HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 01-24-2012 - 8cORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: January 24, 2012
Action Agenda
Item No. ~ - G
SUBJECT: Next Steps: Northern Human Services Center
DEPARTMENT: DEAPR, AMS PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
NHSC Facility Assessment David Stancil, (919) 245-2522
Proposed Timeline (with Public Input Pam Jones, (919) 245-2652
Plan)
PURPOSE: To receive information about community efforts regarding the disposition of the
Northern Human Services Center; and to provide direction to staff on next steps.
BACKGROUND: As reflected in the approved FY 2011-16 Capital Investment Plan (CIP),
$250,000 is allocated for FY 2012-13 to address proposed changes at the Northern Human
Services Center facility (NHSC) located seven miles north of Hillsborough on NC 86. The Center
adjoins Cedar Grove Park. Deconstruction/demolition of the building is recommended, with the
eventual replacement of a community center or other recreational facility that would more
directly meet the needs of the community while providing greater functionality and energy
efficiency.
As previously discussed, the cost of operation is very expensive -over $100,000 in FY 2010-
2011. At this time, the building use is limited to a day care and Head Start program, along with
limited County recreation programs. The day care and Head Start program have been noticed
that the facility would not be available beginning January 1, 2013.
During its work session in March, 2011, the Board of Commissioners expressed interest in
pursuing some type of project at the site, but desired that the community be engaged in a
meaningful dialogue that would help inform decisions about the removal and eventual
replacement of this facility.
After considerable discussion and a review of the current structure's status, the Manager
directed staff as a preliminary "check-in" to contact a small group of northern Orange residents
who had been active in previous efforts at the site and could provide initial informal feedback
regarding the building and the type of facility that would best serve the community. In addition,
the small group provided suggestions about how best to contact the community at large to
assess its interests.
2
Some key activity ideas expressed by local residents included:
• County services continuing to be offered in some form at the site;
• Meeting room/community center;
• Potentially, an Emergency Services base station.
Further, small group members agreed the County should solicit public input from other residents
in the area. Various means to do so were discussed including, but not limited to, distribution via:
mail; some method of surveying preferences (such as Survey Monkey) via the Internet; and
flyers in local stores, churches and other community organizations.
An open house at the Northern Human Services site is also recommended in order to share
ideas and provide a direct avenue for feedback from residents. Based on this discussion, a
timeline of possible activities, including atwo-part public input plan, is attached for the Board's
comment.
The small group discussed a number of ownership options, including leasing or selling the
building to a private or other non-profit group. However, staff has learned that deed covenants
from the 1976 property conveyance from the Orange County Board of Education to Orange
County will require the land and uses of the land to remain `fora public purpose'.
In the facility evaluation and subsequent discussion, staff has refined the most likely project
possibilities and recommends that two options be identified and discussed with the community
residents:
Deconstruction/demolition of the existing facility (following a thorough documentation for
historic preservation purposes), with future construction of a new public facility (in a future
year to be determined as part of the CIP) that would include a "community center" similar to
that existing at Efland-Cheeks Park, and perhaps other components to be determined; or
Deconstruction/demolition of the existing building wings, and retention and renovation of a
core center area, possibly including the gymnatorium and cafeteria (in a future year to be
determined as part of the CIP).
Staff is prepared to commence a formal public input effort, following a discussion regarding
general parameters that should be followed when formulating the project possibilities with the
community.
The attached facility assessment provides an overview of the facility's status.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The FY 2011-16 CIP includes $250,000 to fund removal of the building
and grading/seeding of the site in preparation for future use. There is no current funding in the
CIP for new construction or renovation of the facility as listed in the two options above, these
would need to be added to the future CIP if desired.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board discuss the proposed
timeline and plan of action, make any changes as needed, and instruct staff to begin the public
input and project activity process.
3
NORTHERN HUMAN SERVICES CENTER COMMUNITY FACILITY
BACKGROUND
The Northern Human Services Center, originally a school facility, was
constructed in 1950, with a later addition in 1957 that included the kitchen and
dining area. The facility has seen few significant changes since original
construction and includes many of its original elements. Although the original
coal-fired boiler was later replaced with an oil-fired boiler, most of the original
radiator and steam line heating system is still in place, as are the original single-
glazed, metal frame windows, and exterior doors, all of which are very inefficient
from an energy standpoint. Interior plumbing lines were previously replaced, as
were waste water lines outside of the footprint of the building. Very few structural
changes have been made since original construction.
OPTIONS
Several options for maintaining a community facility at the Northern Center
location exist, including:
1. Total removal of existing facility and replacement with apre-engineered
structure of approximately 10,000 square feet, with masonry and/or block
accented exterior walls at an approximate cost of $1,932,000
($193/square foot).,
2. Total removal of existing facility and replacement with a similarly designed
structure (masonry block with brick veneer) of approximately 10,000
square feet, at an approximate cost of $2,618,000 ($262/square foot).
3. Removal of the classroom wings on the north and south ends of the
facilit ,including the large central restrooms in the south wing, with
adaptive reuse of the gymnasium, kitchen/dining areas, and the central
lobby and offices, at an approximate cost of $1,963,000 ($196/square
foot). Metal building components (window and door frames, roof trusses,
etc.) would be recovered for recycling, and masonry products would be
evaluated for processing and recycling on-site as aggregate substitute for
fill and parking lot construction.1 Figures 1 and 2 provide an overview of
the approximate areas to be removed, and areas that would remain.2
The attached schematic budget comparisons include substantial contingencies
for each option, and are not based on any developmental design plans or
drawings.
For comparative purposes, previous CIP estimates for refurbishment of the entire
facility were approximately $3,278,000, not including parking improvements.
Any of the options identified here could accommodate a park and ride lot.
Crushing at the actual construction site using portable crushers reduces construction costs and the pollution generated
when compared with transporting material to and from a quarry. htto~Uen wikipedia oro/wiki/Concrete recvclino
s An initial assessment by a structural engineer confirmed that the °wings" can be removed without structurally
compromising the portion of the building to remain.
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
5
Certain materials in the facility test positive for the presence of asbestos, which
will require abatement (removal and disposal at a licensed facility). If any portion
of the existing structure is to be retained, it is strongly recommended that all
asbestos containing materials be removed and abated from the entire facility, not
just asbestos-containing materials found in the areas to be removed.
While the existing masonry walls that would be left in place if the gymnasium,
dining area, etc., were retained, have some value in their embodied energy3,
most other infrastructure and components would need to be replaced, due to
their age and condition, as well as the County's on going efforts to create energy
efficient, sustainable facilities. It is not recommended to leave any portion of the
existing facility in place without making the improvements identified below.
Heating/Ventilation/Air Conditioning
The entire complex is served by a heating system that includes an oil-fired boiler,
steam lines and radiators throughout the building. The original boiler was coal
fired, and the original coal bin remains in place, adjoining the partially below
grade boiler room. There is no centralized cooling system for the facility, only a
number of window air conditioning units, and a small package system that serves
the kitchen.
A modern, energy efficient HVAC system would be needed to serve the portions
of the facility that would be left in service if only partial removal of the facility is
pursued, or if the entire structure is left in place. Replacement of the boiler would
also allow removal of the above ground fuel oil storage tank at the site. And a
new HVAC system would also provide centralized cooling for the portions of the
facility to remain, which they currently lack.
9
Boiler Fuel oil storage tank
3 Embodied energy is defined as the sum of energy inputs(fuels/power,materials,human resources etc)that was used
in the work to make any product,from the point of extraction and refining materials,bringing it to market,and disposal/re-
purposing of it.Embodied energy is an accounting methodology which aims to find the sum total of the energy necessary
for an entire product lifecycle.This lifecycle includes raw material extraction,transport,u manufacture,assembly,
installation,disassembly,deconstruction and/or decomposition. http://en.wikioedia.oro!wiki/Embodied energy
3
6
Electrical
The electrical service is adequately sized for the facility, though quantity and
placement of devices does not meet modern expectations in many spaces.
Improvements may be required for space that remains.
Metal halide lighting in the gymnasium would be replaced with compact
fluorescent bulbs and ballasts for energy efficiency. Most other lighting in the
facility has previously been upgraded to T-8 fluorescent bulbs and ballasts.
Plumbing
Most existing plumbing fixtures, water supply lines, and wastewater lines would
be removed as part of the process of removing the north and south wings, as this
would include removal of the main restrooms. The existing well and septic
systems would be left in place. New restrooms would be constructed to replace
the existing central restrooms that would be removed. Existing water supply
lines, and wastewater lines, which run under the remaining slab, would be left in
place.
Roof
The existing roof was installed in 1995 with a ten-year warranty, and so is well
past its expected useful life. Some roof sectors on the portions of the building
that would remain have decking that has tested positive for the presence of
asbestos, although the-decking on the gymnasium and dining hall did not.
Abatement would be required for approximately 21,000 square feet of roof
decking. Although encapsulation is possible, leaving any asbestos-containing
materials or products in place is not recommended.
4
7
Windows
The windows are original to the facility, and are single-glazed, metal framed,
which provide very low R-values. All windows and exterior doors in the portions
of the building proposed to be retained should be replaced to reduce energy
consumed, and to reduce on-going maintenance costs. Some caulking and
glazing for windows and exterior doors tested positive for asbestos and will
require abatement.
v
.y
Flooring
Flooring in the sectors of the building that may not be removed include the
gymnasium, main entrance/office area, dining hall and kitchen.
The gymnasium floor is a carpet product complete with basketball court
markings. The dining hall includes what are assumed to be the original floor
tiles, which test positive for asbestos. Flooring in the corridors which contained
asbestos was previously abated, and now includes a vinyl composition the (VCT)
that is recommended for replacement based on age and condition. Although
asbestos containing tiles were previously removed form the south wing, mastic
(flooring adhesive) in the south wing tested positive and would also require
abatement. The kitchen includes a red quarry the that would need some minor
repairs, if this portion of the facility is retained for use.
Although not required, it is highly recommended to remove and abate the dining
room floor tile, as well as asbestos containing mastic in other parts of the
building. The existing VCT is more than 15 years old in all areas of the building
that may not be removed, and so should be replaced.
5
8
,11+`�,�14,k`41r+MJais"Ji Atr °" f 4,
O".'..4'rw'f475Y`�Lir 1."fii' �f.)�9F:%4�w1a'P1".aC'sNCY r
* 1 A2 'ia�.
�f
s
a
Fire Alarm System
The fire alarm panel was replaced in 2011. Some contracted work would be
required to remove attached devices from the areas of the building to be
removed.
Intruder Alarm System
The existing intruder alarm system provided coverage only in the rooms on the
south end of the facility, and is no longer in use. Attached devices would need to
be removed, but could be re-installed in the portions of the building that would
remain, if an intruder alarm system is to be retained.
Masonry
Virtually all walls in the facility are of masonry construction (brick, block) and are
generally in good condition. Most settlement cracks have been repaired
previously, though some additional work should be completed for the portions of
the building to be left in place. All areas of the facility are slab on grade.
6
9
CONSIDERATIONS
• Adaptive reuse of a portion of the existing facility would:
o Capture the embodied energy of the associated masonry materials
to remain;
o Eliminate the opportunity for optimal alignment of a structure on the
site;
o Eliminate the opportunity for optimal placement of a structure on
the site;
o Limit flexibility for design of interior space;
o Minimize opportunity for overall design of a facility;
o Be accompanied with some unforeseen conditions.
• Construction of a new facility would:
o Allow optimal alignment of a structure for solar, daylighting, etc.;
o Allow optimal placement of a structure on the site for parking, and
other land use;
o Provide for greater flexibility of the overall design of a facility;
o Provide greater flexibility for design of interior space
o Be accompanied with few unforeseen conditions.
7
Northern Human Services Center Schematic Budget Comparison
Abatement, Removal'
Design, Construction, Equipment
Contingencyz
Schematic Budget
Budget per square foot
Considerations:
Option 1
New Construction,
10,000 SF pre -
engineered building,
standing seam roof,
masonry and /or block
accented exterior walls
$250,000
$1,401,760
$280,352
$1,932,113
$193
- sustainable bldg
orientation, future
sustainable
Infrastructure
-more design control
-fewer unforeseen
conditions
Option 2
New Construction,
10,000 SF of similar
design to existing
masonry construction
$250,000
$1,974,000
$394,800
$2,618,800
$262
- sustainable bldg
orientation, future
sustainable
Infrastructure
-more design control
-fewer unforeseen
conditions
Option 33
Removal of classroom wings,
adaptive re -use of 10,000 SF
center portion
$250,000
$1,427,218
$285,444
$1,962,662
$196
- adaptive re -use's captured
energy
- higher costs
- greater unforeseen
conditions
- requires re -work of existing
wastewater treatment
system
Notes:
1. Per FY2012 -13 CIP Budget
2. Contingency is 20% at schematic budget phase.
3. Option based on FY10 -11 CIP Northern Center refurbishment submitted in February 2010.
Contemplates removing classroom wings and maintaining remaining structure, foundation, exterior walls.
Also includes new windows, new roof, new mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems.
Contemplates similar upfit allowance to options 1 and 2 as well as furniture /equipment to suit desired space plan.
All options contemplate a component of the project memorializing the historical significance of the original site and its use.
11
Possible Timeline of Activity and Public Input Process
Northern Human Services Center Project
REVISED DRAFT 12/19/11
• Communicate public meetings by mailing to owners within one mile of property, persons who
were on Cedar Grove Park master plan interest list to solicit attendance at input session and
open house by mail.
• Send flyer/mailing out 7-10 days in advance.
• Post meeting flyers to web site and distribute flyers in community stores and place on marquee
sign, encourage those who receive mailing to invite other interested parties.
• Open House (March) to use large group presentation, and small group discussions and questions
to consider the two options (two 60-minute `drop-in/drop-out' sessions, one at 6:00 and repeat
at 7:00, to allow flexibility for public schedules). Survey disseminated.
• Public input session (June) to present options and recommended option, receive feedback
(facilitated, small groups, reporting to large group).
• Hold information session December 2012 to keep public informed on upcoming activities
(courtesy update).
August-October 2011 Staff reviews information to date, CIP, outlines data needed for project and
develops public outreach outline. Four preliminary options identified.
November 2, 2011 Staff small group meets with 4-5 community leaders for brief overview and
status, thoughts on community involvement process.
December, 2011- Staff working team meets to receive report from focus group meeting,
January, 2012 discuss outreach plan, framework of proposed process and options, and
survey questions.
January 24, 2012 Report to BOCC on Proposed Public Outreach Plan (including draft survey)
and recommended options to BOCC.
February, 2012 Staff refines the two options for project, creates conceptual (bubble)
drawings, and implements public outreach.
Early March 2012 Public Open House held to review site overview (limitations) and brief
history, proposed options, receive feedback, and distribute survey.
March -April 2012 Further distribute survey to those not present; collect survey results
April 2012 Staff uses open house public input, analysis and survey results to further
develop plans for the options.
May 15, 2012 Project option plans and draft recommended option presented to BOCC for
initial review prior to Public Input Session.
June 2012 Public Input Session held to review recommended plan, as modified by
BOCC, receive community feedback. (CIP confirmation of whether initial
deconstruction/demolition is a project for FY 12-13).
12
August 21, 2012 BOCC decision on recommended project
September-November Preliminary planning and design work associated with project.
November 2012 Permits acquired for deconstruction/demolition as per project decision and
funding.
December 2012 Deconstruction/demolition as per project decisions and funding. Informal
information Session held for public prior to activity.
December 2012 - ? Final grading, seeding and site stabilization accomplished, to await next steps
of project