Loading...
SR-1000-008 (8) EPWM: CP:AA:DB:MM:F:\DATA\SPFILES\SP1609\CC1609april27(DP).doc Council Meeting: April 27, 2004 Santa Monica, California TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Staff SUBJECT:Proposed Big Blue Bus Campus Expansion Plan Revisions Introduction This report presents proposed Big Blue Bus Campus Expansion Plan revisions and seeks approval from Council, as the client, on those revisions. When this project was last before Council, a new design approach based on a modified expansion plan was presented. Council expressed concern that it was being asked to consider a new design when it had not approved the modifications to the previous expansion plan. A new design approach based on an approved expansion plan will be presented to Council at a later date. Background In 1996, the City Council adopted a five-year Service Improvement Plan for the Big Blue Bus. Route, frequency, fleet and passenger amenity enhancements were included to address the environmental and service quality needs of the community. Since that time, Big Blue Bus services have increased over 50 percent with commensurate increase in employees and parking needs at the existing transit facility. 1 On February 27, 2001, City Council approved the Campus Expansion Plan necessitated by that growth and certified the Final Environmental Impact Report for the project. At its August 14, 2001 meeting, City Council awarded a construction contract to Mallcraft, Inc. for a Natural Gas Fueling and Bus Wash Facility, Phase I of the expansion, which will be completed in July 2004. On September 11, 2001, Council awarded a design contract to Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. (HOK) for the design of the remainder of the BBB Campus Expansion Project. Analysis of Existing Expansion Plan The 2001 Expansion Plan prepared by RNL/Interplan was based upon facility needs studies done in 1996. In addition to construction of the new natural gas fueling and bus wash facility, the 2001 Expansion Plan calls for the maintenance building at 1620 Sixth Street and the 612 Colorado Avenue building to be demolished, while the administration building at 1660 Seventh Street is renovated and enlarged with a second story addition. A new three-story office building with underground parking replaces 612 Colorado Avenue and a new maintenance building with a detached chassis wash/tire change area along Seventh Street is constructed. The remainder of the site is allocated for bus parking. When HOK was engaged as the design architect on the BBB Campus Expansion Project, an update of the existing Expansion Plan was undertaken. HOK interviewed BBB staff and identified the need for additional parking and workspace, primarily in the 2 maintenance function. This was based on actual and newly projected growth in both employees and fleet vehicles. In regard to re-use of the existing administration building at Olympic Boulevard and Seventh Street, HOK determined that leaving the administration building intact and attempting to remodel would make it impossible to expand the maintenance facility and bus parking area as required based upon the updated space needs. The shape, size and location of the facility, built in 1982, does not readily lend itself to current and future BBB program needs or effectively link the BBB to the downtown. The building is a steel frame structure, making it vulnerable to seismic damage. Constructed to the 1979 Building Codes, which did not consider the full effect of major earthquakes on steel frame structures, the building is in need of seismic strengthening. HOK has indicated that the metal skin and roof of the building will need to be redesigned and replaced. The exterior skin and roof employs dozens of rubberized joints that are prone to deterioration. As a result, rainwater leaks into the interior workspace. Repairs over the years have been only marginally successful. The heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems are at the end of their useful life and do not comply with current energy efficiency standards. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), communications, fire and life safety upgrades are mandatory. Achieving LEED Silver or Gold certification for the building makes remodeling more difficult than starting from scratch for a new facility. The initial capital cost of remodeling and upgrading the existing administration facility versus constructing a new building was analyzed and found to be virtually the 3 same. The life cycle cost of a new facility will be lower than that for a remodeled and expanded administration building. The projected fleet size and the addition of articulated buses to the City’s fleet; the desirability of employee parking at a single location for ease of access to assigned work areas; the higher life cycle cost of permanent re-use and seismic strengthening of the existing administration building; the desire to link BBB customer service functions and community presence with the downtown; enhanced bus parking layout to allow for clearing and maneuvering; and the need for additional maintenance building bays to service the fleet, required exploration of alternatives to the RNL concept. HOK developed possible alternatives that included provision for: (1) Co-location of all administrative functions; (2) Drive-thru bays and an enlarged maintenance building to accommodate current and projected fleet; and (3) Sufficient bus parking, including parking for articulated buses, on site both in the final configuration and during construction. Discussion Proposed Expansion Plan Revision The proposed Expansion Plan revision calls for demolition of the existing administration building at Seventh Street and Olympic Boulevard; construction of an administration building with underground employee and visitor parking fronting Colorado Avenue and 4 linked to a maintenance facility along Seventh Street between Colorado Avenue and Olympic Boulevard; and on site parking to accommodate a total of 235 buses. (see Attachment A) Phasing considerations With Council approval of the revised plan, staff will occupy the existing administration building during demolition of the 612 Colorado building and construction of the new Administration Building. Only essential repair and renovation of the administration building will be required for this interim occupancy. The proposed administration building is built in one construction phase and the proposed maintenance building is built in a subsequent phase. The maintenance building cannot be constructed until the existing administration building has been demolished, since the maintenance building occupies a portion of the site of the existing administration building. Disruption to staff is minimized, and the maximum site area is kept open for interim bus parking in this phasing plan. The advantages and disadvantages of the proposed revised Expansion Plan are: Advantages Disadvantages Provides BBB customers and the Requires demolition of 21 year old ?? community with a single, clear “front administration building door” access along Colorado Avenue Requires some tandem bus ? All administrative functions in a single parking in order to accommodate ? building and all employee parking in one bus parking needs, including location articulated buses, which is not 5 Maintenance building program needs desirable from an operational ? fully met standpoint Greater on-site bus parking and flexibility ? to accommodate fleet growth Eliminates the need for offsite bus ? parking as the fleet grows beyond the 200 buses identified in the existing Expansion Plan Administration and maintenance ? buildings built in two phases Reduced construction schedule (up to ? one year time savings) Enhanced safety and security by ? eliminating unauthorized access to bus yard Enhanced security through building ? consolidation Allows for increased landscaping along ? the perimeter streets Anticipated reduction in facility ? maintenance costs Improved operational efficiency ? Eliminates bus/passenger car conflict at ? Sixth Street and Colorado Avenue Easier for public to access the ? administration building after hours for meetings and events Eliminates conflicts between busses and ? BBB customers walking across site to the administration building at Seventh and Olympic 6 Allows a much higher level of sustainable ? design and construction approaches than could be achieved through retrofit of the old building Tenant Relocation OPCC currently occupies a portion of the 612 Colorado Avenue facility. This property was purchased in 1985 with dedicated public transit funding and leased to OPCC and other tenants on a temporary basis until the site was needed for transit purposes. On August 12, 2003, City Council approved the relocation of OPCC’s Daybreak Shelter and the establishment of their new Safe Haven program at 1751-1753 Cloverfield Blvd., and directed the retention of the Access Center program on the Big Blue Bus campus. The southwest area of the campus currently houses SAMOSHEL, a 110-bed homeless shelter, and SWASHLOCK which contains shower facilities, lockers, laundry facilities and a counseling center for the homeless, both operated by the Salvation Army. Options to achieve that Council direction were developed and evaluated on their impacts on existing social service program activities, Big Blue Bus operational needs, project costs and schedules. The Community and Cultural Services Department was consulted during the option evaluation stage and concurs with the approach described here. A complete analysis of the options is included in the February 26, 2004 Information Item sent to Council and attached as Attachment B. 7 The most cost effective solution to meet OPCC’s and Big Blue Bus’ current and future needs incorporates Access Center and SWASHLOCK in a two-story, 10,550 square foot modular facility (increasing the Access Center square footage from 3,500 to 8,700). It leaves the SAMOSHEL structure and activities unchanged. It provides space for expansion of Access Center functions with minimal disruption to existing social service programs and Big Blue Bus operations. There is sufficient outdoor queuing space for clients, and loading functions can also be accommodated on-site. It does not provide parking on-site but thatwould be accommodated within the proposed Big Blue Bus parking structure. Employee parking capacity for all three social service programs would be improved over what exists today. Construction time, schedule and budget impacts are minimized for the agencies and the BBB by the use of modular construction. The estimated costs would moderately exceed the relocation assistance amount authorized by City Council for OPCC. The construction of this project would occur during the planning and documentation phase of the transit facility expansion project, eliminating the need for OPCC relocation from 612 Colorado during construction. Suitable on site facilities will be made available for the SWASHLOCK function during construction of the new modular building. Phasing The phases of the revised Expansion Plan are as follows: (I) Construction of a natural gas fueling/bus wash Facility (liquefied natural gas (LNG) fuel for buses, compressed natural gas (CNG) for other fleet vehicles), to be completed in July 2004; 8 (ll a.) Demolition of the existing SWASHLOCK facility along Olympic Boulevard and construction of new modular facilities for the OPCC Access Center and SWASHLOCK at the site; (ll b.) Demolition of the 612 Colorado building, construction of a new administration building with a below grade parking structure, and subsequent demolition of prior administration building; (III) Construction of transit bus maintenance facility; and (IV) Demolition of the existing maintenance facility, grading, paving, and other site improvements. The estimated project budget for the remaining phases of proposed expansion plan is $80.4 million. The pre-development costs (which include concept plan preparation, preparation of the EIR, concept design, testing, and program management) aggregate approximately $9,625,000. Relocation and renovation expenses are estimated to be $3,000,000. The construction of a new administration building, maintenance buildings, site work and utilities are estimated at $59,600,000. Finally, the budget includes $2,000,000 for furniture, furnishings and equipment, and other miscellaneous administrative costs and contingencies of $6,175,000. The project is funded by regional transportation funds (Prop. A&C, State Transit Assistance Funds and Transportation Development Act Funds) allocated to the Big Blue Bus and requires no local General Funds. 9 CEQA The subsequent phases of the revised Big Blue Bus Campus Expansion Plan will be reviewed by the Planning Commission for their planning entitlements prior to construction. An addendum has been prepared to the Big Blue Bus Facility Expansion Master Plan Environmental Impact Report to analyze the environmental implications of the revisions to the Master Plan. No additional significant environmental impacts were identified. The Planning Commission will consider the addendum along with the planning applications for the subsequent phases of the Expansion Plan. Requested Action Staff is seeking input from Council on the proposed revision to the Expansion Plan and will return to Council for final approval in December 2004 once the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board review and approve the proposed changes. It is recommended that staff be authorized to proceed to develop the design based upon the proposed revised plan. If such approval is obtained, staff will be back to request authorization to proceed with the renovation for the interim use of existing BBB facilities in parallel with obtaining final Board and Commission approvals. This will assist in avoiding project delays that might escalate the overall project cost. 10 Previous Concept Design Presentation At the October 8, 2003 Council meeting, questions were raised regarding facility design concepts presented that evening. A concept design will be prepared for presentation in the coming months and will address these questions. Budget/Financial Impact There is no budget impact associated with Council action recommended in this report. Note, the estimated project costs are described earlier in this report. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve the revised Expansion Plan for the Big Blue Bus Campus Expansion Project. Prepared by: Craig Perkins, Director of Environmental & Public Works Management Anthony Antich, P.E., Manager, EPWM Engineering & Arch. Division Stephanie Negriff, Director of the Big Blue Bus Janeene De Martinez, Assistant Director of the Big Blue Bus - Transit Finance and Business Services Joe Stitcher, Assistant Director of the Big Blue Bus – Transit Operations Ralph Merced, Transit Maintenance Manager Dave Britton, P.E., Principal Civil Engineer Miriam Mulder, Architect Attachments: Attachment A – Concept Site Plan (Not available electronically. Available at the City Clerk’s Office.) Attachment B - Info Item from February 24, 2004 11 February 26, 2004 Santa Monica, CA INFORMATION ITEM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Staff SUBJECT: Options for Relocating OPCC’s Access Center Program to Southwest Corner of Big Blue Bus Site Introduction: Pursuant to City Council direction, City staff has considered options for moving OPCC’s th Access Center program from the corner of 7 Street and Colorado Avenue to an alternate location on the Big Blue Bus (BBB) site, which currently holds SAMOSHEL and SWASHLOCK activities. This report describes the option that will maximize functionality of the services at this location. Background: OPCC’s Access Center and Daybreak Shelter programs operate from leased space in the BBB facility currently located at 612 Colorado Avenue. The property, purchased in 1985 with dedicated public transit funding, was originally intended as a temporary location for OPCC and other tenants until the site was needed for transit purposes. 12 On February 27, 2001, City Council approved the BBB Expansion Plan and certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project. The plan calls for the demolition of the 612 Colorado building to allow for additional bus and employee parking, a new maintenance facility, and expanded operations and administrative space. During the course of developing design concepts, it became apparent that incorporation of the OPCC functions into the new transit facility would not meet the needs of either OPCC or the BBB. OPCC initiated a process to explore alternative locations for their programs. A site at 1751-1753 Cloverfield was identified. On August 12, 2003, City Council approved the relocation of the Daybreak Shelter, the establishment of the new Safe Haven program at the Cloverfield site, and the retention of the Access Center program at the BBB. Discussion: OPCC Access Center Relocation Alternatives The southwest portion of the BBB site currently houses SAMOSHEL, a 110-bed homeless shelter, and SWASHLOCK, a shower, locker, laundry and counseling center for the homeless, both operated by the Salvation Army. The design team explored several different alternatives for accommodating OPCC’s Access Center at the designated site, considering impacts on existing social service program activities, BBB operational needs, project costs and construction schedules. Due to space restrictions and facility conditions, all alternatives include the replacement of the existing SWASHLOCK with new buildings and equipment. 13 Three alternatives proposed the use of modular construction for the SWASHLOCK and the OPCC Access Center to limit the construction time and overall cost and schedule impact. The fourth involved refurbishment and reuse of the existing BBB administration building for SWASHLOCK, SAMOSHEL and the Access Center. This alternative precluded accommodating the BBB fleet even at its current size. This was the most costly alternative and extended the construction schedule for the bus expansion. For these reasons it is not a practical option. The advantages and disadvantages of the other three alternatives are described in more detail below. Scheme 1 – ACCESS/SWASHLOCK This scheme provides a two-story modular building, adjacent to the existing SAMOSHEL structure. The 5,760 s.f. structure is equivalent to the combined area of the existing Access Center and SWASHLOCK operations. The current Access Center facility is overcrowded which would not be alleviated under this scheme. This scheme offers 10 on-site parking spaces for employees. Additional parking demand would be accommodated within the proposed BBB parking structure. Deliveries and pick- up/loading functions can be accomplished without affecting service activities, but will affect the number of on-site parking spaces available. This solution is the least costly of all the schemes presented and could be accomplished within the budgetary authority approved by Council for OPCC’s relocation. 14 The schedule for this scheme compares favorably to the existing BBB facility expansion plan. The construction of this project would occur during the planning and documentation phase of the main facility expansion project. Key advantages are minimal disruption to BBB and SAMOSHEL operations, equipment upgrades for SWASHLOCK and cost. The primary disadvantage is that this option does not address the space deficiency of the existing Access Center program. Scheme 2 - ACCESS / SWASHLOCK/ SAMOSHEL This scheme provides for one two-story building incorporating Access Center, SWASHLOCK and SAMOSHEL programs within one facility. The total area of the proposed building is 18,700 s.f. which includes space equivalent to the existing SAMOSHEL square footage and 10,700 s.f. for the OPCC and SWASHLOCK programs. Approximately 18 on-site parking spaces are provided for employees and service loading, with the remaining parking need being met within the proposed BBB parking structure. This solution is the most costly of the modular schemes considered and would substantially exceed the relocation assistance amount authorized by Council for OPCC. The schedule for this scheme is the longest of all schemes. Relocation of SAMOSHEL will require temporary trailer facilities at another site. As it is unlikely that a site acceptable to the community could be identified, the temporary facility would be located on the BBB campus and would delay the start of construction of the expansion project. 15 Scheme 2 expands the Access Center space by 5,350 s.f., allowing more space for lounge, counseling and educational activity areas, and offers the greatest amount of outdoor space, including off-street queuing areas for all program clients. The major disadvantage is the need for SAMOSHEL to temporarily relocate from the site in order to build the combined structure. This scheme could result in a change in program operations for the three programs, as services would become centralized within one facility. This relocation would have the most significant impact on project budget and schedule of the three options. Scheme 3 - Expanded ACCESS / SWASHLOCK This scheme incorporates Access Center and SWASHLOCK in a two-story, 10,550 s.f. facility. It leaves the SAMOSHEL structure and activities unchanged. This scheme does not provide on-site parking for employees. All parking would be accommodated within the proposed BBB parking structure. A loading zone would be designated on the eastern side of the property. This option provides outdoor space, including off-street queing areas for all program clients. Estimated costs would moderately exceed the relocation assistance amount authorized by Council for OPCC. The schedule for this scheme would be similar to Scheme 1. The construction of this project would occur during the planning and documentation phase of the transit facility expansion project. 16 The advantages of this scheme are the provision of additional space (from approximately 3,500 s.f. to 8,700 s.f.) to accommodate the Access Center’s services, and minimal disruption to BBB and SAMOSHEL operations. The main disadvantage is the lack of on-site employee parking, but with the construction of the transit parking structure, employee parking capacity for all three social service programs will be improved over what exists today. This is the most cost effective solution and the one that best meets the programming needs of OPCC. Summary: Staff has evaluated options for accommodating the Access Center according to Council direction. Scheme 3 – Expanded Access/SWASHLOCK is both financially feasible and operationally viable for BBB, the Access Center and SWASHLOCK. It provides sufficient space for expansion of Access Center functions with minimal disruption to existing social service programs and BBB operations. There is sufficient outdoor queuing space, and loading functions can also be accommodated on-site. Construction time, schedule and budget impacts are minimized by the use of modular construction. While this scheme does not provide on-site parking, it does provide nearby protected parking, which is an enhancement over current parking availability. Of the three alternative schemes presented, Scheme 3 is the preferred option for OPCC Access Center relocation. Staff will present the revised facility expansion plan, including the preferred Scheme 3 option, for consideration in April, 2004. Prepared by: Stephanie Negriff, Director of Transit Services 17 Janeene de Martinez, Assistant Director-Transit Finance and Business Services Tony Antich, P.E., City Engineer Dave Britton, P.E., Principal Civil Engineer Miriam Mulder, Architect 18