL IMPACT, The design contract for the new Family Law Center and county facilities master pian will be executed at a price not to exceed $588,000. This is a budgeted expense. 8ACKgRO!jN13~ On March 16, 1539 the Board of Supervisors approved recommendations of the Architect Selection Committee for the new Family Law Center and related civic center master plan issues in Martinez. The Board of Supervisors also authorized negotiations with the three highest qualified firms in order of preference. The top three firms in preferred order were Michael Ross/Charles Drulis Architects & Planners, Inc., Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz, and The Design Partnership. The top ranked firm, Michael Ross/Charles Drulis Architects & Planners, Inc., has submitted a price proposal, which is within the county's budget allocation for this work. The executed contract will include the county facilities Master Flan for $60,000, the new Family Law Center's Pre-Design Phase for $35,000, design & Bidding Phase for $374,400, Construction Administration Phase for $93,6€30 and reimbursable _ expense budget of$25,000. This contract is within the budget identified in the Architectural Program for a new Family Law Center by James Miller & Associates, Architecture & Planning, dated ,June 18,1998. The Architect will begin work immediately upon authorization to execute this contract. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: „-YES SIGNATURE: Al't�x— enr, r RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE :,!APPROVE OTHER SMNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON L+ , APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER X APPROVED above recommendations;REFERRED to the Internal Operations Committee. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A UNANIMOUS(ABSENT I TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN NOES: TI,V ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ASSENT: none ABSTAIN:_ nCne_ _- ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTE# APiRTL 6, :999 PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE FJCdA D O UPC YI ORS BY PE1TY Contact: Contact: Phil Batchelor, CAO cc CAC? Finance Auditor/Controller GSC?(Accounting) O'Brien Kreltzberg(via CAC) Consultant(via CAO) Ken Torre, Superior Court v. C3lentliJ vt JkJt �tivlvofC.J :.'+ : CUATRA FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR � COSTA TY DATE: April 6, 1999 SUS.lECT: APPROVE AND AUTHORIZE AMENDMENT WITH O'BRIEN KREITZBERG FOR NEW FAMILY LAW CENTER SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator or his designee to execute the FIRST amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with O'Brien Kreitzberg to increase the payment limit by $436,847 to a new total of $461,720 for project Management services for the Design and Construction Phase of the new Family Law Center. 2. AUTHORIZE the County Administrator or his designee to issue written authorizations for extra work, provided that the cumulative total extra cost for all such authorizations shall not exceed $25,000. FINANCIAL IMPACT: This Amendment increases the payment limit for Project Management and Administrative Services to $461,723. Funds for this increase are budgeted. BACKGROUND: On January 21,1999 O'Brien Kreitzberg Inc., entered into an agreement with Contra Costa County to provide Project Management and Administrative Services for the Pre-design Phase of the new Family Law Center for the Superior Court of Contra Costa County, This initial phase included services to select an architect, negotiate the architect's fee agreement for comprehensive programming and architectural design services, and prepare contracts for County approval. The pre- design phase is now complete and authorization to proceed with the Design, Bidding and Construction Phase is required to ensure continued professional management and oversight of this project through December 1999. The Design Phase will include management of the Architect's contract from programming and site analysis through bidding and award of construction at a fee of $100,000. The Construction Administration Phase which includes management of the construction contract through completion will be done for a fee of$336,840. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _YES SIGNATURE: ?LVCOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S):&&(4221 ZZ& ACTION OF BOARD ON AI?RIS 6. 9 9 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED_y_ OTHER_Xi APPROVED above recommendations; REFERRED to the Internal Operations Committee. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A UNANIMOUS(ASSENT I TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: t i I I I I I NOES.--17-V ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ABSE=NT: none ABSTAIN: none ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED APR11L 6, 1999 HIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD SUPERVISORSBY —,DEPUTY Contact: cc: See Page 2 Contact: Phil Batchelor, CAC? cc: CAO Finance Auditor/Controller GSC (Accounting) O'Brien Krei#zberg (via CAO) Consultant(via CAC)} V OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Lo CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 6 0'-'� , Administration wilding 651 Pine Street, 11 th Floor Martinez, CA 94563 141—A DATE: March 26, 1999 TO, George Roemer, S ni Deputy County Administrator �, .,Q,�„r,., .�,� FROM. Claude L. Van Ma sistant County Administrator SUBJECT: NEGOTIATIONS H ARCHITECTURAL FIRMS FOR THE NEVA FAMILY LAW CENTER Board Agenda date: March 16, 1999 Agenda Item #: C.105 As you may be aware, on March 16, 1999, the Board of Supervisors added to the recommendation on the attached Board Carder. Staff was asked to provide the Board members with copies of the Request for Qualifications and criteria for selection of a firm, to provide the same information to the Ad Hoc Committee (with the City of Martinez) and directed the County Administrator to report the matter back to the Board in 60 days. Laura Lockwood has provided the Request for Qualifications which has been f o Committee.forwarded to the Board members and members o the Ad Hoc � Ste. days from March 16 1999 we ld_ be a r »% 18tlyM 1999. You should #o re o rt on what has meuFF���L CLVM:cgb Attachment cc: Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier Laura Lockwood, Manager, Capital Facilities and debt Management CCCOUNTYFROM: PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 111,lS 1 A DATE: March 16, 1999 to SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE THREE HIGHEST QUALIFIED ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN FIRMS FOR THE NEW FAMILY LAW CENTER SPECIFIC REQUEST($)OR RECOMMENDATIONS)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION HCQ�MnATTQNfSI• APPROVE recommendations of the Architect Selection Committee for the new Family Lave Center and related civic center master plan issues and AUTHORIZE negotiations with the three highest qualified firms in order of preference. The top three firms in preferred order are Michael Ross/Charles Drulis Architects & Planners, Inc.,Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz,and The Design Partnership. RARGRCii A;!'D�l ;y FOR RECONDEbDATIQNS: The Board of Supervisors directed the County Administrator to proceed with the evaluation of potential sites for the new County Administration Building and related parking facilities and an Architect for a new Family Law Court on December 1, 1998. O'Brien Kreitzberg (OK), as agent for the county, developed an R.FQ for Architect/Engineer services dated December 18, 1998. In order to encourage participation from qualified Architects throughout the San Francisco Bay Area,OK placed advertisements in the Contra Costa Times,which appeared on December 29, and 31, 1998. Notices advertising the availability of an RFQ were also sent to the San Francisco, Oakland, and Sacramento chapters of the American Institute of Architects. The deadline for responses to the RFQ was January 29, 1999. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: R YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMIMENDATION OF B ARD CO E APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER X_ IT IS BY THE MRD the above t5otas are APMM; and the Cm=ty A&ImIa,.trator is VOTE the Board with copies of the PagUest for -tel; icati= aad subjgct crit,. Brad provide the same to the tad Hoe Cosmittee as part of the Muter Flan; Bad )SIRE= the Colmty Administrator report on tbS matter I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS!s A UNANIMOUS(ASSENT �- — I to the Board in 60 days.TRUB AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: i ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED M r ,+ 16. 19N PHIL BATCH OR,CLERK OF THE BOARD F VJPERVISORS SYD11 h DEPUTY a.kCKGRQU-ND AM RE ASQri-FQR N nti ue Ten firms responded to the RFQ. These ten firms were evaluated against the criteria stated in the RFQ by the Architect Selection Committee. Committee members included George Roemer, Senior Deputy County Administrator, Ken Torre, Executive Officer for the Contra Costa. County Superior Court, Laura Lockwood, Director of Capital Facilities and Debt Management, Marsha Raines, City Manager for Martinez, and Mark Tortorich of O'Brien Kreitzberg. The Committee recommended five firms for an interview. Interviews were conducted on February 16 and 25, 1999 in the firms offices. Each firm was allowed 45 minutes to present their qualifications, previous experience, and key personnel. The Committee was allowed to ask questions at the end of the presentation and tour each firm's office. The Committee was unanimous in their ranging of the top three firms. The top ranked firm, R.oss/Drulis, has extensive experience in courthouse design,master planning,and public facility design. They presented a clear vision of a humane and dignified Family Court that would be a handsome addition to downtown Martinez. The firm is a small business,but has sufficient staff to provide the complete range of services described by the RFQ. Subject to Board of Supervisors approval, negotiations will begin immediately with this firm for a faxed price contract for architecture and engineering services. If negotiations are not successful with the top ranked firm, then authority is requested to negotiate with the second and third ranked farms. Contact: Phil Batchelor, CAO cc: CAO Finance Auditor/Controller GSI (Accounting) O'Brien Kreitzberg (via CAO) Consultant(via CAO) }. O'BRIEN KREITZBERC 651 Pine Street,6th Floor Martinez,California 94553 925 335 1040 Tel December 2, 1998 9?5 335 1070 Fax Ms. Laura Lockwood Director, Capital Facilities and Debt Management Centra Costa County 651 Pine Street, 6h Floor Martinez, CA94553 SUBJECT: RENOVATIONS TO COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDINGS, 651 PLNE STREET AND SUMMIT CENTRE Additional Services Dear Ms. Lockwood: Attached is our proposal for the expanded services as identified in our?november 4 meeting with Phil Batchelor and for the seismic evaluation of the Summit Centre. We have identified a total of$76,000 for all extra services resulting from our BER.and Space Planning effort. The proposal includes the following. • Additional presentation and strategy meetings with Phil Batchelor and before the Board of Supervisors • .Additional Programming for Sheriff's Department and Courts'Administration • New County Administration Building/Government Center study for the Board Presentation • Developing strategies and related studies for the replacement County Administration Building • Preparation of schedules, estimates and work plans for life safety mitigation at 651 Pine Street In addition,we have identified $32,325 in fees for the following services: • Design and Project Management for the stabilization of bridges and lobby at 651 Pine Street Offices Worldwide Our scope of services continues to evolve as we conduct additional studies and respond to changing strategies. All of this work is based on actual effort. If the effortis less, OK and its sub-consultants will not bill for that portion of the authorization. If you have any questions, please contact me. Very'Truly Yours, O'BRIEN KREMBERG ,0,C�X"' Gerry MacClelland, AIA Principal Encl. cc: John Moll, OK 8.'�,PK=CI%CMMSt PNE=AMPWj_11= tOSden Kreltzberg 651 Pine Strut 12I4I98 Amendment 1 Estimated Level of Effort ADDITIONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES,STUDIES AND EVALUATIONS ACTION ITEMIEND MATE MacClell Eggen Kor'zec Saiido Graphics Total Summit Centre Seismic Eval. 1 8 0 0 0 9 1-Dec Board Presentation 10 24 8 8 30 80 1-Dec Design Ph. Bridges/Lobby 14 40 20 4 0 78 31-Dec CM Mitigation 851 Pine St. 8 48 36 11 0 103 31-Jan Stacking&Space Program Aft. 12 30 0 0 0 42 31-Dec Gov. Center.Strategies&Studies 15 50 32 8 0 105 31-Jan Subtotal Manhours 60 200 W 31 30 417 Billing Rates $135.00 $115.00 $105.00 $50.00 $50.00 OK Labor Cost $8,100 $23,000 $10,080 $1,550 $1,500 $ 44,230 OK Reimbursable Expenses $ 770 SIT $ 45,000 Subconsultant Costs TRA-BER & Gov. Center $ 15,300 TRA-Space Planning extras $ 6,000 Summit Center Seismic Eval.(TRA- $400, FIE-$7,800) $ 8,200 OK Subconsultant Marie-Up 5% $ 1,500 Total 1 $ 76,000 DESIGN AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT FOR STABILIZATION OF BRIDGES Project Management $ 15,000 Design:Acrhitectural $ 5,000 Design: Str=uctural $ 11,500 OK Subconsuttant Mark-Up 5% $ 825 Total $ 32,325 Amt feud Tho Yctc= A=b4tects CONTRACT MODIFICATION FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES CLIENT: Dan Eggen O'Brien Kreitzberg CCC Administrative Building 651 Fine Street,61`floor Martinez,CA 94553 CONTRACT MODIFICATION No- 01 DATE. November 9, 1998 PROJECT: Contra Costa County/Programming PROJECT No.: 98043.00 SCOPE OF WORK: Due to several requests and changes to the Scope of Services,The Ratcliff Architects requests additional compensation per items as follows: 1) Time frame extended beyond the original deadline of October 26, 1998 2) Attend at least 3 additional meetings 3) Tour Summit Centre;gather and document lease information for other building tenants 4) Collect additional information for certain Sheriffs groups 5) Prepare additional stacking variations based upon different directions and scope TERMS AND CONDITIONS: Fixed Fee; $6,000.00 THIS AUTHORIZATION IS SUBJECT TO THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS STATED IN THE BASE CONTRACT. Please sign and return one original of this Agreement as your acceptance of the Additional Services and your approval of the cost. Receipt of this signed original shall be confirmation of your authorization to proceed/continue with the service. Your contact person at The Ratcliff Architects will be Ann Allwein. TmE RATCLtFF CTS ACCEPTED 0 By: By: ate: Date: PLEASE SINN AND RETURN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT COPY aacr;dak ;IA Cse�r �, �cnc C: sg A A•�cs..�:arae: :n P r. F: . ..�.: chez 2c d ,A;A•::cane SchW= •`yi ?=1 Sch'w :.�A• i=-So 5.50.eyle slz*'L� Ma.. PC rex 22 sr-*c r c' fa ch 0er- 'e: _.0 v52 kne:^?V-Le .^_A`Z4CZ8 Berkeley CA c4701 :l-r", cem Fax i:^.'66�-tcr4 'torr a CONTRACT MODIFICATION FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES CUEN Tt Dan Eggert O'Brien Xteeitr.b rg, CCC Administrative Building 651 Pine Surest,r floor Martinez,CA 94553 CONTRACT MODIFICATION No.: 01 HATE: November 16, 1"S PROJECT: Contra cosu Countytl3Elt PROJECT No.: 98043.01 SCOPE OF WOR#!. Due to weveral requests and changes to the S,wosle of Se+vices,The iAtclift Architects requests additional compensation per:`terns as follows: 1) Time frame extended beyond the seven weeks scheduled in the BER Work Plan.Given the project start date of August 12, 1999,the scheduled completion date for finalizing the BER was October 1, 1938. The schedule was extended clue to an extended review period as well as delay in receiving the Failure Analysis Report. (6 weeks X(2 hrs/wk 0 S99hr+ 1 hdwk a$65/hr + 1 h0wk a$10S/hr)-$2,160) 2) Attend additional meetings(I 0/1.V38, 10129!98 & It t1 WSS)to explore:work bund the preparation of the 8ER including new building scenarios,alternative strategies for temporary/quick-fix measures, peer review,board presentation,etc. 00 hrs 0$95/hr + 8 hrs 4,$1051hr + b hrs 0 S12SAr- $2,5403 33 Additional review and revisions beyond the one round of revisions following a review period as described in the Work Plan. The various reviews have been sequential ranter than concurrent necessitating additional cycles of revisions. The Executive Summary has been revised and reissued three times to incorporate review comments. (5 hours 0$1051hr + 25 hours 0$95/hr + 15 hours 0 S651hr - $3,875) 4) Script preparation,rehearsal and ftwmat presentation to Board of Supervisors (10 hours 0 S105/hr + 20 hours a S951hr — $2,950) 5) Development of master plan/new'120dinS study (50 hours 0$105/hr - 55.250) 6) Direct expenses (Reproduction,materials,etc.estimated 0$8401 A&Y sail$A;A s CNOW CTU t•Dog"iyY ��i w" G dtu�a7�e�w w girt' +wl°+t dF �� 1`�i.`ir,,.m V Aitiii w C! Uduowlp lime% U=1 PK`1" 1t;22i+y4+•+tfi :4m '1'i�i'"10"". ;0/.i iY.wyvtuwe CA 94e..9 14:titarlity CA U701 Cam Ttpc r;C A"mc'4 Tba satmgm ANCUM&M CONTRACT MODIFICATION FOR ADDITIONAL SUIVXU Pap Z MOD.AUTti.No— 01 DATE November 16, 1"8 PROJECT: Contra Costa Cesurm,,/$eP. PROJECT No.: 98043.01 TE MS AND CONDITIONS: Hourly Not to Exceed Imo►: $17,61S.00 10 THIS AUTHORIZATION IS SUBJECT TO THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS STATED IN THE RASE CONTRACT. Please sign and return one original of this Agreement as your acceptance of the Additional Services and your approval of the cost. R.eeeiPt of this signed original shalt be confirmation of your authorization to proceed/continue with the seMce. Your contact person at The Ratcliff Arichitects wilt be Leslie Carey. A CAUFO b"Coa rON R $y; Daft:/ . '�11- PLEASE SIGN AND RETURN ACKNOWIMCL&I NT COPY FORELUELSESSER ENGINEERS, INC. Structural Engineers Eric Eisesser.SE David A.Fr-4Crnan.SE James 3 GUMr!e,SE W3lf:am C.i-idnetk.SE October 12, 1998 Simcn uaasen.SE RECEIVED Paul E T oler, s.SE Paul E.�€odler.SE Grace S.Kang,SE Elaacee,manon Mr. ©an Eggen OCT 17 1998 O'Brien Kreitzberg O'IIRIEN KREIMERG 50 Fremont Street San Francisco CA 94105 Re: Summit Center Seismic Evaluation Revised Fee Proposal FOE Job No. 9853 Bear Dan: We are pleased to present our revised fee proposal for the seismic evaluation and the development of upgrade concepts for the Summit Center building at 2530 Arnold Drive in Martinez, California. We understand that the building is a four story, 115,000 square foot steel framed building. Our scope of work will be consistent with that of the 651 Fine Street buildings evaluation and is described below. 1< Seismic Evaluation. We will prepare a limited seismic evaluation of the building structure in accordance with FEMA 178 procedures. We assume that original structural drawings will be available. Not included are a reviewof the building's gravity framing, material testing or the opening of finishes to review concealed construction. 2. Upgrade Concepts. We will prepare upgrade concepts for up to two seismic criteria; life safety and damage control. The concepts will be presented in sketch form for your use in preparing a cost estimate. We understand that they will not be drafted nor Included in the report. 3. Report. We will prepare a written report describing the building structure, the results of the seismic evaluation and proposed upgrade concepts. 4. Meetings. We anticipate two to three meetings with you and the County to present our work, however our proposal does not Include formal presentations requiring significant preparation time. 150 Pine Street San Francisco.California 54111 °re€echcne:415l837-0700 Fax:4151837-0800 ft%VVP f€+119981t 0-12-98.11 October 12, 1998 Mr. Dan Eggen O'Brien Kreitzberg Re: Summa Center Seismic Evaluation Fee Proposal PIE .Job No. 9863 Page 2 Our proposed fee for the scope of work described above is $7,800. Please feel free to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, FORELLIELSESSER ENGINEERS, INC. James B. Guthrie, S.E. Principal 14tVtF�"ltlS$tfd-f2-�8.Lt "�„� flfiELLIELSESEfiENGINEERS,INC. FORELUELSESSER ENGINEERS, INC. Structural Engineers End Elsesser SE RECEIVED David A.FrteCman,SE 1 i���r 1 it if •lari5@5 S.Gun rd7l$.SE Wiifiam C.HcneC�t.SE October 22, 1996 C T , 7 1998 Masan viatts�Se Paul E.F cdfer.SE Grace S O'BRIEN KREIT2$ERG E:izabeM Ha�cnSE Mr. Dan Eggen O'Brien Kreitzberg 50 Fremont Street San Francisco CA 94105 Re: 651 Pine Street Structural Improvements Fee Proposal F/E Job No. 9863 Gear Dan: We are pleased to present our fee proposal for the limited structural improvements proposed for the buildings at 651 Pine Street in Martinez, California. In our recent seismic evaluation, the bridges and the second floor link framing were identified as having potential for failure during a major earthquake. Our proposed scope of work is therefore the preparation of structural Contract Documents to mitigate these two deficiencies by revising the existing framing connections. The work is intended to be an interim solution anticipated to consist of the addition of new steel beam seats and/or the addition of new slide bearing connections. We propose the following scope of services: 1, Concept Development. In concert with you, we will develop a cost efficient structural concept to be documented in sketch form. We recommend that the existing connections to be modified be exposed to confirm their as-built construction. We will document the existing structural construction but assume that others will remove and replace finishes and provide any appropriate documentation of non-structural as-built conditions. 2. Contract documents. We will prepare structural drawings, specifications and calculations for this work. We assume that documents for non-structural portions of the work, such as removal and replacement of finishes, modification of seismic joints, protection and phasing will be prepared by others. S. Construction services. We will review structural submittals, respond to structural RFI's and make two site visits. ISS Pirrr Street San Francisco,canfornis 94111 Tt�fwprtone: 4151837-0700 Fax: 4151837.0800 1AWF"FA1tF 996110-22-9911 October 22, 1998 Mr. Dan Eggen O'Brien Kreitzberg Rea 651 mine Street Structural improvements Fee Proposal FIE Job No. 9863 Page 2 Our proposed lump sura fee for the scope of work described above is $11,500. Please feel free to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, FORELL/ELSESSER ENGINEERS, INC. Jaynes B. Guthrie, S.E. Principal LkWPVPU99611EY22 FOFt Lit L5ESSER ENGINEERS,INC. TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: 7EM BATCHELOR,COUNTY ADi4CNISTRATOR .DATE: Dexmber 15,1999 SUBJECT: APPROVE THE FIRST ANIENDNMNT FOR EVALUATION, PROGRAMOAING AND SPACE pLANNNG OFF COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDINGS AT 631 PINE STREET ANTS S UN O&T CEN_ sME W. 971? L 8ECt)ba+IE2+II1AnQN 1. APPROVE:the First Amendment to the Consulting Servicers Agreement with O'Brien Kreitzberg for continued Project Management, Programming, Space Planning and Building Evaluation Services, and AUTHORI.n the County Administrator or his designee to execute the amendment. 2. AUTHORIZE:the County Administrator or his designee to is=written authormations for extra work,provided that the ctunuladve total extra cost for all such authorizations shall not exceed S25,000. IL FINANCIAL 2&ACT This Amendment increases the Project Management Services limit by$10$,325.00 for additional services identified in the course of the Building Evaluation and Programming. Funds in the capital account established for the project are sufficient to cover the amount encumbered by this Amendment and increase the limit from$3 68,000 to$276,325. IIL BACKc�ROIIND This change represents extra services identified in several meetings held at the County Administrator's Office;including a structural/seismic assessment of Summit Centre;alternate studies for the space planning of divisions and departments identified originally or new departments identified through adjacency studies;design and management of life safety repair work at 651 Pine Street;additional studies,estimates and schedules,expanded programming services,additional stacking plans for Summit Centre and:special studies for identifying the County's long range master planning needs in downtown Martinez L'REC0Nev2N'DAT10N OF COUNTY AD T5 TRATOR RECONDAETIDA:TON OF BOARD CC W&i TEE ____A PROVE OTHER 5IGNATt7RE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON " APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTYMR VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND ENTERED ON THE I UNUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTESTED PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERIC OF TRE BOARD Of SUPERVISORS AND COUNTYADNONISTRATOR By DEPUTY CONTACT: P.Batchelor.CAO CC: CAO Fir=ce Auditor-Contmller GSD(Accounting) O'Brien Kreitzberg via CAO Page l of i TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMIN � COSTA DATE: March 23, 1999OU NTY sU8JECT: APPROVE AND AUT ORIZE AMENDMENT FOR O'BRIEN KREITZB RCI, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE UILDINCS 651 PINK ST&2530 ARNOLD DR. (WH'I 97F) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)A OUND ANIS �iFiCATION RFMNtgFNDATfC N_fS)• ' 1. APPROVE the Second Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with O'Brien Kreitzberg for continued Project and Construction Management Services. and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator or his designee to execute the amendment and increase the limit from $276,325 to $376,725. 2. AUTHORIZE the County Administrator or his designee to issue written authorizations for extra work, provided that the cumulative total extra cost for all such authorizations shalt not exceed $25,000. MANCIAL FACT, This Amendment increases the Project Management Services limit by $100,400.00 for extended services identified for Summit Centre Tenant and Infrastructure Improvements and Building Evaluation Services. Funds in the capital account established for the project are sufficient to cover the amount encumbered by this Amendment and to increase the limit from $276,325.00 to 376,725.00. BACKGRt -IM- The authorized limit for protect and construction management services was based on the project's established predictable contract closeout of space planning for potential future tenants at 2530 Arnold Drive in December 1998. Subsequently, additional services were identified by the CACI to cover additional Construction Management tasks. They include the evaluation of mechanical and electrical systems, the addition of a freight elevator, computer room(s), ADA issues, penthouse, tenant improvement work for ORC and Social services on the 3r°flour and Health Services on the 4t'' floor. These are initial services as part of the ongoing relocation of County personnel to Summit Centre. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: -YES SIGNATURE: XRECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR -RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S). \a ACTION OF SOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE of SUPERVISORS ,J I HERESY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A UNANIMOUS(ASSENT S �1 a TRUE AND CORRECT COPY of AN AYES: NOES, ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ABSENT: ABSTAIN. ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED .r+...✓_„�+"����' HIL BATCHELOR.CLERK OF THE BOARD _SUPERVISORS BY ,DEPUTY ntact: Phil Batchelor, CAO CAO Finance Auditor/Controller GSI (Accounting) O'Brien Kreitzberg (via CAO) Consultant(via CAO) TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: PIS.,BATCHELOR,COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ��LL DATE: August 11,1"S SUBJECT: APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE EVALUATION,PROtyRAhMC AND CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS AT THE COUNTY ADN3NISTRATION BRING(651 PINE STREET)AND SU. MTT CES fR'IIi9'PF) SPECIFIC REQLTEST(S)OR RECOMrviENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION 1. RECQNI Iv�I`Ii3N 1. APPROVE the issuance of is Consulting Services Agreement with O'Brien Kreitzberg for project management, programming and building surveys, and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator or his designee to execute the attract. E, l IMPACT The amount of this Agreement totals 51631,000,which includes a 5%reimbursable expense allowance. This amount is limited to the Building Evaluation Survey at 651 Pine Street, programming various alternative scenarios for both 651 Fine Street and Summit Centre and related management servicers such as scheduling and estimating. This contract anticipates future project management services for the resulting design and construction of work resulting from this planning effort and the Board's resulting decisions. Funds have been identified that are sufficient to cover the amount encumbered for this contract, which will eventually be reimbursed with COPS proceeds related to the project. COWINUED ON ATTACHM T;-�YES SIGI3ATL7tE: �_RECOMNMNVATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR—RECO .JDATION F 90ARD CONIMITTEE X_APPROVE ,®OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON 3 y g.4nr, 11, 1999 APPROVED AS RECOMhiEI'DED X OTHER _ VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTUY THAT TIUS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPT'OF AN ACTION TAKEN XUNANIMOUS{ABSENT - - - 3 AND EN MRED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTESTED An uK :t , t cgx PHII,BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SC.; VISORS AND OUN`N ADMINISTRATOR i BY ,DEPUTY CONTACT: cc: L.Lockwood,CAO Auditor-Controller GSI)(Accounting) Consultant III. BACKGRt3LMI On May 12, the Board of Supervisors received the County Administrator's Analysis of County Capital Facility Needs in Martinez. As a result of that presentation,the Board directed the County Administrator to prepare a detailed finamcial and planning operational analysis on various feasible options and report hack to the Board within 60 to 90 days. In response to that direction,on June 11 the County Administrator's Office issued a formal Request for Statement of Qualifications for Comprehensive Project Management Services. The announcement was sent to 43 firms on the County's bidders Est and advertised in the Com=a Costa ' es and the Daily Pacific Builder. Six responses were received on June 26. Using a written evaluation scoring sheet, a six member screening committee identified three firms for interviews. This selection committee included staff from the County Administrator's office, General Services and Building inspection. On July 15, a selection committee interviewed Abide International, Consolidated CM and O`Brien Kreitzberg. This selection committee included staff" from the CAD's office, General Services, Building Inspection,the Clerk/Recorder and Assessor's office. O'Brien Kreitzberg, in conjunction with their subconsultant, The Ratcliff Architects, was the unanimous first place selection of members of the committee. This team of consultants presented the most comprehensive work plan of the six firms evaluated in the process. O'Brien Kreitzberg will provide overall project management services, including cost estimating, scheduling, stacking plans and budget development,while The Ratcliff Architects will provide space programming and building evaluation services. A detailed Building Evaluation Report for 651 mine Street will be completed in approximately seven weeks. In addition,the team will produce refined space programming, budget, schedule and location alternatives for future agency assignments at both 651 Pine Street and Summit Centre within 75 days. It is anticipated that these reports will be presented to the Board no later than late October 1998. IV. OTHER-ACIM-NSOTHER--NSTO DATE RELATED TO 651STREET/SL, ,l City ofmartinez-1county C'vor&nation In addition to the aforementioned RFQ, the County Administrator's office has met periodically during the past three months with representatives from the City of Martinez regarding issues brought up at the May 12s° hearing in order to brief them on the current status of the project. In addition, Supervisors Uilkema and DeSaulnier, Martinez City Council members Schroder and Ross, and the County Administrator have also met during this period to begin addressing the long-standing problems of flooding and lack of sufficient parking in the downtown Martinez area. On June 5, 1998,the City presented the group with their plan to establish a flood control assessment district in downtown Martinez to pay for improvements which will greatly reduce the frequency of flooding. In addition to leveraging federal and local funds, this district will issue bonds in an amount not to exceed 51.5 trillion and then levy an annual assessment on downtown property owners in an amount needed to cover the debt service costs. On July 14, 1998,the Board agreed, as a property owner in downtown,Martinez, to support the establishment of this district and to the levying of an annual assessment to cover the County's pro-rata share of the debt service costs. Downtown Parking Issues The need for a solution to the downtown Martinez parking problem has become more critical than ever given the recent loss of 84 leased parking spaces from Southern Pacific railroad due to the City of Martinez's intermodal project. In addition, the courts have expressed an interest in the construction of a new, five courtroom Family Law Center in downtown Martinez next to the Bray Courthouse. It is anticipated that over 200 current court parking spaces would be eliminated during construction of the Law Center at this site,with the permanent loss of 122 parking spaces once the project was completed. The City of Martinez has stated that it has hired the parking consulting firm of International Parking and Design to help them develop a comprehensive long-term solution to the lack of parking in downtown Martinez that incorporates the development of a 400-600 space parking garage. The employee Child Cure Facififies Based on the Board Order of June 96, the County Administratoes office, in coordination with the Human Resources Department, developed a survey of employee childcare needs which was sent to employees as part of their August I& paycheck. Responses are due back to the County Administrator's office by August 31*. Results of the survey will be tabulated in September and the findings will be presented to the Family and Human Services Committee in October. A multi- department childcare taskforee will also be established to begin looking at potential childcare sites and to provide recommendations to the Board on various employee childcare options. OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMIN ISTRATOR CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Administration wilding 651 bine Street, I11 Floor Martinez, CA 94553 DATE: March 18, 1999 TO: Supervisor Joe Canciamilla Supervisor Jahn Gioia Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema Supervisor Gonna Gerber Supervisor Mark UeSaulnier FROM: Phil Batchelor;" County Administrator SUBJECT: FAMILY LAW CENTER Attached is the Request for Qualification and the evaluation criteria for the Family Law Center in Martinez, which was discussed at the Beard meeting on March 16, 1999. The architect selection occurred in two phases. The first phase invited architects to submit their qualifications to plan and design a new Family Law Center for the County. The second phase, which was limited to the five most qualified firms, focused on the design team's vision and approach to a new court building amid the future development of County facilities in Martinez. The scope of work, which was distributed in the first phase, included a full range of programming, site planning, and design services. A key element of this scope is the analysis of downtown Martinez, County development plans, and the recommendation of a preferred site master plan for the new court building. This was done for two reasons. First, replacement of the County Administration Building was not contemplated when the Ward Street site was "chosen" for the Family Law Center. A master plan will ensure that the court building does not usurp a valuable site in the County's long-term development in Martinez. Second, the displacement of approximately 200 parking spaces at the Ward Street site was not adequately addressed in the preliminary studies. As you know, perking is a rare commodity downtown, and the elimination of 200 spaces will only exacerbate the problem. A comprehensive master plan for County facilities must evaluate this factor to be truly effective. We hope that this addresses the concerns expressed at the Beard's March 16 meeting. We will discuss this project in more detail with the Ad Hoc Committee on the County's development in Martinez. PB.amb P 1103-99-9 Attachment cc: Marcia Raines, City Manager, Martinez Ken Torre, Superior Court Executive Officer Laura Lockwood, Manager, Capital Facilities and Debt Management George Roemer, Senior Deputy County Administrator Mark Tortorich, O'Brien Kreitzberg -2- O'BRIEN RREI i ZBERG A DAMES 3 MOORE GROUP COMPANY NOTICE December 22, 1998 Request for Statement of Qualifications To Provide Arch itect/Engineering Services For a New Family Law Center for the Superior Court Of Contra Costa County Located in the City of Martinez Contra Costa County is seeking statements of qualifications from Architects to provide comprehensive programming, planning, and design services for the construction of a new 25,000 grass square foot courts building and the renovation of an adjacent 7,000 square foot office building for the County's Superior Courts. The new courts building will be located in the city of Martinez can a site owned by the county. The Architect/Engineer selection process will occur in two stages, This first stage will focus exclusively on the architectural design firm and that firm's past performance, key personnel, and production capabilities. Firms deemed most qualified in the fiat stage will be invited to submit a stage 2 proposal that will identify engineering and specialty consultants. Stage 2 participants will also be interviewed before the County makes a final selection. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors encourages opportunities to develop and support Minority Business Enterprises (MBEs), Women Business Enterprises (WBEs), Small Business Enterprises (SBEs) and Local Business Enterprises (LBEs) by providing opportunities for participation in the performance of contracts financed in whole or in part with County funds. For detailed requirements on submittal of qualifications, interested firms may direct inquiries to Mark Tortorich, AIA, Sr. Project Manager, O'Brien Kreitzberg 651 Fine Street, Bt"' Floor, Martinez, CA 94553 (phone 925-335-1040). Fax inquires will be received at 925-335-1070. O'Brien Kreitzberg (acting as agent for the County) must receive Statements of Qualifications no later than 3.00p January 29, 1999. The County reserves the right to terminate the selection process at any time. F!\SHARED\E V ER.NSARK'.FLCNCTIC.DCC e REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ARCH I 'ECT/EN INFER SERVICES SUPERIOR COURT OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Family Law Center Martinez, California December 18, 1998 O'BR EN KREITZBER+G A DAMES.MOORE GROUP COMPANY O"BRIEt V EI BERG A DAMFS A MOORE GROUP COMPANY REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ARCHITECT/ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR A NEW FAMILY LAW CENTER FOR THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY LOCATED IN THE CITY OF MARTINEZ The Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa County, intends to engage the services of an architect and engineering consultants to provide comprehensive programming, planning and design services for the construction of a new 25,000 gross square foot courts building and the renovation of an adjacent 7,000 square foot office building for the County's Superior Courts. The successful offeror will be selected through an open solicitation and selection process. The Board of Supervisors reserves the right to terminate this selection: at any time. A. Project Description and Status: 1. Currently, the Family Law Courts are housed in the Superior Courts building located at 725 Court Avenue in downtown Martinez. Judicial officers, court staff, and litigants conduct their business in obsolete, overcrowded accommodations where security is marginal and the hearing rooms are inappropriate for their function. 2. James Miller and Associates, architecture and planning firm, prepared the Architectural Program for the county in June 1998. This program identifies the court's minimum requirements for the new facility and provides a program relationship diagram and preliminary cost estimate. A summary of program areas is attached to this RFQ. Contact Mark Tortorich at O'Brien Kreitzberg to review the complete program. 3. The preliminary cost estimate for the new construction (excluding construction contingencies, land acquisition costs, furniture, fittings, equipment, or professional fees) is $4,518,000 (June 1998), or approximately $182/sf. FASHAREMEVERMARKNAESELECT.DOC 2 of 6 92/18/98 Offices WCddvv de R. Scope of Required Services 1. Detailed Building Program: Review the preliminary Architectural Program and prepare a detailed Building Program that identifies the technical requirements far each functional area of the court facility including furniture and equipment. in addition develop adjacency or separation requirements of each functional area, building infrastructure requirements, building security requirements, and parking requirements for staff, attorneys and litigants. The program shall also include a building evaluation for the existing facility at 1111 Ward Street that will be incorporated with this new facility. 2. Site Analysis and Planning: Prepare a comprehensive site investigation that analyzes the building program, available county property, surrounding environment, and development plans for the downtown Martinez. Recommend an optimal building configuration and site master plan. 3. Design: Provide comprehensive and complete architectural and engineering design services including concept design, design; development, and construction document services. In addition provide cost estimating (including value engineering) services, space planning and interior design services, and graphic communication services. 4. Construction: Provide limited construction administration services including: submittal and shop drawing review, response to contractor Requests for Information, preparation of supplementary instructions, periodic site observations, and creation of punch lists prior to construction completion. 5. Supplementary Services: Provide other supplementary planning and design services as requested by the county. F.ASi-BAREMEV'£RMAR"ES£LEC?.00C 3 of 6 11/18158 C. Submittals Interested firms shall submit two copies of their proposal to: Mr. Mark Tortorich, AIA Sr. Project Manager O'Brien Kreitzberg 651 Pine Street, b"" Floor Martinez, California 94553 Phone; 925-335-1040 Fax: 925-335-1070 Proposals must be received no later than 3:00p January 29, 1939 and fully respond to the Stage 1 submittal requirements fisted below. Fax proposals will not be allowed. 1. Past Performance on Design: Submit Standard Form 254 (Architect- Engineer and Related Services Questionnaire) items 1-9 for the firm or the firm's local office (if appropriate) and a profile, no longer than two typewritten pages, which describes the architectural design firm's history and significant accomplishments. The firm may also submit for a maximum of five projects (completed or designed within the last five years) a single page project profile and graphics (maximum three per project) to convey the firm's experience with buildings of similar size, function, or budget. Include with this description the actual and/or estimated construction cost per square footin June, 1998 dollars (excluding construction contingencies, land acquisition costs, furniture, fittings, equipment, or professional fees) and a client reference. 2. Key Personnel. Submit SF 255 for the key personnel that will be principally involved with the design and production of the project. These key individuals should include the Design Principal responsible for guiding the design team, the Project Designer(s) responsible for development of the concept, and the Project Manager in charge of client contact, contractual issues, and construction documents. A portfolio with no more than three (3) projects (completed or designed within the last five years) should accompany the biography of each key person. The portfolio should include a brief description of each project and three (3) graphics per project. F.lSHARECIIEVERMAP,K%AESELECT.DC)C 4 of 6 12/18/98 if two or more key personnel worked on the same project, please do not submit duplicate portfolios or increase the number of graphics for the project. 3. Production Capabilities and Experience with Preparing Construction Documents_ for Public Agency Procurement: Provide a narrative description (no more than two typewritten pages) of procedures and controls used to prepare construction documents. Provide specific examples of project documents prepared for fixedprice procurement. Estimate, as a percentage of the firm's total workload, what portion is awarded through fixed price procurement. 4. Construction Administration: Briefly address the firm's construction administration approach to this project. This statement may be separate (and limited to one typewritten page) or incorporated with the narratives for items 1, 2, or 3 above (i.e. construction administration is incumbent with project management duties). D. Selection Requirements This Architect selection will occur in two stages as follows: STAGE t: The first stage will establish the design and production capabilities of the architectural design firm (or the firm's local office responsible for the project) and its key personnel. This firm, which will have primary responsibility to conceive the design concept and building architecture, will be the prime contractor to the County for the designated services. The architectural design firm must have an active production office in the state of California, and been in continuous business operation for at least 2 years. After this first stage a short list of 3 to 6 firms will be invited to submit Stage 2 qualifications that include engineering and specialty consultants. The architectural design firm's qualifications and capabilities will be evaluated against the following Criteria (in order of importance) to establish the short list. 1. Firm's Ability to Produce Quality Design with Limited_Resources: The firm (or the firm's local office responsible for the project) will be evaluated on their ability to achieve architectural excellence on comparably sued and budgeted projects. 2. Key Personnel's Qualifications and Experience: The education, experience, and training of key personnel will be evaluated to determine their capacity to perform the proposed project. The Project Designer should demonstrate his/her skill with achieving architectural FASHAREMEVERMAMAESELECTDOC 5 of 6 12/18198 excellence on comparably sized projects. in addition, the proposed Project Manager must demonstrate his or her experience with Superior Court facilities. 3. Familiarity and Expertise in Producing Construction Documents for Public_Agencies: The firm will be evaluated on their documented success with maintaining project budgets and controlling construction cost growth on fixed priced construction procurements. 4. Ability to Support Prosect During Construction: The firm will be evaluated on its ability to quickly and efficiently respond to construction submittals, contractor inquiries, and field coordination issues. STAGE 2: In the second stage of this selection, the short listed architectural design firms will be invited to submit information regarding their engineering and specialty consultants proposed for this project. An interview with each short listed project team will follow the review of the stage 2 submittal. After completion of interviews, the firms will be ranked in order of preference. Contract negotiations will commence with the highest ranked firm. Contract award is contingent upon successful negotiations, and the availability of funds. E. Schedule: The preliminary selection schedule follows: 1. Notice of Request for Proposals December 18, 1998 2. Stage 1 Submittals Due 3:00prr January 29, 1999 - 3. Short List Announced February 12, 1999 4. Stage 2 Proposals Due February 26, 1999 5. interviews Week of March 8, 1995 6. Selection Complete March 12, 1999 Attachments: 1. CSA Standard f=orms 254 and 255 (pertinent partsl 2. Program Area Summary 3. Summary Cost Estimate FASHAREMEVERMARMAESELECT.00C 6 of 6 1116/96 0 1 G �+0nt "r' ".�i s,� A a�✓� ��C j t� 'y' � ;oyS+� s��+ +'f'C /i""'� ,,r�� ,,..'��'yy+( �e����� t'Y fst+ ur �v�+r � 4� +'�+' 'tn�`�' S^ �*, � itr�•,.d ZOO r•0�+.►�µ� °+% . � CD So ' at. +y ejv,eery�..i4 y, fir✓ r'"' VS � a , 11 ?1 R : j'`�«w.."'7'34 ' i'ti 'a +�'CY r� .r s ,,,..y � ��.^� ip� w,.' #"y� tAt �+ ✓� % +.,�' } .ter A„ ,,, A ✓+ ' R '"` ,r r 3 fY r .+ i +�► ' U' G 44 .'�+yi 1� " f�' r :: CD ♦ ��'."M 91 .��a � � `� ..-� y �ry ';��r �N..,. '�,�,.� ti+" . a ` ' G` +- 'mo i C �;SCv C n+, ,; U. rr "�` t9 .+r�r �r � G .r � rA}+' ":► �.' C1.! W � � '�""�.' � �r i ul CD 'v'rir�+• `•M .•+�, �p� Ri tri o ' rj +.b ++{"r ;� T+�.,'St "S' q+w ;,� G', .+" �✓>"r" �}"a�tr6 t�,3 "',i'Y' s r'�" ,,,V ra y '�+ r� tp S r+w dr �"' � 40 N+'� i�cle '�' `V S�+✓•..+A h �j w �!0 !y ,+,.�i.. y t�S� TT00 «+ r0 ,,,4ty kr�tb'CI f ty y� ;,', y q� r'�„ 6b, 'S ^.. ,,,«, �'� 7� +� .r C5 tQ ..t .� µ r ..t � .ip ��+�+'cir •r. w r tp "L +may r.'tr 0j `� t0 G CJ G « O o'er` ��� � iy`�w�C'. w+ � y4 i' 'F � w A F wr'� t'a'i.� .i.✓..> G 4/� i1` 3►�"RD, K3^+u 2g �+t �s Y.` t`5 .+ +1� wd�,.iy 'may p„ r",,� � "e j�� � � uw„� � � r„`L.r y `W`�".�`�+ of t0 �++',,,�'t�4 � +� � y r• � .+i ,ter r N tM• N �i} '"�, ... .r r^ ...e�P �'p ' ?j1 ''� t'f C+ N '{". p,w,' _ C} w t ik 11; 0a oz o V y I yx w'r—S'� 0 015, +,�+ ti> �° �'� rW '° �"` �" � r sy 4+ �� � `�� ♦ ..+. y VS-4 tr .fir "''� Cp4 ��.. "`3r;,.�r"r." �„�� qr�� i' �' �•' ,+,+? '� '�, G�3 '�� .�"rr y� {� „r.. }''� ''e` ,« +„ P6 "�' t'i S,,,., r �'.+`.G�� '`Sj �s �to �� '� ��µ�,� " N ✓�„� "r� �'�"y.`��' � � �y .r '.� two �,G�n �+ ''+ .�ab"r3 t` r�"nC''t ..e v� "a r.✓i ",3 C °"'PS `S ,,.' • '' L'T �Q_ ... ' ' :A ...r+` r,,,.jg A ." r.✓ .re» tr r !Sy ..c '✓ m— r/� � .✓ .fi. .. 'T3 r'� � 1-5 Ap�, i(y «+ , `,�. r" s•w,� ig j"r+'�. + 7 t5's yy v'+ '3R tGS it+4s "r3 a �'r3r C ...C+ ,yp.. G a t�bg i`y tO"os S".;'',.Cd r"", z�"p f"' G�'f.. may+N..yr i.S+ 4 t�wC +"i w -A. jp %� j �" 1 -5 ae� 1 ,rt+r' c1Y t'�,y '✓tom+ "" f4 to to SO + .+ i''x r iz '. � e �bra �� ��' ar i+6 N �> t�'4 �".»r ��G' � ,we .r` A rsri Gia" � ..r•• '�,e �{y ,4 rr�T..� ,�` x� � :° � rr'o A +' tb � t'y � �tC •�'✓„"~, �,g � G tJ �,"" 1r'� v'+ � i>ry d'�s a� ap"� :a �°. i�� A � N� ✓C i � �' ..+; � .. "` �CS��" i+b (gig� t��.r '� � +„'��r+r x�„� d{b� :we LI� "rt � .✓;o•a ^� .,eCs t!S y r r r R .✓ s !"S � A (�Y.� Q + �." �,. �w'°� ,mow �6 �•• 0.+r✓.+ � 6n � 'C gyp' !�'S �� �� � '� 1�.,� 0 �.• �. iG3Kyr Q r "C: G . �+ i i1'�++ 0► jb Y• a e - �. .. ..-- a a i«-• go y --7. 3 tiro Zi _ Efop CV t� u Cly. f+►i►e.► lit Ut ��j1 3 y 'C t aac CD Ift,trul a prj;-�S.!-7E, +i f� ri !"S `_ +moiS •E W''�V• 1 f r z +, w A v" ?y V_► x r w `oe j z f4 JOR S"�" `� Z � Cj 1� m ,d, tin .0 ,S. ` V, ,.1.0 � � w - tti � � Ct t5 � t,,,r � �. et< u it" is �3 "= :;, ,C Cj �t = o C �f �• rya�+t slr y � � fir � � ~ i 2, x � � O O CS �+`i !ft ! tO '"� �v 8 n' C i3 °' rL` w �,w'I m"1. ..�� :.Lam`. `n 3-A ;3 r6 n Lel t'� C ror�" —®i' � � eo p a a u S + y 42.2 4 � � f i � "�O A y n }c- ex iL 14,CO6 i xv ti. toZ3 �E TZ, mZl 20 I:lr 2 M3 r rr Xi I41 ab.t12 . S x►� .® M a. 11 0 `� 'lt~ "rtv M104A 'J C +die lJV Ay mo` wsus .n W «► a Utz loi2 C6 s aamA A i'C ill A «►� � Y�1 A � C6 +fit A a.v w J`� ai •tilw19 "A 6 V Olt- IOUs-. .e itstsfps ` os . �►- f2. V ... IVA CD •"" toto t3� In Uls si3 A .+ ► "` C3 CSS w CZ + to c 0.1 10, 7.4 IN m 6-- rntap t� a to 10 Ito% r' 4 s ` Tt an N ® > Q _ _ Lrl cr f cri�+' r etc to cn t7 w Z G rm t� 0 m � r to lato h fR n ( tm Ecc to Cu m 'all fA Cb i C 0 tv tg Si5 v i CD fk � f ' C :7'0cmS0 CL ;r 0 m 2 = per `' ifs com � cu .. ! � _ r ' tb .-. 0 Dsc 3 _ cr � o m CL it Fr c ID ttr Im r: tris k t f at Martinez, California Prepared by 2-00 All'harnbra A-enue maninez. California and James Miller &- :associates Architecturle cS, Plannina, o i 1) cast hird Str et Pirtsbun.z. CA 94565 June 18. 199S CL a t� tr > 40 -c 4 s. Ci } C CS. � 'O 5 to - t -8 CL to 5 z A .. �\�^ § «:. .d .�/� \/\ ���� \ �\�_ ?y\: �\� �\ ��/� .�\ �/�~�\ . �\� � :\� 2 :�\� 2«} � Jcrr:es Miller and Associates Architecture and Fanning June 18, 1998 FAMILY LAW CENTER PROGRAM AREAS 1. f ,1AG: - i�am D1 m Stla ___UzC ale 4 sats 8 Std_ a_ttsi ' en a1 ' `l+na 'Seats €i Zj ;��;�`Jtiif� -Li7�1:113eP'iaftthrtr3�tet �- a 2 {�." ­411 4.4,z56ith oileb r � x"325; 's"_r � ,, °Sl r• - x,� . 19 uC-13ft�e 25ft;Mttr1oflet} 325 q .� 3't x 25ft With ti3El@t} +r}�...yyy��p �y-y J�.�aj��-. .�. "`a•�s.a' w` �:.,u,t#!a r 'y"s.�.�,.� g`�.�°` 3� a .Gri -xa F�V is�ff t.J3llr 4 £ °. ,�, M gt+4y'v`r Xy • .dlry.rt i f} V-ef.rj.c,fe+ without e}y.E'.i�j 4b Judtctai Support Staff;-,clerk, baflff�court reporter,t`Eltng � ° . - s It'},$ 'L. � �r � '!"& � � r d'� _XL .s :s T ..t, •.; _.-.'r� ..;1- < _may n+�++��? -44 SSSS , t Common library for all judges r. Il. 'P'AM LY LAW FACtL1TAIC31t CRCiUP s a :I Facilitator :. -5 legal Technicians Ill. R0 PER -.E~aching Roam (uses conference area moms} riput Cleric r^ 100 i cirrus areaa 5 y � orlr areas 516- Ar - Pyr ea 1 ,t=es Miler and Associates Architecture and Planning .dune 18, 1998 SPA C 7-1 > !V, { i a • i V. 1CQRN` S '�tVAlT1tG AREA t _ ��9 � L PlaY/ ai$t; A1C@ t,. � 7 VI. . 0! MON.CCNFERENCE ARMS a ?5f(3 7taters ibr stand-up presentatic n*s, wvrting 50 ..:.. . Conference Rooms for 2-4 persons 280 Settlement Rooms for 4-6 persons 320 MWeeting Room..for 40-50 persons 950 _-s a `sss ra t i- a ii V11. ERlCS.C}�FlC� 1099 ,a l*amk L.aW Clerks, 5 Counter Spaces, 1 Supervisor 825 .� `Eueuinc 274 VIII.. CbRDS 360 Sterage for live days of records 100. Preparation Area w Py 90 - Staging Area ,so. Copy,Area $g . PX.ENTRY _ 2700 Common Waft: Areas w.1 v00 t Security Area 400 Public Toilets, nursing area, telephones, drinking fountains 8E0 e s X. STAFI= BREAK AREA 230 wreak Area for 10people 230 X!. UPPLY f STORAGE! EQUIPMENT f9t� l a.intenance areas, supplies storage, Igo XII. MECHANICAL 1 ELECTRICAL AREAS 1680 Basement} MVAC, Chiller,Not Water, TelephonelOata, Electrical 1680 2 F Syy�y}f/M1}�,/��! ..► s .. ,� JUS-20-98 10 : 19 AM M LEE CORP P. 03 Lee Family Law Canter Martine, CA Conceptual Design Construction Cost Estimate 6-Jun-98 Preamble 1.0 Outline 1.1 The conceptual construction cosi estimate (estimate) is comprised of the following three Integral pans: a) estimate summary b)site estimate details c)building estimate details 1.2 This estimate Is for the construction of a new one-story wood-framed building Including sitework within the property lines, 1.3 This estimate Is based on the following information: a) Preliminary architectural floor plan by James Miller&Associates b) Site plan by James Miller&Associates Q Verbal clarifications with the Architect. 2.0 Assumptions & Qualifications 2.1 The estimate specifically excludes the following: Abatement of hazardous or toxic materials Fumiture, bridge, fittings and equipment unless they are an integrated part of the building construction Administration costs such as bidding, advertising and contract award Professlonal fees for architect, engineers, consultants, construction management and other soft coats Cost escalation (For the next three years, it is suggested to use 4%per year as an estimated escalation factor for construction cost) Project contingency It is assumed that the above items, It needed, are Included elsewhere In the owner's overall project budget. 2.2 The estimate Is erased on estimated prices current as of June 1998,with four to six responsible and responsive bids under a competitive bidding environment fora fixed price lump Bum contract. 2.3 The estimate is based on all world to be performed during regular hours. No overtime has been Included. 2.5 The estimate represents our best Judgment of probable construction costs, but since we have no control over market conditions and other factors which may affect the bid prices,we cannot and do not warrant or guarantee that bids or ultimate construction costs will not vary from the Cost estimate. _ 404sd 1 of 2 Preamble .TliM -28 -98 10:28 AM M LEE CORP P. 04 Lee a Fan* taw Csr r Mil" CA Conceptual noign Consbucdon Cost 1=stlMOA &JUn46 Prsartmbls 3.0 est tress in the stlniats: Tho fbilowMg areas are used in this astlmate{and for estlmattio puur;xws onfy} t mond fiw a 23.OW sf Basomem a 1,680 sf ProJed site area=68,520 sf 4043d 2 of 2 Preamble ZUN- 20 - 9 10:20 AM M LEE CORP P..o Prw tl►LAW Center � MarlInoxF CA C+x ptuol InIBn C,ottsb%wdon COO EWmd r suf"Mary 24,746 gsf LINE WORK SECTIONS: EST.3 SIGSF%of Total 1 EXCAVATION E FQUNMATICN 190,079 7.68 4% 2 STRUCTURAL FRAMING 34ZM 13.86 7!i 3 ROOFING&WATERPROOFING 108,884 4.27 2% 4 I~MRIOR WALLS 358,480 14.49 11% 5 INTERIOR WORKS 630,320 21.43 11% a SPECIALTIES&EQUIPMENT 121,400 4.21 3% 7 CONVEYING SYSTEM!•NONE 0 0.00 0% 8 PLUMBING 128,311 5.19 3% 9 HVAC 495,862 20.03 11% 10 FIRE PROTECTION 80,425 3.25 2% 11 ELECTRICAL 385,0134 14.75 4% 12 - 13 DIRECT BUILDING COST 2,719,353 109.85 58'46 14 SITEWORK 370,369 15.21 8% 15 - - ...... ._.. ..... . 16 DIRECT COST TOTAL 3,094,712 125.08 86% ROUNDED-OFF 3,005,000 17 GENERAL CONDITIONS &BOND, 12% 328,000 13.17 7% 18 - 19 SUBTOTAL 3,421,000 138.24 73% 20 G. C.'S FEE, 10% 342,000 13.82 7% 21 .... .....� ..�.�,....,... 2 SUBTOTAL 3,783,000 152.08 80% 23 DESIGN 6 ESTIMATE CONTINGENCY,20% 753,000 30.43 11196 24 ...�...-.... TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION 26 COST 4,510,00C 482.49 989 PRICES CURRENT AS IN,LUNE 99 2$ESCALATION TO JUNE 1999, 0 4% 18010011 7.30 4% TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION 271 COST(BABE BID) _ 189.7"9 100414 Nat#. 9!a impottant to road also the otfachod NProdmbW and'Estimate Doors"whkh tofm an tntsbrrat,pad of the setimstt. 404" Of t SiitlC&7 A DAMES A MOORS GROUP COMPANY 651 Viae Street,6rh Floor VIA FARC: (415) 394-7158 Martinez,CaUforasa 94553 925 335 1040 Tel February 4, 1999 925 333 1070 Fax Ms. Elizabeth Chaney, Director ICAPLAN/MC LAUGHLIN/DIAZ 222 Vallejo Street San Francisco, California 94111 Clear tants. Chaney: Congratulations on making the short list for Contra Costa County's new Family Law Center. As you know the first stage of this selection focused exclusively on the architectural design firm and the proposed key personnel. After evaluating each submittal in depth, we are confident that the firms can our short list have the capacity to produce a functional and elegant worts of architecture within the county's budgetary goals. In this second stage of the selection we will evaluate the architectural design firm including the firm's engineering and technical consultants. We are particularly interested in the project team's creativity, internal working relationships, and the lead designer's response to the symbolic and functional issues of the program. We have identified below the specific evaluation criteria for this second stage as well as guidelines for the submittal and interview. EVALUATION CRITERIA The selection of an A/E design firm will be made on the basis of information submitted in stage 1, stage It, and the interview. The evaluation criteria for final selection are identified in descending order of priority. 1) Design talent and potential for creating a humane and dignified family court that also satisfies functional requirements. 2) Project management structure and proposed key personnel for each discipline. 3) Engineering and technical consultants. 4) Anility to create a master plan for county facilities in downtown Martinez. 5) Courthouse (or similar building type) experience. STACE 11 SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS The deadline for stage If submittals is February 16, 1999. Offices Waridwide Please submit Standard GSA form 254, questions 1 through 9, for all proposed consultants not identified in stage l including the structural, mechanical, electrical, landscape, security, and programming consultants; and Standard GSA form 255, question 7, for a maximum of three key personnel from each consulting discipline (i.e., mechanical, engineering, security, etc.); and Supporting illustrations and graphics as appropriate. INTERVIEWS The interview should focus on the following topics. 1) The lead designer's role in previous projects. identify at least one project submitted in stage I and describe the lead designer's role in: ,Master Planning/Programming Concept Design Design Development including Detailed Development of Public Spaces Construction Documents Construction Observation Shop Drawing Review Cost Management 2) The lead designer's vision for a new Family Law Center. This may be expressed through images of previous work by the lead designer, but can not include proposed design solutions (i.e., models/sketches/renderings) for the project. 3) The project manager's role in the project, including the proposed integration structure between the architectural design firm and consultants. 4) Cather topics that the firm considers relevant to the selection. An interview will be held in the offices of each short listed firm. However, please limit attendance to a maximum of 4 key individuals. Each firm will be given 45 minutes for the interview with an additional 15 minutes for questions/answers. I will contact you with- further information on the time for your presentation. Congratulations again on raking the short list. if you should have any questions, please contact me at (925) 335-1040. Sincerely, ARCHITECT SELECTION COMMITTEE /V Alt !� 7 .�--Z�� Mark Tortorich, AIA Senior Project Manager A CAMES i MOORE GROUP COMPANY 651 Pine 5crem 6th Floor VIA FAX: (510) 655-6654 mardrim CA ornia 94553 925 335 1040 Tal 925 335 107'0 Fax February 4, �#999 Ms. Carolyn Silk, Principal The Ratcliff Architects 5856 Doyle Street Emeryville, California 34608 Dear auris. Silk. Congratulations on making the short list for Contra Costa County's new Family Law Center. As you know the first stage of this selection focused exclusively on the architectural design firm and the proposed key personnel. After evaluating each submittal in depth., we are confident that the firms on our short list have the capacity to produce a functional and elegant work of architecture within the county's budgetary goals. In this second stage of the selection we will evaluate the architectural design firm including the firm's engineering and technical consultants. We are particularly interested in the project team's creativity, internal working relationships, and the lean designer's response to the symbolic and Functional issues of the programa. We have identified below the specific evaluation criteria for this second stage as well as guidelines for the submittal and interview. EVALLIATIQN CRITERIA The selection of aro A/E design firm: will be made on the basis of information submitted in stage 1, stage It, and the interview. The evaluation criteria for final selection are identified in descending order of priority. 1) Design talent and potential for creating a humane and dignified family court that also satisfies functional requirements. 2) Project management structure and proposed key personnel for each discipline. 3) Engineering and technical consultants. 41/ Ability to create a master Calan for county facilities in downtown Martinez. 5) Courthouse (or similar building type) experience. STAGE It SUSt I T AL REQUIREMENTS The deadline for stage It submittals is February 16, 1999. 4fces,rtn de 'B R!EN SCR ESB ERG A MAMFS t MOORE GROUP COMPANY 651 Pias Screen,6th Floor IIIA FAX: (415) 777-3476 Martine?,Cali&mia 94553 925 335 1040 Tel February 4, 1993 925 335 1070 Fax Mr.John Kibre, AIA Partner The Design Partnership 375 Fremont Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, California 94105 Dear Mr. Kibre: Congratulations on making the short list for Contra Costa County's new Fancily Law Center. As you know the first stage of this selection focused exclusively on the architectural design firm and the proposed key personnel. After evaluating each submittal in depth, we are confident that the firms or our short list have the capacity to produce a functional and elegant work of architecture within the county's budgetary goals. In this second stage of the selection we will evaluate the architectural design firm including the firm's engineering and technical consultants. We are particularly interested in the project tearn's creativity, internal working relationships, and the lead designer's response to the symbolic and functional issues of the program. We have identifies below the specific evaluation criteria for this second stage as well as guidelines for the submittal and interview. EVALUATION CRITERIA The selection of an A/E design firm will be made on the basis of information submitted in stage i, stage It, and the interview. The evaluation criteria for final selection are identified in descending order of priority. 1) Design talent and potential for creating a humane and dignified family court that also satisfies functional requirements. 2) Project management structure and proposed key personnel for each discipline. 3) Engineering and technical consultants. 4) Ability to create a master plan for county facilities in downtown Martinez. 5) Courthouse (or similar building type) experience. STAGE If SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS The deadline for stage ll submittals is February 16, 1999. ;offices wartd"de A aW S a MOORE CROUP COMPANY 651 Pint street,6th Floor VIA FAX: (415) 247-1111 Martinm Cdif+orni2 94553 925 335 1040 Tel February 4, 1999 925 335 1070 Fix Mr. Jeffrey Heller, FAIA Heller Mannus Architects 221 Main Street, Suite 940 San Francisca, California 94,105 Dear Mr. Heller: Congratulations on making the short list for Contra Costa County's new Family Law Center. As you know the first stage of this selection focused exclusively on the architectural design firm and the proposed key personnel. After evaluating each submittalin depth, we are confident that the firms on our short list have the capacity to produce a functional and elegant work of architecture within the county's budgetary goals. In this second stage of the selection we will evaluate the architectural design firm including the firm's engineering and technical consultants. We are particularly interested in the project team's creativity, internal working relationships, and the lead designer's response to the symbolic and functional issues of the program. We have identified below the specific evaluation criteria for this second stage as well as guidelines for the submittal and interview. VALUATION CRITcRIA The selection of an All_ design firm will be made on the basis of information submitted in stage I, stage ll, and the interview. The evaluation criteria for final selection are identified in descending order of priority. 1) Design talent and potential for creating a humane and dignified family court that also satisfies functional requirements. 2) Project management structure and proposed key personnel for each discipline. 3) Engineering and technical consultants. 4) Ability to create a master plan for county facilities in downtown Martinez. 5) Courthouse (or similar building type) experience. STAGE It 5USMITTAL REQUIREMENTS The deadline for stage II submittals is February 16, 1999. offices worldwide A DAMES t MOORE GROUP COWAW 651 Pine Street,6th Moor VIA FAX: (707) 996-8542 Martinez,California 94533 925 335 1040 Tel 9'25 335 1070 F= February �, 1999 Mr. Charles R. Drulis AIA Michael Ross/Charles Drulis Architects & Planners Inc. 190 W. Napa Street Sonoma, California 95476 Dear Mr. Drulis: Congratulations on making the short list for Contra Costa County's new Fancily Law Center. As you know the first stage of this selection focused exclusively on the architectural design firm and the proposed key personnel. After evaluating each submittalin depth, we are confident that the firms on Baur short list have the capacity to produce a functional and elegant work of architecture within the county's budgetary goals. In this second stage of the selection we will evaluate the architectural design firm including the firm's engineering and technical consultants. We are particularly interested in the project team's creativity, internal working relationships, and the lead designer's response to the symbolic and functional issues of the program. We have identified below the specific evaluation criteria for this second stage as well as guidelines for the submittal and interview. EVALUATION CRITERIA The selection of an A/E design firm will be made on the basis of information submitted in stage I, stage It, and the interview. The evaluation criteria for final selection are identified in descending order of priority. 1) Design talent and potential for creating a humane and dignified family court that also satisfies functional requirements. 2) Project management structure and proposed key personnel for each discipline. 3) Engineering and technical consultants. 4) Ability to create a master plan for county facilities in downtown Martinez. S) Courthouse (or similar building type) experience. STALE 11 SUBM177AL REOUIRENUNTS The deadline for stage If submittals is February 16, 1999, Vices 4vcr'ciw+de 32 TRANSACT I ON REPMT FOR HP FAX--700 SER IES VERRS i C?N: 01 FAX NAME: C)' BR I EN--KRE I T" t: DATE: 05-FEB- FAX f ER: 1 92S 335 1070 TI lv1E: 10 D TMe R_ JE FAX NAMEER OURAT I EC BESUw 01 A IN 'c. 04-FEB 12:20 R 510 934 8132 0:01 :05 2 CK SA381:30011 04-FEB 12:23 R 510 934 8132 0.01 :29 2 OK SA481300? 1 04--FEB 12:2S R 2094781516 0:02:02 3 CK 58311300/ 1 04 12:47 S 415 981 3157 0:03:45 7 OK 5838401001 04-FES 12:53 S 4158827763 0:03: 18 7 CK 55354010+" 04-FEB 13:30 S 19259402299 0:01 :23 2 OK 6638401001 04 13:39 R 41.53975219 0:00;34 1 CK 6638130011 04-FEB 15:37 R 925 313 5840 0:01 :29 4 CK 5538130011 04--r-EB 15:43 R 8961891 0-00-34 1 CK 66381300111 04---r'ES 15:4S S 415 436 5091 0-.01 :22 2 2 CK 6638401001 04-+-EB 15:53 R 0-0e.49 1 OK 6A381 3001 ' 04--F'cs3 16: 12 S S 1 S 106446309 0:00:00 0 NO ANS 4236BA74000,00 04-+-EB 16:45 R 0:01 : 10 2 CK 563113001 ?+ 04-FEB 16:47 R 0:01 : 10 2 CK 56311.30011+ 04-FEB 16:51 R 0:00:44 1 OK 5631130011c 04.-FEB 16:52 R 0:04 -09 2 CK 563 1 130'01 1 i 04- -B 16.S4 R 510 934 81:32 0:01 -210 2 CK 6A3813001 1 t 04-FES 17:20 S 3940 40 ,/` 0:01 :03 2 OK 5535401,00114 04--FEB 17:22 S 415 777 34.76 0.01 :00 2 CK 6638,101001� 04-FEB 17:24 S 4152471111 0:01 :05 2 CK 663840'0Oe 1 i 04--FEB 17-26 S 517079968542 ,r��/L wda-� ++„�► `r' 0:00:58 2 OK 6638401000 04--FEB 17:28 S 510 655 6654 777 0 0:01 .00 2 OK 663840 1 00 1� 06- FEB 07:00 S 925 313 6840 0:00:56 2 CK 663840100?c OS--f--`EB 063:40 S 4157775177 0:02,32 6 CCK 663840'10014 05-°F 08:49 R 4157773023 0:02:38 3 OK 66381300110 05-FEB 09:33 R 9254584214 0:02: 13 5 CK 66381300110 05--FEB 09:51 S 415 777 3023 0:01 .20 2 CK 66384.01001 a M-FEB 10:03 R 14.154216060 0:00:55 1 OK SA38130011C 05-+-EB 10:32 S 89616.91 0:0.3:05 7 CK 66384010014 05--FEB 10:38 R 510 275 9930 0:00:33 1 CK 66381.300110 OS-+-EB 10:45 S 14154.216060 0:03: 11 7 CK 6638d010(315 05-FEB 10:49 S 707 746 6416 0:00:54 2 OK 6638.4010018 FAX I1x x x x x/C 1{x x x YF x x x x x x 1 x%x x x%R iY%1!%x x x x x %R s x f x x rt :' x w x • w S= AX SENT ' R=FAX RECEIVED I=PCt.L IN(FAX RECEIVED) C=PC)t.i ED OUB`t FAX SENT) County Administrator Contra Board ofSupsrvisom o sta Jim Rogers C.cNimty Adrsainitatraatlon B;�ikiing ,ss District 651 Pftw Strut,11th Fioor &*is 8,tfiikema Matlfrtez,Qd1forma 94553-1229 County 2nd District 35 (510)3 -1080 Donna Gsrtr.r FAX:(510)335-1098 Std District Phil Battdtador ,� ,- Mark Distrks t iNer County Administrator Jos C 0%clamme 5th District June 11, 1998 Request for Statement of Qualifications To Provide Comprehensive Project Management Services For Renovations to County Administration Buildings Located at 651 Pine Street and. 2.530 Arnold Drive,Martinez, California The Beard of Supervisors, Contra Costa. County, California, intends to engage the services of a consulting construction management firm to provide project management, with technical support services, for the planning, design, and construction of building renovations being contemplated at the main County Administration Building at 651 Pine Street Martinez, California, as well as tenant improvements to an Dike building the County is in the process of purchasing located at 2534 Arnold Drive,'Martinez, through an open solicitation and selection process. The Board of Supervisors reserves the right to terminate the selection process at any time. A. Project Description and Status 1. Due to budget constraints, many County departments located in the County seat of Martinez have office space needs that have not been met over the past several years. In addition, little preventive maintenance was done on County buildings over the past decade. As a result, many County buildings are in need of extensive repair. The main County Administration Building located at 651 fine Street, Martinez, California, is one of thesebuildings. With approximately 80,000 square feet of net useable space, this building houses the County Administrator's office, County Counsel,the Board of Supervisors, Human Resources, Risk Management, Community Development, Building Inspection, State Permit Bureau and other administrative functions. 2. The 5-story North Wing of the building was constructed in 1954, while the main 12-story portion of the building was constructed in 1962. The building has problems with fire alarms; lack of fire sprinklers, old pipes which are leaking and breaking, and outdated electrical and plumbing systems. When these problems are addressed., asbestos abatement will be necessary to address the asbestos in the floors and ceilings of the building. Finally, the .. 1 building may need seismic strengthening to bring it up to current building standards. 3. Correcting these problems has been estimated to cost approximately $9 million, excluding relocation, project contingencies, and financing costs. The County is planning to finance these improvements using Certificates of Participation. 4. To begin meeting the pent-up demand for space, and in keeping with the County's overall policy objective of moving employees, into permanent County-owned facilities, the Board of Supervisors have agreed to a master lease with option to purchase with the owners of 2530 Arnold Drive in Martinez (the "Summit Centre"). This Class A office building will add approximately 110,000 of net useable space to the County's building inventory. While the County will be leasing portions of the building over the next year, it is contemplated that the County will exercise its purchase option by early 1949. The purchase of the Summit Centre, and tenant improvements thereto, will also be funded through Certificates of Participation. S. On May 12, 1995, the County Administrator presented two preliminary approaches for occupancy of the Summit Centre, involving its use as either a County Administration or Health Services Administration building. In both scenarios, the aforementioned building improvements to 651 Pine Street were proposed, although the ultimate tenants of the renovated facility would dif'f'er depending on the choice of tenants at the Summit Centre. Preliminary estimates as to the space needs, as well as scope and cost of building improvements were provided to compare in rough terms the two overall approaches to utilizing the Summit Centre. .Attached to this RFQ is the Board Order and preliminary financial analysis presented to tate Board of Supervisors at the I12'tay 12th meeting. 6. Based on staff's preliminary findings, the Board directed the County Administrator to provide a more detailed financial and planning operational analysis of these two options or possibly other variations to the Board within the next 90 days. 7. Given the complexity of the project, the County Administrator believes that a Project Manager should be selected at this point in time to assist the County in refining all elements of this plan. These elements include but are not limited to establishing more accurate space needs by department, preparing a comprehensive building evaluation report, and developing more detailed cost estimates, stacking plans, and schedules for completion of the project. It is anticipated that this Project Manager will also coordinate the later phases of the design, construction, and post-construction process. -2- 8. Previous space studies for some of the affected County departments, as well as building drawings, feasibility and engineering studies are available for on- site review at the offices of the County's Architectural Services Division of the General Services Department located at 1220 Morella Ave., Martinez. Please contact the Division at 925-313-7200 to arrange an appointment to review this information. B. Scrape of Required Services 1. A Project Manager shall be assigned to the project by the consulting construction management firm for the duration of the planning, design and construction of the renovations of the two aforementioned facilities. This manager must be an experienced architectural administrator who will define the tasks necessary to accomplish the project, monitor and coordinate the tasks and deliver a final product on time and within prescribed cost limits, a. Duties and responsibilities of the Project Manager will include the following: • Represent the County and protect the County's interests in the project • Establish a project work plan delineating the project services, tasks, responsibilities, schedules and budgets • Manage the project personnel, consultants, and contractors on a day- to-day basis • Coordinate the development of a detailed plan for the renovation of 6151 Pine Street and the Summit Centre, including gross space estimates by functional unit, stacking plans, project budget and schedule recommendations • Set up user design and review workshops • Periodically measure project performance against yard sticks established in the work.plan • Monitor project scope, quality, schedule, budgets, and take corrective action when deviations are detected • Delp select consultants and architects and prepare consultant agreements • Prepare .Board of Supervisors orders for approval of project milestones, agreements, and other documents • Ensure that all applicable local, State and Federal codes and regulations (including CEQA) are met • .Ensure coordination in construction documents • Ensure practical construction phasing and logistics • Advise the County on bid strategies, including scope and timing • Solicit bids • Assist in relocation,building occupancy and startup operations • Supervise guarantee/warrantee work -3 - b. The Project Manager will be a designated individual, dedicated exclusively to this project for the duration of the project. The Project Manager will work in the offices of the County on or near the project sites. 2. Technical support services must be provided by the consulting construction management firm for the Project .Manager during planning, design, construction and post-construction. The support services shall be provided as needed by the Project Manager, to help him fulfill his responsibilities.. a. The consulting construction management firm shall be capable of providing a full range of management and technical staff with a broad base in engineering disciplines and experience in complex building and support systems, as well as computer-based control and information systems. b. Support services which might be required by the Project Manager include: • Agreement and contract review • Cost estimate review or preparation + Project and construction scheduling review or preparation • Construction document coordination and technical review • General and specialty inspection of construction The actual scope of services will be determined during negotiations for an agreement with the prospective construction management-consulting firm. B. Submittals Firms capable of performing the required services may submit qualifications to: Laura W. Lockwood Director, Capital Facilities and Debt Management Office of the County Administrator 651 Pine Street, l l Floor Martinez, California 94553 (925) 335-1093 -4 - Submittals must be received by 4:00 p.m. on Friday, June 26, 1998. At a minimum, submittals must include nine (9) sets, one of which is loose-bound, of the following information: 1. A letter of interest. The letter shall include: a. Three references for the designated individual who would be Project Manager. At least two of the references shall be personally familiar with the performance of the individual as project manager on a multimillion dollar building renovation and construction project., preferably an office building constructed prior to 1965. b. Three references for the firm, in addition to the references required for the designated Project Manager. At least one of the references shall be personally familiar with the performance of the firm on a multimillion- dollar building renovation project. c. If the firm is not located within 60 miles of the Centra Costa County borders, a description of how the firm or individual would offset disadvantages of not being close to the project site. d. Identification of subconsultants, joint venturers, or firms intended to satisfy the various tasks identified in this RFQ. Please provide at least two references for each subconsultant identified in this RFQ. 2. Supplemental Questionnaire for individual to be Designated Project Manager 3. GSA Standard Form 254, "Architect-Engineer and Related Services Questionnaire." 4. GSA Standard .Form 255, "Architect-Engineer and Related Services Questionnaire for Specific Project." C. Selection Process 1. Evaluation Criteria. .All submittals will be screened, with emphasis on the qualifications of the individual designated to be Project Manager and other key personnel to be assigned to the project. Criteria will include knot necessarily listed in order of priority); (a) experience and training in building design and construction managements (b) reputation for integrity, timeliness and competence (as determined by reference checks); (c) ability to provide a full range of construction management services including construction scheduling cost estimating, testing and inspections (e) experience coordin#ting space planning, cost estimation, building evaluation, scheduling and logistics for multimillion dollar building renovation projects, particularly with public -5 - sector clients; (f) project approach, work plan and schedule for completing the tasks outlined in this RFQ. 2. Screening. A screening committee will review and evaluate the submittals and will select not more than six (6) arms for interviews by a selection committee, composed of various County representative. Subsequent interviews of the top-ranked finalists with the County Administrator may also be required. 3. Final Selection. A selection committee will interview the firms picked by the screening committee and will select the three most qualified, ranked in order of preference. The County Administrator, who may adjust the rankings accordingly, may also interview the top-ranked firms. The County Administrator's office will recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the final ranking and authorize County staff to negotiate a satisfactory agreement for project management services. If the County is not able to negotiate a satisfactory agreement with the candidate ranked first, it may terminate the negotiation and undertake negotiations with the candidate ranked second and, if necessary, the third ranked. 4. Cost. While cost will not be a factor in the initial evaluation and scoring, it may be a factor in the final selection by the County Administrator's office. Proposers should prepare a price proposal in a separate envelope that at a minimum addresses the County's desire for(1) establishment ofmore accurate long-term space needs for affected departments as outlined in the Board Order of May 12, 1998; (2) preparation of a comprehensive building evaluation report for 651 Pine Street; and (3) the development of more detailed cost estimates, alternative stacking plans, logistics, and schedules for completion of each phase of the proposed projects at 651 Pine Street and 2530 Arnold Drive. Proposers should include billing rates for all proposed team members as well as payment limits for each of the three major tasks listed above. It is anticipated that the selected Project Manager will also coordinate the later phases of the project, including the design, construction, and post-construction phases of the project. While the County anticipates negotiating a separate contract for this portion of the work at a later time, proposers are requested to provide preliminary estimates as to billing rates and overallcosts for project management services for these portions of the project. -6- F. Schedule The tentative project schedule is as follows: 1. FIRMS SEND SUBMITTALS TO COUNTY NOT LATIN THAN 4:04 P.M., FRIEDAY, JUNE 26, 19 98. Proposals received after this time will not be accepted. 2. County completes screening and invites up to six(6) firms to interviews, not later than July 6, 1998. 3. County conducts interviews during week of July 13, 1998. 4. County approves ranking of candidates during week of July 27, 1998. 5. County executes agreement; Consultant proceeds with services during week of August 3, 1998. 6. Project Manager Completes Defined Plan by October 15, 1998. ,Attachments: 1. Supplemental Questionnaire 2. GSA Standard Forms 254 and 255 3. Contra Costa County Board Order of May 12, 1998 -7- SUPPLEMENTAL.QUESTIONNAIRE FOR INDIVIEDUAL TO BE DESIGNATED PROJECT MANAGER 1. Describe your experience on multimillion building renovation projects over the past ten years. Provide project names, locations, sizes in terms of construction cost, your title and responsibilities on the projects and dates. . Describe your experience as a Construction Administrator on major renovation projects. Provide firm names, locations, dates, project names, locations and sizes in terms of construction costs. (experience as a Construction Administrator,Project Coordinator/Architect or as a Managing Principal might be concurrent) 3. Describe your experience writing specifications for major non-residential projects over the last ten years. Provide project names, locations and sizes in terms of construction cost. 4. Describe your experience working with government sector clients on multimillion- dollar building projects over the past ten years. Provide project names, locations, sizes in terms of construction cost, your title and scope of responsibilities on the projects and dates. 5. Please provide a description of the approach and schedule for the completion of the tasks requested in this RFC . is the October 15'4 deadline for completion of this phase of the project planning realistic? 6. Please attach a one to two page essay describing your firm's approach to the issue of differentiating between warranty vs. maintenance items during the past-construction "Shake-out" period. blow do you strike a balance between your client and the various other participants in the building construction process? _g _ Board Orders Related to Planning for New Facilities TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA FROM: PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR COSTA GATE. April 6, 1999 COUNTY SUBJECT: COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AT 661 PINE STREET- STABILIZATION OF BRIDGES AND REMOVAL OF TEMPORARY BARRICADE! (WHi 978) SPECIFIC REQUEST(5)OR R€COMMENDATION($)6 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION R.EQ2ME AT10N(S1: DETERMINE that there is a need to continue with the emergency action taken by the Beard or January 26, 1939 pursuant to Public Contract Code Sections 20134 and 22050. The financial impact remains as stated to the Board on January 26, 1999. BACKGRQV".A_NMN N Can January 26, 1999, the Board acknowleded physical condition at th�d%f Pine S eet building which required immediate remedial action to protect the public's he a ese remedial actions included the stabilization of bridges connecting the north an outh wings of the administration building and the removal of a temporary tunnel in the public lobby, Board policy requires a periodic update on the status of emergency actions. The County Administrator's Office proceeded with this remedial work through emergency contracting methods authorized by the Board. These methods included bidding by other than full and open competition. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT. X YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMIN13TRATOR -RECOMMENDATION OF SOARD COMMITTED APPROVE. OTHER EIGNATUREISj:/.t/ ACTION OF BO RD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER NOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A UNANIMOUS(ASSENT - 1 TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES, -- , - _ NOES:- -- _ ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ABSENT: -ABSTAIN; ON MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTS Ay r i l6 x 19-9 9 PHIL$Ml � ,CLERK OF 6 S7ERYI ORS 8DEPUTY Contact: cc: Site Wage 2 BACKGROM AND REASON FOR RECOM'DATIQT ttfi(Continued): The remedial work has occurred in two separate phases. The first phase was hazardous materials abatement. This abatement work began the weekend of February 20, 1999 and was complete March 20, 1999. Fabrication and installation of the steel shoring columns represents the second phase. A general contract has been awarded for this work. The contractor obtained his building permit, all materials have been ordered and installation began the evening of March 19, 1999. This construction work should be complete by April 20, 1999. {Ince installation is complete, the tunnel can be removed and this emergency action will be terminated. Tunnel demolition is expected to occur by April 30, 1999. Contact: Laura Lockwood, CAO cc: CAO Finance Auditor/Controller GSD (Accounting) O'Brien Kreitzberg (via CACI) Consultant(via CAO) TO: BOARD OR SUPERVISORS FRONL. PHUL BATCHELOR.COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BATE: March 23,1999 SUBJECT: COiTNTY ADNWi STRATION BL+`IIXING AT 631 ME STREET–STABILIZATION OF LOBBY AND BRIDGES(WH19M L RECO DETERINCNE that there is a need to continue the emergency action taken by the Board on January 26, 1999 pursuant to Public Contract Code Sections 20134 and 21450,to subilize the lobby and bridges of the County Administration Building at 651 Pine Street,Martinez. Funding fon this project is estimated to East between$64,400 and 580,004 and has boett identified and budgeted in the FY98199 Plant Acquisition budget (See Attached) RECO.MMEN-DATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _ RECC}1WENDATION OF BOARD CONOXITTER APPROVE OTHIER SIGNA-4 U`RE(S): Ilf�i Ii�I�+�ffFi�M�YY�iY Y�iY IfifY YfifflffYYiYfI ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECO ED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT TATS IS A TRLE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON TIM UNANv'1MOU5(ABSENT } I►ID`1`t,"TES OF THE BOARD SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWM AYES: NOES: ABSENT ABSTAIN: ATTESTED: PIM BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADML'MTRATOR BY: DEPUTY Contact: P.Batchelor,CAO cc: CACI Finance Auditor/Controller GSD(Accounting) O'Brien Kreitzberg(via CAO) Consultant(vin CAO) RACKGR. UrtD A. On December 1,1999 the Building Evaluation Rzport for the County Administrative Building was presented to tate Board of Supervisors with the recommendation that life safety concerns for the employees working in the buildings and the public conducting business in the buildings must be the primary consideration in deciding what action to take in regard to the buildings. B. Upon acknowledgement of the report the Board of Supervisors raafed the findings and concurred with the immediate action plan to reinforce the hazardous conditions until such time as a permanent solution was found(plans for a new facility).The current condition continues to represent a danger to employees and the public.In addition the closure of portions of the lobby and the bridges has caused delays and hardship to tenants in the building. C. On December 15,1948 the Board of Supervisors approved the funding to have the structural design prepared to shone the lobby and bridges in a most expeditious manner.The design for this work was completed on January 20,1944 and it was recommended to immediately start with the work without delays.Consequently,on January 28, 1999(Agenda Item#SD2)the hoard: 1. Found that an emergency exists. 2. relegated authority to the County Administrator to proceed in the most expeditious manner to start with the stabilization work at the lobby and bridges. 3. Directed the County Administrator to maize reports to enable the Board to review the emergency actions and to determine that there is a need to continue the action. 4. Declared that the project,is exempt from the provisions of the Cal€fornia Environmental Quality Act. D. The condition that the Hoard found to be an emergency on.January 26, 1944 continues to exist.That is,the hazard identified by the structural engineers to tenants and the public continues to pose a condition that requires immediate and continued attention.The work steeds to be accomplished in the most expeditious manner possible and will only be mitigated once the shoring of the lobby and bridges is complete. E. Asbestos Abatement work has started during the weekend of February 20, 1949.Proposals have been issued to 3 suitable contractors.Contracts for the shoring work will be issued by 2,123199-On Mach 8, 1999 the potential of lead paint was identified on the steel members to be shored.The Consultant confirmed the presence of lead.Abatement took place on March 13 and 20,1994.The General Contractor has obtained a building permit and all materials have been ordered and is being fabricated. TO: BOARD Or SUPERVISORS FROM- PHIL BATCHELOR,COUNTY ADNENISTRATOR DATE: January 11,1999 SUBJECT. APPROVE THE 1NI'ERIM CHANGES AS SHOWN IN RECOMMENIMATION NO.32 OF THE PHASE It REPORT OF THE DECMABER 1, Mg B0ARIOMEETINO OF COUNTY ADM 4STRATTVE BUILDING AT 651 PINE STREET I. HEMA "3ATION 1. FRiD,based on the evidence so forth below and as contained in the minutes of tate Board meeting held on December 1, 1998,pursuant to Public Corttract Code sections 20134 and 22050,that an emergency exists,that the emergency will not permit a delay froth c;ompetitive solicitation for bids,and that the action described in this order is necessary to respond to the emergent'. 2. AUTHORIZE the County Administrator or his designee to issue written authorizations for extra work to promed in the most expeditious way to shore the lobby seed bridges of 651 Pitme Stied Administrative Building. 3. DIRECT the County Administrator to make reports to the Board of SupervisoM as required by Public Contract Code Section 22050,stating the reasons justifying why the emergency will not permit delay resulting froth competitive solicitation for bids and why the action is nooessary to respond to the emergency,to enable the Hoard of Supervisors to review the cr=gency action and that there is a need to continue the action. 4. DECLARE that the project,as an emergetcy,is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act under Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(2)and(4)and Sanctions(b)and(c)of the CEQA Guidelines. 11. EW"IAL MACI Funding for this project is estimated to asst between 560,000 and$80,000 and has been earmarked in the FY9&99 Plant Acquisition budget. III. ba (See attached) _RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD CtOMMtiTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) L"L La ACTION OF BOARD ON �u a r'v ?ta / 95 APPROVER As RECOMMENDEi0 VOTE OF SUPERVISORS i HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN UNANIMOUS(ABSENT _���� ) AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES TES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. AYES: NOES: ._ ASSENT: _ABSTAIN. ATTESTED ED OF BOARI}OF VISORS ANE}COUNTY ADM ASTFBATOR BY ,DEPUTY CONTACT: P.Batchelor,CAO CC: CAO Fittastee Auditor-Controller GSD(Amounting) O'Brien Kreit#be:rg via CAO LACK ,tROUND A. In May 1998 the Board of Supervisors agreed to retain O'Brien Kreitzberg to prepare a Building Evaluation Report on the North Wing and the South Tower at 651 Pine Street..O'Brien Kr+eitzberg and their consultants,The Ratcliff Architects,Forell Elsesser Structural Engineers and trayner Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing Engineers,completed the Building Evaluation Report in November 1998.The report concluded that the building had outlived its useful life.Specifically the entrance lobby sad the bridges connecting the two buildings represented a bazard and needed to be expeditiously reinforced or supported. B. To ascertain the buildings structural condition the County Administrator had an independent stru mesal consultant,EQE International,vex*and confirm the findings.The County Administrator then directed the Du=W of Building Inspection and the mal Service Department to coordinate the immediate closure of the acted areas until such time the mitigating measures were in place. C. On December 1,1998 the report was punted to the board of Supervisors with the recommendation that life safety terns for the employees working in the buildings and the public conducting business in the buildings must be the primary consideration in deciding what action to take in regard to the buildings. D. Upon acknowledge at of the report the Board of Supervisors ratified the findings and concurred with the immediate action plan to reinforce the hazardous conditions until such time as a permanent solution was found(plans for a new facility).The current condition continues to represent a danger to employees and the public.In addition the closure ofpottions of the lobby std the bridges has caused delays and hardship to tenants in the building. E.• The design for the support of the more permanent solution for the lobby and bridges was completed in early January 1999 This solution involves the installation of 22 pipe columns to support the existing lobby and bridge girders and provide ramps for the second floor landings.Access to Orders will be from the plaster ceilings and includes asbestos removal,fireproofing and weatherproofing at the end of the installation.As requested the installation will provide renewed access to the bridges upon completion. F. It is recommended to reduce the public risk and find that an emergency exists that will not pertnit delays resulting from preparation of documentation leading to competitive solicitation for bids,and that the Board of Supervisors action is necessary to respond to the emergency. #';cap •++� w act Ct It n 44 w , 4*s+i 7 Va M f 44 ih va 44 � w � .iN &F#44 ,• i9 g �C fit• G7 i3 CCC333 CC33 hi t•� �} � !V `s!' M' rte- r r •••£� iV CV s,. CV 44 4 Va ira Va w' 44 Ni M va ' iA' s Va iii::.. {q':'{ W ...`s" � >: V!u"M, V1�'g Va XS:Ni s>.#.:V►�.;�'.,, 4, �,� CV �•s>: ",�°si 's''Ci#yss.Cry�'�+i's.M s N ia` A,jYk{ 6011. iii Yi.. Ni i`ii iAb�,i, 'sS' H � M��.:Vi�,�#�,••'��,�..-'•Ir'l,�s,'�s�66�^`VI`< il►i14 �r _ u9 to; M„ VeY Va � ii� 3#::N#s •N y�V►�'Vas iH1i#. Vi Y►" S° NCV CV f:1 33 ,s4'r CW ;:nv'CV ' CV f� ss`r-. ,. r3F N s"tct."°v:,;3 N yyy, &J ' t 3• ;s3.. 3s},'eR,�� H ,s S tAh C� 1 f{ C s's'S {.ss t,s ...^ >$ L jJ's• G An i se t0 {t ie tV s qpD{ -'ffi7§. >S C 3''7�r `•+� '""" C�'�y a, s`� E +• •'s7 rk".`� y» +s •t7y C: (J3 ffi - '�' '`3 3sx 03} �s "x>x tTst tV3'#ice d.. £rt•'- s �3 C3 t t cr m>z y 3$ t� $# lt:� ffi � st II? tJ7 +c L '�w t„s LSS..3J• iLl t tl3 Cr y 0,1& ss z rz; 11rill CV � r Csa'' E•3• `tt' GC P`7 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY / BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Adopted this Resolution on January 26, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: SUPERVISORS GIOIA, UI KEMI GMER, DeSATUINIER Alm CANCIA-MIU A: NOES: 1ONT AB SENT:Notts RESOLUTION NO. 99140 (Government Code § 25350) SUBJECT: Intention to Purchase Reel Property Summit Centre Office Building 2530 Arnold Drive Martinez, California 4 RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County RESOLVES THAT: It intends to purchase from Summit Centre Investors, Inc., for County office purposes, the real property described in Exhibit "A"attached hereto, for$12,200,000.00, In accordance with the terms and conditions of the Lease Agreement between the County of Contra Costa and Summit Centre Investors, Inc.,dated February 1 1998,which is a fair and reasonable price therefor. A copy of said agreement is on file in the Public Works Department. This Board will meet on March 9, 1999, at 9:00 a.m. in the Board's Chambers, County Administration Building, Martinez, California, to consummate this purchase and the Clerk of this Board is DIRECTED to publish the attached Notice of Intention to Purchase Real Property in the Contra Costa Times pursuant to Government Code Section 5053. This Board hereby FINDS that the proposed acquisition will not have a significant effect on the environment and that it has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under State CEQA guidelines Section 15061 (b)(1). This Board DIRECTS the Director of Community Development to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk and DIRECTS the Public Works Director to arrange' for payment of the $25.00 handling fee to the County Clerk. Pt30.gPP G:tOrpOats!ttaatPropt1490-FFtsst$g•iiOR2-1.2b,dac Orig.Dept.. Public Works Depart.(RIP) Contact; Paul Gavey(313.2720) cc; County Administrator Auditor-Controller General Services(L.MI Grantor(via R!P) P.W.Accounting(via RIP) RESOLUTION NO. 99/ 40 NOTICE OF INTENTION TO PURCHASE REAL. PROPERTY The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County declares its intention to purchase from Summit Centre Investors, Inc., at a pace of $12,200,000.00, an office building containing approximately 118,550 square feet of floor space on approximately 7.5 acres of land located at 2530Am old Drive, Martinez, California and more particularly described In Resolution leo. of the Board and will meet at 9:00 a.m. on March 9, 1999, In its Chambers, County Administration Building, 551 fine Street, Martinez, California, to consummate the purchase. PHIL. BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator B 40 # e" --- -- Deputy Clerk Date(s)of Publication: February 3, 1999 February 10, 1999 February 17, 1999 PBG:gpp G:1GrpOatelReeiProp11999-Fiies199-1\BR2-1-26.doc RESOLUTION NO. 991 40 a Order No,: 6152934 I»XHISIT"A" The land referred to herein is in the State of California, County of Contra Costa, City of MARTINEZ, and is described as foams: PARCEL ONE, Lot 1, as shown on the Map of Subdivision 6207,`Crest OOffice Park"filed, December 26, 1989, In Bock 310 of Maps, Page 6, Contra Costa County Records. EXCEPTING FROM PARCEL 03NE ABOVE: That portion of land described in the Geed to Contra Costa County Water District recorded January 28, 1987, Book 13414, Page 96. PARCEL TWO: _ A non-exclusive easement appurtenant to Parcel One above for drainage purposes, as granted in the Grant of Easement from Johnson Clark, et ux, recorded April 3, 1981, in Book 10267, Page 169, 07fficial Records, over, under and across a strip of land described as follows: Portion.of Rancho Las Juntas,described as follows: Commencing at the most westerly corner of Lot'D" as shown on the Map envied 'Map of Vine Hill Homestead Tract, Contra Costa County, California*, filed April 17, 1884 in Book B of Maps, Page 42, Contra Costa County Records: thence south 631157' 13'east,207.98 feet, along the southwest line of said Lot"D"(B M 42)to the point of beginning for this description:thence from said point of beginning south 6315 57' 13'east, 10.00 feet along the southwest line of said Lot"D* (B M 42), thence south 260 02'47"west. 30.00 feet thence north 630 57' 13'west, 10.00 feet thence north 261,02'47" east, 30.00 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL THREE: A non-exclusive easement appurtenant to Parcel One above for ingress and egress purposes, traffic signal facilities and for all public utilities, as granted in the Grant Beed from Jay Property Systems, Inc., a California Corporation, recorded December 26, 1986, in Book 13345, Page 726, Official Records, over, under and across all that portion of Lot 2, as shown on the Map of Subdivision 6207, (310 M 6) tying within the strips of land designated as`Proposed 60 ft. non-exclusive easement'and'traffic signal facilities easement&6€7 ft non-exclusive easement"on the above referred to Map of - Subdivision 6207, being a strip of land thirty(30')feet wide within said Lot 2 and thirty(30')feet wide within Lot 1 of said Subdivision 6207. EXCEPTING FROM PARCEL THREE. All that portion thereof, 30 feet in width, lying within Lot 1 of said Subdivision 6207. PARCEL.FOUR: A non-exclusive easement appurtenant to Parcel One above for maintenance, repair and replacement of the common driveway improvements and fear vehicular and pedestrian access, ingress and egress, as granted in the Common Driveway Construction, Maintenance and Reciprocal Easement Agreement from Jay Property Systems, Inc., a California Corporation, recorded December 26, 1986, in Book 13345, Page 356 Official Records, over, under, across all that portion of Lot 2 on the above referred to Map of Subdivision 6207, being a strip of land ten (10') feet wide adjacent to, outside and along the entire length of the easement area located thereon designated"proposed 60 ft. iron-exclusive easement"anis "traffic signal facilities easement and 60 ft. non-exclusive easement'. A.P.N. 161-510-001 RESOLUTION NO. 99/ 40 EXHIBIT"A"' DemnM is .Barry,AICP Corhmunity Contra Community Development Direct Development Costa DepartmentwL Courtly County Administration Building 651 Pine Street 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez,California 94553-0095 336-1210 Phone: January 7, 1999 County File #CP 98-93 Attention: Public Works Department Leigh Chavez- Design Division Dear Applicant: The Contra Costa County Community Development Department has completed an initial study of the environmental significance of the project represented by your pending application bearing County File Number CP Sa-23 SumMi !Qa=S AgUIsItIon. in conformance with Contra Costa County Guidelines for implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), it has been determined that your project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Your project falls within the following category: AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) IS NOT REQUIRED. The project is categorically exempt (Class._-). The CEGA requirements are accommodated by the EIR previously prepared for A statement that an EIR is not required (Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been filed by the Community Development Department (unless appealed). W) Other: General Rule of Applicability {Section 15061 (b)(3)). AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) IS REQUIRED. I The complexity of your project requires your submission of additional special reports or information (as outlined on the attached sheet) (which will be outlined in a forthcoming letter). A consultant will be hired to prepare the environmental impact report. This procedure is explained on the attached sheet. Preparation of the EIR cannot be started until the fee and additional information requested 13 received by the Community Development Department. If you have questions concerning this determination or desire additional information relative to environmental impact report regulations, please call (510) 335-12110. Sincerely yours, Dennis M. Barry,AICP Community Development Director By: /1711 A&'t4' thYtt Office Hours Monday - Friday:8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. Office is closed the 1 st, 3rd& 5th Fridays of each month ` d d , ' d DETERMINATION ERMINATION THA i AN ACTIVITY IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FILE NO.: 4197-6G5384 CP NO.: ACTIVITY NAME: Summit Centre Acquisition DATE: December 10, 1998 PREPARED BY: Leigh Chavez This activity is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Pursuant to Article 5, Section 15061 (b) (1) of the CEQA Guidelines. The activity is not a project as defined in Section 18378. 2ESCRIPTIQN QF TH9 ACTIVITY: Contra Costa County is acquiring an existing four--story Class A office structure in Martinez (APN 161-510-001). The building contains approximately 118,550 s,f. and sits on 7.5 :� acres of land. The office building is presently leased and occupied by the County and other tenants, LOCATIQN: The office building is located at 2530 Arnold Dr., Martinez (Figures 1'--4) J&I REVIEWED BY: A�0�79111410ATE: Cece Sellgren Environmental Planner APPROVED BY: � t� DATE: I�� Community development Representative G:1g atakdesign\envlm\99pto 10EQAoniyr Determ$ummf rs#re iguTe k t V co ccs ua J, t + � r CL- or- 0 CY- :. ag fl- 1 t f ` .. » z .i. f�yr rr e t•` 3 ,F�n�. r,.,1l,1..;��\. '•4 F ys'V.-,� rr �'i� • 'S��� L�r j { �� ��.�v� ��'r. m r T.s.ri t� * its a.• is t n t3 �J c^► i d RESOLUT ON NO. 98/ fiI8 OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA.COSTA CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE BY THE COUNTY OF CON'T'RA COSTA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY OF NOT TO EXCEED $85,000,000 AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF LEASE REVENUE BONDS(REFUNDING AND VARIOUS CAPITAL PROJECTS), 1999 SERIES A FOR THE FINANCING OF VARIOUS CAPITAL PROJECTS AND THE REFUNDING ANN DEFEASANCE ANCE OF TI-1E COUNTY'S 1988 CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION, AUTHORIZING THE FORMS OF AND DIRECTING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A TRUST AGREEMENT, A FACILITY LEASE (VARIOUS CAPITAL FACILITIES), A MAS'T'ER SITE LEASE, A LETTER OF INSTRUCTIONS, A BOND PURCHASE CONTRACT AND A CONTINUING DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT; APPROVING FORM OF AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE OFFICIAL STATEMENT FOR SAM BONDS, A�N`D AUTHORIZING TAKING OF NECESSARY ACTIONS A.N M EXECUTION OF NECESSARY CERTIFICATES IN CONNECTION THEREWrIH WHEREAS, the County of Conga Costa (the "County') and the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency) have heretofore entered into a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement, dated as of April 7, 1992 (the "Joint Powers Agreement), which Joint Powers Agreement creates and establishes the County of Contra Costa Public Financing Authority (the "Authority"); WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 4 of Chapter 5 of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Marks-Roos Local Bond'Pooling Act of 1985") and the Joint Powers Agreement, the Authority is authorized to issue bonds for financing public capital improvements whenever there are significant public benefits, WHEREAS, pursuant to a Trust Agreement dated as of July 1, 1988 (the "1988 Trust Agreement"), among U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as successor trustee (the "Prior Trustee'), the Conte Costa County Public Facilities Corporation (the "Corporation") and the County, the County has heretofore caused to be executed and delivered its 1988 Certificates of Participation. (the "1988 Certificates'), in the aggregate principal amount of$61,590,000, for the refinancing of the costs of acquisition and improvement of various County facilities (the "1988 Project!), WHEREAS,pursuant to a Rase agreement,dated as of July 1,1988,by and between the Corporation and the County (the "1988 Facility Lease"), the Corporation has leased the 1988 Project to the County; rrocssrx:3cas.sa.s 1 WHEREAS, under the 1988 Facility Lease, the County is obligated to make base rental payments to the Corporation; WHEREAS, the County has been advised that in a favorable interest rate market, it is possible for the County to reduce the interest rates on its debt by the issuance of refunding bonds, thereby reducing the rent payable by the County under the 1988 Facility Lease or generating funds for other capital projects,resulting in significant public benefits; WHEREAS,this Board of Supervisors has heretofore determined that it would be in the best interest of the County to proceed with a lease revenue ',bond financing for the refunding of the outstanding 1988 Certificates and the financing of additional capital projects including improvements to the Los Medanos health facility in Pittsburg, California, construction of the Family Law Center in Martinez, California, acquisition and improvement of an office building located at 2530 Arnold Drive in Martinez, California (the "County Office Building"), improvements to the Antioch Social Services Building (the "Social Services Building") and a portion of the County's match toward construction of juvenile detention facilities (the "1999 Project"); WHEREAS, it is further proposed that the Authority and U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as trustee (the "Trustee"), enter into a trust agreement (the "Trust Agreement') acknowledged by the County, pursuant to which the Authority will issue not to exceed $85,000,000 aggregate principal amount of County of Contra Costa Public Financing Authority Lease Revenue Bonds (Refunding and Various Capital Projects), 1999 Series A (the "Bonds"), and will use the proceeds and certain other funds to defease the 1988 Certificates and to finance the 1999 Project; WHEREAS, it is proposed that the County enter into a Master Site Lease (the "Master Site Lease") pursuant to which it will lease the West County'Detention Facility, the County Office Building, the Bray Courthouse and the Social Services Building (the "Facilities') to the Authority; WHEREAS, it is proposed that the County enter into a "Facility Lease (Various Capital Facilities)"(the"Facility Lease") pursuant to which it will lease back the Facilities from the Authority; WHEREAS, under the Facility Lease, the County would be obligated to mare rental payments to the Authority which the Authority will use to pay debt service on the Bonds; WHEREAS, a public hearing regarding the proposed financing was conducted by the County on December 8, 1998; WHEREAS,notice of such hearing was published five days prior to such hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the County; WHEREAS, an Official Statement describing the Bonds will be distributed to potential purchasers of the Bonds; r)oCSSF1:308164.5 2 WHEREAS, this Board has been presented with the form of each document hereinafter referred to relating to the Bonds, and the Board has examined and approved each document and desires to authorize and direct the execution of such documents and the consummation of such financing; WHEREAS, the County has full legal right, power and authority under the Constitution and the laws of the State of California to enter into the 'transactions hereinafter authorized; and WHEREAS, the County expects to finance the costs of the 1999 Project on a tax- exempt basis; WHEREAS, the County expects to pay certain expenditures (the"Reimbursement Expenditures") in connection with the 1999 Project prior to the issuanceof indebtedness for the purpose of financing costs associated with the 1999 Project on a long-terra basis; WHEREAS,the County reasonably expects that debt obligations in an amount not expected to exceed $85,000,000 will be issued and that certain of the proceeds of such debt obligations will be used to reimburse the Reimbursement Expenditures; and WHEREAS, Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations'requires the County to declare its reasonable official intent to reimburse prior expenditures for the 1999 Project with proceeds of a subsequent borrowing; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board' of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa, as follows: eclj,on.l.. The foregoing recitals are true and correct. cct:,on-2. This resolution is made for purposes of establishing compliance with the requirements of Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations. The County hereby declares its official intent to use proceeds of indebtedness to reimburse itself for Reimbursement Expenditures. eQti=.3. The County hereby specifically finds and declares that the actions authorized hereby constitute and are with respect to public affairs of the County and that the statements, findings and determinations of the County set forth above are tree and correct and that the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority and the financing of the 1999 Project will result in demonstrable savings in effective interest rate, bond preparation, bond',underwriting or bond issuance costs producing significant public benefits. Sgglion The Board of Supervisors hereby approves the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority,in an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed$85,000,000 for the refunding and defeasance of the 1988 Certificates and the financing of the 1999 Project. ti r5. The form of Master Site Lease, on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, is hereby approved, and the Chair of the Board of Supervisors ("the "Chair") or the Vice Chair of the Board of Supervisors (the "Vice Chair") and the Clerk of the Board of DOCSSF1:308164.5 3 Supervisors (the"Clerk') or any Deputy Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (the "Deputy Clerk") or their designees are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Site Lease in substantially said form, with such changes therein as such officers may require or approve, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery thereof; �v howev, , that the term thereof shall not exceed June 15, 2049. . The form of Facility Lease, on file with the Clerk, is hereby approved, and the Chair or the Vice Chair and the Clerk or the Deputy Clerk or their designees are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Facility Lease in substantially said form, with such changes therein as such officers may require or approve, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery thereof, pL vide , wrv,rte, that the maximum annual base rental payments payable under the Facility Lease shall not exceed $7,000,000 and the term of the Facility Lease (including any extensions) shall not exceed June 1, 2049. Among the changes authorized to be made to such Facility Lease are such changes as are necessary in the event the County Administrator or his designee, upon consultation with the Financial Advisor, determines it is desirable to obtain municipal bond insurance. eco . The form of Trust Agreement by and between the Trustee and the Authority and acknowledged by the County, on file with the Clerk, is hereby approved. The Chair or the Vice Chair and the Clerk or the Deputy Clerk or their designees are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Trust Agreement in substantially said form, with such changes therein as such officers may require or approve, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery thereof. Among the changes authorized to be made to such Trust Agreement are such changes as are necessary in the event the County Administrator or his designee, upon consultation with the Financial Advisor, determines it is desirable to obtain municipal bond insurance for the Bonds. . The form of Official Statement describing the Bonds, on file with the Clerk, is hereby approved and the County Administrator or the Director, Capital Facilities and Debt Management, or a designee of either, is hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver a final Official Statement in substantially said form with such additions, corrections anti - revisions as may be determined to be necessary or desirable by the Financial Advisor, Bond Counsel or the County Counsel's Office. The Financial Advisor is hereby authorized and directed to cause to be supplied to prospective purchasers of the Bonds copies of a preliminary official statement in such form, and to supply the purchaser of the Bonds with copies of a final official statement, completed to include, among other things the interest rate or rates, and final sale information. The County Administrator or his designee is hereby authorized and directed to execute a certificate confirming that the Preliminary Official Statement has been "deemed final" by the County for purposes of Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12. S-ec-tion,9. The proposed form of Bond Purchase Contract (the "Bond Purchase Contract") among the Authority, the County and Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc., as representative of the underwriters (the"Underwriters"}, on file with the Clerk, is hereby approved and the County Administrator or the Director, Capital Facilities and Debt Management,or'a designee of either, is hereby authorized and directed, for and in the name and on behalf of the County, to accept the offer of the Underwriters to purchase the Bonds as reflected in the Bond Purchase Contract; and to execute and deliver the Bond purchase Contract in substantially the form on file with the nOcssFI 30$164.5 4 Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, with such additions, deletions or changes therein as such officer determines are necessary or appropriate and are approved by such officer, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery of the Band Purchase Contract; that the interest rate on the Bonds shall not exceed a true interest cost of seven percent (7%) per annum and the underwriting discount (excluding any original issue discount) shall not exceed one percent(l.%). ct' n. The proposed form of Letter of Instructions, by and between the County, the Authority and the Prior Trustee, on file with the Clerk, is hereby approved. The Chair or the Mice Chair and the Clerk or the Deputy Clerk or their designees are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Letter of Instructions in substantially said form, with such changes therein as such officers may require or approve, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery thereof. S1QtWjLU. The proposed form of Continuing Disclosure Agreement, to be dated the date of issuance of the Bonds, by and among the County, the Authority and the Trustee, on .file with the Clerk, is hereby approved. The County Administrator or his designee is hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Continuing Disclosure Agreement in substantially said form., with such changes therein as such officer may require or approve, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery thereof: Section-12. The officers of the County are hereby authorized and directed,jointly and severally, to do any and all things which they may deem necessary or advisable in order to consummate the transactions herein authorized and otherwise to carry out, give effect to and comply with the terms and intent of this Resolution, including, but not limited to, executing or accepting all deeds, termination agreements or other documents related to the defeasance of the 1988 Certificates and the clarification of title to the 1988 Project. The Chair, the Vice Chair, the Clerk, the Deputy Clerk, the County Administrator, the Director, Capital Facilities and Debt Management of the County and the officers of the County are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver any and all certificates and representations, signature certificates, no- litigation certificates, tax and rebate certificates and certificates concerning the contents of the Official Statement distributed in connection with the sale of the Bonds, necessary and desirable to accomplish the transactions set forth above. DOCssFi:308 r 6a.s $ ,S.ection 13. All actions heretofore then by the officers and agents of the County with respect to the issuance and sate of the Bonds erre hereby approved and confirmed. Socb .14. This Resolution shall take effect from and after its date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this Wh day of December, 1998. i414 Chair of the Board of.Supervisors County of Contra Costa,California [Seal] ATTEST: Philip I Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator 1 o By CLOf ,,,-, � Deputy Jerk of a Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra.Costa, State of California DOCSsrs:30s164.s 6 t �4 CLERK'S CERTIFICATE I, Ann Cervelli Deputy Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa,hereby certify as follows: The foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of said County duly and regularly held at the regular meeting place thereof on the 8th day of December, 1998,of which meeting all of the members of said Board of Supervisors had due notice and at which a majority thereof were present; and at said meeting said resolution was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Uilke=, Gerber, DeSaulnier, Canciantilla and Rogers NOES: None An agenda of said meeting was posted at least 72 hours before said meeting at 651 Ping Martinez, California, a location freely accessible to members of the public, and a brief general description of said resolution appeared on said agenda. I have carefully compared the same with the original minutes of said meeting on file and of record in my offices the foregoing resolution is a full, true and correct copy of the original resolution adopted at said meeting and entered in Said minutes; and said resolution has not been amended, modified or rescinded since the date of its adoption, and the same is now in full force and effect. WITLESS my hand and the seal of the County of Contra Costa this 8th day of December, 1998. [seal] Deputy Clerk of the Beard of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa, State of California DOCSSF1:3083 64.5 �.. Uf Il i 'Roal PHIL BATCHELOR, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR �, '� Ste CATM November 24, 1996 SUBJECT. PHASE 11 REPORT ON COUNTY FACILITIES IN MARTINEZ SPECIFIC REQUEST($)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)A BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: I. ACKNOWLEDGE the Building Evaluation Reportfrom O'Brien/Kreltzberg and The Ratcliff Architects, their architectural consultants,which identified that a significant level of repair work In the County Administration Building at 651 Dine Street is needed. 2. ACKNOWLEDGE the Report from EQE, International (Structural Engineers) which validates the conclusions reached by Foreil/Elsesser Engineers, who did the seismic work for O'Brien/Kreitzberg/The Ratcliff Architects,that there are no significant life safety Issues in the building except for the need to reinforce the bridges between the North Winn and the South Tower. 3. AGREE that life safety concern for the employees working In the building and the public who have business In the building must be the primary consideration in deciding what action to take in regard to the building. [MMFDIAIE WC}RK NEEUEL?: 4. CONCLUDE that the bridges which connect the North Wing and South Tower (the 12 story main portion of 661 Pine Street) need to be expeditiously reinforced or supported. CO"NUEDONATTACHMENT: _.._....YES SIGNATURE- -RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR -RECOMMENDATION OF OOARO COMMITTEE .,......o.APPROW .....OTHER I A ACTION OF BOARD ON December 1,_.1998 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED_X._ OTHER SEE ADDMUN FOR BOARD AMON. ti1'YT€OF SUPERVISORS I HERESY CERTIFY THAT THIS 15 A TRUE ...�, UNANIMOUS(ASSENT S AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYE'S: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOAAD ASSENT. ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED December 1• 1995 CiontaC,w!yr srtfiIrl r+rir,ec♦rni'r.p Phil.BATCHELOR.CLERK OF THE EOARC OF 5. RATIFY the actions taken by the County Administrator to date to have the Director of Building Inspection work with the General Services Department to close off the affected areas. 6. AGREE to proceed with actual design work to reinforce or support the affected areas. 7. CONCLUDE that there are several alternative ways to mitigate the concerns regarding the bridges and lobby roof and that further analysis of the various alternatives is necessary before a specific course of action can be recommended. 8. DIRECT the County Administrator to report to the Board of Supervisors on December 15, 1998 with a proposed scope of warp for the temporary work needed In the affected areas. CON ION 0 THS. BQILDINCCURRENTLY: 9. CONCLUDE from a review of the reports from Forell/Elsesser Engineers and ECCE, International that, as it now stands, in the event of a major earthquake, the building will be damaged to the extent that it will not be repairable and will have to be abandoned, but that the building does not present a significant life safety danger to employees and the public since it is unlikely that the building will fall. The only significant seismic hazard present In the building is the interconnection of the bridges and the lobby below, as discussed above. 10. ACKNOWLEDGE that the Building Evaluation Report found numerous deficiencies and costly repairs that would be required to renovate the building, including: A. Rofi ng: + the roof on the South Tower needs to be removed and replaced and other steps taken to prevent further baking elsewhere in the building. B. Milch n„ ical: • the heating, ventilating and air-conditioning system (HVAC)are inadequate to circulate the volume of air that is currently required to meet health standards and needs to be replaced in both the North Wing and the South Tower. » the existing HVAC smoke evacuation system is old and does not meet current code requirements. • the boilers for the hot water heating system are old, show signs of rusting, and need to be replaced. • the entire chilled water system in the North Wing needs to be replaced and be tied in with the system in the South Tower. One of the chillers in the South Tower needs to be replaced,rust needs to be removed and the entire piping system needs to be replaced. The system does not meet current code requirements and needs to be upgraded to current code. C. E&Mbi1. • the pneumatic temperature control system is old,even though it Is still operational, and should be replaced with a combination of direct digital control and pneumatic control systems. • the galvanized steel piping In both the cold water and hot water systems should be removed and replaced with copper tubing and fitting. • replacing the plumbing system requires gaining access to the floors and ceilings throughout the building, which contain asbestos which would have to be removed. • the stall type urinals and some other restroom fixtures do not meet code and need to be replaced. • the underground storage tank for storing fuel oil needs to be replaced with an above ground tank that meets all current code requirements. D? El t al/PowerlLi ha tincil om_. unLcati,n • the electrical system, while operational, is old equipment, for some of which parts can no longer be obtained and should be totally replaced. • the interior lighting system is old and needs to be replaced with energy saving lamps and automatic sensors to conserve energy usage. • the electrical floor system is at capacity and cannot accommodate new wiring. E. FireUfa Safe -S sty ems: • the North'Wing contains no fire alarm system,the South Tower contains an inadequate fire alarm system and that installing such systems or replacing the system that is present requires access to the ceiling,thereby triggering the removal of asbestos from the building. the fire alarm system needs to be upgraded to meet current fire cede and ADA standards. there is no automatic fire sprinkler system in the North Wing and one only in the basement in the South flower. Automatic fire sprinkler systems are now standard on all floors with over 1,500 square feet. F. Akgstos-and Hazardous Materials: • the building contains known and suspected asbestos containing materials at numerous locations. Any asbestos containing material that may be disturbed by remodeling must be removed ahead of time by a licensed and registered asbestos abatement contractor. undertaking the removal of asbestos from the building will require that the entire building be evacuated for the duration of that work. G. Inter Systems the interior office layouts are antiquated and do not support a productive work environment. the elevators should have smoke-tight doors in front of the elevator doors. all openings into rated exit corridors should be upgraded to meet current building codes. • the seventh floor should have windows added because the height of the building and the lack of windows restricts access for fire fighting. This is especially a concern due to the limitations of the fire fighting equipment available locally for fighting a fire in a high-rise building. • the stairways in the South Tower are not pressurized and need to either be pressurized or have vestibules added. H. ADA Qom lianc • there are inaccessible restroom facilities on each floor of both the North Wing and South Tower. All restrooms must be made accessible and there must be both a men's and women's restroom on each floor. • the drinking fountains everywhere except on the first floor of the South Tower are not in compliance. • public telephones need to be moved to accessible height. • there is no code conforming signage for accessibility, including building access and maps, permanent room identification, and toilet roams. • most moors within the building have hardware (knobs)that does not meet access requirements. The exterior entry doors have 4 push/pull hardware and many of the first floor offices have pull bars. All of these need to be replaced. • the elevator in the North Wing is not accessible and should be upgraded. • the elevator in the North ging does not go to the fifth floor, rendering that whole moor inaccessible to the disabled. C-0-N LUSION. 11. CONCLUDE from a review of the Building EvaluationReport that the County Administration Building at 661 Pine Street (both the North Wing and South Tower) has outlived its useful life and that all of the building's systems (mechanical, plumbing and electrical)are inadequate and deteriorating. 12. RECOGNIZE that major remodeling will trigger the requirement that the building meet current building code and fire code standards. 13. RECOGNIZE that major remodeling will also trigger the requirements that the building meet the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 14. CONCLUDE that if the life safety improvements are doing to be made, the plumbing, electrical, HVAC, and mechanical systems need to be addressed at the same time. 15. AGREE that, If a decision were made to do the Work outlined above,once this much work is being done, in order to protect the County's investment in the building,seismic structural work on the building should be done to improve the likelihood that it would be repairable following a major earthquake or even that it be upgraded to the level of an "Essential Services'Building," meaning it could continue to function as an office building after an earthquake with little or no damage. COST OE TR INF R T OF THE BUILDING: 16. ACKNOWLEDGE that the cost to do the work necessary to bring the building up to"Essential Services Building"standards, remove the asbestos, comply with existing building codes, comply with ADA, replace the mechanical, plumbing and electrical systems and bring the building to the point that it can continue to serve as an office building for the next 30050 years is approximately $26.46 million, exclusive of temporary rent casts and moving expenses. 17. ACKNOWLEDGE that bringing the building up to the point that,while it would be damaged in a major earthquake, the building would be repairable in the event of a major earthquake:, is not a sound business decision because all of the ADA,mechanical,plumbing,electrical,HVAC,building code and fire code upgrading and asbestos removal will still be required and that they constitute the vast majority of the cost for full renovation of the building. The reduced cost would only be$2.88 million of the$26.46 million total,or a total of$23.68 million. 18. ACKNOWLEDGE that addressing only the life safety issues(those that could cause death or the collapse of the building), knowing that the wilding will likely be a total loss in case of a major earthquake, is also not a sound business decision because all of the ADA, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, HVAC, building code and fire cede upgrading and asbestos removal will still be required and that they constitute the vast majority of the cost for full renovation of the building. The reduced cost would only be $3.93 million of the $26.46 million total, or a total of$22.53 million. FEASIBILEYF-R ENOVATINQ 651. PINE STREET. 19. ACKNOWLEDGE that the Building 'Evaluation Report concluded that a major limitation of the current complex is Its small floorplates, that these small floor areas have made it difficult to efficiently house the County's administrative and public functions and that this problem will continue should the existing buildings be renovated. 20. NOTE that the wilding Evaluation Deport finds that the problem with the small floor areas will be exacerbated by the need to add new ADA compliant toilet facilities and new fan roams for a new HVAC system, which will result in the lass of useable space. 21. CONCLUDE that for approximately the same amount of money that would be required to remodel the building (estimated to be$23.42 million),the building could be replaced with a more efficient, low-rise building in the immediate vicinity on existing County property, with the existing building being demolished once a new building is completed. Again,these estimates do not include the fairly considerable cost of renting additional facilities and the cost of temporarily relocating employees to another location while the renovation work is completed and then returning the employees to the building. 22. AGREE that with minimal expenditure of money to enhance the life safety of the current building (including repairing the bridges between the North Wing and South Tower, adding more smoke detectors, doing more fire drills, _ enhancing the training of the existing floor wardens to assist in evacuating the building, taking other fire prevention and fire detection steps and the development of an emergency response plan in the event of a major seismic event, since the building will be unusable) the current building can be used safely for the 3-4 years it will take to complete a new building. 23. CONCLUDE that it is not a sound business decision to invest 26 million in renovating the building and that it should be replaced and eventually be demolished. FUTURE USE OF THE SUMMIT CENTRE: 24. ACKNOWLEDGE that the space needs of departments currently housed in Martinez cannot be met simply with the purchase of the Summit Centre, particularly with the loss of 651 Fine Street, and that additional office space will need to be constructed or leased, probably in the downtown area. C 25. ACKNOWLEDGE that the decision about which departments and functions are moved to the Summit Centre depends largely on whether the Board's Chambers are going to be at the Summit Centre or in downtown Martinez. 26. DETERMINE, based on the assumption that the Board's Chambers can be housed either at the Summit Centre or in downtown Martinez, whether the Board wants its Chambers at the Summit Centre or in downtown Martinez. 27. Direct the County Administrator, depending on what decision the Board makes about the location of its Chambers,to return to the Board with detailed options for moving staff to the available space in the Summit Centre, taking Into account all of the departmental space needs which were detailed in the report to the Beard on May 12, 1998. 28. PROPOSE to the City of Martinez,providing that the Board wishes to keep its Chambers in downtown Martinez, that the City and the County enter into a joint planning process which would examine the feasibility of constructing a joint City-County Civic Center Complex which could house the principal functions of County government as well as the offices of the City of Martinez. FAMILY I.AW_„ NTFR: 29. AGREE with plans to construct a Family Law Center in the parking lot across the street from 1111 Ward Street and adjacent to the Bray Courthouse Annex, designed to provide more secure and coordinated space for five courtrooms and related facilities,using the second floor of 1111 Ward Street,which would be connected to the Family Law Center. 30. ACKNOWLEDGE that the City of Martinez has agreed to provide parking to mitigate the parking which will be lost with the construction of the Family Law Center. 31. DIRECT the County Administrator to proceed with financing and construction of the Family Law Center. ADDI L N, ACTIONS IQ BE OAKEN: 32. DIRECT the County Administrator to proceed with the interim changes to the bridges and lobby mentioned ,above. 33. DIRECT the County Administrator to return to the Board with options for constructing a new office building to replace 681 Pine Street and a timetable for doing so. 4. DIRECT staff to identify funding streams which could retire the debt required to construct a new building. 3 . EXPRESS the Beard's intent to exercise the option to purchase the Summit Centre for $12.2 million, recognizing that the total cost, with tenant improvements,will be in the neighborhood of$18.5 million,and direct staff to take the necessary steps to complete the purchase, including CEQA requirements. BACKCR UNIT: lnAroduction: On May 5, 1998,the Board of Supervisors agreed to lease the Summit Centre,with an option to purchase. Can May 12, 1998,the Board of Supervisors received a report on facility needs in Martinez, approved a number of recommendations relating to doing a more extensive analysis of the structural integrity of the Administration Building, and refine the cost to do the necessary remodeling. The Board also agreed to establish a Committee consisting of Martinez City Councilmen Rob Schroder and Mark Ross, Supervisors Uilkema and DeSaulnier and the County Administrator to work on issues regarding the presence of the County in the downtown area of Martinez. That Committee has met on several occasions, The County retained O'Brien-Kreitzberg to prepare a Building Evaluation Report on both the North Wing and the South Tower at 851 Pine Street. The Building Evaluation Report was completed by O'Brien-Kreitzberg"s Architectural consultant, The Ratcliff Architects, in conjunction with Forell/Elsesser Structural Engineers and Gayner Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing Engineers. Because of the importance of the decisions which would be made based on the report from the structural engineer in particular,the decision was made to retain a second independent firm of structural engineers to review and comment on the work done by 1`orelllElsesser Structural Engineers. Finally, the County contracted with The Ratcliff Architects to evaluate the space needs of various departments and prepare"stacking plans"for several alternative uses of the Summit Centre,showing which departments could most appropriately be bused at the Summit Centre under different scenarios. REF?QRT_QF R -KR T R T FF ARQHI, ECTS. The architects hired by the County to evaluate 851 Pine Street have concluded as fellows: • The complex has outlived its useful life and needs to have major upgrades or be replaced. • There are structural and life safety deficiencies in the current building that need to be addressed. • The structural system in the North Wing poses the potential of a life safety hazard in a major earthquake. The structural system in the South Tower will generally meet life safety standards but will sustain major, Irreparable damage in a major earthquake. The bridges between the two buildings represent the single seismic danger that needs to be repaired immediately. • The lacy of a proper fire alarm and fire suppression system violates current code requirements and needs to be remedied if the building is going to be used for an extended period of time. The existing ventilation system does not provide adequate free air to meet current health standards. * The lack of windows on the seventh floor and the height of the building restrict access for fire fighting, especially due to the limitations of the fire fighting equipment available locally for fighting a fire in a high-rise building. They have provided a series of five alternatives: 9. Renovate the building to the State's"Essential Services Act"level so that the building would be operational after a major earthquake of a magnitude greater than that of the Loma Prieta earthquake. It will cost$26.46 million to do major renovation 551 Fine (including the North Wing)to accomplish this. 2. Only renovate the building to the paint that,while It would likely be damaged in an earthquake, it could be repaired. This level of renovation would cost $23.56 million, a cost reduction of$2.85 million. 3. Renovate the building only to respond to the FEMA 178 red flagged items. After an earthquake, the building would be so damaged that it could not be repaired, but there would not likely be any loss of life': The cost for this level of renovation would be $22.53 million, a cost reduction of$3.93 million. 4. At the very minimum,the bridges connecting the north and south wings need to be removed or their connections to the buildings need to be upgraded. This would allow the building to only meet"collapse prevention" standards. 5. As a final alternative, the consultant concluded that it would cast $23.42 million to rebuild a four-story office building behind the current buildings. This new building would have a life expectancy of 30 to 50 years. With some minimum level of renovation, at least the South Tower could continue to be used for the 3-4 years that would be required to construct the new building, at the conclusion of which the entire building complex would be destroyed, leaving room for parking and future expansion. Or, no renovations could be - undertaken at this time and all staff could be moved to ether locations until the completion of construction on a new complex. REPORT C? E INTERNATIONAL: Because of the vital importance of insuring that the lives of the public and employees are protected,we contracted with a second firm,"EQE, international"to review the structural studies by Forell/Elsesser and render their own conclusions about the conditions of both the North Winn and South Tower. This second opinion essentially validated the report from Forell/Elsesser and concluded: "...it is our opinion that the only significant seismic hazard present in the building is the Interconnection of the bridge and the lobby structures discussed above. If this problem were corrected, we believe that there would be no other significant structural hazards in the building and that earthquake induced collapse of the structures would be unlikely to occur. . . We also believe it is important to note,that while we do not believe that collapse of the buildings is likely,we do believe that they n would be subject to extensive damage in the went of strong ground motion at the site, and it is unlikely that the building would be available for re-occupancy until extensive repairs were conducted. Such damage following a major earthquake may be so significant, that the building would be deemed impractical to repair." EQE, International also noted that: "We note, however,that taken In total with other building upgrades that would likely be performed concurrently with the seismic work, the cost of such a program could easily exceed the cost of developing a new replacement building." RF.ASONS FOR NQTRPI N H € € t_ : It is apparent from the reports of the consultants that the work on the interconnecting bridges and lobby area must be undertaken as quickly as passible. In addition, it is clear that additional seismic work Should be done on the building if the County is going to continue to occupy it for the indefinite future. Once any significant remodeling is done on the building it will be necessary to comply in full with the existing building and fire codes as well as with ADA requirements. When all of that work is clone,the County will still have a building that has small floor areas that are difficult to work with, and, in fact,the useable floor area will actually be smaller than it is today. It does not appear to be cost effective to remodel the building, given that the cost to replace the building is equal to or less than the cost to completely remodel the building. FAMILY LAWCENTER: As the Board is aware, plans are moving ahead to construct a Family Law Center across the street from II11 Ward Street and adjacent to the Bray Courthouse Annex. The Family Law Center will be financed by pledging revenue from the courthouse construction fund. This will provide a more secure and coordinated location for all of the County's family law functions and will get several courts our of inadequate leased space. R P RT F THE T €FFR Hl T N STACKING DIAGEAMS EOR THE SUMMIT CENTRE: One of the problems at the Summit Centre is that there are some existing tenants who have leases which expire several years into the future and who are not interested in leaving the building early. In order to force them out, it would be necessary for the County to buy out the leases of some or all of the existing tenants. Therefore,one set of stacking diagrams assumes that the County only fills the space at the Summit Centre as leases expire. Five of the stacking diagrams make this assumption. The other set of stacking diagrams assumes that the County buys out the leases. Three stacking diagrams make this assumption. Asurnes spaceis filled asrit e e v ll l 1. Assumes that all of the employees and functions now in the North`dying go to the Summa Centre immediately, along with Supervisor Uilkema and miscellaneous support functions like the copy center. In 2001, the County Administrator's Office,County Counsel,Human Resources and L.AFCO would move to the Summit Center. The Board Chambers would remain at 651 Pine Street. The Social Service department's Area Agency on Aging,which is now at the Summit Centre, would have to be relocated to other quarters. 2. Assumes that all of the employees and functions now in the North Wing go to the Summit Centre immediately, alone with Supervisor Ullkema and miscellaneous support functions like the copy center. In 2001, the County Administrator's Office,County Counsel,Human Resources and LAFCO would move to the Summit Center. The Board Chambers would remain at 551 Pine Street. The only difference is on which floor at ,Summit Centre various functions are located. The Social Service Department's Area Agency on Aging, which is now at the Summit Centre, would have to be relocated to other quarters. 6. All of the employees from the South Tower go to the ,Summit Centre. The Board Chambers is also moved to the Summit Centre. Other arrangements would have to be made for the functions now in the North Ming. The Social Service Department's Area Agency on Aging, which' is now at the Summit Centre, would have to be relocated to other quarters'. 7. Functions which are now at the Summit Centre remain there. The balance of the building is filled with various functions from the Health Services Department. Cather arrangements would have to be made for all of the employees and functions now at 551 fine Street. 8. The Assessor and Clerk-Recorder are moved from their various locations to the Summit Centre. The Social Service Department's Area Agency on Aging, which is now at the Summit Centre, would have to be relocated to other quarters, as would the Training Institute, which is also at the Summit Centre currently. Other arrangements would have to be made for all of the employees and functions now at 551 Pine Street. Assumes lea e f c rr n t ant are ht out: 3. All staff from the North Wing and South Tower are moved out of 551 Pine Street and into the Summit Centre. The Board Chambers would remain at 551 Pine Street. 4. All staff from the North Wing and South Tower are moved out of 651 Pine Street and into the Summit Centre. The Board Chambers would remain at 651 bine Street. The only difference is on which floor at Summit Centre various functions are looted. 5. All staff from the North Wing and South Tower are moved out of 651 Pine Street and into the Summit Centre. The Board Chambers would remain at 651 Pine Street. The only difference is on which floor at ,Summit Centre various functions are located. RECOMMENDED-COURSE OF ACDON: As is outlined above,we are recommending that immediate steps be taken to repair the interconnecting bridges between the North Wing and the South Tower at 651 Pine Street. We are also recommending that we not undertake the cost of renovating 651 Pine Street, but instead pian on building a new office building in the immediate vicinity of 661 Pine Street. Haw the Summit Centre is used depends to a large extent on what decision the Board makes about where its Chambers should be located. We can either remodel the Summit Centre to accommodate the Chambers or we can anticipate that a new office complex in downtown Martinez should provide for the Beard's Chambers. We are also recommending that discussions be undertaken with the City of Martinez regarding the feasibility of creating a Joint City/County Civic Center on existing County land in the immediate vicinity of the existing County Administration Building. Once the decision is made regarding the location of the Board Chambers, it will be possible to go through the already prepared "stacking diagrams"or commission additional stacking diagrams to make the most logical and cost effective use of the available space at the Summit Centre and then to determine what will be needed in downtown Martinez In the way of office space. ADDENDUM TO ITEM n.3 DECEMBER 1, 1996 Can this date, the Board of Supervisors considered a report from Phil Batchelor, County Administrator, forwardino reports from consultants on the condition of the County Administration Building, 651 pine Street, Martinez, and the Summit Centre and recommending that certain steps be taken in view of the consultants' reports. Phil Batchelor, County Administrator, presented the report to the Board, commenting on the purchase of the Summit Centre, and the review of 651 Pine Street. Ferry McClelland, O'Brien and. Kreitzberg, introduced lion Crosby, Ratcliff Architects; Jim Guthrie, Forell/Elsesser Engineers; and Ron Hamburger, EuE International, who commented on their roles in the evaluation of the 551 rine Street building. Carlos Baltadano, Director of the Building Inspection Department, concurred with the consultants' recbmmenda.tiors, and commented on the temporary solutions being taken. Jerry McClelland further commented on the cost to brine 651 Pine Street up to code and the alternative to build a. replacement building. . Laura Lockwood, County Administrator's Office, commented on the space needed by various departments in the 651 mine Street building. Mr. Batchelor summarized the recommendations in the report. The following persons presented testimony; Mark Ross, 711 Grandview Avenue, Martinez, representing the City of Martinez; Rob Schroder, 100 Green Street, Martinez, representing the City of Martinez. The Board discussed the matter. on recommendation of Supervisor Carciamilla, seconded by Supervisor Gerber, the Board took the following actions; 1. APPROVED the recommendations in the report from. the County Administrator on phase II Deport on County Facilities in Martinez; 2. AMENDED Recommendation No. 26 to declare the Board's intent that the Board chambers remain in downtown Martinez for the present time; 3. AMENDED Recommendation No. 28 to include a direction for the point Planning Process Committee to report to the Board of Supervisors by December 31, 1999, on the feasibility of constructing a joint County/City facility and long tern solutions to the parking and flooding problems; 4. AMENDED Recommendation No. 33 to read direct the County Administrator to return to the Board with options for replacing 681 Pine Street and a timetable for doing so including construction of a new office building or locating other sites for potential purchase; S. AMENDED Recommendation No. 35 to express the Board's intent to exercise the option with that to return to the Board; 6. DELETED the word downtown in references in the report to replacement building in downtown Martinez. 1 I Prollminary as of 5/12198 Acquisition of Surnrnit Center Analysis of Building Occupancy Alternative$ project Courts Summit Cerner Summit Center for a for a #ieatlt#t Admin Bldg count Admin Sidi___ Offferenee Summit Coater 18,150,000 18,750,000 600,000 595/597 Center Ave 4,440,000 2,1340,000 (2,400,000) 851 Pine Street 8,725 000 .910651000340,000 Total 31,315,000 29,855,040 _�-(1,460,000) Overoll,annual Debt Servke* Summit Center s 1,535,000 105,000 50,000 595/597 Center Ave improvements 350,000 173,000 (2022,000) 851 Pine street improvements 765,000 825,000 60,000 Total New Debt Service 2,680,000 2,588,000 (92,000) E)dsting Debt Service on 595/597 Center Ave 1,033,785 1,033,785 Less Lear Savings and revenue Offsets 1,964,799 2,117 19 152 398 Not County Building Costs 1,748,986 1,5014,588 (244,398) Less E)dsting Leases 144,510 144,510 Increase In Not County Costs 1,804,476 1,504,588 9,888} *Assumes 30 year terra at 6% Preliminary as of 5/12MS Acquisition of Summit Center Analysis of Building Occupancy Alternatives projoct costs Summit Center Summit Center for a for a Health Admin Bldg County Admin_Bldg_ Difference Smolt Center Purchase 'Price 12,200,000 12,200,000 - Tenant improvements 4,430,000 5,030,000 600,000 Acquisition of Adjacent Property 1,520,000 1,520,000 - (p"ng enhancements,future expansion) Subtotal-Summit Center 18,150,000 13,750,000 600,000 89&07 CentorAve Tenant Improvements 3,000,000 300,000 (2,400,000) New Parking Facility 114401000 1,440,000_ Subtotal-5951597 Center Ave 4,440,000 2,040,000 (2,400,000) "f Pin*Street Main Building Fire Sprinklers/Asbestos Abatement 2,300,000 2,300,000 - Seismic Improvements 2,000,000 2,000,000 Tenant improvements 1,500,000 1,885,000 385,000 Replace PA System 45,000 (45,000) Electrical improvements 200,000 200,000 Subtotal-Maim Building 6,545,000 6,88$,000 340,000 Naim Wing HVAC System Replacement 1,000,000 1,000,000 - Electrical Improvements 350,000 350,000 Plumbing improvements 250,000 250,000 Asbestos Removal 150,000 150,000 Fire Alarm System 100,000 100,000 - Elevator Renovation 100,000 100,000 - Replacement of 1st Floor Doors-ADA 30,000 30,000 - Tenant improvements to 1st Floor 200,000 200,000 Subtotal-North Wing 2,180,000 2,130,000 - Subtotal-651 Pine Street 8,725,000 9,065,000 340,000 Total Project Costs 31,315,000 29,855,000 1,460,000 i'�re#irnirssry as of 51'!2198 Acquisition of Summit Center Analysis of Building Occupancy Aiternattvos Rhondho Assuawtfons Summit Center Summit Center for a for a Health Admin Bid Co"tr Admin 9149__ Di ftrence Souses COP*Proceeds-Summit Cents"' 21,030,000 21,715,000 6$5,000 COPS Proceeds-6M97 Center Ave" 5,465,000 2,645,000 (2,920,000) COP*Proceeds-651 Fine Street' 10,670,000 11 A40,000 S70,000. Tote/Some$ 37,165,000 35,500,000 (1,485,000) US" Project Costs-Summit Center 16,150,000 16,750,000 600,000 Project Costs-555557 Center Ave 4,+140,000 2,040,000 (2,400,000) Project Costs»651 Pine Street 8,7251000 9'"51000 340,000 Subtotal-Project Costs 31,315,000 25,555,000 (1,460,000) Debt Service Reserve Fund 2,921,630 2,528,004 (55,626) Capitalized Interest during construction 1,959,$97 1,$57,045 (102,549) Costs of issuance 400,000 400,000 Underwrttees Discount($8/1000) 297,580 254,003 (13,557) Bond insurance (35 bps) 266,093 273,951 7,#55 Contingency 4,820 3,964 55ts Total uses 37,165,000 35,500,000 (1,665,000) }yam+ is i'A a A g o ' N a N iii a G7 C N G r 140 f Qi tri ., iCit�23 r r : + s : s s 'f`��yy it5121 V. W v ,! Com.. � G� CS �" C� 2r11r. 11Y � G3 _G tC-1 of 4412 5 t LS N 1 l m 0 tCv V- wzt) tea! iYCDNtoNt0�' g Ct3 �!} �p �" ChiP. Id`l �} 0 ! 2"! t•9 � � ® C'i t3f +! P. � tq IN c ° An c r# ��. r r a t s r r r ! ! ! ts � j r YYNNii? t7? 2 CO CL n CL Cli 4q O NifS � N �iiA�' t91knt4. Q 2A C3 �- 3 .. sp h tib V- CIq 6 i V) P R� 44 qUA I t to m cm to co us cis 3 A t 0 co 5L7 Edi {�"� yie E ' v uwr .tr. Ewe 05 0 ! CIq I'- z —(nV- V. � c 0 V m uy tn co _ ct--. t:3 � tt� Cly cm IL .2 ." 0 � 2 cat � fill #3 =2 5coa. � OI0, IU 4 ft W CONSIDER WR GAYLE B. U I LKEMA COLWTV ADMIXISTUTION-$LL)G, 631 PINE STREET,Itt}OM 108A CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MARTINEZ,CA%$33.1293 SUPERVISORIAL D1STRlCT 2 (310)335.10"-FAX(SIO)335.1096 wwMrr.rrwrwri` F� EIV MEMO VAY t 1 FSK OF slim.`;'t i,:._ DA"I"S: may 111 199$ TO: Chair, Jim Rogers Donna Gerber Marts De Saulnier Joe Canclamilla FROM: Cada D. Ullkema SUBJECT: Item D.4, Analysis of County Capital needs In Martinez There are many outstanding questions which need to be addressed in our consideration of facility uses. Several questions which need to be explored are: 1. What are the casts of refurbishing the Board of Supervisors chambers? (including video and CCCTV taping). 2. Could chambers be used for large juror assembly purposes now? 3. What discussions have occurred with the Long-Term Court PlanningFacilities Committee regarding court needs? 4. What are the relocation costs (including telecommunication's costs) for either of the proposed plans? a. What are the identifiable revenue sources of$45M - $48M? 6. What are the comparative costs between renting and leasing facilities from the County's point of view? ?. How will public transit services (fixed route and paratransit) be provided to Summit Center? 6. What are the shuttle costs between: -Summit and 651 Pine Street -Summit and hospital facilities g. What is cost of providing such a shuttle service and which agency will be the service provider? CONSIDER WrIl GAYLE B. U I LKEMA Cttt.fivN'N ADMINISTUTWN BLDG. 681 FINE 5 rREF.T.P.00M 10EA CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 7NARTW=CA%S&LIZ$0 SUPERVISORL L DISTRICT 2 (510)33S-10"4 FAX(510)335.1076 RECEI , . MEMO MAY DATE: May 1111998 TO: Chair, Jim Rogers Donna Gerber Mark De Saulnler Joe Canclamilla FROM: Gayle B. Ullkema SUBJECT: Item 'B-4, Analysis of County Capital needs In Martinez There are many outstanding questions which need to be addressed in our consideration of facility uses. Several questions which need to be explored are: 1. What are the costs of refurbishing the Board of Supervisors chambers? (including vides, and CCCTV taping). 2. Could chambers be used for large juror assembly purposes now? 8. What discussions have occurred with the long-Terra Court Planning Facilities Committee regarding court needs? 4. What are the relocation costs (including telecommunication's costs) for either of the proposed plans? 5. What are the identifiable revenue sources of$45M - $48M? 6. What are the comparative costs between renting and leasing facilities from the County's point of view? 7. How will public transit services (fixed route and paratransit) be provided to Summit Center? S. What are the shuttle costs between. -Summit and 551 Pine Street -Summit and hospital facilities 9. What is cost of providing such a shuttle service and which agency will be the service provider? TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM' Barton J. Gilbert, Director of General Services '� 'yamCosta yw Counter DATE. December 16, 1997 SMECT: LETTER GP INTENT FOR A LEASE WITH OPTION TO PURCHASE FOR 25313 ARNOLD DRIVE, MARTINEZ SPECIFIC REQUESTS OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND IUSTTICATION I. REC0J M.ENDATLO-N APPROVE a Letter of Intent, dated December 5, 1997, with Summit Center Investors, Inc. to lease with option to purchase the premises at 2539 Arnold Drive, Martinez, for occupancy by the Health Services Department, and other County departments, under the terms and conditions more particularly set forth in said Letter of Intent, and AUTHORIZE the Director of General Services to EXECUTE Said Letter of Intent- on ntenton behalf of the County. The officers of the County are hereby AUTHORIZED and DIRECTED, jointly and severally, to do any and all things which they may deem necessary or advisable in order to carry out, give effect to and comply with the terms and intent of the Letter of Intent. The Director of General Services, the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and the officers of the County are hereby AUTHORIZED and DIRECTED to EXECUTE and DELIVER any and all Leases (after recommendation for approval by the Office of the County Administrator and approval as to form by County Counsel), Memorandums of Lease, and other documents necessary and desirable to accomplish the transactions set forth above. DETERMINE that the above project is a Class 1 Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act. DIRECT the Community Development Department to DILE a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk. II. FINANCIAL-IMPACT Payments required are to come from the budgets of the Health Services Department and the Social Service Department. A specific financing plan will be submitted to the Board at a later date. III. REASONS F-OR_REC4MM.ENDATI-O.NLBAC-KGROU-ND Provide for use of office space as requested by the Health Services epartment. fAft CONTINUED ON A"'ACHMENT. -_ YES SIGNATURE. RECOMMENCATiON CSF COUNT`!ADM:NIST.RATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURES; ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDE" OTHER ITTIER OF INTENT FOR SUMMIT CENTRE 2530 Arnold Drive Martinez, CA 94553 LF.SSOR: Summit Centre Investors,Inc.,a Delaware Corporation LFSSFE/ C31=: Contra Costa County LOCAnQ: 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez,California EnmAil)EFFE-C�'I`t DAT.EOF A(iREFM February 1, 1998 IERMI : Ten (10)years and 6 months TENNI MORARY LEASED PRFMBa: County shall lease Suite 300, approximately 14,023 rentable square feet, for eleven (11) months (from February 1, 1918 through December 31, 1598.) County shall lease Suite 300 in"as is" condition for a rate of$13,500 per month. On January 1, 1139, Temporary Space shall become part of Primary Leased Premises(described below). P MA i A�SF-D P_Fl` : County will lease 55,785 rentable square feet on the third and fourth floors,as of January 1, 1999 on the hent Schedule below. Ci .,MM FLQQR REMMES: County shall continue to lease Suite 100, occupied by the Training Institute,which is approximately 4,108 rentable square feet, at a rate of $1.50 per rentable square foot per month. Additionally,County shall lease at least 8,000 rentable square feet at S 1.50 per square foot on the ground flour, commencing July 1, 1998. County shall have an ongoing right of first refusal to lease all ground floor space. IFT t, Suite 19 County may operate the Deli, Suite 190, on the ground floor (including all fixtures within) in "ass is" condition, at its convenience and at no charge to County from February 1, 1198 through December 31, 1999. Any repairs or improvements to the space shall be at County's expense,but may be allocated from the total Tenant Improvement Allowance at County's discretion. -1- RENT IED LE Months 1-40, $1.50 per rentable square foot per month. Months 41-80, $1.60 per rentable square foot per month. Months 81.120, $1.70 per rentable square foot per month. ES CT TPaNCY: In the event that County desires to occupy a portion of Primary Leased Premises (except Suite 300) prior to January 1, 1999, County may do so at a rate of$1.50 per rentable square font per month. TENANIIMPROVE MENT AL OWANCF: Lessor shall make funds available for Tenant Improvements on an as needed basis, not to exceed the amount of$2,276,000,which shall be the total Tenant Improvement Allowance. Tenant Improvement Allowance shall be comprised of three different portions: "Lessor's Share,"Tenant's Share,"and"Ground Floor Allowance." 'These terms are strictly used as points of reference; the Tenant Improvement Allowance may be allocated to any space leased by County at County's discretion. However, any improvement cost exceeding the total Tenant Improvement Allowance will be at County's sole expense. It will be Lessor's responsibility to undertake and contract for Tenant Improvements using consultants and contractors acceptable to County. I ESSOR'S S14AR 5836,775 (55,785 sq ft x $15.00 per sq ft) shall be provided by Lessor, the unamortized portion of which shall be repaid to Lessor at the close of escrow. '&SHARE: $1,394,625(55,785 sq R x$25.00 per sq ft)shall be provided by Lessor,hearing ten percent(10%)simple interest,which shall be paid in the form of$11,621.87 per month until, close of escrow, at which time the entire balance of County's Share shall be repaid to Lessor by County. In the event County does not exercise its purchase option described below, the County's Share will be ® amortized over the remaining terra of the lease. LM FLOOR N ANT IMPRQVE h' ALLOW-AN-CE: Lessor shall contribute $5.00 per rentable square foot of space leased by County on the ground floor. This amount may be applied and used at the County's discretion and is not to be refunded or amortized. -2- A8 .LIRCTIM A L LaIE IFIL I.,..y Tep: In advance of an executed lease document, Lessor and County shall each contribute up to $50,000 to cover architectural and consultant costs for preparation of Tenant Improvement plans and for due diligence inspections. These planning costs shall be charged against the Tenant Improvement Allowance. P11RCHASE QP-T1 (112,904 sq ft rentable) County shall have the right to purchase Lessor's fee simple interest in 2530 Arnold Drive,Martinez, together with all leases, personal property,contracts,licenses and rights applicable thereto for $12,200,000 on or before December 31, 1999 with at least sixty(60)days prior written notice to Lessor. At close of escrow, Lessor shall convey to County a good and marketable title to the premises free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, and clouds upon the title except for easements and exceptions acceptable to the County. At close of escrow,the County shall pay to Lessor the unamortized portion of the Tenant Improvement Allowance. Cho Hung Bank and the holder of any lien or mortgage on the premises will recognize the County's Purchase Option. ACr fi ?.1"1': It is expressly understood that this letter shall not constitute a binding agreement between the parties, but only reflects our present understanding of the discussions and negotiations that we have had regarding the proposed transaction. No binding contract shall exist or be effective between Summit Centre Investors, Inc. and the County until a final lease is signed by all parties. The parties further agree that until a final lease is signed by all parties, any letters (including but not limited to this letter), drafts, other communications or conduct of the parties shall not be used to impose any legally binding obligation on another party. This Letter of Intent is subject to execution and delivery by both parties hereto of a valid lease with an option to purchase in form and substance acceptable to both Lessor and County. The lease shall contain such representations and warranties as are agreed to by Lessor and County and shall require the delivery of Tenant estoppels in form and substance satisfactory to County. Upon mutual acceptance of this Letter of Intent,the parties hereto shall commence preparation of the lease. -3- Upon execution of this Letter, all parties agree to proceed in goad faith towards the execution of a Lease with an Option to Purchase evidencing the terms and conditions contained herein. Accepted and Agreed to this day of December, 1997. r-.()L'Y" 'V LESSOR COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, SUMMIT CENTRE'INVESTORS, INC., a political subdivision of the a Delaware Corporation State of California By By Director of General Services Title RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: By Title By Deputy County Administrator By Deputy General Services Director By Lease Manager APPROVED AS FORM: VICTOR J. WESTMAN, County Counsel By. Deputy -4- Martinez Connection Newsletters o<o E iUNAL 4,11 SHORELINE •- Baa ( � /SCALE:I'-30 MARTINEZ WATERFRONT P) f BUCKLEY s� 4w 410 'Joe DIMAC010' 424 FIik157 � +` ! fmAmpDSNA 'A l 1fA i*a F E,COBAR STf,t ESCOaAR ST Alf 04 t'.$ ti$� � � 001 G30i rf t tt0 ffioWE ACM*4Sfl mk cott3r ;37-4v vs tuwDn� 1f6f1.pdC a'- aw MAIN ST wof MAIN ST 51 1 721 GIM" E g g lt. 7ss s + oto •721-737 WARD ST m WARD ST � G w102 ig C tlt +'rwarrt " viva" YiRA'iGFAL ' a2a�tz2 w m 0 7 xi tit 0fit 40UHfY coiulfs Comm �a,x roar Ito 127 tai tFA,GE t7i GREENS( W tYA Y of 4 GREEN ST, .. m 9>S" itf3 rM ta3o 313 L 4s3C SM 7 It ` B21 — 99low !► .�_, i34 itt-tat aw 4021 *34 !on MASONIC ST 017 Sf>N 7�40W� Covey 035 ttJ i442lOQt : ;roos•!o®s 1035 4W � yy. f:01 am 101i—t4t3i°1i tam t4S2 lost moo t 1020 %am Aftapt itkt7 102! f639 Cr so lolf 1024 � txS '�"'w v ur 1Q53 1022 tOS6 N24 1021 MELLUS ST y talc 1=9 rh riot ► 1,03 tsoi #ELL 1S ST tif0 tttS illi � ti2a -" 1135 XF C7 tfii ti 4 1:12 � � � Nt r'r"• tl2s 7C tr1 tris � SSSt ti` _ 1141 tt$3 rx tsm r St St23 1t2t LQ2 Q y HENRIETTA ST -+ 1133 t3tleS istt22i HENFti Stat s242jigi RECONFIGURED El`1A QST CNE�4WAY z2fo IP PLAZA zifs 31i ✓ t:a iii 5 RESTS zxsa PARKt2i! 1=4 zits tt2i soy♦msrut 1111 pft'11tf,7 1523 t23c NE',t FA44ILY SUSANA ST SUSANA ST =10 ! LAW CENTER E:t tses SUSANq MEMORANDUM CITY COUNCIL AGENDA December 2, 1998 DATE. November 2S, 1998 To: MAYOR.AND CITY`COUNCIL FROM: MARCIA RAINES, CITY Iv AINAGER.IW4,"'"� SUBJECT: MULTI-USE GOVERNMENT CENTER.CONTLEX ACTION: Adopt resolution requesting a joint Facility Master Elan between Contra Costa County and the City of Martinez for the development of a City/County Multi-Use Government Center in Downtown Martinez. BACKGROUND: The County is currently examining facilities in the downtown area to determine suitability for various departments' needs over the next decade. As a part of this, the City has been working with the County to determine levels of support services needed. Currently, the City is in the process of constructing an $8.4 million flood control and creek enhancement improvement project throughout the downtown area. Efforts are also being devoted to improve parking availability and to provide improved public transportation to the downtown area. Several years ago the City and County discussed the concept of a joint City/County Civic Center in the downtown area, It seems that current activities warrant re- examination of that concept. Staff recommends the City adopt a resolution requesting the Board of Supervisors begin a master plan process to determine feasibility of a Multi- Use Government Center (see Exhibit A). If we begin working together immediately, such a centerwill still be years in the future. But unless the two agencies begin working together at this paint and time,decisions revolving around odsting County facilities may take another turnover the next several months. MR:elm Attachments f RESOLLMON NO. Requesting a joint Facility Master Plant. Between Contra Costa County and City of Martinez for the Development of a City/County Multi-Use Government Center in Downtown Martinez WHEREAS, Contra Costa County is currently evaluating e�dsting facilities in the downtown arta; and VVI EREAS, the City and County are working together to ensure the future of downtown Martinez as the County seat; and WHEREAS, the County evaluation of facilities has determined extensive repairs .are necessary to their existing facilities; and %rHEREAS, one component of planning for County facilities needs should be development of the long discussed Multi-Use Goven mens Center. WHEREAS, a facility master plan for the City of Martinez and the County should be part of the examination of options regarding existing facilities; and WHEREAS,the need exzsts to make a request to the Board of Sup=rvisors that the two agencies begin working together immediately to develop such a plan; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Martinez requests the County Board of Supervisors°work with the City to develop the concept of a Multi-Use Government Center for downtown Martinez as a part of the current evaluation of existing facilities. I HEREBY CERA that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Martinez at an Adjourned Regular Meeting of said Council held on the 2nd day of December, 1998,by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Richard G. Hernandez City Cleric By: Mercy G. Cabral Dep u City Clerk Pro Ten, City 0 Martinez Itvlultiusc.R.es VD j{ 7 f REG1OtvAL pja '°a SH «UNE ,p SARK U SCALE-`-30' 1 M WATERFRONT PF SUCIt>v 1 FJOE X}lAtgGGiO { w 1 424} 4t4 Mill .., i w M(SM+t St'al1tY+ .Sap } VAi"J !tt 300 lAlVtaYs .sii. .dye► S05 Sid did 94 j Fy ESC OJaR STr` t� ESCC AR S 'est Sa+ ei5 eta etf Sta a Tart $1S W 61-1—W dig . 3 :� �� ..:; s r a. � a��.. "'i 113 r i}w r • sY.i Y. M i est MAIN ST c¢ y 6p y MAIM ST !V. 7^.At 735 04'516#5 SrARiaita ani Tia }} flFAAR'Y64'1 721-737 � 736 WARD ST � WARD ST � � `'" � � WARO f a2a-s sss NA j M ets iu L.� 1$3, az S74 � vKr,REEK its m GREED ST, .sir-�rrsrr, ass set.ert sas � S06 s � � � e21 5ls She �i iM 517 SY2.� 527 (#}425 g3Z{y( e3a 1 e e 3 41 - teas us tv—Ji ( � i13+� #tt.�•yii u 1021 y,� 1 MASONIC ST r vii foss T HOMPSON, ST t� Y 'fS7 1603t01ie i.a N w002•20012 1055 low>" itaf pa0 t } m I= :17;f$S1�t015` 1pC5 iC:e 35 tLi f0i t027 50 224 10 } i+l"24 �i02i mu 1635 y .. MELLUS ST tA Yi0e tia5 it04 `i' "'Si 4410 ili5 ilt4 124 iN ills it55 I Ni. 1125 lit$51124 + fti 4ti2 { ii2a i133 :. it= 112 1125 ltss ( 33 r......,..... 12M # HENRIETTA S7 "+ tics 1534 1" 11 k2&4 u k202 p.{E�ReE7TiA S`I' 37 I 4202 GNACIO it t2ia � PLAZA � � veRrwrt � 12�i7 ixi+ 1215 1454+ is 5232 PARK 1 1 {{ 1231 1235 i 1235 11 SUSANA ST u K+O€Z SUSA1vA S SUSANA ST zb. t3d,Kj U3c3 rrw rrrs CITY OF MARTINEZ MULTI—USE GOVERNMENT CENTER COMPLEX E)(HISI-r "Ar D.4 THE BOARD OR SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on May 12, 193$�„by the following vote: f It S: Supervisors Uilkema, Gerber, DeSaulnier, Canciamilla, J/ Rogers ROBB: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None sssssssssssssssssssssssssssaasrssasssss.ssasrss:sss:ssaRs:ssssswssssssssssssssssss sDWECrt Analysis of County Capital Facility Needs In Martinez Phil Batchelor, County Administrator, presented to the Board this day his report on the Analysis of County Capital Facility bleeds in Martinez Including his recommendations on actions for the Board to considered. A copy of the report Is attached and included as a part of this Board Order. Counclimembers Rob Schroder and Mark Ross of the City of Martinez spoke on the recent meeting with Supervisors Uilkems and DeSaulnier and County Administrator Phil Batchelor in which Issues of concern were discussed. Both Counclimembers expressed the desire to continue to most with County staff on issues pertinent to the County offices In downtown Martinez. Board members discussed the recommendations of the County Administrator,the need for a detailed financial analysis,the Issues pertinent to making the Summit Centre a County Administrative Center(Option A)or making the Summit Centre a Health Services Administrative Center(Option B),the treed to perform maintenance work and asbestos abatement to 551 Pine Street Including the North Wing,the space needs of the various County Departments, utilization of the Board Chambers at 551 Pine Street, solicitation of employee Input on changes that will be occurring with the renovation of County buildings as well as the public hearing process,transportation issues to and from County facilities, and a proposal for locating certain County services in regional centers In various areas of the County. Therefore, at the conclusion of the discussion,the Board took the following actions: I. APPROVED Recommendations Nos. 1 through 56 of the County Administrator's Report with direction given to the County Administrator to report to the Board within 60 to 90 days on a detailed financial and planning operational analysis on Options A and B and possibly other variations for the Board to consider as a result of the analytical data studied in the development of the report: 2. CLARIFIED Recommendation No.Sat to reflect that it is not the Intention of the Board to leave 651 Pine Street empty or partially empty, but staffed with County Departments in accordance with their space needs; 3. REQUESTED the County Administrator to explore possible locations for an employee child-care facility; 4. ESTABLISHED a Committee consisting of Martinez City Councilmen Rob Schroder and Mark Ross, Supervisors DeSaulnier and Ullkema, and County Administrator Phil Batchelor to work on issues regarding the presence of the County In the downtown area of the City of Martinez(Recommendation No.64); 5. REQUESTED the County Administrator to review transportation resources for access to the ,Summit Centre and other County facilities Including the conduct of a survey on modes of transportation used by visitors to County offices; 6. INSTRUCTED the County Administrator to request the City of Martinez to take Immediate steps to augment available parking In the downtown area to accommodate the new functions that are being transferred into Martinez as wen as the new Court operations (Recommendation No. 70); and Board Girder Analysis of County Capital Facility !Needs Page#Two May 12, 1998 7. REQUESTED the County Adrninistrator to report in Novemberm*comber 1888 on the feasibility of locating County services in regional centers In various areas of the County. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS tffi A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES Of THE BOARD OF Eumvism ON THE DATE sHowN. ATTESTED: _May 12,10$Q PM Batchaior,Clark or tho Board of 8upely sm*md County Adm1h*ntor By Deputy For distribut on see Page 20 of the report. rnUN.. PHIL BATCHELOR, cu€ -r�rDnr €s -€ zO ' �' sta County SLATE: May 7, 1998 "' ANALYSIS OF COUNTY CAPITAL FACILITY NEEDS IN MARTINEZ SPECIFIC RSOUSST(S)OR RECOMMENDATIONS)t BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION i. SUM $` . P BLE981 QAT'NT Many County departments have office space needs which we have not been able to meet over the past several years. Buildings need an adequate level of maintenance to take dare of problems which occur as buildings age. Little preventive maintenance has been done in the past ten years because of the shortage of funds. As a result, many County buildings are in need of extensive repair. The County Administration Building at 651 Pine Street is one of these buildings. There are problems with fire alarms, lacy of fire sprinklers,old pipes which are leaking and breaking, and outdated electrical and plumbing systems. When these problems are addressed asbestos abatement will be necessary because there is asbestos in the floors and ceilings which will have to be removed when any major maintenance Is done. Correcting all of these problems will cost approximately $9.0 million at 661 Pine Street, including both the 12 story main building and the forth Ming. To begin meeting some of the space needs of a variety of departments, the .Board of Supervisors has agreed to lease the Summit Centre on Arnold Drive In Martinez. This will add 110,000 of net usable space to the County's inventory and allow various space needs to be met. CONTINU€D ON ATTACHMENT: ., .....YES SIGNATURE: ` -RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY AOMINISTRATOR -RECOMMENDATION OF SOARD COMM;TwEE -APPROV€ -OTHER I NAT R s 1993 ACTION OF BOARD ON 1` APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER . VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I EBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE -UNANIMOUS(ASSENT �+ AND C CT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: k0€S: AND ENTERS THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS 0 E DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED Contact: PHiL BATCMELOP CLE RN rt€SC'}ARD OF The extent of the repairs needed at 651 Pine Street cannot be accomplished while the building is fully occupied by employees and Is open to the public. With the action taken by the Board of Supervisors on May 5, 1998 to authorize leasing the Summit Centre,the County is not only provided with much needed additional space. It is also presented with a relatively unique and economical opportunity to perform the necessary repairs at 651 Pine Street by moving staff to the Summit Centre on a temporary basis while the repairs are being made. At the conclusion of the repair work,the same or different employees, departments and programs would be returned to 651 Pine Street. The following report identifies some of the most pressing capital needs in the County and recommends steps that can be taken to meet those needs. The report Includes two scenarios for which departments and programs should occupy the Summit Centre, the Health'Services Department buildings at 595 and 597 Center Avenue in Martinez and the County Administration Building at 651 Pine Street after the major repairs are completed at 651 Pine Street. The first scenario assumes that the Summit Centre becomes a County Administrative Center. The second scenario assumes that Summit Centre becomes a Health Services Administrative Center. The report also Identifies common moves which should be made regardless of which scenario Is chosen, some of which the Board has previously authorized and are currently in progress. Our conclusion is that making the Summit Centre a County Administrative Center solves more of the existing space problems and is actually somewhat less expensive in the lona run than making the Summit Centre a health Services Administrative Center. 1. RECOGNIZE that of the 3,757,000 square feet of owned and leased space the County occupies throughout the County, 1,852,000 square feet or 49.3% of that space is located in the City of Martinez. 2. CONCUR that one of the principal objectives of the County's capital facilities program is to relocate staff from rented or leased space and into County-owned facilities whenever feasible,cost effective,and when future costs can be protected from inflationary increases by purchasing a building. 3. AGREE that the functional relationship among elements of some departments dictates that staff should be located in close proximity to each other to facilitate work flow and documentprocessing. 4. AGREE that when the County has the opportunity to address building maintenance issues In a County building,the County should do so. 5. CONCUR that the County has a number of aging buildings which should be repaired to avoid further deterioration, whenever possible, and that the County should try to meet some of the pent-up capital needs and deferred maintenance needs which have developed during the recent recession as opportunities present themselves. 1) meet the pubiic's convenience and serve customer needs. lll. lM& FXIFNT Assessor 7. ACKNOWLEDGE that the space presently occupied by the County Assessor at 834 Court Street, Martinez is inadequate working space for County employees and is not suitable for efficient customer service. ` 8. CONCLUDE that because of the problems with the present space at $34 Court Street, Martinez,the County Assessor should be relocated to more suitable quarters. g. ACKNOWLEDGE that the space presently occupied by the Elections Division of the Clerk-Recorder's Office at 824 Main Street, Martinez Is Inadequate working space for County employees and is not suitable for efficient customer service. 10. CONCLUDE that because of the problems with the present space at 824 Main Street, Martinez, the Elections Division of the Clerk- Recorder's Office should be relocated from its presently leased space to more suitable quarters. 11. ACKNOWLEDGE that the functional relationships among staff in the Recorder's Division of the Clerk-Recorder's Office dictate that the staff have more adequate working space than is possible in the facilities in which they are presently located at 730 Las JuntasStreet, Martinez and that parking is a significant problem where the Division is presently located. 12. CONCLUDE that because of the shortage of space in which to serve the public and because of the shortage of parking for employees and the general public, it is desirable to relocate the Recorder's Division and the County Clerk's Division of the Clerk-Recorder's Office to more suitable quarters. E b is Defender: 13. RECOGNIZE that the Board has recently agreed to purchase and renovate the old "State Theater" building in 'Martinez so as to consolidate in one location of 27,000 square feet at a cost of $3.5 million the staff of the Public Defender's office, thereby terminating leases in Concord and Richmond and freeing up County-owned space the Public Defender now occupies in Martinez for occupancy by the Alternate Defender's Office. Halth Services: 14. ACKNOWLEDGE that the County has just completed Phase I of a building program in Martinez which has resulted in the construction of the $85 million Contra Costa Regional Medical Center. 15. RECOGNIZE that Phase 11 of the building program will involve demolishing unused buildings on the grounds of the Regional Medical Center and replacing them with a new laboratory at a cast of approximately$7.5 million. 16. RECOGNIZE that completion of Phase 11 will free up space at 1111 Ward Street for the District Attorney and Court administration. 17. ACKNOWLEDGE that the space presently occupied by the Health Services Department's administrative offices at 20 Allen Street, Martinez 1s inadequate in terms of meeting seismic standards and In teras of adequate parking. 18. ACKNOWLEDGE that because of the problems with the present space at 24 Allen Street, Martinez, the Health 'Services Department's administrative offices should be relocated to more suitable quarters. 13. ACKNOWLEDGE that there is a pressing need to update the Master Flan for additional medical and administrative space on the grounds of the Contra Costa regional Medical Center in Martinez and that such a Master Plan update is underway. 20. ACKNOWLEDGE that the facilities occupiedby the Health Services Department at 595 and 557 Center Avenue, Martinez are crowded and that some relief should be provided. 21. ACKNOWLEDGE that there is a significant shortage of parking at 595 and 597 Center Avenue, Martinez. Social Seixicc 22. ACKNOWLEDGE that there is also a significant shortage of parking at the facilities occupied by the Social Service Department at 30 and 40 Muir Road, Martinez, adjacent to the Health Services Department's facilities at 595 and 597 Center Avenue, Martinez. 23. CONCLUDE that remedy of the parking shortage at the complex of offices at 595 and 597 Center Avenue and 39 and 40 Muir Read, Martinez is a high priority. F3gttl.Qdeling 651-Pi. e Stra+t 24. ACKNOWLEDGE that fire alarms and fire sprinklers were not required In the North Wing of the County Administration Building at the time it was built in 1954. 25. ACKNOWLEDGE that General Services Department staff are concerned about electrical failures in both the North Wing and main building at 651 Pine Street in view of the fact that the entire electrical system in the North Wing,which is supplied by the main building, shut down on Monday afternoon, April 27, 1998 and that similar failures in the future could disrupt vital County functions in both buildings. 26. ACKNOWLEDGE that tate Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning {HVAC}system and the plumbing in the North Wing of 651 Pine Street need to be replaced. 27. ACKNOWLEDGE that recent corrosion of water pipes in the North Wing of the County Administration Building has caused flooding and destruction of equipment,files, records and property, necessitating that repairs and preservation of the North Wing must also be a high priority. 28. ACKNOWLEDGE that the main County Administration Building at 651 ' Pine Street, Martinez(a nearly 35 year old building)has asbestos in the ceilings and floors, lacks fire sprinklers, requires exterior sealing to protect the building from further water damage, and may require seismic improvements to enhance the overall structural integrity of the building. 29. CONCLUDE that since there is vacant space available into which staff can be moved while repairs are being made, it would be prudent to remove the asbestos and install fire sprinklers, waterseal the walls, make seismic improvements and perform other required maintenance on the main County Administration Building at 651 Pine Street, Martinez. 30. ACKNOWLEDGE that it will not be possible to perform the work on the County Administration Building while it is occupied by employees and the general public and that it will,therefore, be necessary to completely clear at least one floor at a time to perform the necessary work and relocate those functions to other quarters on a temporary basis. Risk Martaaempnt: 31. RECOGNIZE that the Risk Management Division of the County Administrator's Office, currently located on the 6th floor of the County Administration Building, needs additional space to accommodate the additional staff which have been added in order to peep the Workers Compensation Program in-house. Counfy Cg3 32. RECOGNIZE that the County Counsel's Office, currently occupying most of the 8th and all of the 9th floors of the County Administration Building, needs additional space because the County has been able to bring more of the tort cases in-house by hiring additional attorneys. Sh ff:Cher: 33. RECOGNIZE that the Sheriff-Coroner,currently occupying the 7th floor of the main County Administration Building and portions of the 8th and 1 st floors of the main building, as well as the first floor of the North Wing of 651 Pine Street, as well as several rented facilities in the immediate area, needs additional space to consolidate his fiscal staff which are now on the 8th floor of the County Administration Building with the records unit in the North Wing,training and other functions now on the 1 st floor of the main building. stmt, nevi 34. RECOGNIZE that the District Attorney needs to be moved from costly leased space in Concord to Martinez where stag will be in closer proximity to the courts. Qlerk 2f The Boad: 35. RECOGNIZE that the Clerk of the Board, currently occupying a portion of the 1 st floor of the County Administration Budding, needs additional storage space for the Board of Supervisors'fibs and records. Area 2nQ�on Agip 38. RECOGNIZE that the Area Agency on Aging, a division of the Social Service Department, is currently occupying leased quarters in Martinez due to a lack of space at the Department's administrative offices at 40 Douglas Drive, Martinez. !Q!2mmunt Dgmelo Mgni & B Ei gingi, .LIbion Departmentt' 37. RECOGNIZE that the Community Development and Building Inspection Departments,which are housed in the North Wing of 551 Pine Street, are overcrowded and need some additional space. 38. RECOGNIZE that the Central Permit Counter should be moved to the first floor of the North Wing in order to provide more space and to be more accessible to the public. Maty'f'. armit renter: 39. ACKNOWLEDGE that the State Permit Center, which currently occupies a portion of the 4th floor in the County Administration Building, would prefer to be co-located with the Health Services Department's Environmental Health Division, which is currently occupying rented space in Concord. QQardinated Trial Courts: 40. ACKNOWLEDGE that the Courts must vacate,as soon as practical,the court facilities in the George Gordon Center at 500 Court Street, Martinez which the courts have occupied since the fire which destroyed the courtrooms of the Mt. Diablo Municipal Court in Concord. 41. RECOGNIZE that the sum of up to$5 million has been made available to the courts for capital facilities. 42. ACKNOWLEDGE that there are other pressing needs for additional courtrooms to facilitate coordination, eventualconsolidation of the courts .and long-term expansion. 43. RECOGNIZE that the existing jury assembly room is Inadequate to handle the large number of jurors who must be summoned for major trials like capital crimes, where 150-200 jurors may have to be summoned at one time. 44. RECOGNIZE that the Coordinated Trial Courts have identified 27,000 square feet of need to salve the above identified problems. 45. RECOGNIZE that the Coordinated Trial Courts are working with staff on a "Family Law Center" which would consolidate most family law functions in a single location, including housing five courtrooms, conference rooms for,attorneys and clients, and space for the family law facilitator. card of ,lac. I 46. ACKNOWLEDGE that the existing Board Chambers are not equipped for video tele-conferencing,live broadcast of Board meetings via CCT', and other state-of-the-art audio-visual presentatlons. P=Iema I Imp Martinez: 47. ACKNOWLEDGE that there Is a shortage of parking in downtown Martinez for both County employees and the general public, and that this problem will be exacerbated with the loss of 42 parking spaces near 651 Pine Street once Amtrak widens its tracks as part of the intermodal transportation project. 48. ACKNOWLEDGE that the parking situation will only become more difficult with the building of additional courtroom facilities which will allow more jury trials to take place at the same time and which could remove a number of existing parking spaces. 49. ACKNOWLEDGE also that parking will become more difficult as additional staff are brought into Martinez by the Public Defender and District Attorney. 50. As has been demonstrated earlier this year, and as recently as last week,ACKNOWLEDGE the flooding which readily occurs in downtown Martinez, making movement through the downtown area difficult if not Impossible and causing costly damage to County departments. , riteda.for Solution to Id miffed Problems: 51. CONCLUDE that it would be preferable If the solution to this multitude of capital facilities problems could be cost-effective,minimize disruption to the general public and County employees, and be designed in such a way as to make service to the public more efficient, rational, and easily accessible. !V, BOOM= 4181 ARE AMILARLE 19 20LYL -12ANDE112 EEMPLUML 52. RECOGNIZE that the County currently has available to It the following resources which can be used in an effort to solve most if not all of the above-Identified problems. The availability of the Summit Centre at 2530 Arnold Drive, Martinez, a multi-story office building containing approximately 110,000 square feet of net usable space which Is within the city limits of the City of Martinez, at a cost of$12.2 million. The possibility of building a parking structure adjacent to the buildings at 595 Center Avenue, 597 Center Avenue, 30 Muir Road and Ota Muir Road, Martinez, at a cost of$1.4 million. The Court's desire to utilize the $5 million promised for court capital facilities for the construction of a new court building adjacent to 1111 Ward Street which would serve as a "Family Law Center" and provide five new courtrooms, plus additional facilities for all types of family law programs. Once the Health Services Department laboratory is relocated from 1111 Ward Street to the Regional Medical Center, portions of"I"I 11 ward Street will become available for justice department purposes. The land where the County Assessor's office is presently located at 834 Court Street, Martinez, alone with adjacent land in the block bounded by Ward Street, Green Street, Court Street and Las Juntas Street, Martinez, where the 'veterans Building is located, including the land on which former Supervisor Nancy I*anden's Office stood at the comer of Ward Street and Las Juntas Street. V. CEN AGREE to the following changes, designed to solve the most urgent problems identified above, and DIRECT the County Administrator to return to the Board with a detailed schedule for accomplishing and financing the following: Remodelino 651,Eine Street; 53. DIRECT the County Administrator to take the necessary actions to rune cost estimates,prepare documents for the Board's consideration, and identify funding sources for the following: (a) To do the necessary work on the North Wing to remove asbestos-containing floor tiles and upgrade the electrical system at a cost of approximately$500,000. (b) To replace the heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) system in the forth Wing at a cost of approximately$1,000,000. (c) To install fire alarms and fire sprinklers in the North Wing of the County Administration Building at a cost of approximately $100,000. (d) To replace corroded pipes and upgrade the plumbing in the North Wing of the County Administration Building at a cost of approximately $250,000. (e) To upgrade the elevator in the North Wing at a cost of approximately$100,000. -8- (f) To move the Central Permit Counter to the first floor of the North Wing at a cost of approximately$200,000. (g) To make modifications In the North Wing to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA) at a asst of approximately $30,000. (h) To remove the asbestos from the floors and ceilings in the maim building at 651 Pine Street, Install fire sprinklers, repair exterior leaks and mare seismic safety improvements which will enhance the overall integrity of the building at a cost of approximately$7 million. This work cannot be undertaken or completed while the space Is being used by County employees and the general public. Therefore, at least one floor at a time must be completely vacated while work Is In progress.The leasing of the Summit Centre presents the County with a relatively unique and economical opportunity to perform the necessary repairs at 651 Pine Street by moving staff to the Summit Centre on a temporary basis while the repairs are being made. 54. AGREE that It Is not envisioned that any major percentage of the administrative functions would be removed from downtown Martinez except for the short, Intermittent period of time needed to do renovation of 651 Pine Street. Purchase of-the Summit Centre: 55. DIRECT staff to do the necessary engineering studies on the integrity of the Summit Centre and identify available funding sources which would permit the purchase of the Summit Centre for $12.2 million, thereby providing an additional 110,000 usable square feet of office space for various County departments and programs. 56. AGREE that the Summit Centre may be used as a temporary office for employees and the general public while repairs of the North Wing and main building at 651 Pine Street are underway. pct A= ey: 57. REAFFIRM the Board's previous commitment to provide space in the 3rd floor of the County building at 1111 Ward Street for the District Attorney. Public Defender: 56. ACKNOWLEDGE that the Board has approved the reconstruction of the State Theater building in order to consolidate most of the staff of the Public Defender's Office in Martinez, at a cost of$3.5 million. ,p, ina at Cgnter venue: 59. AGREE in principle to construct a new parkingstructure at the 595 Center, 597 Center, 30 Muir Road,40 Muir Road, Martinez complex in order to relieve the existing and future parking problems and DIRECT the County Administrator to return to the Board with justification for the ®c.. parking structure and identification of funding sources to pay for the structure at a cost of approximately$1.4 million. Go=mated Trial QoUrts. 60. DIRECT the County Administrator to work with the Presiding Judge of d the Coordinated Trial Courts to determine whether the Assessor's building at 834 Court Street, Martinez is appropriate to use for court storage in the interim until a permanent use can be Identified for that site. 61. DIRECT the County Administrator to work with the Presiding Mudge of the Coordinated Taal Courts to better understand the Court's desire to construct a new building and utilize the 2nd floor of 1111 Ward Street for Family Court Services by utilizing the $5million which has been committed for court capital facility purposes. The only function which would not go into this new building would be the Family Court Services which are currently located in leased space at 724 Escobar Street and which the Court would like to locate on the 2nd floor of 1111 Ward Street in such a way that 1111 Ward Street could be physically joined to the new Family Law Center. V#. "COUM DIMINISIRMIVE CENTER" OR A xM ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER": The Board of.Supervisors is KQ1 being asked to make any final decisions today about these very Important capital facility decisions. By asking that the Board approve either recommendation 62 or 63,the Board LS being asked to mare broad policy decisions regarding the capital program for the County and to give direction to staff so more detailed financial and operational planning can be accomplished and brought back to the Board'for final resolution. A. 62. DIRECT the County Administrator to do more in depth planning and analysis to determine the financial feasibility and operational desirability of doing the following, and return to the Board of Supervisors with a report; Asses=. (a) MOVING the County Assessor and his staff from 834 Court Street and the 5th floor of the County Administration Building to the Summit Centre, thereby freeing up the County-owned building at 834 Court Street, Martinez. Clerk-Recorder: (b) MOVING the Elections Division of the County Clerk-Recorder's Office from 524 Main Street, Martinez to the Summit Centre, thereby freeing up leased space at 524 Main Street, Martinez. (c) MOVING the Clerk-Recorder's Recorder Division from 730 Las Juntas Street, Martinez to the Summit Centre,thereby freeing up leased space at 730 Las Juntas Street, Martinez. (d) MOVING the Clerk-Recorder's County Clerk Division from 822 Main Street, Martinez to the Summit Centre, thereby freeing up leased space at 622 Main Street, Martinez. Healtheryices Adonis atjve Q, lc s: (e) MOVING the Health Services Department's administrative staff from 20 Allen Street to 5951597 Center Avenue, thereby terminating leased space at 20 Allen Street. Counly Counsel: (f) MOVING the County Counsel's Office from 651 Pine Street, Martinez to the Summit Centre, thereby freeing up the 9th and most of the 6th floors In the County Administration Building. Human as+aurces: (g) MOVING the Human Resources Department from 651 pine Street, Martinez to the Summit Centre, thereby freeing up the 2nd and 3rd floors of the County Administration Building. RiskManaaement: (h) MOVING the Risk Management Division of the County Administrator's Office from 651 Dine Street, Martinez to the Summit Centre, thereby freeing up the 6th floor of the County Administration Building. Qoulty.Admjni= or: (l) MOVING the County Administrator's Office (the staff currently occupying the 10th and 11th floors in the County Administration Building)from 651 Pine Street, Martinez to the Summit Centre, thereby freeing up the 90th and 11th floors of the County Administration Buildi sild'€ngInsl2 €on: (l) MOVING the staff of the Building Inspection Department presently occupying the 4th floor of 651Pine Street to the North Wing of that building, thereby consolidating the staff of the Building Inspection Department In the North Wing. 0 (m) MOVING the Central Permit Counter to the 'tet floor of the North Wing to provide greater access to the public and provide more space. Training €nstittt (n) LEAVING the Training Institute at the Summit Centre. -dcro r: (o) ALLOCATING one additional floor in the County Administration Building at 651 Pine Street to the Sheriff-Coroner in order to consolidate the staff he currently has on the 8th and 1st floors of the main building and the 1 st floor of the North Wing. F„ nAronrnentailealt: (p) MOVING the Environmental Health Division of the Health Services Department from leased quarters in Concord to 651 r mine Street, to occupy four floors of that building. l Heath S Ice Patient-Acc+�lc�,tine: (q) MOVING Health Services' patient accounting from 5951597 Center Avenue to 651 pine Street, to occupy four floors of that x building to relieve overcrowding at Center Avenue and provide i space for the administrative staff from 20 Aden Street to be relocated to Center Avenue. Q!2or ed Trial Courts: I (r) MAINTAIN the existing Board Chambers as a facility that can be used for very large hearings or community meetings by the Board of Supervisors, meetings of the County Planning Commission, LAPCO, as well as to serve as a jury assembly room which can accommodate large jury panels of 150-200 jurors which are needed for capital cases. Summary Resufts�of Selection thig Optign: Approval of these recommendations does N-QT solve the following problems: Space for the Area Agency on Aging,which will have to seek alternative space In the near future. o- wn Approval of these recommendations will result in the following departments/programs being located in the Ssmmit- ntre: ✓ Assessor Clerk-Recorder& Elections Board of Supervisors ✓ Clark of the Board of Supervisors V County Administrator ./ County Counsel V Human resources i` ✓ Risk Management ✓ Training Institute Approval of these recommendations will result In the following department /programs being located in the 525&27 C Avenue Complex: J Existing Health Services staff, except for patient accounting J Health Services Administration from 20 Allen Street Approval of the above recommendations will result in the following departments/programs being located at 651 bine Street: ✓ Supervisor, District ll ✓ Sheriff-Coroner ✓ Environmental Health Health Services Patient Accounting District Attorney ✓ Jury Assembly Room • Central Permit Counter ✓ Building Inspection Department Community Development Department J redevelopment Agency OR B_ 1, 7 63. DIRECT the County Administrator to do more in depth planning and analysis to determine the financial feasibility and operational desirability of doing the following, and return to the Board of Supervisors with a report: Health Servlaes Department: (a) MOVING the Health Services Department's administrative staff from 20 Allen Street to the Summit Centre, thereby terminating leased space at 20 Allen Street. (b) MOVING all of the Health Services Department staff from 595 and 597 Center Avenue to the Summit Centra upon completion of the repairs at 651 Pine Street. 11 Aueswc (c) MOVING the County Assessor and his staff from 834 Court Street and the 5th floor of the County Administration Building to 595/597 Center Avenue, thereby freeing up the County-owned building at 834 Court Street, Martinez. C r -Recorder: (d) MOVING the Elections Division of the County Cleric-Recorder's Office from 524 Main Street,Martinez to 5951597 Center Avenue, thereby freeing up leased space at 524 Main Street, Martinez. (e) MOVING the Cleric-recorder's County Recorder Division from 730 Las Juntas Street, Martinez to 595/597 Center Avenue, thereby freeing up leased space at 730 Las Juntas Street, Martinez. (f) MOVING the Cleric-Recorder's County Clerk Division from 822 Main Street,Martinez to 595/597 Center Avenue,thereby freeing up leased space at 822 Main Street, Martinez. rea Ageacy on Acing: (g) MOVING the Area Agency on Aging from the Summit Centre to 595/597 Center Avenue, Ding Institute: (h) MOVING the Training Institute to Center Avenue. Summary Results of$21ection this QQtion• Approval of these recommendations does NQJ solve the fallowing problems: V Jury Assembly doom needs V Environmental Health remains in leased space ✓ Human Resources overcrowding ✓ Clerk of the Board storage space Risk Management overcrowding ✓' Sheriff Coroner's overcrowding ./ Community Development/Building Inspection overcrowding Inadequate parking in downtown Martinez ./ Upgrading the Board Chambers ./ Moving the Central Permit Counter Approval of these recommendations will result in the following department/program being located in the Summit Centre: V Health Services Department J 0 Approval of these recommendations will result in the following departments/programs being located in the 5951527 Center Avenue Complex: w� Assessor ./ Aeric-Recorder& Elections ✓ Area Agency on Aging ✓ Training Institute The net County cast increase for making the repairs to 651 Pine Street and then making the Summit Centre a County Administrative Center is$1.5 million annually for 30 years. The net County cast increase for making the repairs to 651 Pine Street and then making the Summit Centre a Health Services Administrative Center is $1.6 million annually for 30 years. The difference In cost between the two scenarios is due to the fact that 5851597 Center Avenue will have to be remodeled for new tenants if Health Services moves to the Summit Centre, whereas if Health Services stays at 595-597 Center Avenue, little if any remodeling will need to be done. These are preliminary costs that will have to be refined after we have gotten engineer's estimates for the work that must be done. It is important to bear in mind that even though the cast of the two scenarios is nearly equal, making the Summit Centre into a Health Services Administrative Center leaves far more existing space needs unmet and will require the County to continue leasing space for various agencies as well as find additional leased space for certain County functions which are overcrowded. These are needs which will not go away and will have to be met and financed at some time in the not too distant future. Making the Summit Centre Into a County Administrative Center solves nearly all of the currently identified space problems in the Martinez area and can be accomplished for a net savings of$100,000 per year over making the Summit Centre Into a Health Services Administrative Center. Included in this report are several charts showing the estimated cost for the two scenarios, using the preliminary information we now have available regarding project costs. vr. UEELIMCNI& BI.QQW026330A 64. AGREE to the establishment of a Committee consisting of Martinez City Councilmen Rob Schroder and Mark Ross and two members of the Board of Supervisors to work on issues regarding the presence of the County in the downtown area of the City of Martinez. 65. AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to appoint a Committee which would be charged with looping at the long-term capital needs of the County on a Countywide basis. 4 s 66. DIRECT the County Administrator to determine existing public transportation resources In the vicinity of the Summit Centre and meet with:the County Connection to pian for any needed changes to the bus routes that may be needed in order to adequately serve this facility. 67, DIRECT the County Administrator to conduct a survey to determine the modes of transportation used by visitors to County offices in the f Martinez area. / 68. DIRECT the County Administrator to discuss with the Central Contra Costa unitary District the District's plan for major renovation work in the downtown Martinez.area In order to determine the impact on County offices and to coordinate such work with County building projects. 69. DIRECT the County Administrator to develop a new County Capital Facilities Plan for presentation to the Board of Supervisors within the next year. 70. REQUEST the City of Martinez to take Immediate steps to augment available parking in the downtown area to accommodate the new functions that are being transferred into Martinez as well as the new Court operations. SACKORtJ : A number of County Departments that are located in downtown Martinez creed additional space. The North Wing of the County Administration Building at 651 Pine Street was originally constructed in 1954 and added to in 1964. The current main County Administration Building at 651 Pine Street, Martinez was constructed in 1964. Fire sprinklers were not required when either building was built and they have never been installed, even though the fire alarms in the main',part of the building are currently in the process of being upgraded. Fortunately, there has never been serious fire in the building, installing fire sprinklers would require opening the existing ceilings on each floor. We know that asbestos was used to fireproof the steel structure of the County Administration Building. As long as it remains sealed it does not present a hazard to employees. However, special precautions must be taken every time the material is disturbed by maintenance, repair, or alteration activity. Opening the ceilings to Install fire sprinklers would expose and disturb the asbestos and require it to be removed. The asbestos probably ought to be removed In any case, even though it does not present an Immediate health threat to employees currently. It makes sense to do the work necessary to Install fire sprinklers and remove the asbestos from the building at the same time. The porcelain enamel panels on the exterior walls of the County Administration Building are leaking. This can lead to rusting the bolts underneath that are holding the panels on the walls of the building,which could then fall tiff In case of a severe earthquake or high wind. The science of making a building seismically safer than when it was originally constructed has developed considerably since 1964. Many public and private buildings are being seismically upgraded to current standards in other ;areas, such as San Francisco, Richmond, and Hayward. Even though the County Is not required to upgrade the seismic safety of the building, failure to do so could result lir severe damage to the building in case of a strong earthquake. Therefore, to preserve the value of the building, it would appear to make sense to upgrade the building at the same time that the fire sprinkler work and asbestos remover are being done. As we have teamed recently,the water pipes in the North Wing of the Administration Building are corroded and on at least two instances in the past year pipes have leaked or broken, ruining files, documents, computers, fax machines and other equipment and supplies. In addition,the North Wing has neither fire alarms or fire sprinklers, the electrical system needs to be upgraded and the plumbing system needs to be replaced. There is also asbestos In the floor tiles which need to be replaced. We plan to move all of the staff from the North Vying, plus the Building Inspection staff from the 4th Boor of the main building at 651 Pine Street, to the Summit Centre first so the North Wing will be completely vacant and repair and maintenance work can proceed more quickly than if only one floor at a time is vacated. Once that work Is completed and the staff are returned to the forth Wing,we plan to proceed with the repair and maintenance work in the main building at 651 Fine Street. Perhaps ideally, rather than undertaking this work on an admittedly old building,the County should tear down the existing County Administration Building and design a larger building which could better utilize the space which is available on that site, perhaps including the site occupied by the "old"jail, across Pine Street from the County Administration Building, However,even conservative estimates indicate that to do so would,cost at least$20 million. The building the Assessor currently occupies at 824 Court Street has numerous problems, including flooding, lack of disabled access and inadequate fighting and ventilation. In addition, parking is limited for both employees and the general public. For these reasons, it is Important to move the Assessor and his staff to a more suitable site. This building is old enough and in poor enough condition that it is probably not financially feasible to renovate it for other than storage purposes. The Courts need additional storage space and the use of this building for that purpose provides a relatively inexpensive, short-term solution to the Court's storage needs. The building which had been occupied by former Supervisor Nancy Iranden has been removed from Its site and the County owns the remaining buildings on this block. By removing these remaining buildings, except for the Veterans Building, It would be possible to have a site which could be used for some other purpose, Including expansion for the Courts. The building the County Clerk-recorder leases at 524 Dain Street for the Election Division is Inadequate. It floods nearly every year when Alhambra Greek overflows Its banks. The building also has earthquake cracks, mold and water damage In the walls and rodent problems. In addition,parking is limited for bath employees and the general public. It Is also Important for the Elections Division to be as accessible from major freeways as possible to speed up the delivery of ballots on election nights, thereby speeding up the counting of those ballots. For these reasons, it Is important to move the Elections Division to a more suitable site. In addition,this is leased space and relocating the Elections Division to County- owned space furthers our objective of getting County programs out of leased space and Into County-owned space. The building leased by the County Clerk-Recorder's Recorder's Division at 730 Las Juntas is not in as bad a condition as the Elections Division's building. As Is the case with Elections, there is limited parking for employees and the general public. Although physically separated by a few blocks,there are functional interrelationships between the work conducted by the Recorder's Division and the Election Division. For these reasons, it would be helpful, to move the Recorder's Division to a more suitable site. In addition,this is leased space and relocating the Recorder's Division to County-owned space further our objective of getting County programs out of leased space and into County-owned space. The building the County Clerk-Recorder leases at 822 gain Street for the County Clerk Division is too small, both in terms of providing adequate space for County employees and In terms of providing an appropriate levelof service to the general public. In addition, parking is limited for both employees and the general public. As long as the Elections division and Recorder's Division are moving to either the Summit Centre or 5951597 Center Avenue, it makes sense to beep all of the Clerk- Recorder's staff together in terms of increasing efficiency,to permit maximum use of technology and to improve customer service. The County is In the process of leasing, with an option to purchase, a building at 2530 Arnold Drive,Martinez,known as the Summit Centre. The County already has some of this space leased for the Training Institute and the Area Agency on Aging Division of the Social Service Department. The County can purchase the building for an attractive price. The building has 110,000 square feet of net usable space, enough to meet the current space needs of the County while staying in the City of Martinez. There are at least two distinct scenarios which can be pursued in trying to salve the space problems Identified above. Which of the two should be pursued depends primarily on whether the Board wishes to make the Summit Centre a County Administrative Center or a Health Services Administrative Center. If the Summit Centre Is made a County Administrative Center they} the Board Chambers are moved to the Summit Centre, thereby also moving the Clerk of the Board,County Administrator,County Counsel,Rask Manager and Director of Human Resources and their staff to the Summit Centre. In addition, the Assessor would move his staff from 834 Court Street and the County Clerk-Recorder would move all of his staff, Including the County Clerk, Recorder and Election functions, to the Summit Centre as well. In this scenario, most of the Health Services staff who are presently at 595 and 597 Center Avenue, Martinez would stay there. This scenario also includes making the Board Chambers available for a jury assembly room in addition to ether existing uses. This scenario assumes purchasing the Summit Centre,along with building a parking structure at the Center Avenue/Muir Road complex, incorporating Health Services administrative space Into a new medical office building on the Contra Costa Regional Medical Center campus, and moving certain new functions into 851 bine Street. This scenario will allow the County to solve the following problems which have been Identified above: lD Solves the space needs of the Assessor • Solves the space needs of the Elections Division • Solves the space needs of the Recorder's Division • Solves the space needs of the County Clerk's Division t3 Solves the space needs of the Sheriff Solves the space needs of Risk Management • Solves the space needs of Human Resources t3 Solves the space needs of the County Counsel lD Solves the space needs of the Clerk of the Board 0 Gets Environmental Health out of leased space J Gets the Mete Permit Center co-located with Environmental Health * Relieves the overcrowding for the Health Services Department C1 Relievers the parking problems for both Social Servide and Health Services If the Summit Centre is turned into a Health Services Administrative Center, most of the staff currently in 651 Pine Street would move tem2grarily to the Summit Centre while the repair worm is being done on 651 Pine Street and would then move back to 651 Pine Street. Once the Summit Centre is again vacant, all of the Health Services Department staff from 595 and 597 Center Avenue would move to the Summit Centre,following which the Assessor, and County Clerk-Recorder(County Clerk, Recorder and Elections)would move to 595/597 Center Avenue. This scenario will allow the County to solve some of the problems which have been Identified above: 0 Solves the space needs of the Assessor • Solves the space needs of the Elections Division Q Solves the space needs of the Recorder's Division • Solves the space needs of the County Clerk's Division U Relieves the overcrowding for the Health Services Department 0 Relieves the parking problems for both Social Service and Health Services This scenario, however, does not solve the overcrowding problems currently experienced by the County Counsel, Sheriff-Coroner and Human Resources Department. It leaves Environmental Health in leased space,falls to co-locate the State Permit Center with Environmental Health,falls to solve the space problems of Risk Management,fails to solve the space problems of the Clerk of the Board and does not provide additional space for the Courts. SMA i WA SUNIMARY DF nLTESRNATIVE SPACE CCNFI UR.AT1QNS ACTION COUNTY ADM d1 ITRAME HEALTH-SERVICES MODE AOIVI;151EST EME M 912EL Replace corroded pipes in North Wing X X Replace HVAC in North Wing X X Install dire alarms and sprinklers in North Wing X X UpS7rade plumbing In North Wing X X Remove asbestos In 851 Pine x X t/ Install Are sprinklers in 651 Pine X X Repair leaks in 651 Pine X X Make seismic improvements in 1151 Pine X X Take steps to move turd purchase of Summit Centre X X Provide space for the District Attorney at 1111 Ward St. X X Complete reconstruction of the State Theater for the PO X X Plan to construct a parking structure at 5951597 Center X X Plan use of Assessor's Building X X Consider FamilyLaw aw Center X X Consider moving Assessor to Summit X Consider moving Cleric-Recorder Department to Summit X Move health Services Admin staff to Center Avenue X Consider moving County Counsel to Summit X Consider moving Human Resources to Summit X Consider moving Risk Management to Summit X Consider moving the CAO to Summit X Consider moving the Clerk of the Board to Summit X Consider moving the Board of Supervisors to Summit X Consider moving 4th Floor of 651 Pine to North Wing X Consider leaning Training Institute at Summit X Consider additional space for the Sheriff at 661 Pine X Consider moving Environmental Health to 851 Pine X Consider moving patent accounting to 651 Pine X Maintain Board Chambers far various uses X Gansi der moving Health Services Admin staff to Summit x - Consider moving Haan Services staff from Center to Summit X Consider moving Assessor to Center Avenue X Conner moving Clerk-Recorder's Department to Center X Consider moving AAA from Summit to Center Avenue X Consider moving the Training Institute from Summit to Center X cc: County Administrator Director of General Services District Attorney Sheriff Coroner Assessor County Clerk-Recorder Presiding Judge, Coordinated Trial Courts Director, GMEDA Community Development Director Director of Building Inspection Public Defender Health Services Director Social Service Director County Counsel Director of Human Resources . Clerk of the Board Risk Manager Manager, Capital Facilities and Debt Financing -20-