SR-306-000
\ \- 8
Jl.Il 8 \~t
CED:CNS:BJS
Council Meeting 7-8-86
{I'll II?
~-
......
Santa Monica, California
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
City Staff
SUBJECT:
Recommendation to Certify Initial Study and
Negative Declaration and to Retain Architect for
the Community Services Center
INTRODUCION
This report recommends that the firm of Koning Eizenberg
Architecture be retained to provide architectural and engineering
services for the Community Services Center.
The report also
recommends certification
of the Initial Study
and Negative
Declaration and
briefly discusses the next steps needed to
implement the project.
BACKGROUND
On August 13, 1985, the city Council approved the use of a
City-owned parking lot on 4th Street between Broadway and
Colorado as a site for a new Community Services Center to house
a senior multi-service center as well as other non-profit social
service agencies. At that time, the Council also authorized the
submittal of a grant application to the State Department of Aging
for State Senior Center Bond Act Funds to supplement previously
appropriated City funds.
In April, the City was officially
notified that the Governor and Legislature had approved $700,000
, I-~
Jl.Il 8 \~
- 1 -
in senior Center Bond Act funds for the senior center component
of the project.
o
This award, in addition to $1.67 million in General Funds,
$650,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds, and $200,000
to be raised by the senior agencies, result in $3.2 million
currently available for the design and construction of the
Center.
with state funding assured, City staff proceeded with selection
of an architectural firm and completion of environmental review
procedures. The following section provides additional
information on these activities.
DISCUSSION
(1) ARCHITECT SELECTION
Request for Proposals: Upon approval by the State to proceed
with architect selection, a Request for Proposals (RFP) was
issued on April 10, 1986. Availability was widely advertised
including an extensive mailing to architectural firms and notices
in the Evening Outlook, Los Angeles Times, and a state-wide
architectural publication. In response, nineteen proposals were
submitted by the May 16th deadline.
The proposal Review Process: A review committee was formed
to review and evaluate all proposals, to develop a "short list"
of proposers who would then be interviewed by the committee, and
to select the recommended firm. This committee was comprised of
the Director of Community and Economic Development, Assistant
Director of General Services, four staff from these two
- 2 -
departments, and two representatives of the senior agencies to be
housed in the Center. The committee was assisted by a technical
advisor, a principal of the Arroyo Group, an architectural firm
currently on retainer with the City.
six of the nineteen firms met with the review committee for one
hour presentations. Based on the interviews, written proposals
and reference information obtained by city staff, the committee
selected two firms for a second interview and more extensive
evaluation of technical capacity and design ability. After these
interviews, the final recommendation was made.
Selection criteria: Major criteria used in evaluating firms
included: design capacity; design innovations and creativity;
sensitivity to users and understanding of the special nature of
the project; technical capacity; ability to complete projects
within budget and project timelines; commitment of principals to
the project; commitment to WMBE hiring; quality of proposed
subcontractors; ability to work with public groups and advisory
bodies; and experience with senior projects or comparable
facilities.
Recommended Firm: Based on the application of the above
criteria, City staff recommends that the firm of Koning Eizenberg
Architecture be retained as the project's architects. Important
factors in this selection were: (1) capacity as a strong design
firm with demonstrated ability to develop creative, economical
design solutions -- an essential factor given the complexities of
the building program and the project budget; (2) technical
- 3 -
capabili ties of the principals as fully documented by highly
favorable references, (3) experience with related projects
including the recent completion of the Alternative Living for the
Aging Senior services Center, a communal senior housing project
in Santa Monica for the same client which is about to begin
construction, and prior involvement with a range of educational
and commercial facilities of comparable size; (4) the competence
of engineering consultants experienced in projects of this
complexity and scope as indicated by review of qualifications and
interview with structural engineer; (5) inclusion of a special
gerontological consultant to assist in the design of the senior
center portion of the project to ensure sensitivity to users and
functionality of design; (6) extensive involvement and
availability of both principals of the firm throughout the entire
project; and (7) documented ability to consistently meet budget
constraints and project timetables.
Scope of Services and Fee: The firm will provide
architectural and engineering services through all phases of
planning, design and construction. Activities include: (1)
refinement of the building program, (2) design development, (3)
development of construction contract documents, (4) bid
evaluation, and (5) construction administration. The firm will
also participate in public and user meetings as necessary.
Services will be provided for a fee not to exceed $210,697
including all subcontracts, special consultants and reimbursable
expenses.
- 4 -
(2) ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Initial study and Negative Declaration has been developed in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (see
attached). Pursuant to this process, staff recommends that the
City Council certify the attached Initial study and Negative
Declaration.
(3) NEXT STEPS
Refinement of Building Program and Cost Estimates: As
discussed in the August 13, 1985, staff report recommending the
current site for the Center, it is hoped that a facility of
approximately 25,000 square feet can be built on the site. This
estimate was based on average construction costs for this type of
facility and on projected funding available for the project. It
was further determined that, based on a preliminary assessment of
current senior services, the senior center component of the
project would need approximately 16,000 square feet. In
addition, the initial program incorporated approximately 163
parking spaces, including replacement of the 74 public parking
spaces currently on the site.
During the initial stages of the design process, it will be
necessary to refine this building program and address the
following issues: (1) what are the detailed space needs of the
senior center component and what will the final allocation of
space be between the senior component and non-senior component;
(2) what impact will various design scenarios for parking have on
- 5 -
the cost and design of the facility given that the cost of
parking varies widely depending upon whether it is above grade or
subterranean; and (3) what are the "trade offs" if the initial
program has to be adjusted due to budget constraints?
During the next several months, city staff will work closely with
the project architect and user groups to clearly define space
needs, costs of various design scenarios, and the final scope of
the project given the funding constraints.
Participation by senior Agencies. An important part of the
project is the active participation and involvement of the two
major tenants of the building--WISE and Senior Health and Peer
counseling Center. As partners in the project, the two agencies
will contribute $200,000 in matching funds for construction of
the senior center component as well as provide additional tenant
improvements and furnishings. A Building Committee, comprised of
representatives from the agencies' Boards of Directors, has been
formed and is meeting on a regular basis. A fundraising campaign
is being developed and a management plan for the Center has been
drafted and presented to City staff for discussion. staff will
continue to meet with the Committee to develop a mutually
acceptable management plan for approval by the City Council at a
later date.
Execution of senior Center Bond Act Contract. The ci ty
recently received all necessary contract documents for receipt of
Senior Center Bond Acts funds. Pursuant to City Council
Resolution Number 7060, approved August 13, 1985, the city
- 6 -
Manager is authorized to execute contract documents upon award of
funds. This contract will be executed wi thin the next several
weeks and will provide the authority to receive state funds as
needed by the project.
BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT
Funds to cover the costs of architectural and engineering
services in the amount of $210,697 is currently available in
capital
account
no.
01-720-262-000-920.
No
additional
appropriations are needed.
RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council certify the attached
Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the Community Services
Cter and authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with
Koning Eizenberg Achitecture for architectural and engineering
services for the same project.
Prepared by: Barbara Stinchfield, Community Development Manager
Department of Community and Economic Development
- 7 -