The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda_GGAF_07.15.2014Notice of Meeting for the General Government and Finance Advisory Board of the City of Georgetown July 15, 2014 at 1:00 PM at Georgetown Public Library Classroom, located at 402 West 8th Street, Georgetown, TX The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Legislative Regular Agenda A Walking tour of the old Public Library building located at 808 Martin Luther King Jr, the Police Station at 809 Martin Luther King, Jr, and the Georgetown Communications and Technology facility at 510 West 9th Street. (no action will be taken during the tour) B Presentation, discussion and possible direction regarding phasing, funding and priorities for major projects in the Five Year General Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for Parks, Downtown, Sidewalks and Facilities - Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager and Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer C Discussion and possible direction to provide feedback on the potential Request for Qualifications for the engineering and design services for downtown parking structure study, site study and conceptual plans - Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all times, on the ______ day of __________________, 2014, at __________, and remained so posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. ____________________________________ Jessica Brettle, City Secretary City of Georgetown, Texas SUBJECT: Walking tour of the old Public Library building located at 808 Martin Luther King Jr, the Police Station at 809 Martin Luther King, Jr, and the Georgetown Communications and Technology facility at 510 West 9th Street. (no action will be taken during the tour) ITEM SUMMARY: The City is preparing for the next phase of the Facilities Plan. The Police Department will move to its new facility in the Fall, which will vacate 6500 square feet in the Georgetown Communications and Technology facility, 8000 square feet on the first floor of the Police Station (Historic Light and Water Works Building), and 2400 square feet on the second floor of the Police Station. Additionally, the old Public Library facility is currently vacant (17,000 square feet). A feasibility report was prepared by Nore Winter Company for redevelopment of these three facilities. Additionally, a facilities master plan study was prepared by Ron Hobbs architects to determine the most suitable immediate and future uses for these facilities. This tour will be conducted with the GGAF members to familiarize them with the three facilities under review in order to prepare for the discussion with Ron Hobbs Architects on recommendations for the sites. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The financial impact will be included in the discussion on the architectural analysis. SUBMITTED BY: Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager City of Georgetown, Texas SUBJECT: Presentation, discussion and possible direction regarding phasing, funding and priorities for major projects in the Five Year General Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for Parks, Downtown, Sidewalks and Facilities - Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager and Micki Rundell, Chief Financial Officer ITEM SUMMARY: The five year CIP for fiscal years 2015-2019 was initially presented to the GGAF in June. The committee scheduled future discussion for projects that were considered to be beyond routine maintenance and considered major improvements. The discussion will include major Parks improvements that were recommended by the Parks Advisory Board. Other projects include Downtown Master Plan improvements, Sidewalk Improvements, Public Safety improvements and Facility improvements. While the GGAF and the City Council review the CIP based upon the five year planning horizon, only the first year is adopted during the budget process. This presentation on major projects will focus on the first fiscal year, 2014/15, as that is what will be considered during the budget adoption; however it is expected that more in depth review will be taken for the City's facilities plans, as a phasing of renovations for facilities in the City's Downtown West area are included as comprehensive redevelopment of the area. The relocation of City services to the Downtown West area was recommended in the 2003 and 2014 Downtown Master Plans. More detailed studies were completed in 2014 by an urban planning firm (Winter & Co) and an architectural firm (Ron Hobbs Architects). Those studies are provided and Mr. Hobbs will be presenting the results of the recommendations. FINANCIAL IMPACT: GO – General Obligation Bonds (Parks, Already Issued) CO – Certificates of Obligation (proposed 2015) Albs – Proceeds from Albertson's sales TOTALS 2014/15 Cash CO GO Albs Other Total Parks $ 2,882 $ - $ 1,150 $ 1,400 $ - $ 332 $ 2,882 Downtown MP & Infrastructure $ 741 $ 340 $ 194 $ - $ - $ 207 $ 741 Sidewalks $ 500 $ - $ 500 $ - $ - $ - $ 500 Fire Stations/Public Safety $ 1,300 $ - $ 250 $ - $ - $ 1,050 $ 1,300 Facilities - General Utility $ 750 $ - $ 750 $ - $ - $ -$ 750 Facilities - Downtown West Repurposing $ 6,160 $ 160 $ - $ - $ 3,500 $ 2,500 $ 6,160 TOTALS $12,333 $ 500 $ 2,844 $ 1,400 $ 3,500 $ 4,089 $12,333 Other – Parkland Dedication Fees, Grants, TIRZ revenue, Sale of City Hall and CVB SUBMITTED BY: Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager and Micki Rundell, CFO ATTACHMENTS: Description Type CIP Proposed Projects; 5 Year Projection; Staff Summary; Space Needs Cover Memo Georgetown City Center - Winter & Company Feasibility Study Cover Memo Facilities Master Plan - Ron Hobbs Architects Cover Memo 1 Municipal Center Concepts GEORGETOWN CITY CENTER APRIL 28, 2014 A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED CITY SERVICES AND PUBLIC SPACE 2 City of Georgetown, TX TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION3 PROJECTNEEDSANDPROGRAMREQUIREMENTS 7 EXISTINGCITYASSETS9 EXISTINGSITECONDITIONS12 ALTERNATIVESCENARIOS&PHASING14 PROJECTCOSTS&FUNDING25 CONCLUSIONS30 APPENDIXA1 PROJECT CREDITS: Winter&Company Boulder,CO www.winterandcompany.net 3 Municipal Center Concepts INTRODUCTION TheCityofGeorgetownseekstoprovideanenhanced“citycenter”forthecommunity withconsolidatedservicesinthedowntownwheremanycitygovernmentoperations canbeconductedandwherespecialeventsandtheenjoymentofpublicopenspace canoccur.Specificneedsforafuturecitycenterareidentifiedinthe2014Downtown Master Plan Update.Theyinclude: •Outdoorpublicspaceforcivicevents andgatherings •Indoorpublicspaceformeetingsand smallperformances •Anoutdooramphitheater •Publicparking •Consolidatedcityfacilities •Renewedinvestmentonthewestside ofdowntown Newopportunitieswithexistingcityas- setscouldhelpmeettheidentifiedneeds. Currentcity-ownedlandincombination withalreadyvacatedandsoon-to-be- vacated,city-ownedbuildings,formthe basisforthisfeasibilitystudy.Inaddi- tiontocity-ownedproperties,thetiming isrighttocoordinatesomeofthepublic improvementsthatareenvisionedwith existingfundingsources(CIPstreetscape workandParksbond.)Thisfeasibility studyseekstotestthepotentialforcom- biningtheidentifiedneedsintoacentral locationbyusingexistingcityassets,as wellaslookingatlong-termopportunities fortheentirestudyarea. Outdoor public space for civic events and gath- erings was a major need, as expressed in public workshops. 4 City of Georgetown, TX STUDYAREA ThestudyareaforanewGeorgetownCity Centerisadjacenttoandsurroundingthe CentralLibraryat8thandRockStreets. Thestudyareaisboundedby7thStreet tothenorth,9thStreettothesouth,Rock StreettotheeastandMartinLutherKing Streettothewest.Italsoincludestwo city-ownedblockswestofMLKStreet between8thand10thStreets. Thisstudyfocusesoncity-ownedprop- erties,butalsoillustrateswaysinwhich theCountyandnearbyprivateproperty ownerscoulddeveloptheirproperties tostrengthenthebenefitsofanewcity center.Notethatthepossibledevelop- mentconceptsshownoncountyand privately-ownedlandaresimplyopportu- nities.Eachofthesealternativeswould, Figure 1 - Study Area Property Ownership County-owned Property City-owned Property City Center Study Area Central Library County Courthouse Au s t i n A v e . Ma i n S t . Ro c k S t . Fo r e s t S t . ML K S t . We s t S t . 8th St. 7th St. 9th St. 10th St. ofcourse,occuronlyiftheCountyand privateownersweretodeterminethat doingsowouldbetotheirbenefit. Fourpossiblealternativesarepresented, alongwiththeirprosandconsandfinan- cialanalyses.Preliminaryspaceneeds forcivicfacilitiesandopenspaceare providedalsoprovided.Theoverallintent istoillustrateoptions,andnotnecessar- ilycommittoonespecificplan.Ineach scenario,however,thefirstphaseofim- provementsisthesame,allowingasig- nificantamountofworktobeginassoon asfundingcouldbesecured. Notethatadvancedplanningstageswill needtooccurfollowingthisstudy,inor- dertoprovidemoredetaileddesignsand publicoutreach. 5 Municipal Center Concepts PREVIOUSPLANS Initialideasforacitycenter,withconsolidatedcityofficesandpublicspace,came fromthe2003Downtown Master Plan.ThePlancalledforanewCentralLibraryalong 8thStreetbetweenRockandMLKStreets.EighthStreetwasenvisionedasa“festival street”thatcouldbetemporarilyclosedtoautomobilesforpurposessuchasfarmer’s marketsandotherspecialevents.Thelibraryisnowinplace,withenhancedsidewalk andstreetscapetreatments,andcouldbenefitfromthesynergyofothermunicipaluses. Central Library Public Parking Structure Retail Wrap Retail Wrap City Hall ParkPlaza Festival Street 2014 EXISTING CONDITIONS Central Library Plaza Plaza Streetscape Improvements 2003 MASTER PLAN CONCEPT Figure 2 - 2003 Master Plan versus Existing Conditions 6 City of Georgetown, TX AspartoftheDowntown Master Plan Update(2013/14)process,newalterna- tiveconceptsforacentralCityCenter wereexplored.Verybroadconceptswere developedbycommunitymembersand designersinapublicworkshop.Specific needswereidentified,aslistedonpage 3,alongwiththepopularideaofutilizing theexistingcity-ownedproperties: •Theoldlibrary(presentlyvacant) •ThehistoricLight&WaterWorksbuild- ing,soontobevacated,asthepolice headquarterswillrelocateinlate2014, and •The1stflooroftheGCATbuilding, whichwillalsobevacatedaspolice dispatchserviceswillalsorelocatein late2014. FullDraftMasterPlanscenariosforacity center,asdevelopedbythecommunity, areincludedasanappendixtothisreport. Additionalplanningforthefeasibilityof aCityCenterwasexploredfollowingthe masterplanupdate.Interviewswithcity staffandstakeholderswereconductedin ordertounderstandfutureprogramming andspatialneeds.CityCenterconcepts wererefinedfromtheinitialdraftmaster planexercises,basedoninformation gatheredfromthisprocess.Thisreport summarizesthefindingsofthisadditional exercise. Concepts for a Municipal Center in different con- figurations were explored by community workshop participants. 7 Municipal Center Concepts PROJECT NEEDS AND PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS Throughpublicforumsandmeetingswithstaffandstakeholders,thefollowingproject needsandprogramrequirementsweredeterminedfortheGeorgetownCityCenter: 1. OUTDOOR CIVIC SPACES Downtowncurrentlylackssufficientcivic spacesforthegeneralpublictoenjoy. TheTownSquareisagreatplacetohost civicevents,howeveritiscurrentlythe onlyplacetoholdeventsdowntown.Itis sometimesover-crowdedforevents,and itisnotamenableforstagingotheractivi- ties.Thereisaneedtoprovideadditional high-qualityspaceforeventstorelieve thepressureonthesquare.Analterna- tivelocationthatiseasiertoprogram anddoesnotdisrupttrafficisdesired.A keyconceptwhichwascarriedoverfrom theoriginalvisionandsupportedbythe community,istocreatea“festivalstreet”, whichcouldbeclosedtoautomobiles temporarilyforspecialeventssuchas farmer’smarkets.Asdowntownbecomes amoredesirableplacetolive,moresmall parksandplazaswillbeneeded.ACity Center,asenvisioned,couldbeaperfect locationtoprovidetheseoutdoorcivic spaces. 2. COMMUNITY MEETING SPACE Currently,thelibraryisoneoftheonly placesdowntownwithflexiblecom- munitymeetingspace.Theexisting meetingroomsinthelibraryareheavily programmed.Providingadditionalindoor meetingandeventspacewasidentifiedas amajorneedwithindowntown.Inaddition togroupmeetingspace,aflexiblespace thatcouldhostsmallperformancesforthe artsisalsodesired.Thisprogramrequire- mentwouldfitwellwithinacitycenter. A “festival street” could be closed to automobiles to hold special events such as farmer’s markets (web image - Franklin, TN). Additional indoor meeting and event space is needed downtown. 8 City of Georgetown, TX 3. AMPHITHEATER Anamphitheaterhasbeendesiredfrom thecommunityforalongtime.Originally, anamphitheaterwasenvisionedalongthe river.However,communitymemberswere excitedaboutthepossibilityofincluding anamphitheaterintheCityCenter,asit wouldprovideaprominentlocationto hostspecialeventsandperformances thatismorewidelyaccessible. 4. PARKING Citizensparticipatinginplanningwork- shopsrepeatedlystatedthatconvenient andaccessiblepublicparkingwestofthe squareisneeded.Thelibrarycurrently demandsmoreparkingthanisprovided andtheoverflowlotacross8thStreetis oftenused,althoughtheconditionofthe lotcouldbeimproved.Somedowntown advocateshaveenvisionedanewparking structurewithinthearea.Acitycenter couldbeaperfectlocationtoprovidethis service,asitcouldservecityfunctionsas wellasdowntownbusinesses. 5. CONSOLIDATED CITY FACILITIES Amorecentralizedlocationformanycity officesisdesiredinordertobetterserve customers,aswellastoimproveoverall efficiencyofoperationamongcityde- partments.Althoughitisdifficulttopre- dictfuturegrowthofgovernment,what isknownisthatthecityisexperiencing significantpopulationgrowth.George- townisbecomingadesirableplacetolive andappealstoawidevarietyofpeople: seniors,families,andyoungprofession- als.Aspopulationisexpectedtonearly doubleby2030(from52,700to101,700), itcanbeassumedthat,evenwhenoperat- ingtohighlevelsofefficiency,citystaff andserviceswillalsogrow.Twogrowth A parking structure could be beneficial to the down- town and could serve multiple users and functions. An amphitheater could help activate downtown and provide an alternative location for events and performances (web image - Independence, OR). scenarioswereusedasastartingpoint fordeterminingspaceandprogramneeds forthefuturecitycenteroffices.Afull descriptionofstaffgroupings,including adjacencyneedsandfuturesquarefoot- agepredictionsisprovidedasanappen- dixtothisreport. 6. RENEWED INVESTMENT WEST OF DOWNTOWN Inadditiontopublicspaceandservices, theareasurroundingtheCentralLibrary couldbenefitfromrenewedprivatein- vestment.Oftentimes,privatedollars followpublicimprovements.IftheCity Centermovesforward,itcouldcreatea marketforotherprivateimprovements throughoutdowntown. 9 Municipal Center Concepts EXISTING CITY ASSETS CITY-OWNEDPROPERTY PROPERTIES TO BE KEPT AND REUSED Apopularideaamongstcommunitymembersandcitystaffwastoreuseexistingcity- ownedpropertiesaspartofthenewGeorgetownCityCenter,atleastuntilsignificant growthoccurredandtheneedforanewCityHallisrequired.Eachoftheseexisting buildingsaregenerallyingoodcondition,howeversomerepairandrenovationswould needtooccurtoaccommodatemodernuses.Theyare: 1. HISTORIC LIGHT AND WATER WORKS BUILDING TheGeorgetownPoliceiscurrentlyhead- quarteredinthehistoricpowerplant.It includes11,000totalsquarefeetofspace withapproximately8,500squarefeeton thehistoricfirstfloorofthebuildingand 2,500squarefeetofspaceinthesecond flooraddition. Thepolicedepartmentisrelocatingto alargerfacilityoutsideofdowntownin late2014,leavingitavailableforanew cityuse.Itishighlydesiredtoreusethis buildingaspartoftheCityCenter,orfor anotherpublicfunction.Artspacesand galleries,andpublicmeetingroomand eventspacearepotentialusestocon- sider. 2. OLD LIBRARY Theoldlibrary,locatedat8thandMLK Streets,wasbuiltin1987andwasvacated whenthenewCentralLibrarywasbuilt.It includes17,000squarefeetofspaceon asinglefloorwithauniquecentralspace thathas“zig-zag”rowofwindowsover- lookingacourtyard.Ithasbeenutilized forstorageinrecentyearsandthepark- inglotisusedforoverflowpoliceopera- tions.Withtherelocationofthepolice headquarters,theparkingwillnolonger The Historic Light and Water Works building should be reused as part of the City Center or other func- tion for public benefit. The old library could be reused as part of the City Center or other public use. 10 City of Georgetown, TX beusedandstoragecouldberelocated. Indiscussionswithstaffandthepublic, somefeltstronglyaboutreusingtheold library,eitheraspartoftheCityCenter orforotherpublicfunctions,suchasper- formingarts,artgalleryspaceorpublic meetingrooms.Growthscenarioscould includeaddingontothisbuilding,orde- molishingitandreplacingitwithanew building. 3. GEORGETOWN COMMUNICATIONS AND TRAINING BUILDING TheGeorgetownCommunicationsand Training(GCAT)Building,locatedat9th andMLKStreets,waspurchasedand renovatedin2007bythecity.Itcurrently housesInformationTechnologyandLegal ServicesonthesecondfloorandPublic SafetyDispatchandAncillaryPoliceuses onthefirstfloor.Atrainingroomalso servesasthecurrentEmergencyOpera- tionsCenteronthefirstfloor. ThefirstflooroftheGCATbuildingisan ideallocationforthefutureMunicipal CourtandCourtAdministrationoffices, oncethepolice-relatedusesrelocate.The trainingroomcouldbeconvertedintothe courtroomsinceithasaseparatepublic accessandisdirectlyadjacenttoasur- faceparkinglot.Thefronthalfofthefirst floorcouldthenbededicatedtocourt administrationoffices. EachMunicipalCenterdevelopmentsce- narioassumesthattheMunicipalCourt willrelocatetotheGCATfirstfloorinlate 2014orearly2015. The first floor of the GCAT building could become the City’s new Court Administration offices and Courtroom. It would benefit from exterior facade improvements, such as a new entry, to highlight the building as part of the City Center. RENOVATIONS REQUIRED Renovations that would be required to reuse existing buildings include: • Historic Light and Water Works building - minor interior renova- tions to accommodate modern uses. • Old Library - exterior and interior renovations, as well as the poten- tial to construct a 2nd floor for additional space (constructing a 2nd floor would require structural improvements - see Scenario C.) • GCAT building - exterior facade improvements and interior renova- tions to accommodate new uses. 11 Municipal Center Concepts PROPERTIES TO BE VACATED AND SOLD Currently,citydepartmentsarescatteredthroughoutdowntowninvariouscity-owned buildings.WhentheconsolidationtoaCityCenteroccurs,itwillleaveafewcity-owned buildingsavailableforotheruses.Thecityshouldconsidersomeoftheseproper- tiesasassetsthatcouldbesoldtohelpfundthefutureCityCenter.Thisadditional revenuecouldhelpreducetheamountthatmaybefundedbyabondissueorother means.Theyare: 1. HISTORIC POST OFFICE (CITY HALL) ThecurrentCityHallislocatedat113E. 8thStreetinthehistoricU.S.PostOffice. Thebuildingwasconstructedin1931and renovatedin1991-92andhasservedas CityHallsincethen.Asthedepartments withinCityHallarerelocatedtoanewCity Center,thisbuildingcouldbesoldtohelp payforit.Thecurrentvalueisestimated tobe$1.048Million(source:Williamson CentralAppraisalDistrict.) 2. VISITOR’S CENTER TheexistingVisitor’sCenter,whichalso housesofficesfortheConventionand Visitor’sBureau(CVB)andtheDown- townGeorgetownAssociation(DGA),is locatedat103W.7thStreet.Whilethe CVBandVisitor’sCentershouldstaynear thecourthousesquareinordertoremain highlyvisible,thisbuildingisprimereal estate,andcouldbesold. ThecurrentplanisfortheCVBandthe Visitor’sCentertomoveto101E.7th Street-directlyacrossMainStreetfrom thisbuilding-whenMunicipalCourtand CouncilChambersrelocateintotheGCAT building.Thiswouldallowthecurrent buildingtobesoldwhileallowingCVBand theVisitor’sCentertohaveacontinuing presenceonthesquare.Theestimated valueoftheVisitor’sCenterbuildingis $380,200(source:WilliamsonCentralAp- praisalDistrict.) The Historic Post Office (current City Hall) could eventually be sold to help pay for the City Center. The Visitor’s Center on the square is a real estate asset for the City. 3. ALBERTSON’S BUILDING TheoldAlbertson’sbuilding,whichislo- catedjustnorthofthedowntownbetween I-35andAustinAvenuewasownedbythe cityandrecentlysoldtoaprivatedevel- oper.Whilenotinthedistrict,thiscity assetcouldstillbeusedtohelpfundthe futureCityCenter.Itsoldfor$3.5Million. 12 City of Georgetown, TX EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS TheCityCenterstudyareaislocatedoneblockwestofthecourthousesquarealong 8thStreet.Itconsistsoffourcityblocks:tworegularblocksandtwoexpandedcity blocks.RefertoFigure3belowforanaerialphotographwithnotes.Blockdescriptions areprovidedonthefollowingpage. 1 23 4 Williamson County Courthouse GCAT building Flower shop Old library Historic Light and Water Works building Central Library Private buildings Library parking Temporary County buildings Overflow library parking Private professional offices Figure 3 - Existing Conditions Ro c k S t . Au s t i n A v e . Fo r e s t S t . ML K S t . We s t S t . Ma i n S t . 8th St. 9th St. 7th St. 10th St. 13 Municipal Center Concepts BLOCK ONE Blockoneincludesamixtureofcounty andprivateproperty.Theexistingcounty buildingsaretemporarymetalstructures andcurrentlyhouseofficesandrelated functions.TheCityandCountyhavean agreementtodeconstructthebuildings andusethisareaasatemporarysurface parkinglot. TheexistingprivatebuildingsalongRock Streetincludeprofessionaloffices. Block one consists of temporary metal buildings that house offices and other related functions for the County. BLOCK TWO BlocktwoincludestheCentralLibraryand PoliceHeadquartersinthehistoricLight andWaterWorksbuilding,aswellasafew privatelyownedbuildings.TheCentral Libraryisasignificantanchorofactivity forthecommunity,butoftenexperiences burdensfromover-programmedcommu- nitymeetingspacesandlimitedparking. Thecountypropertyonblockone,as mentionedabove,iscurrentlyusedfor overflowparkingforthelibrary.Thelibrary includesacentralatriumspaceandim- provedstreetscapingtreatmentalong8th Street,aswellasalocalcoffeeshopand courtyardwithcafeseatingandawater feature.Themainparkinglotisaccessed from9thStreetandthatentranceincludes asmallsculpturegardenandplaza. ThehistoricLightandWaterWorksbuild- inghousesthepolicedepartment,which willbevacatedinlate2014.Thisbuilding alsoservesasabeaconforthecommunity withit’siconicsmokestack.Atemporary buildingisusedforauxiliarypurposes. Thesmall,privately-ownedbuildingson blocktwoarelocatedalong8thStreet andincludecommercialretailspaceand asmallautomechanic. BLOCK THREE Blockthreeconsistsofthevacatedformer library,whichwasconstructedin1986.It iscurrentlyusedforstorageandthepo- licedepartmentusestheparkinglotfor theirautomobiles. Block three includes the old library and parking lot. The parking lot is currently used by the police department for extra storage of police vehicles. BLOCK FOUR BlockfourincludestheGeorgetownCom- municationsandTraining(GCAT)building whichhousescityandpolicedepartment services.Asmallflowershopisalsolo- catedonthisblock. 14 City of Georgetown, TX ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS & PHASING Fouralternativescenariosprovideoptionsfortheconfigurationandpricingofanew CityCenter.AphasedapproachallowstheCityCentertoevolveovertime.Eachsce- narioisdesignedtomaximizeuseofcity-ownedpropertyinPhase1,savingtheCity andtaxpayersmoney.Whenexpansionisnecessary,optionallocationsforafuture CityHallandpublicparkingstructureareshowninPhase2.Notethatsomeofthese optionswouldrequiretheCityacquiringland(eitherbypurchasingorswappingland) fromtheCountyorprivatelandownersinordertodoso.Inaddition,eachscenario showshowothernewdevelopmentbytheCountyandprivateownerscouldoccur aroundtheCityCenterinPhase3(orasthemarketdemands.)Thefirstphaseis generallythesameforeachscenario(seeexceptionsonpage15,)allowingimprove- mentstobeginimmediately.Phasestwoandthreeincludethephasinginofafuture CityHall,parkingstructureandnewsurroundingdevelopment.Figure4explainsthe phasingoptions: ALL SCENARIOS • Outdoor public- realm improve- ments • Surface public parking lot • Renovations of existing buildings SCENARIO A • City Hall North + public parking structure ALL SCENARIOS • New infill devel- opment on County and private land (as market demands) PHASE 1 PHASE 2 SCENARIO B • City Hall East + public parking structure SCENARIO C • City Hall West (addition) + public parking structure SCENARIO C2 • City Hall West (new) + public parking struc- ture Figure 4 - Alternative Phasing Scenarios PHASE 3 15 Municipal Center Concepts PHASE1 ALL SCENARIOS Phaseoneincludespublic-realmimprovementsandrenovationstoexistingbuildings. Allimprovementsoccuroncity-ownedproperty,orpropertythatisalreadyunder agreementfortemporaryuse(parkinglotoncountyland.)Relocatingexistingcityde- partmentsintotherenovatedbuildingsalsoprovidesanopportunitytosellcityassets tohelpfundtheseimprovementsintheshort-term.Itisdesignedinsuchawaythat thecitycouldmoveaheadwiththisstage,whilecontinuingtoevaluatethealternative laterstages.Phaseoneimprovementsinclude: Figure 5 - Phase One Improvements (Plan) 1 3 4 6 5 PHASE 1 EXCEPTIONS Depending on which scenario is chosen, the old library (#3) may or may not need to be reno- vated in phase 1. Scenario C suggests using the old library as the new City Hall by adding onto the existing building. This decision may need to be made up front so that construction can take place all at once. Scenario C2 does not require renovating the old library because it would be demolished in phase 2. 2 Ro c k S t . 9th St. 8th St. 7th St. Fo r e s t S t . ML K S t . We s t S t . 16 City of Georgetown, TX Amphitheater Large plaza behind library Shade corridor Children’s play area Reading gardens Expanded sculpture garden Outdoor cafe seating 9th Str e e t Fore s t S t . MLK St . Festival Street 200-space surface parking lot Entry Plazas Pedestrian Corridor Shade corridor 8th Stree t For e s t S t r e e t MLK St. 5 Figure 6 - Phase One Improvements (3D Renderings) 1 2 1 2 3 4 6 17 Municipal Center Concepts 1. SURFACE PARKING LOT (200 SPAC- ES) Apublicparkinglotisdesignedtobecon- structedoncountylandonthecornerof MLKand8thStreets,aspreviouslyagreed uponbytheCityandCounty.Thisparking lotwouldservethelibraryandcitycenter, andotherdowntownservices,untilafu- tureparkingstructurecanbebuilt.Thislot shouldbedesignedmuchliketheoneon thecornerof9thandMain,withlandscap- inganddecorativesidewalks.Itshould alsobedesignedtobeflexibleinuse, perhapsaccommodatingspecialevents. Apedestriancorridorcouldbeprovided throughtheparkinglotthatconnectsinto the“shadecorridor”andamphitheater(as describedin#5.) 2. FESTIVAL STREET Duringweekends,8thStreet(between RockandMLK)andMLKStreet(between 8thand9th)couldtransformintoa“fes- tival”atmosphere.Thesestreetscould betemporarilyclosedtoautomobilesfor specialeventssuchasartfairs,concerts orfarmer’smarkets.Thestreetshouldbe designedtoappearasaspecialplace, perhapswithuniquepaving,andshould alsoincludepoweroutletstoaccommo- datethespecialevents.Sidewalksand streetscapingtreatmentsalongthese streetsshouldalsobedesignedwitha high-levelofdetail. The surface parking lot should be designed much like the existing surface lot at 9th and Main Streets, with improved streetscaping and signage. The “festival street” could host events such as farmer’s markets and art fairs and be designed with unique paving to make it appear special. The surface parking lot should be designed to accommodate special events and link into other amenities in the City Center area, such as the “shade corridor.” 18 City of Georgetown, TX 3. OLD LIBRARY (17,000 SF) Theoldlibrarycouldberenovatedto serveasaninterimlocationforthefol- lowingservicesuntilanewcityhallis constructed: •CouncilChambers&offices(6,000SF) •CityManager’soffice(2,800SF) •CitySecretary’soffice(1,400SF) •HumanResources(1,750SF) NotethatforscenariosCandC2,the decisionaboutthefuturelocationofCity Hallmayneedtobemadeupfront.For scenarioC,itmaybemoreefficienttoalso constructtheadditionatthistime.Other- wise,thelistedcityservicesmayhaveto relocateonceagain,whentheadditionis constructed,orelselivethroughamajor constructionproject.AsforscenarioC2, theoldlibrarywouldnotneedrenovated, asitwouldbedemolishedinordertobuid anewCityHallonsite. 4. HISTORIC LIGHT AND WATER WORKS BUILDING (11,000 SF) ThehistoricLightandWaterWorks buildingcouldberenovatedafterpolice headquartersrelocate(late2014)toac- commodatethefollowingservices: •FinanceandAdministration(4,200SF) •PublicCommunications(700SF) •EconomicDevelopment(1,000SF) •DowntownCommunityServices (1,400SF) 5. GCAT BUILDING (6,500 SF) The1stflooroftheGCATbuildingwould berenovatedafterpoliceheadquarters relocate(late2014)toaccommodatethe followingcityservices: •MunicipalCourtroom(5,000SF) •Courtadministrativeoffices(2,100SF) PHASE 1 ESTIMATED LIFETIME Square footage assumptions are gen- erally estimated at 350 square feet per employee. The square footage (SF) listed adjacent to each depart- ment to the left is representative of existing space needs, not projected needs. It is estimated that the exist- ing building renovations would serve city services for the next 5 to 7 years before expansion is needed. Refer to Figure A1 in the Appendix for a full square footage analysis of existing versus future needs. OTHER PHASE 1 OPPORTUNITIES By temporarily moving city depart- ments into the existing city-owned buildings, it could allow the following to occur: • The Visitor’s Center, CVB and Downtown Georgetown offices could relocate into the building at 101 E. 7th Street when Municipal Court and Council Chambers re- locate. • The Visitor’s Center building could be sold (estimated value: $380,200) • The existing historic post office could be sold (estimated value: $1,048,000) • The existing staff located on the 2nd floor of the Downtown Art Center (Finance and Administra- tion, Public Communications and Downtown Community Services) could relocate, allowing the Art Center to expand. 19 Municipal Center Concepts 6. PUBLIC-REALM IMPROVEMENTS Asstatedpreviously,amajordesireof communitymembersistohavemore parksandopenspacetoenjoyindown- townandtoprovideanareaforspecial eventsinordertorelievepressureonthe square.Theseimprovementsshouldhap- peninphaseonetoaccommodatepublic wishes.Theyinclude: • Small entry plazasattherenovated formerlibraryandpolicestationbuild- ings. •A“shade corridor”,orlinearpedes- trianplaza,wheretheexistingservice roadexists.Thisspaceshouldbe designedwithshadestructuresto bringauniqueidentitytotheareaand provideshadedoutdoorspacesforthe publictoenjoyduringthehotsummer months. •Alarge plazabehindthelibrary.This areawouldbuildoffoftheexisting sculpturegardenwithexpandedar- easshowcasingpublicartandareas forrespiteandreading.Smallreading gardensareplacedadjacenttothe library’ssouthwallandachildren’s playareaisenvisionedforthisarea, perhapsincludingapop-upwaterfea- turetoenjoyduringthehotweather months.Apicnicareacouldbelocated southoftheoldpolicestationbuilding forstafftoenjoy.Thisareaflowsinto thefinalpublicfeature: •Anoutdoor amphitheaterattheter- minusoftheshadecorridor.Anamphi- theaterwouldprovidespaceforspe- cialeventsandoutdoorperformances tooccur.Itcouldbedesignedwith integratedshadestructures,muchlike theshadecorridortotieinthedesign themeforthearea. A “shade corridor” could be designed to bring a unique identity to the area and help tie in other features such as the amphitheater and plazas. A children’s play area could be integrated into the public plaza to activate the area. 20 City of Georgetown, TX PHASES2&3 Phasestwoandthreeassumethat,as growthcontinuesinGeorgetown,anew CityHallwillbeneededtosupportgrow- ingstaffandcitydepartmentservices. Additionally,itisassumedthatapublic parkingstructurewouldbebuilttosup- portthenewCityHallandGeorgetown CityCenteraswellasdowntownbusiness patrons.Thefollowingscenariosillustrate differentoptionsforthelocationofthese services.Inaddition,newinfilldevelop- mentisshowninordertodemonstrate howtheareacouldtransformover-time, asthecountyandprivatepropertyown- ersredeveloptheirsitestoaccommodate theirowngrowth. • “FestivalStreet” Hard-scapedpublicimprove- ments(sidewalksandplazas) Soft-scapedpublicimprove- ments(parkareas) CityHall FuturedevelopmentbyCounty/ privateowners 3-DIMENSIONAL ILLUSTRATIONS LEGEND: 21 Municipal Center Concepts SCENARIO A PHASE 2 ScenarioAplacesanewCityHallnorthofthelibraryalong8thStreet,betweenRock andForestStreets,inphasetwo.AparkingstructureisplacedbehindCityHallatthe cornerofRockand7thStreets. PHASE 3 Phasethreeshowshowfuturedevelopmentcouldoccuroncountyandprivateproperty whenthesurfacelotisreplacedbytheparkingstructure. New City Hall New public parking structure New private development New county development For illustrative pur- poses only. Not intend- ed as actual develop- ment proposals. 22 City of Georgetown, TX SCENARIO B PHASE 2 ScenarioBplacesanewCityHalleastofthelibraryadjacenttothecoffeeshopin phasetwo.Apublicparkingstructurewouldreplacetheexistingbanksurfacelotsouth ofthenewCityHallatthecornerof9thandRockStreets. PHASE 3 NewdevelopmentoncountyandprivatelandisshownnorthofthelibraryandCity Hallinordertoactivate8thStreetandthesurroundingCityCenteruses. New City Hall New public parking structure New development on county and private property For illustrative pur- poses only. Not intend- ed as actual develop- ment proposals. 23 Municipal Center Concepts SCENARIO C PHASE 2 ScenarioCplacesthenewCityHallontheoldlibraryblockinphasetwo.Thisoption couldeithertakeplaceasanadditiontotheoldlibraryorbydemolishingtheoldli- braryandconstructinganewbuilding(scenarioC2.)Apublicparkingstructurewould beconstructedatthecornerof8thandRockStreets,justeastofthelibrary. PHASE 3 Newdevelopmentisshownoncountyand privatepropertynorthofthelibraryon8thStreetoncetheparkinglotisreplacedby thestructure. New City Hall New public parking structure New development on county and private property For illustrative pur- poses only. Not intend- ed as actual develop- ment proposals. Note that the old library is not load-rated to carry a 2nd floor. Therefore, in or- der to construct a 2nd story addition, the steel trusses and columns would need to be replaced. 24 City of Georgetown, TX SCENARIO C2 PHASE 2 ScenarioC2isanalternateofscenarioC.Itusesthesamecity-ownedlandforCity Hall,butinsteadofaddingontotheoldlibrary,itisdemolishedinordertoconstructa newbuilding.Thepublicparkingstructurestaysatthecornerof8thandRockStreets, justeastofthelibrary. New City Hall New public parking structure New development on county and private property For illustrative pur- poses only. Not intend- ed as actual develop- ment proposals. PHASE 3 Newdevelopmentisshownoncountyandprivatepropertynorthofthelibraryon8th Streetoncetheparkinglotisreplacedbythestructure. 25 Municipal Center Concepts PROJECT COSTS & FUNDING Preliminarycostingforeachscenariohelpsdeterminewhichoptionismostfeasible fromafinancialperspective.Forthepurposesofhelpingtoanalyzefuturecostsand funding,specificallyannualbondingcapacity,thefinancialsarebrokendowninterms ofproposedphasing: COSTSPERPHASE PHASE 1 - ALL SCENARIOS CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES RenovateMunicipalCourt/CouncilChambers $500,000 RenovateGCAT1stFloor $650,000 *RenovateOldLibrary $1,700,000 RenovateOldPoliceStation $1,100,000 200-spacesurfaceparkinglot $400,000 FestivalStreet $3,500,000 SoftscapedParkSpace $188,000 HardscapedPlazas $750,000 Amphitheater $250,000 TensileStructures $600,000 PlayAreawithFountain $56,000 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY 15%contingency $1,454,000 LAND LEASE EXPENSES LeaseCountylandforparking $20,000 PROPERTY SALES REVENUE (LESS BROKERAGE FEES) Visitor’sCenterbuildingonsquare $358,000 ExistingCityHall/HistoricPostOffice $985,000 Albertson’sbuilding $3,500,000 TOTAL PHASE 1 COST (EXPENSES MINUS SALES)$6,325,000 *not required for scenario C2. 26 City of Georgetown, TX Further planning with full construction documents is needed to allow for exactness about such items as utilities, lighting, structural, interior fittings and furnishings, exterior furnishings and materials, and other such details. Full spreadsheets for each scenario are provided in the appendix. PHASE 2 - SCENARIO A CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES NewCityHall(approximately45,000SF)$9,281,000 Furniture,Fittings,Equipment,andSecurityfornewCityHall $2,250,000 Newparkingstructure $7,875,000 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY 15%Constructioncontingency $2,911,000 LAND ACQUISITION EXPENSES LandfornewCityHallandparkingstructurenorthofLibrary $1,654,000 PROPERTY SALES REVENUE (LESS BROKERAGE FEES) Sellcity-ownedpropertyatNWcornerof9th&RockStreets $226,000 TOTAL SCENARIO A COSTS (EXPENSES MINUS SALES)$23,745,000 PHASE 2 - SCENARIO B CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES NewCityHall(approximately45,000SF)$9,281,000 FFE,SecurityfornewCityHall $2,250,000 Newparkingstructure $7,875,000 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY 15%Constructioncontingency $2,911,000 LAND ACQUISITION EXPENSES LandfornewCityHalleastofLibrary $255,000 TOTAL SCENARIO B COSTS $22,572,000 27 Municipal Center Concepts PHASE 2 - SCENARIO C CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES CityHall-additiontooldlibrary(approximately28,000SF)$5,775,000 FFE,SecurityfornewCityHall $1,400,000 Newparkingstructure $7,875,000 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY 15%Constructioncontingency $2,258,000 LAND ACQUISITION EXPENSES LandfornewparkingstructureeastofLibrary $254,000 TOTAL SCENARIO C COSTS $17,562,000 PHASE 2 - SCENARIO C2 CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES NewCityHall(approximately45,000SF)$9,281,000 FFE,SecurityfornewCityHall $2,250,000 Newparkingstructure $7,875,000 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY 15%Constructioncontingency $2,911,000 LAND ACQUISITION EXPENSES LandfornewparkingstructureeastofLibrary $255,000 TOTAL SCENARIO C2 COSTS $22,572,000 28 City of Georgetown, TX TOTALCOSTCOMPARISON Acostsummaryforeachscenarioisprovidedbelow Summary of Options A B C C2 Renovations Council Chambers/Municipal Court $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 GCAT 1st Floor $650,000 $650,000 $650,000 $650,000 Old Library $1,700,000 $1,700,000 $1,700,000 $0 Old Police Station $1,100,000 $1,100,000 $1,100,000 $1,100,000 New Construction City Hall $9,281,000 $9,281,000 $5,775,000 $9,281,000 Furniture,Fittings,Equipment, Security $2,250,000 $2,250,000 $1,400,000 $2,250,000 Parking Temporary Surface Lot $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 Parking Structure $7,875,000 $7,875,000 $7,875,000 $7,875,000 Open Space Festival Street $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 Park Space $187,500 $187,500 $187,500 $187,500 Plaza $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 Amphitheater $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 Tensile Structure $600,000 $600,000 $600,000 $600,000 Play Area with Fountain $56,000 $56,000 $56,000 $56,000 Subtotal of Construction (Rounded to Thousands)$29,100,000 $29,100,000 $24,744,000 $27,400,000 Contingency $4,365,000 $4,365,000 $3,711,600 $4,109,925 Total of Construction (Rounded to Thousands)$33,465,000 $33,465,000 $28,455,600 $31,509,425 Acquisitions/Leases Land for City Hall/Parking $1,653,600 $254,400 $254,400 $254,400 Legal for Ground Lease (allowance)$20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 Subtotal $1,674,000 $274,000 $274,000 $274,000 Total of Construction/Acquisitions $35,139,000 $33,739,000 $28,730,000 $31,783,000 Dispositions NW Corner of 9th & Rock $225,600 $0 $0 $0 CVB Building $357,000 $357,000 $357,000 $357,000 City Hall/Post Office $985,000 $985,000 $985,000 $985,000 Albertson's $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 Total of Dispositions (Rounded to Thousands)$5,068,000 $4,842,000 $4,842,000 $4,842,000 Cost Less Dispositions (Rounded to Thousands)$30,071,000 $28,897,000 $23,888,000 $26,941,000 Figure 7 - Cost Comparison Summary 29 Municipal Center Concepts PROJECTFUNDING Theusualfundingforsuchprojectsisbonding.Currentratesformunicipalbondsvary from±3.5%to±5.5%andup.Forthepurposesofunderstandingtherangeofannual debt,amediumvalueof4.75%wasusedfora25-yearbondappliedtothecostafter dispositions.Thedebtcoverage,asrequiredinGeorgetown,is1.5.Figure7showsa breakdownofbondingcapacityneededforeachscenario: Bonding For Improvements A B C C2 25 yr Bond Debt Service at 4.75%$2,080,000 $1,999,000 $1,653,000 $1,864,000 Debt Coverage 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Cash Flow Needed for Bonding $3,120,000 $2,999,000 $2,480,000 $2,796,000 Annual Ground Lease from County $105,000 $105,000 $105,000 $105,000 Annual Total for Bonding and Ground Lease $3,225,000 $3,104,000 $2,585,000 $2,901,000 Figure 8 - Bonding Comparison Summary Thevarianceincostbetweentheoptionsisapproximately$6.2million,andtherevenue neededtosupportbondingandagroundleasevariesbyapproximately$640,000.The rangeofoptionsthusappeartooffermultiplechoicesthatallowforafuturecitycenter witharelativelysmallvarianceinthebondingcapacityneeded.Assuch,theoptions presentchoicesthatmayhingelessdirectlyuponconstructioncostthanuponpublic prioritiesfortheurbandesigndesired,anduponconsiderationsoffuturepublicneeds. 30 City of Georgetown, TX CONCLUSIONS Withtheanalysisprovidedinthisreport,doesoneofthedevelopmentscenariosstand outasapreferredoption?EachoftherefinedoptionspresentedasA,B,CandC2 areviable.Theanalysisofpotentialspaceneeds,preliminaryestimatesofpotential constructioncostsandconsiderationofthelandareathatmaybeavailableinthe studyareaprovidessomeusefulinformation: OPPORTUNITIESANDCHALLENGES Eachoptionhasuniqueandfavorableopportunities,aswellasdifficultchallenges. Intheend,multiplevariableswilldeterminethechosenoption.Theoverarchingop- portunitiesandchallengesforeachscenarioare: SCENARIO A ScenarioApracticesgoodurbandesignbyflankingbothsidesof8thStreetwith active,civicuses-anewCityHalltothenorthandtheCentralLibrarytothesouth. Thisisoneofthenegativeaspectsof8thStreetasitexiststoday,asonlythesouth sidecontributesactivitytothestreet.ThedownsidetoscenarioAisthatitrequires significantpurchase(ornegotiation)ofCountyandprivatepropertyinordertodoso. SCENARIO B ScenarioBbuildsonthesynergywiththelibrarybyplacingCityHalldirectlyadjacent toit.ThisgivesCityHallprominentexposureandadjacencytothecourthouse,another civiciconindowntown.ThisscenariorequireslesslandacquisitionthanscenarioA, buttheplacementoftheparkingstructureonbankland,mayormaynotworkout dependingonthebank’sfutureneeds. SCENARIO C ScenarioCfullyutilizescity-ownedpropertyandisthemostconservativeapproach, butitfallsbehindonoverallbestpracticesforurbandesign.Itismakingbestuseof existingcityassets,butmayrequireanupfrontdecisionontheplacementofCityHall inphase1,however.Anotherpotentialopportuniyisthattheplacementoftheparking structure,mainlyoncity-ownedproperty,mightallowthecitytomoveforwardwith thestructuresooner,ifitprovedtobefeasible. SCENARIO C2 ScenarioC2alsoutilizescity-ownedproperty,butinvestsinanewbuildingtoserve long-termneeds.LikescenarioC,itmayrequireanupfrontdecisionabouttheplace- mentofCityHallinphase1.Again,thesameplacementoftheparkingstructuremight allowthecitytomoveforwardwiththestructuresooneraswell. 31 Municipal Center Concepts Figure8offersamoredescriptiveanalysisofthepotentialopportunitiesandchal- lengesforeachscenario.Thislistconsistsoffactorsthataffecturbandesign,location, acquisitions/partnerships,program,andoverallprojectcosts. SCENARIOS: CATEGORIES:A B C C2 URBANDESIGN Activatesbothsidesof8thStreet X SynergywithLibraryandotherpublicimprovements X X RockStreetisactivatedwithcivicuses X X Providesamplecivicoutdoorspace X X X X LOCATION CityHallisclosetoTownSquare X X ParkingStructurelocationidealfortrafficflow X X X X ACQUISITIONS/PARTNERSHIPS CouldpartnerwithCountytobuildparkingstructure X Couldpartnerwithbanktobuildparkingstructure X Landacquisitionrequiredisrelativelylow X X X PROGRAM Enablesallexistingbuildingsinstudyareatobeuti- lizedinphase1 X X OVERALLCOSTS 1=mostexpensive;4=leastexpensive 1 2 4 3 Figure 8 - Opportunities 32 City of Georgetown, TX OTHERCONSIDERATIONS Nowthatmultipleoptionshavebeenanalyzed,itistimetotakethenextsteptoward bringingtheGeorgetownCityCentertoareality.Somefinalthingstotakeintocon- siderationareasfollows: 1. Sufficient land is available for any of the potential scenarios. Are the necessary acquisitions worth pursuing? Evenwithprojectedgrowthinspaceneedsbyincludingothercivicfunctions,thearea canaccommodateallofthedevelopmentenvisioned,andevenhavelandavailable forothercomplementaryprivatedevelopmentorcountyuses.Someoptionsrequire landacquisitionofCountyandprivateproperty.Whilethismightposeachallenge, thefinaloutcomemaybeworthit. 2. As with any major public project, there are lots of moving pieces. Consider the timing of when certain parcels might become available to influence the final selection. Momentumforbuildingacitycenterispresent.Ifascenariodependsonthewilling- nessofotherpropertyownerstosellorjoininsomeofthedevelopment,itcould extendtheprojectscheduleandthecitymightrisklosingtheexcitementandsupport thatcurrentlyexists. 3. Each scenario can be phased, and should begin with public improvements. Eachscenariohasthepotentialtobephased,beginningwiththeutilizationofexisting buildingsforcityservicesandthebeautificationofpublicspaceandenhancement ofservicessuchaspublicparking.Buildingpublicimprovementsfirstwillassurethe communityofthismajorinvestment,especiallyasbondingwillmostlikelybethemost relevantfundingsource.Italsohasthepotentialtospurprivateinvestmentsooner. Fundingwillalsodeterminehowtheprojectgetsphased. 4. Exploring the construction of a parking structure in phase 1 could help support later phases. Iftheobjectofcreatingaparkingstructureistocreateadistrictsolutionforparking thatenablesfutureprivatesectordevelopment,buildingthestructureimmediately couldreassuretheprivatesectortomoveforwardwithpotentialdevelopment(shown inPhase3.)Whilethebondingcostforthetemporarylotisonlyapproximately$32,000 annually,overthelifeofthebondthisisatotalcostofapproximately$800,000that couldbeeliminatedbybuildingthestructureimmediately. 5. In choosing any scenario, changes should be anticipated. Finally,itisimportanttorecognizethatalloftheinformationgeneratedforthisstudy isbasedonbroadestimatesgeneratedata“highlevel,”andthatchangesinanysce- narioshouldbeexpectedasinformationbecomesmorerefined. FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY JULY 7, 2014 Submitted by RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY - GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 1 Executive Summary GOAL FOR THIS STUDY: The goal for this study was to provide an unbiased opinion regarding the most suitable immediate and future uses for the Old Library, the ground floor of he GCAT Building, and the Historic Light & Water Works Building. During the previous process planning process associated with the Downtown Master Plan study the City identified City Hall functions, Municipal Courts, and City Council activities as potential users for the buildings. The City asked us to review the City of Georgetown's spatial needs for each of these functions and based upon our findings recommend the most suitable uses for each building. Our recommendations were also to include a potential phasing plan and related costs for implementing the plan. PROCESS: The process of developing the feasibility study included the following activities: • Interviewing staff and discussing visions • Gathering and reviewing documents and technical data relating to the existing buildings • Review of previously prepared facility master plans • On-site analysis of each existing building and its site • Touring the existing Municipal Courts/City Council Building and Arts Center • Preparing facility needs program • Conceptual design studies • Anticipated project budgets Staff Interviews, Information Gathering, & Visioning - The first step of the process involved gathering information about the City’s spatial needs relating to City Hall functions, Municipal Courts, and City Council. Copies of the 2007 City of Old Library New Library Historic L&WW GCAT Bldg. RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY - GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 2 Georgetown Updated Facilities Plan and the 2014 Downtown Master Plan Update were obtained and carefully studied. In addition to these documents we used the City’s web site department listings, and our in-house data from similar municipal design projects to develop square footage projection for each function. We also had numerous meetings and detailed conversations with several staff members, including Laurie Brewer, Micki Rundell, Jackson Daly, Eric Lashley, Matt Synatschk, and Cathy Leloux. Discussions focused the functional requirements needs of each facility, knowledge of the existing buildings, management/ organizational philosophies, and insights into the long term goals of the City. Analysis of the Existing Buildings - An on-site investigation of each existing building was conducted to study existing building conditions and systems that could affect the conversion of the building into any of the potential new uses. Items that were studied and reviewed included the structural and foundation systems, exterior walls, interior finishes, expansion capabilities, environmental issues relating to potential hazardous materials, accessibility issues (ADA and TAS), and other related code issues such as fire protection, energy, and ventilation. The building evaluations were used to determine if each building could successfully accommodate any or all of the anticipated new uses. Site Analysis - The properties surrounding each building were studied for its suitability for the proposed new use. Site related information that was reviewed included existing land use, parking possibilities, site ingress and egress, topography, drainage, utilities, sun angles, prevailing winds, trees and vegetation, adjacent neighborhoods, views (to and from the property), adjacent buildings/activities, and possible value relating to the Downtown Master Plan. Facility Needs Program - Based upon information obtained from discussions and interviews with City staff, the 2007 City of Georgetown Updated Facilities Plan, the City’s web site regarding staffing, and our in-house data from similar municipal design projects a preliminary facility needs program was prepared. The facility needs program identified anticipated functions, potential users, and the anticipated square footage requirements for each function and use. Master Plan Options - Using the information gained from the analysis of the existing buildings and sites several options for reusing the existing building were developed, studied, and tested against the square footage and functional needs as identified in the Facility Needs Program. Relationships of the different city functions were studied for adjacency and separation requirements. Anticipated Project Budget - In order to assist the City in evaluating the master plan option a budget estimate was prepared for each option. The budgets prices were obtained from construction manager-at-risk firms that are experienced in working with municipal clients. EXISTING BUILDING CONDITIONS: Old Library - The irregular shaped stone facade building contains 17,000 square feet. It is constructed using a conventional structural steel frame with steel bar joists framing the roof. The roof joists are fairly long space thus reducing the number of interior columns. There was some belief the building's structure was designed in a manner that would allow a second floor to be added. Our field inspection of the RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY - GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 3 structure indicated this was not the case. We contacted the original architect and confirmed the structure was not designed to support additional floors. Our field investigation indicated the building is in good condition considering the length of time it has been vacant. Both the building's size, shape, ceiling heights, and the fairly column free interior space makes the building easily adaptable for reuse. GCAT Building - The GCAT Building provides approximately 6,500 square feet of useable floor area on the ground level. The building is a steel framed building with a stucco exterior. Based upon our field investigation we believe the building would be suitable for a variety of office activities. However, the low floor-to-floor height will prohibit placing any large, assembly type, spaces in it. The maximum available ceiling height is approximately 9 to 10 feet. Another concern with the building is it's appearance. The building's exterior facades are very non-descript and uninviting. The City of Georgetown is known for the architectural character of its buildings. GCAT's appearance simply does not meet these standards. Historic Light & Water Works Building - The Historic Light & Water Works Building has tremendous architectural character. It contains approximately 8,000 square feet of space on the ground floor and approximately 2,400 square feet on a second floor. The second floor was created by filling in the building's grand central space. While the second floor added valuable floor space for the Police Department it also destroyed one of the building's major architectural features. The building's primary structural system is load bearing masonry walls. Face brick is exposed in numerous locations throughout the building. New roof trusses have been added in portions of the building. The new trusses blend very well with the original architecture. The current configuration of rooms and the resulting tight spaces they create make any attempts to simply reuse the building without totally redesigning the interior unadvisable. Furthermore, the second floor has extensive accessibility issues. RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY - GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 4 FACILITY SQUARE FOOTAGE NEEDS: The facility square footage needs includes what we believe to be realistic space requirements for each facility to adequately fulfill the needs of the staff, elected officials, and citizens for each function. The City Hall/City Council includes the following functions: Administration: • City Manager • Executive Assistant • General Utilities Manager • Project Coordinator • Temp • Record Storage • Mail Couriers • Coffee • Admin. Waiting City Secretary: • City Secretary • Assistant City Secretary • Records Coordinator • Mayor’s Office Downtown & Community Services: • Assistant City Manager • Executive Assistant to ACM • Main Street Manager • Housing Coordinator • Historic Planner • Public Communication Manager • Webmaster City Council: • City Council Chamber • Council Desk • Council Conference Room • Kitchenette • A/V Room • Council Restroom Economic Development: • Director • Program Manager • Intern The total projected spatial needs for City Hall and City Council function is 15,650 square feet. The Municipal Court Facility will include the following functions: Court Functions: • Courtroom • Judge’s Bench • Teen Court • Temp • Workroom • Record Storage • Public Service Counter Human Resources: • Director • Assistant Director • HR Specialist • Generalists • Temp • HR Waiting Area Finance & Administration: • Chief Financial Officer • Finance Director • Executive Assistant • Administrative Assistant • Utilities Financial Analyst • Controller • Accounting Supervisor • Sr. Accountant • Acct. Special Sr. • Payroll • Accounting Specialists Building Support: • Public Lobby • Public Restrooms • Staff Restrooms • Break Room • Kitchenette • Custodian • File Storage • Workrooms • Conference Rooms • Records Storage • Mechanical Rooms • Electrical Rooms • Fire Riser Room • IT/Server RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY - GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 5 • Jury Room • Court Waiting • Judge’s Offices • Attorney Office • Court Administrator • Court Supervisor • Deputy Court Clerk Senior • Associate Deputy Court Clerk • Deputy Court Clerk • Customer Service Representative The total projected spatial needs for the Municipal Court facility is 15,000 square feet. The projected square footage needs of Municipal Court is considerably greater than the current 6,700 square foot courts facility. After touring and studying the existing Municipal Court facility we believe the current facility provides approximately 50% of the work and office space needed. The proposed 15,000 square feet reflects the current space needs, a growth factor, and space for court related functions that are not currently available in the existing building. MASTER PLAN OPTIONS: Although several master planning options were considered, explored, and tested two primary options emerged as the most viable. They include: Option “A”: This option involves converting the Old Library building into a new Municipal Courts facility. The building’s size, 17,000 square feet, provides adequate space to house all Court functions. The building’s high ceilings and few interior columns will allow for several design options in placing the Court Room. Since the building contains approximately 2,000 square feet more than is currently needed by the Court the additional square footage could be used for other functions. This Option requires City Hall/City Council functions to be located in different buildings. Total space needed by the combined City Hall and City Council functions is 16,650 square feet. Combination of remaining space available for City • Attorney/Client Conference Building Support: • Public Lobby • Public Restrooms • Staff Restrooms • Break Room • Custodian • Mechanical Room • Electrical/Telephone/IT • Fire Riser RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY - GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 6 Hall/City Council use is 16,500 (8,000 sf in the Historic Light and Water Works Building, 6,500 in GCAT Building, and 2,000 sf in the Old Library). We believe the various City Hall/City Council functions can fit into the available space. Option “A”, while basically addressing the current spatial needs, presents several potentially challenging issues. The first is space for future growth. Since it uses all of the available square footage in each existing building there is no available space within the buildings for future growth. The Old Library can be expanded by either adding an addition to the west side, filling in the existing garden/courtyard, or by spanning across the existing building to add additional levels. The GCAT Building can also be expanded. There is approximately 9,000 square feet of land on the east side of the building that could be used for expansion. The Historic Light and Water Works, in our opinion, cannot and should not be expanded. Finally, it should be pointed out that typical staff growth in City Halls occur fairly uniformly throughout each department. Therefore, it is very likely that once the City Hall functions needs to be expanded it will either require additions to be constructed on each building that house one of the City Hall functions or some departments will need to be relocated again. Another important issue presented by Option “A” is a potential management concern - the separation of functions (departments) into different buildings. In today’s municipal government there are numerous advantages of creating and maintaining the synergy of keeping various departments together. Option “B”: This option involves adding approximately 8,500 square feet to the east and north sides of the ground floor of the GCAT Building to house a new court room, court lobbies, and related activities, converting the Old Library building into a new City Hall/City Council facility, and saving the Historic Light & Water Works Building for other use opportunities such as flexible multipurpose space for public meetings, City Council Chambers, art shows, or music events. We believe this Option has numerous advantages over Option “A”. The first advantage is related to the site. We believe the positioning and relationship between the new Library and the Historic Light and Water Works Building, if used as an expansion of the Arts Center, will greatly benefit both the Library and the Arts RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY - GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 7 Center by providing a variety of spaces for meetings, music, and the arts. The Old Library, if used as a City Hall, creates a strong and logical visual termination to 8th Street and what will be become a new Municipal Center. The Municipal Courts facility, being located behind this group of buildings on 9th Street, is slightly less visible but readily accessible. A Municipal Court facility is typically a less desirable neighbor for a Library than an Arts Center or City Hall. Another advantage of Option “B” is growth potential. The Old Library’s size, 17,000 square feet, provides adequate space to house all City Hall/City Council functions. The building’s high ceilings and few interior columns will allow for same design options in placing the City Council Chamber as it did for the Court Room. The building provides City Hall functions with approximately 10% of growth space within the existing building. The GCAT Building can easily house numerous functions associated with the Municipal Court. A very large portion of a court building activities occur behind a secure perimeter and completely out of sight by the public. We believe the existing 6,500 square feet combined with a new addition of approximately 8,500 square feet can adequately address Municipal Court needs. The building expansion, as previously stated, should occur on the east and north sides of the building. The east side expansion could contain the new Court Room and related activities. The expansion would allow for proper ceiling heights for the Court Room. The north expansion could house public lobbies, corridors, and service/payment windows. The location of the expansion on the site would provide a new façade appropriate for a municipal courts facility. By expanding the GCAT Building and using it as a Municipal Court facility additional growth space can be added with the initial expansion, thus saving future expansion costs. We believe another important advantage of this Option is phasing. Providing proper facilities for the Municipal Court is the most pressing issue and will be the first step in implementing the selected master plan option. The advantages of Option “B” will become noticeable as Phase II of the plan is started. Option “A” requires renovating all three buildings while Option “B” renovates only two and postpones any decisions, work, and costs for the future renovations of the Historic Light & Water Works Building. OTHER OPPORTUNITIES: Site Opportunities - The 2014 Downtown Master Plan Update offers an exciting vision for downtown Georgetown. The Plan states “Downtown also should strengthen its role as the center of government, with major concentrations of city and county offices in the form of a Municipal Center as well as some state and even federal workers. In addition, it should be the cultural center of the city. Museums, galleries, and performance venues should thrive here and the central library should continue to be a key activity center. Conferences from the Rivery should bring regional residents to downtown, and festivals and outdoor markets should continue to add accent to daily life here”. The sites these existing buildings occupy, the spaces created between buildings, and their relationships to the adjacent streets and to each other are critical to the successful implementation of the Downtown Master Plan. Accordingly, we believe strong consideration should be given to removing as much paving, driveways, and parking from the south side of the new Library and from all sides of the Historic Light & Water Works Building and converting all available space into public outdoor green space suitable for a wide RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY - GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 8 variety of venues - festivals, music, markets, and public art. Parking - The 2014 Downtown Master Plan Update offers several options for parking structures. We believe another option should be considered. This option would involve constructing an elevated parking structure running along 9th Street from Rock Street to West Street. The structure could cantilever slightly over 9th and over the public outdoor spaces discussed above. An elevated parking structure combined with a terraced down public outdoor space would provide not only ample parking in the center of the Municipal Center but also create a covered and shaded all-weather outdoor event. An elevated parking structure, as proposed, would need to be carefully designed to insure that it would not become a visual barrier. ANTICIPATED PROJECT BUDGET: In order to ensure the cost information that is included in this report was as accurate Parking Structure RON HOBBS ARCHITECTS FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY - GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 9 as possible, we asked several construction firms to assist in the preparation of the budget estimates. Each firm that we consulted with has experience in both municipal projects and renovation projects. Construction Costs - The estimates include improvements only to the building’s immediate site, interior demolition, minor repair work such as caulking, waterproofing, adding doors, etc. to the exterior walls, reroofing of the Old Library, minor structural modifications, new HVAC systems, plumbing, electrical, lighting, doors, millwork, and all new interior finishes (walls, floors, ceilings, etc.). The HVAC system in the GCAT Building will be modified. New exterior walls are included for the GCAT building addition proposed in Option “B”. The estimates also include the contractor’s profit and overhead and all expenses typically referred to as “soft” construction costs. These items will include such things as supervision, temporary facilities, construction related utilities, storage containers, and equipment rentals. FF&E - No costs have been included at this time. These costs can be added after a survey of existing FF&E items can be conducted. Professional Fees - Includes an allowance for professional fees including the architect, structural engineer, mechanical/electrical/plumbing engineer, civil engineer, landscape architect, and acoustical consultant. The following represents a range of projected costs that we received from the various construction firms. Because of the very early stage of project development the higher range costs represents a more conservative budget approach. As each Option is developed in more detail and refined the projected budgets will be refined. Option “A”: (Old Library converted to Municipal Courts Facility) Old Library (Municipal Courts + City Hall functions): $2,350,000 - $2,950,000 GCAT Building (City Hall functions): $700,000 - $800,000 Historic Light & Water Works Bldg. (City Hall functions): $1,400,000 - $1,725,000 Total: $4,500,000 - $5,475,600 Option “B”: (Old Library converted to City Hall) Old Library (City Hall/City Council functions): $2,025,000 - $2,475,000 GCAT Building (Municipal Court): $700,000 - $800,000 GCAT Expansion (Municipal Court): $2,065,000 - $2,300,000 Historic Light & Water Works Building (City Hall functions): $0.00 Total: $4,790,000 - $5,575,000 In summary, the cost differences between Option “A” and Option “B” are minor. While the total cost for Option “B” is slightly more than Option “A”, Option “B” provides 500 square feet more than Option “A”, thus the square foot costs are basically equal. City of Georgetown, Texas SUBJECT: Discussion and possible direction to provide feedback on the potential Request for Qualifications for the engineering and design services for downtown parking structure study, site study and conceptual plans - Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager ITEM SUMMARY: The City is seeking professional architectural and engineering consultants to provide preliminary design services for a downtown parking structure that is proposed to be located on the city-owned surface parking lot at 9th and Main Streets. This study will include traffic impacts, a site study and an estimate of construction and operating costs. These qualifications were developed and reviewed by staff, including engineering and transportation services. This information is being provided to the GGAF to determine if there are additional qualifications that should be considered in procuring these professional services. FINANCIAL IMPACT: $400,000 is budgeted in the General Capital Projects Fund for this preliminary work on the proposed parking structure. It is anticipated that this report will provide information that will be the basis for final project plans, construction costs and operating costs for future budget impact. SUBMITTED BY: Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Draft RFQ Language Cover Memo Background The City of Georgetown, Texas is in the process of investigating the construction of a parking structure. This project will be in the Southeastern portion of the Downtown Overlay District as outlined in the 2013 Downtown Master Plan and the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed parking structure is an extension of the City’s goal of providing infrastructure to the community and enhancing development opportunities. The City seeks the services of qualified architectural consultants for the development of a parking study, site study, conceptual drawings for the structure and estimates of probable construction and operational costs. The qualified firm will provide professional architectural services including, planning and preliminary design. Technical Expertise The City seeks to work with a team who has a reputation for innovative design and experience working on large publicly-owned projects of significance. The ability to forecast provide cost efficient design and meet deadlines are prime factors for consideration. The City will require planning and design complementary to the themes established by the City’s Downtown Plan and Downtown Design Guidelines. The design must be consistent with the City’s history and character of downtown. The firm must be able to apply and integrate the use of current and cutting edge technologies in the development and design of this project, which would include utilizing green building technologies when cost effective. Personnel must have experience and knowledge of state, federal and local regulations and building codes. Proposed Site The proposed site is located at the southeast corner of 9th and Main Streets in Georgetown. The current use of the block is surface parking. (map) Downtown Overlay District The City of Georgetown created a Downtown Overlay District in 2003, identifying an area of the historic downtown for redevelopment. The District serves as the boundaries for the Historic and Architectural Review Commission’s Downtown historic district, the Main Street Program District and the recently established Arts and Culture District. Although the district encompasses approximately forty city blocks, the focal point of the district is the nine block area surrounding the Williamson County Courthouse. As part of the project, the City adopted the Downtown Master Plan in 2003, with an update completed in 2013. The Downtown Master Plan identifies the core strategies for the continued growth and redevelopment of the Downtown Overlay District. The 2013 Plan update identified parking strategies to support continued activity within the district, including the possible construction of a parking garage. The Downtown Master Plan emphasizes a walkable pedestrian environment, with multiple street edge activities. The proposed parking garage shall include a first floor retail component along 9th and Main Streets to continue the development of the pedestrian core and promote walkability throughout downtown. The proposed parking garage shall comply with the design standards established in the Unified Development Code and the Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines. The Downtown Master Plan is available online at https://dtmasterplan.georgetown.org The Unified Development Code is available online at https://udc.georgetown.org The Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines are available online at https://historic.georgetown.org Map of Overlay District Scope of Services Phase One – Quantify and qualify the parking needs in the study area to determine the parking demand. This should be accomplished through field work, parking utilization studies, surveys and a projection of parking demand. This phase should consider the following: 1. How many parking spaces are available in the area, how many of those spaces are public and how many of the spaces are occupied at intervals throughout the day? 2. What is the parking demand that exists in the Town Square area and how does the transit station located adjacent to the proposed site influence parking demand and the use of parking space in the area? 3. The site is located in an area serviced by primarily local streets. What would the transportation impacts and routes suggested to effectively manage traffic generated by a structured parking facility. 4. What will be the parking needs of future developments and how do they impact peak hour parking and traffic? 5. How many additional spaces are needed to satisfy the existing and projected needs for future development in the area? This will consider the parking spaces that currently exist on the site that will be lost to the footprint of the proposed structure. 6. What is the optimal design for a parking structure on the proposed site considering the different user groups (downtown employees, downtown visitors, county office customers, special events) and integration of the parking structure with the new development from a pedestrian/vehicle flow basis? 7. What are the security requirements based upon existing conditions, the future user groups for the parking? Phase Two – Review the proposed parking structure site, prepare conceptual and preliminary design drawings, including a façade and cost estimate. The conceptual drawings of the preferred scheme should include the massing and façade of the parking structure and the preliminary landscape/streetscape plan that follows points in the Downtown Master Plan, the City’s Unified Development Code standards and the City’s native plant ordinance As a part of this analysis, a preliminary traffic analysis for the site should be prepared. 1. The site is adjacent to a residential area, thus concerns will be with light, noise infiltration, traffic and the massing and aesthetics of the building on this site. 2. The City is looking for concept drawings of the preferred scheme to include the massing and façade of the parking structure, preliminary landscape/streetscape plan that follows points brought up in the Downtown Master Plan and 2030 Plan and finally “Green Building” opportunities that can be employed in the parking structure to save on future utility and operating costs. 3. The City is interested in integrating ground level retail/commercial shell space in the development of the facility. The City would expect this to encompass the area at the street view level. 4. A cost estimate for the preferred scheme is to be prepared with a pro-forma for potential public/private partnerships and estimated operating costs. Both phases of the study should include public and stakeholder meetings to provide information, as well as to generate public and stakeholder input on feasible solutions. Submission Requirements Interested and qualified firms are invited to submit one electronic and one original copy of their Statement of Qualifications, which demonstrates their experience in performing projects of this scale and complexity. Documentation should include: • Identification of the firm/team responding to the RFQ, including location of the headquarters and location of the offices were work will be performed • A brief description of each firm/team member’s qualifications to satisfy all the technical areas identified in the section “Technical Expertise” (30 points) • List of key firm/team members proposed to work on the City project with a brief summary of their experience (20 points) • A representative list of clients with contact names ( 20 points) • A representative list of projects similar to the complexity and scale of the project, which is being considered by the City. The list should include the following (30 points): o project location o description o project construction cost o date of construction o services provided by your firm o owner contact name • From the representative list of projects discuss in detail the publicly-owned project your firm has completed, which you believe most closely matches the effort which will be required for this project. • Detail any experience with public/private partnershProvide a proposed schedule for the delivery of the project