Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-06-2002 - 3 JOINT MEETING ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS/ HILLSBOROUGH BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: May 6, 2002 Action Agenda Item No. SUBJECT: Justice Facilities Development DEPARTMENT: Purchasing and Central Ssi PUBLIC HEARING: (YM) No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Jones(919)2952652 94-01 agenda abstract recommending the facility planning process TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732.8181 Chapel Hill 9684501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 3362274W31 PURPOSE: To provide information regarding the evolution of the County's Master Plan for the Downtown Hillsborough campus.. BACKGROUND: The Town Commissioners have previously received Information about the Cepnty'6 master plan for noun facilities expansion. In order to provide up-to-date infomtation, the County Commissioners have asked their consultant, Freeman-Whhe Architects, to present an overview of the expanded master plan of the downtown Court/Government Services Center campus during the joint TownfCounty work session on May 6, 2002. The County Commissioners received the information during a work session on April 30, 2002. The information is intended to provide a point of departure for discussion about issues whose solutions may fall under the jurisdiction of the Town and/or other regulatory agencies_ In order to lend historical perspective to the discussion, it is helpful to recall that the County Commissioners have,for the past several years, been presented with various options for the expansion of Justice Facilities. For a variety of mavens and who the support of the Town of Hillsborough, expressed through a resolution from the Town, it was determined that the Court facilities should remain in the downtown area rather than being relocated elsewhere. Understanding that expansion of either the Courthouse or the Government Services Center on this campus would have significant visual impact on the Town,the Boats commissioned the master plan of the downtown site to determine the extent of development that could occur. The completed master plan results, that included Justice Facilities expansion, potential expansion of the Government Services Center and the required parking for the expanded fecilifies was presented to the County Commissioners on April 30. 2002. lathe context of the overall build out potential of the site, the Board expressed preference toward a more sustainable level of development. Not surprisingly, even with the diminished scope of development on the County's downtown campus, traffic and padding were identified as two z important impacts of the expansion of the Court facilities. Solution to these Issues will likely require the collaboration of the Town, County and the Department of Transportation. The architect selection and programming process for the Judicial Facilities Expansion as adopted by County Commissioners In September 2001 is also included for the Town Board's information. In summary,the County will involve three separate groups in various aspects of the project as follows: • Arch@ed selection committee • External Programming committee • Internal Programming committee A complete description Is induced in the attached agenda material dated September 4, 2001, FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds for planning the project are available In the 2001-2011 Capital Investment Plan. The proposed 2002-2012 CIP includes funding via alternative financing for Phase I construction in FY 2004-2005. RECOMMENDATION(S):The Manager recommends that the Boats receive the information and provide comments as may be appropriate. 3 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: September4. 2001 Action Agenda Item Ng. SUBJECT: Hillsborough Judicial Facilities Expansion Planning Process DEPARTMENT: Purchasing and Central PUBLIC HEARING: (TAN) No Services ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Jones(919)245-2652 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 1324181 Chapel Hill 968-0.501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 336-22742031 PURPOSE: To consider approving a planning process to be used in the Designlconstructlon of the Justice Facilities Expansion Project. BACKGROUND: Original Justice Fadl'I as Studv In 1994, the Orange County Board of Commissioners appointed a group to study the long-term needs ofjustice facilities in Orange County. All judicial functions within the County were represented in the Justice Facilities Study Group. The results of their efforts were reflected in a report published in July 1995. Efforts W Address Most Critical Neetl The scope of the long-term needs as identified by the Group were extensive. The County's ability to undertake expansion of this magnitude was limited. To that end, components exhibid'ng the greatest need were considered separately and two projects specific to those needs lobster. • The Jail Expansion project completed in early 1998 Edited 58 beds to the existing 71, thereby raising the total capacity in the jail to 128. Although capacity of the Jail is inadequate for the long-term, cooperation between the Sheriffs Department and judges has served to minimize overcrowding. The Federal Marshal continues b use the Orange County Jail as a major depot for pnsoners. The addition of the Gordon Battle Courtroom in early 1998 allowed the heavier volume District Coon to utilize the large courtroom on the main floor as its Primary mud location. A greater flexibility in scheduling various courtrooms was agreed b among the judges,thereby allowing a more efficient use pattern of all courtrooms. A second group of Judicial Officials and County staff were convened later in 1998 to evaluate the impact of these We expansions. Although these changes may have negated the need for 4 further expansion far to decade the group agreed that the long-term need still exist and theta proactive approach to o development was critical Hillsborough Justice Facilities Campus Master Plan In 1999,the County Commissioners commissioned Freeman-White Architects, Charl to produce a site plan that reflected the total build-out capability ofthe site. The results of this report, presented in Apol 2000, outlined two options, one of which would allow approximately 96,000 additional square feet of building (Option A),the other approximately 105,600 square feet(Option B). It is Important to note that the study defined the scope of the master plan acts to be only Me area between the Government Services Center to the east.the Courthouse to the west, Margaret Lane to the north and the edge of the existing parking lot to the south. Each option defined building construction in four phases. Option A incorporated the panting deck into the courthouse construction,while Option B developed a 6level free-standing parking structure in the approximate location of the existing Sheriffs Department At the request of the County Commissioners,the Master Plan was also presented to the Town of Hillsborough Commissioners in June 2000. Concerns ralsed by both Boards were similar, examples of which include the following: • Parking suthcienoy and location; _ • Concern about losing the vista from Margaret Lane into River Park,and • Scale of the proposed buildings in relation to the existing structure; and • Farmers Market location. In an effort to further clarify the challenges associated with development of a court facility on Margaret Lane,iwo Commissioners, two Judges and County staff met with representatives from the Town of Hillsborough, the Historic Alliance,the Tourism Board and local citizenry. While there is general consensus that development can occur on Me site, there is significant concem Mat it be done in a manner hat embraces a strong sensitivity to historical cement of the community as well as the resulting environmental impacts, These concerns will be reflected in the criteria used in the selection of a design firm. Proposed Expansion of the Master Plan Since the completion of this Master Plan,the Board has received recommendations regarding future development of County Government buildings in the immediate vicinity. Several issues were misea during those discussions, including the potential that a parking deck could be located closer to the Government Services Center rather than being buitl as part of the Courthouse Project. Regardless of whether that should be the case, it is a forgone conclusion that Me design outcome for bath facilities will be more effective If their needs are considered in tandem. For example: • The facilities will have similar parking needs; • Pedestrian and Vehicular circulation from one site to the other should be considered; • Should the Board choose to site a Fanners Market on this site, it should be sited with considerations of both faclldiea In mind. Bemuse of the close Interaction of the two potential expansions in the Downtown Hillsborough area, it is recommended that the scope of work for architectural services for the Courthouse design be expanded to integrate all County land that lies: • South of Margaret Lane • East of Churton Street 5 • West of Cameron Street • North of the Eno River Upon Board confirmation,the following assumptions regarding the use of the land would be cited to the arohhect: • The area that is presently River Park land would remain dedicated b park/open apace,with extremely minimal, if any encroachment by parking. • The area that is presently River Park could be utilized for part or all of a Famter's Market Facility, f the final design Indicated that b be the optimal location. • The building in which the Sheriffs Department is local should be left intact fi M all possible. (The Court Campus Master Plan recommence Its removal.) • The Occaneechi Indian Village remains as is. • A multi-level parsing dock remains an acceptable solution to providing adequate parking to the area. The revised master plan would be presented to the Board for approval befcm commencement of the actual design process for the Courthouse. Should the Board so direct,Ne film who produced the Court Campus Master Plan could be contacted regarding availability for the expanded plan and a contract for such presented to Me Board for consideration in the near future. Processed Planning Process Following fie approval of the proposed expanded she master plan,the Justice Facilities Expansion Project, as endorsed by the County Commissioners should move forward. The process listed below is recommended in order to incorporate the interests of various stakeholders at the appropriate times throughout the planning process. The individuals listed are recommended based on their expressetl interest, specific area of expertise and/or previous involvement In the process. The process has been compartmentalized into the following segments: • Selection of Dasign Firm • Programming: Interior • Programming: Exterior(Includes River Park area) 5alectlon of the Design Film Scope of Work: Appointees to this group would be responsible for the following: • Approving the criteria whereby the firms will be evsluffieq • Reviewing the Requests for Proposal submitted by the various firms and creating a short-list of firms that appear to best meet the project needs; • Interviewing the firms placed an the short list(generally no more then six): • Recommending the preferred design firm for Board of Commissioner consideration, Recommended! appointees: • Mark Sheridan.Town of Hillsborough Commissloner and Tourism Board member • Susan Frankenburg, Alliance for Historic Hillsborough • Cathleen Turner, Alliance for Historic Hillsborough • Todd Dickinson, Historic Preservation Architect • 2 County Commissioners • Sher'Rf Lindy Pendergrass • John Link, County Manager. • Wade •• Barber, orCourt Judge Jae Buckner, hief Distnct Court Judge Jamie Stanfo rd, Cl ark of Court • Pam Jones,Orange County Directorof Purchasing and Central Services David Stencil, Orange County Director of Environment and Resource Conservation Department Programming, Exterior Scope of work: This task group will be responsible for working with the designer to design building that meets the community concerns about the appearance of the building and the users concerns about the access, parking, efc. This group will also provide design direction regarding River Park and the functional molding ofthe building with the Paid. The task groups recommendations will be brought forward for County Commissioner consideration. Recommended Appointees: • Msr<Sheridan, Town Commissioner and Tourism Board member Margaret Hauth,Town of Hillsborough Planning Director • Susan Frankenburg,Alliance for Historic Hillsborough • Todd Dickinson, Historic Preservation Architect Cathleen Turner,Alliance for Historic Hillsborough • Norman White, Landscape Architect • David Stancil, or designate • 2 County Commissioners • Judge Wade Berber • Judge Joe Buckner • Jamie Stanford, Clerk of Court • Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass • Car Fox, District Attorney John Link, County Manager Pam Jones Further, in order to ensure the Involvement of all stakeholders, input will be solicited at the appropriate time in the exterior design process from groups representing the Interests of the Occaneechi Indian Village and the Farmers Market, among others. Proorammina: Interior Scope of work: The scope of the project originally defined In the master plan included approximately 30,000 square feet of space to accommodate at least the following functions: • New entrances for public and staff with the public entrance designed to be a secure entrance; Offices forthe Sheriffs Department; Offices for the Clerk of Court to relocate man eased space; • Expansion for judicial functions presently located in the building. Appointees within this category will work with the design team to ensure that the functional needs of the proposed occupant departments are met. The task group's recommendations will be brought forward for County Commissioner consideration. Recommended Appointees; • Judge Wade Barber • Judge Joe Buckner • Jamie Stanfct, Clerk of Court Carl Fox, District Attomey • Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass , • 2 County Commissioners • Jahn Link, County Manager Pam Jones Input from other building users, such as the Public Defender, ProbationdParole,the 15B Bar AssotlaGOn, ate.will be solicited at appropriate times during the design process as well. Upon Board approval of the process, the Request for Proposal for erchffact selection will be prepared and solk:hed during the Fall, with a recommendehon from the selection committee anticipated by the end of January 2002. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The Indirect effect of approval of this matter is as follows: • Cost of construction for building only is estimated at$6 million. This cost would be funded through alternative funding mechanisms, such as Certificates of Participation (COPS)ora private placement loan. • Although design considerations for River Park will be included in the scope of this work, any recommendations regarding me actual development would be considered as a separate cost item. • Cost of design for the building only is estimated at 10-12% of construction cost or approximately S600,000-$700,000. These tuna have been appropriated over the past Me years in the Capital Investments Plan (CIP). If approved, cost for the expanded site master plan would also be charged against these funds. Specific cost implications for each of these activities will be presented for Boats approval as they become known. RECOMMENOATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Boat: Approve the expanded master plan work and authorize the Director of Purchasing and Central Services ho negotiate a contract for Boat approval with Freeman-White Architects; and • Endorse the proposed planning process; and • Make appointments to the three task groups as indicated above, including the designation of two County Commissioners who will serve; and • Authorize the Director of Purchasing and Central Services to solicit proposals for design services for the Justice Facilities Expansion Project, Phase I.