The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOW 2017-05-22 Item 4D - Public Safety Plan - Facilities Final Siting CriteriaCOUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS ;Weer' its Dale Prepared/ .Ylayor'r review 05/22/17 BG Ch� C'ortmil review ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 4.D. 51 ST.\1'I'`SPONSOR: BOB GIBERSON ORIGINAL AGI:NI).1 Dxii'.: 05/22/17 AGENDA I I Em Trni. Public Safety Plan Facilities Final Siting Criteria. 05/22/17 ❑,1101101 :1.I1 g Dale ❑ Resolution Alta Date ❑ Ordinance Mtg Date ❑ Bid Award Altg Date ❑ Public Hearing RI(g Date ❑ Other A rig Date C.v1'I.:Cx[)Rl' Irl Disatsaian Aitg Date SP()NS()1t 1111 Council ❑:14ayoor ❑HR ❑DC ❑i dance ❑Fire NTS' ❑P &'R ❑Police el PH' ❑Court SPO SOR'S The Council is being asked to provide consensus on the final siting criteria. S(.1!,IM.\RY RI :A' I ] :1X'1'.1) BY ❑ C.O.W. Mtg. Trans &Infrastructure DATE: 5/15/17 • CDN Comm • Finance Comm. Comm. CHAIR: // Public Safety Comm. ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks COMMITTEE ❑ Planning Comm. MCLEOD RECOMMENDATIONS: SI \soR /A1nIT\. Comm Public Works ift EF Unanimous approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole for consensus COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE E iiI NI)I`I'URF RIQUIII t) AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ $ Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 05/22/17 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 05/22/17 Informational Memorandum dated 5/12/17, amended after PS meeting Final Siting Criteria, amended after PS meeting Minutes from the Public Safety Committee meeting of 5/15/17 51 52 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor t9oa INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Public Safety Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Director CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: May 12, 2017 SUBJECT: Public Safety Plan Facilities Final Siting Criteria Revised at May 15, 2017 Public Safety Committee ISSUE Staff is seeking consensus from the Committee and Council on the final siting criteria matrix associated with the Public Safety Plan buildings program. BACKGROUND The draft siting criteria was presented to the Committee on February 21, 2017 and at the Open House on March 18, 2017. In addition, Heartland LLC, the selected real estate brokerage consultant, has reviewed and concurred with this final siting criteria matrix. RECOMMENDATION Staff is asking for the Committee's consensus on the final siting criteria matrix and forward this to the May 22, 2017 Committee of the Whole meeting for consensus. ATTACHMENTS Final Siting Criteria Matrix- committee concurrence to: • Remove Duplicate # 3.vii "Accessibility to Tukwila Community Center" from Justice Center sheet • Rernove #3.vii ''Consider proximity to schools for training oppys` from PW Facility sheet • Modify scoring scale to 0 -5 -10 instead of 0 -1 -2 for Operational Requirements Site Selection Criteria, v.6 Public Safety Plan Facilities Justice Center Criteria 15- May -17 Red Indicates Essential Component u, 2 -a Q v in EVALUATION CRITERIA - JUSTICE CENTER Site Alternatives - Justice Center #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 For Illustration Only Example Site 3900 S Example Street 1. City Operational Requirements - Must Have Illustration a. Police Requirements Only Parcel accommodates building footprint, space requirements, environmental conditions ii. Secure parking for 80 PD vehicles iii. Secure parking for PD equipment 5 5 iv. Secure parking for evidence vehicles (optional) v. Outdoor training area 0 5 10 10 10 vi. EOC Requirement: microwave communications equip vii. EOC Requirement: seismic, flood plain viii. EOC Req: fuel storage for emergency generator ix. Multiple access points, min 2 streets x. Proximity of high frequency transit b. Court Requirements i. Parcel accommodates building footprint & requirements 5 ii. Public parking needs: 150 spaces iii. Secure parking for staff /judge: 15 spaces 5 iv. Community /meeting room for 50, flex configuration W-10 v. High Frequency Transit - scored above above above above above above above above above above Subtotal out of possible 28: 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2. City Policy Requirements /Guidance a. Benefit to Public Safety b. Commitment to Customer Service c. Ensuring the Efficient Delivery of Customer Service d. Containing Development Costs - Ensure ability to deliver all promised facilities e. Mindfulness of Ongoing Operations Expenses f. Importance of Location g. Significance of Flexibility h. Opportunity to catalyze private developments i. Opportunities for future expansion j. Location of utilities and infrastructure k. Ongoing operating expenses I. Opportunities for innovation Subtotal: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3. Public Desires i. Expandability to accommodate future needs ii. Security for the public and the staff iii. Nearby transit access iv. Opportunity to enhance a neighborhood v. Cost of the overall facility vi. Sustainability /environmental concerns vii. Conference rooms available to the public viii. Close to roadways, city buildings, businesses ix. Far from residential areas Subtotal: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Score 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4. Site Details a. Existing Building? YES b. Parcel Size 120,000 c. Building size 45,000 d. Parking capacity - public 175 e. Parking capacity - secure 20 f. Walking distance to transit (feet) 675 g. Transit frequency (every xx minutes) 15 5. Costs a. Purchase Option - applied to purch price, not in total b. Purchase Price $5,699,000 c. Due Diligence d. Site Modifications e. Building Modifications f. New Construction Total Costs $5,699,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Legend: Requirements 0 5 10 NO Acceptable Optimal Policy /Public Unfavorable Neutral Favorable 1 -3 4 -6 7 -9 55 Site Selection Criteria, v.6 Public Safety Plan Facilities Fire Station Criteria 15- May -17 Red Indicates Essential Component 0 N E' L Q N EVALUATION CRITERIA - FIRE STATIONS Site Alternatives - Fire Stations I Station 52 Station 54 #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 For Illustration Only Example Site 3900 S Example Street 1. City Operational Requirements - Must Have Illustration a. Location within Response Time Polygon Only 5 5 b. Parcel Size, Environmental Conditions c. Parking Needs d. Multiple Entry Points IMIIIM 5 10 10 10 e. Site meets same standards required for an EOC f. Neighborhood Considerations g. Location of utilities and infrastructure h. Ongoing operating expenses Subtotal out of possible 16: 45 0 0 0 0 0 2. City Policy Requirements /Guidance a. Benefit to Public Safety b. Commitment to Customer Service c. Ensuring the Efficient Delivery of Customer Service d. Containing Development Costs - Ensure ability to deliver all promised facilities e. Mindfulness of Ongoing Operations Expenses f. Importance of Location g. Significance of Flexibility h. Opportunities for innovation Subtotal: 0 0 0 0 0 0 3. Public Desires a. Include meeting rooms available to community b. Make fire stations easier to find Subtotal: 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Scorel 45 0 0 I 0 0 0 4. Site Details a. Parcel Size 43,560 b. Building size 12,500 c. Parking capacity - public 15 d. Parking capacity - equipment 4 5. Costs a. Purchase Option - applied to purch price, not in total b. Purchase Price $1,500,000 c. Due Diligence d. Site Modifications e. Building Modifications f. New Construction Total Costs $1,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Legend: Requirements NO Acceptable Optimal 5 Policy /Public Unfavorable Neutral Favorable 1 -3 4 -6 7 -9 57 Site Selection Criteria, v.6 Public Safety Plan Facilities Public Works Facility Criteria 15- May -17 Red Indicates Essential Component v 0 Q .i .i EVALUATION CRITERIA - PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY Site Alternatives - Public Works Facility #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 For Illustration Only Example Site 3900 S Example Street 1. City Operational Requirements - Must Have Illustration a. Parcel accommodates building footprint, space requirements, environmental conditions Only 5 b. Location c. Reserve power, fuel storage 4 10 10 10 d. Expansion capability e. Location of utilities and infrastructure f. Ongoing operating expenses g. Site meets same standards required for an EOC h. Adequate Parking Subtotal out of possible 14: 39 0 0 0 0 0 2. City Policy Requirements /Guidance a. Benefit to Public Safety b. Commitment to Customer Service c. Ensuring the Efficient Delivery of Customer Service d. Containing Development Costs - Ensure ability to deliver all promised facilities e. Mindfulness of Ongoing Operations Expenses f. Importance of Location g. Significance of Flexibility h. Opportunities for innovation Subtotal: 0 0 0 0 0 0 3. Public Desires i. Expandability to accommodate future needs ii. Sustainability /environmental concerns iii. Opportunity to enhance a neighborhood iv. Central location v. Access to new public spaces vi. Facilities sharing a site Subtotal: 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Score! 39 0 0 0 0 0 4. Site Details a. Parcel Size 225,000 b. Building size n/a c. Parking capacity - public 27 d. Parking capacity - equipment 13 5. Costs a. Purchase Option - applied to purch price, not in total b. Purchase Price $2,600,000 c. Due Diligence d. Site Modifications e. Building Modifications f. New Construction Total Costs $2,600,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Legend: Requirements NO Acceptable Optimal 5 Policy /Public Unfavorable Neutral Favorable 1 -3 4 -6 7 -9 59 60 City of Tukwila City Council Public Safety Committee PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes May 15, 2017 - 5:30 p.m. - Hazelnut Conference Room, City Hall Councilmembers: Thomas McLeod, Chair; Joe Duffie, De'Sean Quinn Staff: David Cline, Chris Flores, Rachel Bianchi, Bob Giberson, Mike Villa, Laurel Humphrey Guests: Justine Kim and D.J. Baxter, Shiels Obletz Johnson; Matt Anderson and Matt Hoffman, Heartland; Emma Nowinski, Weinstein A +U CALL TO ORDER: Committee Chair McLeod called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. I. ANNOUNCEMENT II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Public Safety Plan Facilities Siting Criteria Staff is seeking Council approval of a final siting criteria matrix to be used for the Public Safety Plan buildings program. The Committee previously provided input into draft criteria, and this version incorporates additions received at the public Open House in March. Mr. Baxter went over the additions since the Committee last reviewed the criteria. Chair McLeod inquired about next steps after the criteria is approved, and representatives from Heartland, the City's contractor for brokerage services, indicated that they would start with parcel data and run through the essential components of the siting criteria. From there, individual properties would be scored according to the other components. Committee members asked clarifying questions and decided to remove "accessibility to Tukwila Community Center" from criteria for the Justice Center because that would conflict with the "high frequency transit" need which they deemed more important. They also requested that "proximity to schools" be removed from the Public Works facility criteria as that is not realistic. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL AS AMENDED. FORWARD TO MAY 22, 2017 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. B. Public Safety Plan Local Hiring and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Pilot Policy Proposal As follow up to discussions held in March at the Public Safety and Community Development and Neighborhoods Committees, staff proposed two pilot policies regarding local and disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) hiring for the Public Safety Plan construction projects. Councilmembers have expressed strong support for encouraging local hiring /apprenticeships and DBE participation on these large projects. Staff believes that formal labor agreements such as those in place at Sound Transit and City of Seattle would require dedicated City staff to oversee, monitor and audit. Those large agencies have that capacity, while the City of Tukwila does not have funding for such a position. With these proposed policies, the burden of tracking 61