Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 12-10-2002-1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: December 10, 2002 Action Agenda Item No. I,, SUBJECT: Justice Facilities Expansion and Other County Space Needs DEPARTMENT: Purchasing and Central Services PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Excerpt from June 11, 2002 Minutes Pam Jones (919) 245-2652 relevant to this subject Materials from June 11, 2002 Budget Work TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Session Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 968-4501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 336-227-2031 PURPOSE: To continue discussion regarding County space needs as cited in the Space Needs Task Force Report with a primary focus on the Justice Facilities Expansion and issues associated with the Government Services Center expansion. BACKGROUND: The Board has previously received information regarding the space needs for all County departments via the Space Needs Task Force report, dated March 29, 2001. The Board through various discussions has refined some aspects of the plan to a more acceptable level of development, specifically the Justice Facilities Expansion and the expansion of the Government Services Center in Downtown Hillsborough. Although staff will be prepared to answer questions about any part of the study that the Board may wish to discuss, the information presented will focus attention on the areas of most urgent space needs as cited in the study. Presentation material and minutes from previous work sessions, used in tandem with the Space Needs Task Force report and the Justice Facilities Master Plan form the basis of the information to be presented by staff during the work session. Assumptions During previous work sessions, the Board has generally expressed endorsement of the following assumptions: • County facilities on the downtown campus would be expanded only to the extent that parking needs could be addressed by surface parking. No parking deck is anticipated. • Justice Facilities would be developed only to the extent that a parking deck would not be needed. This would provide expansion area for approximately 48,000-54,000 square feet of total build out, or Phases I and II of the expansion plan. Phase I only is to be pursued at this time. • The building presently occupied by the Sheriff's office will remain intact (Removal was contemplated in the master plan). • Alternatives are to be developed to the GSC expansion options as defined in the Space Needs Task Force Report. The amount of development on the site would be limited, if at all and would include only surface parking. • The space study proposed expansion of the Government Services Center(GSC) to the point that three departments, Planning, Environmental Health and ERCD could relocate to the site. Since the additional square footage needed would require deck parking, alternative means of addressing the 2 critical space needs for these three areas is necessary. This being the case, no expansion for GSC would be contemplated in the early phases of the space study. Justice Facility Expansion The planning process for justice facilities expansion was scheduled to begin around July 1, 2002. However, as the Board will recall, the planning process was delayed by six-months due to budgetary constraints for FY 2002-2003. As presented in material during the Board's budget work session on June 11, 2002, the revised timeline would be as follows: • The appointments to the three planning groups established by the planning process adopted by the Board on September 4,2001 would be made in January 2003. • The architect selection process would be completed and recommendation of the group presented for Board consideration no later than June 30, 2003, thereby requiring no design funds during the 2002- 2003 fiscal year. • Commencement of construction of the facilities is anticipated in FY 2005-2006, with completion approximately 15-18 months thereafter (FY 2008-2009). In order to ensure clear understanding of the various planning groups associated with this project, the Board may wish to provide further direction and comments in the following areas: • Size of the addition: The master plan revised the phases of justice facility expansion from four to three; and increased each phase from 24,000 S.F. to 27,000 S.F. This would allow a total expansion on the site of 81,000 S.F.. However as noted below, surface parking on the downtown campus will accommodate only two phases of the expansion for a total of approximately 54,000 SF. Please note that additional detention space is not contemplated as part of the justice facility expansion. Phase I, which includes one approximately 27,000 square foot addition, is planned for construction at this time. • Parking Phase I includes underground parking of approximately 8,000 square feet., which will be used as secure parking for court officials and a way to safely bring inmates into the building. All other parking associated with this addition will be surface parking. • Programming It is important to note that the programming phase of this project offers complete flexibility in such things as how the building will be configured, where individual functions are situated within the building, how space will be accessed, exterior areas for drop off of clients, deliveries etc. Functional preferences are normally discussed at the first meeting with an architectural firm after a contract has been approved and they are ready to commence work. However, it is important to understand and agree to the specific functions that would be included in a building. The Master Plan presented in March 2000 provided: o Expanded support space for the Clerk of Court, thereby allowing consolidation of all Clerk's office operations back to the Courthouse; and o Security vestibule, whereby a single point of entry could be established. o Space in which to relocate the Sheriff's Department. o The balance of the space was to be allocated by the County to other functions currently located in the Courthouse, which, as space allows could include the following: • Additional office space for the District Attorney; • Courtroom/meeting/mediation space Note: Smaller courtrooms/hearing rooms that could be used for a variety of uses such as mediation were suggested. Mediation is now a core function of the court 3 system. Lack of appropriate space for these functions continues to present daily challenges. These areas would ideally be designed in a manner to allow the space to be opened up to create a larger space, which could also be used for larger meetings ( e.g. BOCC or other community related meetings) Sheriff's Department Operations The future use of the existing Sheriffs office remains a pending decision. One potential use, as suggested in materials for the June 11, 2002 budget work session, is to expand the facility and leave the Sheriff's operations at that location. This suggestion was predicated on: o The Board's stated desire to leave the building intact; and o The stated desire to limit development on the site to only what can be accommodated by surface parking. A minimum of 10,000 square feet was programmed for the Sheriffs office in the 27,000 square foot Phase I addition of the courthouse. Although the expanded Justice Facilities Master Plan calls for three phases of development, 27,000 square feet each, the parking limitation will effectively reduce the allowable expansion to two phases under the existing Town of Hillsborough regulations governing parking. (This does not take into consideration any future agreements that might be struck between the Town and County regarding alternative off-site parking locations to accommodate Justice Facilities and GSC area parking needs.) The opportunity to expand the Sheriffs office was seen as a way to maximize the use of the available space for long-term court- related growth. Should the Board see merit to this suggestion, options could be developed along the lines of: o Impacts, including cost, of expanding the existing Sheriffs office to accommodate entire department; o Exploring options, including cost that would allow accommodation of the Sheriffs office space needs through a combination of the existing building (not expanded) and additional space in the expanded courthouse. Confirming Expectations While it is not critical that programming decisions be made during the November 11, 2002 work session, it will be important to ensure that clear expectations of the facility are articulated prior to retaining an architectural firm to design the facility. The most recent discussion about programs to be included in the building occurred quite some time ago, so it may be prudent to re-convene the court officials to confirm the programs that they understand are to be included in the Phase I construction. The suggested participants include: o Resident Superior Court Judge o Chief District Court Judge • Other District Court Judges as their schedule allows • Representatives of other programs supervised/administrated by the Chief District Court Judge as he may designate o District Attorney o Sheriff o Representative of the 15B Bar Association o County Commissioners (2) o County Manager and other County staff as he may designate Resulting feedback would be provided to the Board in advance of beginning the architect selection process. Government Services Center Expansion (GSC)/Planning and Ag Building Issues 4 The Space Needs Task Force report proposed that the Government Services Center (GSC) be expanded to support the relocation of the Planning Department, Environmental Health and ERCD to the GSC . Since each of these departments have a significant space deficit that impacts their ability to operate efficiently, their needs were given priority. Further, in an effort to provide a higher level of customer service as well as to promote collaboration among departments with the same service focus, co-location of these departments with other land records-related departments was proposed. Although, it is acknowledged that within the past couple of years, the ability to electronically access maps and other land-related information has somewhat mitigated the inefficiency caused by not being co-located with other land-related departments. The decision to limit expansion on the downtown Hillsborough campus to what can be accommodated with surface parking also affects the extent to which the GSC can be expanded. For your information, parking requirements by the Town of Hillsborough are calculated using a county campus approach. The campus, as defined by the Town, includes parking east of Churton Street, south of Margaret Lane, west of Cameron Street and north of the Eno River. By that definition, the Government Services Center (GSC) and the Judicial Facilities, including the Sheriff's office, share parking facilities. Given that a new approach is needed to addressing the space needs of departments originally targeted to relocate to the GSC, the Board is asked to provide appropriate direction to the staff on the following concepts that may be used in future development of options: • The Planning Department and Environmental Health will continue to be co-located; and • The Planning Department and Environmental Health would receive high priority in having their space needs addressed, i.e. the project would continue to be considered "Level 1". The Space Needs Task Force Report estimates that the two departments need approximately 14,000 square feet of total space for 2005 needs and 22,000 square feet for 2010 needs. • Suitable space could be created by: • Acquiring additional property and expanding the existing building; or • Acquiring additional property and constructing a new building; or • Acquiring property with an existing building suitable for use or rehab in which to house at least the Planning Department and Environmental Health. • A portion of the CIP funds originally designated for the GSC expansion could be reallocated to support any the resulting projects. • If the preferred approach to providing additional space involves relocating the two departments away from the existing building, the original space study recommendations regarding reallocation of space within the existing Planning and Ag building will remain as presented, with the following possible exceptions: • Farmer's Market. The Farmer's Market will be relocated to the downtown campus and the funds for its construction removed from the renovation estimates for the Planning and Ag building; and • ERCD. The original space study recommended that Cooperative Extension, Soil and Water Conservation, Farm Service Agency and the USDA Rural Development office remain at the Planning and Ag Building. After considering the amount of space requested by these agencies, approximately 2800 square feet remained unallocated. Space requirements cited by ERCD were approximately 1600 square feet. Allocating the requested square footage to them and reconfiguring it appropriately during the limited renovation that is to occur at the building could satisfy their need through 2010. • If the preferred approach involves expansion of the existing building, the issue will be re- visited and alternatives cited. • The Recreation and Parks administrative function was to be relocated to the Animal Control offices at such time that the new Animal Shelter was built and the Animal Control offices relocated. This recommendation will be discussed with the new Recreation and Parks Director and suggested revisions, if any, will be presented at a later date. 5 Future Steps In order to allow adequate discussion opportunities for the projects contained in the space study, it is recommended that the Board continue discussion of specific space study projects at future work sessions. Suggested projects for discussion during an early-2003 work session include the Animal Shelter, Senior Centers, the Farmer's Market and the Library. Follow up information resulting from the November 11, 2003 work session would also be included. FINANCIAL IMPACT: No financial impact associated with receiving the information. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive the information provided and provide direction to staff as may be appropriate; and designate two Commissioners to meet with the court officials to confirm the functions to be included in Phase I construction of the Justice Facilities. (0 Excerpt from Minutes: June 11, 2002 budget work session Justice Facilities: John Link said that the staff needs clarification of the assumptions that were made in the memorandum and also clarification of change to the timeline that is assumed. Purchasing and Central Services Director Pam Jones spoke about the assumptions. The assumptions are that the justice facilities downtown would be developed only to the extent that a parking deck would not be needed, the Sheriff's office will remain intact, and the Government Services building will not be expanded (if at all, it would include only surface parking). The architect selection process could be delayed by six months which means that expenditure of planning funds would not be required until 2003-2004. If the Sheriff's office is put in the justice facilities building, it is going to take about half of the space and will minimize what can be done in phase I for the courts. The Sheriff is not opposed to adding on to his existing building. The decision points are to confirm the assumptions, define the acceptable time table, and state interest in leaving the Sheriffs Department at its present location and expanding the existing building. Commissioner Halkiotis said that he is concerned about the potential reuse of the Sheriff's Department. He is puzzled as to why this came up so late in the process. Pam Jones said that since the Government Services expansion was pulled off, it leaves them with the issue of what to do with the building. He said that the County Commissioners have not had a discussion with what functions would be at the Government Services Center if it were expanded and where to put all of the vehicles. Commissioner Brown would like to postpone this for a period of time and regroup to get some more ideas about it. She said that everybody has worked on this project and what would be included except for her. She wonders if we would want to take into consideration possibly combining some of the mental health issues with the court system. In the future, she feels we will not be looking at a conventional project. Commissioner Gordon asked how the addition to the Sheriff's building would be financed. Pam Jones said that this is an option to look at on reuse of the building. If the County Commissioners express an interest, the staff will come back with a financing plan. Chair Jacobs said that at this point we are not aware of everything that was included in phase I. None of the County Commissioners thought that the Sheriff's building would be expanded. He has no problem with the operating assumptions, but he thinks we need to look at the timing. He said that there is still an interest with the justice facilities in the old post office in downtown Chapel Hill. Commissioner Carey said that we should agree with the assumptions outlined by Pam Jones. He asked how much of the$500,000 would be saved if they decided to start the process in January instead of August. Pam Jones said that the entire $500,000 would be pushed to the next fiscal year. Commissioner Gordon said that we should decide what we need to do this year (i.e.,justice facilities phase I) and push the other items forward to next fiscal year. Chair Jacobs said that the alternative would be to add a fourth assumption that reflects that by not expanding the GSC beyond the surface parking capacity, it leaves us with pending decisions about other departments that the space needs study identified as possibly relocating to the GSC site. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Carey to adjourn the meeting at 10:13 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS The next meeting is scheduled for June 17, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Barry Jacobs, Chair Beverly A. Blythe, CMC Memorandum TO: County Commissioners From: Pam Jones, Director of Purchasing and Central Services Re: Justice Facilities Development Date: June 5, 2002 Background Information Information reflecting previous discussions about the development of justice facilities on the downtown Hillsborough campus is attached (see index on page 4). Assumptions Based on these discussions, staff is operating under the following assumptions: • Justice Facilities on the downtown campus would be developed only to the extent a parking deck would not be needed. This would basically include only phases 1 and 2 of the plan. • The Sheriffs office building will be left intact. (Removal was contemplated in the master plan) • Indirectly related to justice facilities, we further understand that alternatives are to be developed to the GSC expansion options as defined within the 2000 Space Study. The amount of development on the site would be limited, if at all and would include only surface parking. The Board is asked to confirm the accuracy of these assumptions. Justice Facilities Development Current Funding Plan for Justice Facilities The 2002-2012 Capital Investment Plan (CIP) indicates that funding for various stages of the work would be available for spending as follows: • CIP funds currently appropriated: $500,000 for the planning of the project. • 2004-2005: private placement of$6,000,000 for construction Timeline Under Current Funding Plan for Justice Facilities • The Board has approved three groups who will carry out various aspects of the planning process; however, individual appointments have yet to be finalized. The earliest this could be done is August 20, 2002. • Architect selection would be carried out within 3 months following the appointment of the task groups, thereby necessitating that the design money be available around January 2003: • Commencement of construction is anticipated in FY 2004-2005, with completion approximately 15-18 months later (FY 2007-2008). Six-Month Delay Possibilities • Changes in the project timeline are anticipated as follows should the selection process be delayed by 6 months: o Appointments to the three planning groups would occur around January 2003. o The architect selection process would be completed and presented to the . Board no later than June 30, 2003. Expenditure of planning funds would therefore not be required until FY 2003-2004. o Commencement of construction would be anticipated in FY 2005-2006, with completion approximately 15-18 months later (FY 2008-2009). Potential Re-Use of Sheriff's Office Building An approximately 24,000 square foot addition was proposed for the existing courthouse in Phase I, of which approximately one-half(12,000 s.f.) was to be allocated to the Sheriffs office. As you recall, the Sheriffs office building was to be removed under the original plan to accommodate the required parking for the built out site. Pursuant to the revised assumptions stated earlier, the Sheriffs Building would remain intact and be available for continued use. The Sheriff has previously indicated a willingness to entertain the idea of additional space for his department through expansion to his existing building. Initial assessment of the site indicates that a two- level extension to the west end of the existing building could afford potentially 8,000- 10,000 additional square feet (4,000-5,000 s.f. per level). As you may recall, the original expansion for the courts was to consolidate the Clerk of Court's offices back into the courthouse and to provide additional space for support staff, but was not necessarily to add courtroom/hearing room space. The elimination of the Sheriffs offices within the confines of the new addition would certainly allow the development of flexible open areas that could be utilized for courtroom space, mediation rooms, etc. The effect of this action could extend the life of the Phase I Justice Facilities for decades. Funding scenarios would be developed and presented at a future work session if the Board expresses interest in considering this option. Decision points The steps listed below are needed prior to further progress on Justice Facilities development. The Board may choose to provide direction and guidance while reserving final decisions on the project to a later work session in late summer-early fall. 1. Confirm or modify the operating assumptions as stated at the beginning of this memorandum. 2. Define the acceptable time table by which the justice facilities are to be developed: a. Begin appointment process in August, which requires planning money to be available in FY 2002-2003 and construction funds to be available in 2004-2005; or b. Delay process for 6 months, which requires planning money to be available in FY 2003-2004 and construction funds to be available in 2005- 2006. c. Delay the project indefinitely. This is not recommended by staff due in part to the court's ability to find the County in contempt and require the mandated facilities to be constructed immediately. 3. State interest in leaving the Sheriff's Department at its present location and expanding the existing building. Funding scenario to be brought back to Board at future work session. June 11, 2002 Work Session Justice Facilities Development Attachment Index • Pages 5-6: May 6, 2002 agenda abstract: Presentation of Expanded Master Plan in joint meeting with Town of Hillsborough Town Commissioners • Pages 7-8: April 30, 2002 agenda abstract: Presentation of Expanded Master Plan by Consultant • Pages 9-10:January 28, 2002: Agenda abstract presenting county supported facility needs • Pages 11-16: Presentation excerpt regarding Justice Facility Development • Pages 17-18: November 7, 2001 agenda abstract defining scope of work for expanded master plan defined • Pages 19-23: . September 4, 2001 agenda abstract outlining the proposed justice facility planning process • Pages 24-25: Minutes of September 4, 2001 meeting • Letters of support for justice facility development from: a. Page 26: Orange County court officials b. Pages 27-28: Senior Resident Superior Court Judge • / ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: May 6, 2002 Action Agenda Item No. SUBJECT: Justice Facilities Development DEPARTMENT: Purchasing and Central Services PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Jones (919) 245-2652 9-4-01 agenda abstract recommending the facility planning process TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 968-4501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 336-227-2031 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 County's master plan for court facilities expansion. In order to provide up-to-date information, the County Commissioners have asked their consultant, Freeman-White Architects, to present an overview of the expanded master plan of the downtown Court/Government Services Center campus during the joint Town/County 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 reasons and with 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 Board 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 facilities was presented to the County Commissioners on April 30, 2002. In the 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 parking were identified as two 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. av 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: • Architect selection committee • External Programming committee • Internal Programming committee A complete description is included 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 Board receive the information and provide comments as may be appropriate. ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: April 30, 2002 Action Agenda Item No. SUBJECT: Justice Facilities Development; Expanded Master Plan Presentation DEPARTMENT: Purchasing and Central Services PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 9-4-01 agenda abstract and minutes Pam Jones (919) 245-2652 11-7-01 agenda abstract 1-28-02 Power Point slides applicable to this TELEPHONE NUMBERS: topic. Hillsborough 732-8181 Expanded master plan (under separate Chapel Hill 968-4501 cover) Durham 688-7331 Mebane 336-227-2031 PURPOSE: To receive information regarding design options for court and parking facilities on the downtown Hillsborough county campus. BACKGROUND: The Board has previously received information on various design options for the Hillsborough court facilities and the associated parking. The more recent discussions are as follows: • September 4, 2001, the Board approved the planning process for the Justice Facilities Expansion and requested that the site's master plan be expanded to consider relocating the parking facilities to an area with less visual impact, i.e. in closer proximity to the Government Services Center. (abstract and minutes attached) • November 7, 2001, the Board approved a contract with Freeman White Architects for the completion of the Expanded Master Plan for court facilities; (abstract attached. Minutes reflect that the contract was approved.) • January 28,2002: Justice Facilities, with a brief overview of the Expanded Master Plan findings, were included in a presentation about overall county space responsibilities; (See attached Power Point handouts from presentation) The presentation at this work session is intended to include the following: • Full presentation of the Expanded Master Plan by representatives from Freeman- White Architects (The report is provided under separate cover.) • Brief elaboration regarding how the implementation of the expanded plan might impact the expansion of the Government Services Center as proposed in the 2000 Space Study. 7 The Board has previously approved the composition of the architect selection committee, the two planning committees (interior and exterior) and the development process proposed for the Justice Facilities Expansion. However, determination of a design preference, particularly as it respects the parking-facilities will be required at such time the Board is prepared to proceed further with the expansion initiatives. As a reminder, parking options identified at this time include: 1. Parking facilities integrated into each phase of courthouse expansion, beginning with the Phase II (Phase I includes only underground secured parking for judicial officials and was referenced as Option B in the original master plan report). 2. Separate parking deck situated in the approximate location of the existing Sheriffs office. (Referenced as Option A in the original master plan report. Commissioners have previously supported leaving the Sheriffs building intact and not placing a free-standing deck on this site.) 3. Separate parking deck situated in the approximate location of the existing Government Services Center Annex parking lot. (Included in the expanded master plan.) FINANCIAL IMPACT: The Board may recall that 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 as it was originally proposed. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board receive the information and provide direction to staff as may be appropriate. /5 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT • Meeting Date: January 28, 2002 Action Agenda Item No. 3 SUBJECT: County Supported Facility Needs DEPARTMENT: Purchasing and Central PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) No Services ATTACHMENT(S): #1 9-4-01 agenda abstract establishing planning process for the Justice Facility Expansion #2 Minutes for 9-4-01 meeting INFORMATION CONTACT: #3 County Space Needs Report Pam Jones (919) 245-2652 Executive Summary #4 Northern Human Services Center TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Task Force Report Hillsborough 732-8181 #5 Community College Task Force Chapel Hill 968-4501 Report Durham 688-7331 #6 10-11-01 Joint meeting w/Durham Mebane 336-227-2031 Tech meeting notes PURPOSE: To receive information and provide feedback for the following facility related issues: • Justice Facility Expansion (See attachments #1 and #2) • Projects included in the Preliminary County Space Needs Task Force Report (See attachment#3) • Including Senior Centers • Including Northern Human Services Center(see attachment#4) • Durham Technical Community College Satellite Campus Development (see attachments #5 and #6) ; and • Homestead Road Campus at the Southern Human Services Center BACKGROUND: The January 28, 2002 discussion regarding County facility needs will provide the opportunity to view all of the aforementioned projects in the context of overall County needs and obligations for the next several years and will hopefully provide the Board with relevant information by which to make facility related decisions. With the exception of the Homestead Road Campus, the Board has at one time or another during the past several months received information and/or discussed each of these facility development needs. The brief presentations that will be provided by staff during the work session are designed to accomplish the following: • Provide a brief synopsis of the projects; • Cite where the previous discussions left off; • Identify any decisions/modifications that have been made to the projects since the last discussion; • Explore options that may exist to satisfy the need; • Identify funding options that may be available for the projects; • Cite imminent decision points and the preferred timetable for approvals. Background information from previous presentations has been provided in attachments to this abstract to enhance Board/staff collective recollections in preparation for the work session. It may be helpful for the Board to be aware of imminent decision points that will be necessary in order to move some of the more time sensitive projects to the next level of development. To the extent practicable, these have been listed below. It is important to note that these decision points are listed for the Board's information, rather than as an expectation of the work session outcome. Justice Facilities Expansion • Select desired design approach. Note that an overview of the Expanded Court Campus Master Plan based on preliminary information from Freeman-White Architects will be provided to the Board during this work session. However, more complete information will be presented by the architect during an upcoming Commissioner's meeting, at which time the Board may choose to select the preferred design approach. Space Study Projects • Confirm space study prioritization of projects, or modify projects as may be needed, such that staff may incorporate them into the upcoming CIP in funding years commensurate with Board wishes. Community College Satellite Campus in Orange County • Establish and begin process to site the facility • Determine preferred funding method for the State match FINANCIAL IMPACT: There are significant capital (and in many cases, operating) expenditure impacts associated with the projects to be discussed during this work session. Many of those will be addressed through an overall bond and alternative financing plan presented initially for the Board's information at the December 11, 2001 BOCC meeting. The overall plan for financing these projects will be laid out in detail in the 2002-2012 Manager's Recommended CIP, to be presented, reviewed, modified, and ultimately approved by the BOCC during the period March — June 2002. RECOMMENDATION: The Manager recommends that the Board receive the information and provide appropriate feedback and direction to staff. '/7 yr Justice Facilities Justice Facilities Expansion • Master Plan presented to BOCC April 2000 ■ Called for four phases of development of approximately 24,000 square feet each • Phase I facility to include: — Sheriffs Department — Expansion for functions currently located In courthouse r•____ _._J_J I1__.__ r I__ 1A1�.1. ����.�� A '1A A'] w..... is J stice Facilities Expansion: D sign Options • Two design options: –Option A—parking deck constructed as part of building beginning Phase 2 –Option B—Free-standing multi-level parking structure located where Sheriff's Office now stands, constructed during Phase 2 Justice Facility Expansion • Board did not select a design approach –Expressed preference for Option A • Board approved facility planning process September 4, 2001 -Authorized expanded master plan _ . • •a a _ rti_._ t A S——I ___...._— _._ • el" A•1 i1 3 stice Facilities Expansion: E panded Master Plan ■ Desired Plan Outcomes were to determine: • How people could easily access River Park • How the vista from Margaret Lane could be preserve • How the mass of the buildings proposed along Margaret Lane could be minimized $stice Facilities Expansion E panded Master Plan Desired Expanded Plan outcomes,continued: • What options existed to relocate the parking structure from the main courthouse campus to an area of less visual Impact • Assumes the removal of the Government Services Center Annex • Assumes that the Sheriff's Building remains intact _ . . • • . r... .•• . • _ _ _ • AA AA ------ 3 stice Facilities Expansion E panded Master Plan Preliminary Findings of Expanded Plan: • Revises number of development phases from four to three — 27,000 s.f. increments — Total build-out 81,000 s.f.vs.99,000 s.f. • All phases included 8,000 s.f. under-building parking • Creates a pedestrian Walkway from Margaret Lane to River Park stice Facilities Expansion E 3 panded Master Plan Preliminary Findings of Expanded Plan: • Five level deck could be located south of GSC- Annex site • 500+ vehide capacity • Needed by Phase 2 of courthouse expansion Fxnanderl Master Plan Work session on 4-30-02 max i ), Ii' L _ , _ rii *la��•, O1eco:o�oia;o,ote o o_rO I "F'dicc .1 El ' ... imaimi mit p IFNI411 .. (AF---.--m , MIMI' }r;aaasraaass• ,, Y i • Justice Facilities Expansion Expanded Master Plan • Traffic is Primary Challenge — Margaret Lane and Churton Street —Cameron Street and Margaret Lane P nanriari Mastar Plan Wnrk session on 4-30-02.max ,fro Justice Facilities Expansion Expanded Master Plan • Suggestions by Traffic Consultant: — Optimize traffic signal timing •Add loop detectors to allow signal light operation to respond to actual conditions — Remove parking along East Margaret Lane — Remove parking along Churton Street from during peak travel hours • 7 am to 9 am •4 pm to 6 pm • • Expanded Master Plan Work session on 4-30-02.max ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: November 7, 2001 Action Agenda Item No. SUBJECT: Justice Facilities Site Expanded Master Plan DEPARTMENT: Purchasing and Central Services PUBUC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Jones(919)245-2652 Freeman-White Proposal TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 968.4501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 338-227-2031 PURPOSE: To consider retaining Freeman-White Architects to conduct an expanded master plan of the downtown Court/GSC campus. BACKGROUND: County Commissioners approved a process for planning and designing the proposed Justice Facilities Expansion during the meeting on September 4,2001. The Board directed the Purchasing Director to seek a proposal for expansion of the existing Master Plan for the Court Campus in order to consider the potential impacts of the recommendations in the preliminary County Space Needs Study and incorporate them as might be appropriate.The Justice Facility Master Plan preceded the publication of the preliminary County Space Study, which proposes expansion of the Government Services Center(GSC) and potential removal of the Government Services Center Annex(GSCA). The GSC/GSCA project potentially opens new opportunities for synergistically providing parking for both the GSC/GSCA and the Justice Facilities projects. Additional information is required however,to ensure that our planning basis for both the building expansion and the parking structure is realistic and makes the most efficient use of the available land. Scone of Work The proposed expanded master plan will expand the original master plan prepared for the court campus to include the GSC/GSCA area. Further, it will also consider the impact of the proposed future projects on the River Park area. Neither project being considered, however,will encroach upon the River Park area. The proposed expanded master plan will provide in-depth investigation of the site and will specifically determine the feasibility of a parking structure on the GSC/GSCA site. The expanded plan will Include the following major elements: • Sub-surface investigation to determine the ability of the soil to support the structures proposed; • Traffic analysis to determine options for moving the significant number of vehicles that a parking structure would generate; • Review the preliminary findings of the Space Needs Study and determine a revised space allocation plan for the courthouse and county government operations, including the Sheriff's Department. The proposal is attached to more fully define the scope of work. Pvnanriari Mactar Plan Wnrk cacsinn nn 4-1f1-i72 may Cost Elements, Costs of the study include the following: • $12,000: Architect • $7,500: Traffic Analysis • $2200; Sub-Surface testing $21,700 Total of expanded study Timetable The report will be completed in approximately 30 days from the date agreement is approved. Presuming the agreement is approved on November 7,2001, the approximate date of completion should be December 10,2001. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds to support the cost of the expanded master plan are available in the Justice Facility Planning Capital Project In the current CIP. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board retain Freeman-White Architects to complete the expanded master plan for a sum not to exceed$21,700 as outlined in the attached proposal;and authorize the Purchasing Director to execute the appropriate paperwork. og ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: September 4, 2001 Action Agenda Item No. SUBJECT: Hillsborough Judicial Facilities Expansion Planning Process DEPARTMENT: Purchasing and Central Services PUBUC HEARING: (YIN) No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Jones(919)245-2652 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 7324181 Chapel Hill 968-4501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 336-227-2031 PURPOSE:To consider approving a planning process to be used in the Design/construction of the Justice Facilities Expansion Project. BACKGROUND: Oricinal Justice Facilities Study In 1994 the Orange County Board of Commissioners appointed a group to study the long-term needs of justice 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 to Address Most Critical Needs The scope of the long-term needs as identified by the Group was extensive. The County's ability to undertake expansion of this magnitude was limited. To that end, components exhibiting the greatest need were considered separately and two projects specific to those needs initiated. • The Jail Expansion project completed in early 1998 added 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 Sheriff's Department and judges has served to minimize overcrowding. The Federal Marshal continues to use the Orange County Jail as a major depot for prisoners. • The addition of the Gordon Battle Courtroom in early 1998 allowed the heavier volume bistrict Court to utilize the large courtroom on the main floor as its primary court location. A greater flexibility in scheduling various courtrooms was agreed to 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 two expansions. Although these changes may have negated the need for further expansion for up to a decade, the group agreed that the long-term need still exists and that a proactive approach to development was critical. . •• ... ,.. . _• _ _ • nn nn ------ Hillsborough Justice Facilities Campus Master Plan In 1999,the County Commissioners commissioned Freeman-White Architects, Charlotte to produce a site plan that reflected the total build-out capability of the site.The results of this report,presented in April 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 site to be only the 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 parking deck into the courthouse construction,while Option B developed a 6 level free- standing parking structure in the approximate location of the existing Sheriff's Department. At the request of the County Commissioners,the Master Plan was also presented to the Town of Hillsborough Commissioners in June 2000. Concerns raised by both Boards were similar, examples of which include the following: • Parking sufficiency 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 • Farmer's Market location. In an effort to further clarify the challenges associated with development of a court facility on Margaret Lane,two 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 the site,there is significant concern that it be done in a manner that embraces a strong sensitivity to historical context 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 Plant 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 raised during those discussions,including the potential that a parking deck could be located closer to the Government Services Center rather than being built as part of the Courthouse project. Regardless of whether that should be the case, it is a forgone conclusion that the design outcome for both 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 Farmer's Market on this site, it should be sited with considerations of both facilities in mind. Because 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 • 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 architect: • The area that is presently River Park land would remain dedicated to park/open space,with extremely minimal,if any encroachment by parking. • The area that is presently River Park could be utilized for part or all of a Farmer's Market Facility, if the final design indicated that to be the optimal location. I \A/.-!. ............. .... A 9A A7 ., , or/ • The building in which the Sheriff's Department is located should be left intact if at all possible. (The Court Campus Master Plan recommends its removal.) • The Occaneechi Indian Village remains as is. • The expanded master plan would consider and leave intact the recommendation for the potential expansion of the GSC and GSCA as proposed by the Space Needs Task Force in March 2001. • A multi-level parking deck remains an acceptable solution to providing adequate parking to the area. The revised master plan would be presented to the Board for approval before commencement of the actual design process for the Courthouse. Should the Board so direct,the firm who produced the Court Campus Master Plan could be contacted regarding availability for the expanded plan and a contract for such presented to the Board for consideration in the near future. Proposed Planning Process Following the approval of the proposed expanded site 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 expressed interest, specific area of expertise and/or previous involvement in the process.The process has been compartmentalized into the following segments: • Selection of Design Firm; • Programming: Interior • Programming: Exterior(includes River Park area) Selection of the Design Flnm, Scope of Work: Appointees to this group would be responsible for the following: • Approving the criteria whereby the firms will be evaluated; • 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 on the short list(generally no more than six); • Recommending the preferred design firm for Board of Commissioner consideration. Recommended appointees: • Mark Sheridan,Town of Hillsborough Commissioner and Tourism Board member • Susan Frankenburg,Alliance for Historic Hillsborough • Cathleen Turner,Alliance for Historic Hillsborough • Todd Dickinson, Historic Preservation Architect • 2 County Commissioners • Sheriff Undy Pendergrass • John Link,County Manager • Wade Barber, Superior Court Judge • Joe Buckner,Chief District Court Judge • Jamie Stanford,Clerk of Court • Pam Jones, Orange County Director of Purchasing and Central Services • David Stencil,Orange County Director of Environment and Resource Conservation Department Proorammina: Exterior Scope of work: This task group will be responsible for working with the designer to design a building that meets the community concerns about the appearance of the building and the user's concerns about the access, parking,etc. This group will also provide design direction regarding River Park and the IA.. ne •cninn nn A_'2n_n' m7v functional melding of the building with the Park. The task group's recommendations will be brought forward for County Commissioner consideration. Recommended Appointees: • Mark 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 • Norma White,Landscape Architect • David Stencil,or designate • 2 County Commissioners • Judge Wade Barber • Judge Joe Buckner. • Jamie Stanford,Clerk of Court • Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass • Carl Fox, District Attorney • John Unk,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. Proarammina: Intdor 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 for the Sheriff's Department; • Offices for the Clerk of Court to relocate from leased 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 Stanford,Clerk of Court • Carl Fox, District Attorney • Sheriff Undy Pendergrass • 2 County Commissioners • John Link,County Manager • Pam Jones Input from other building users,such as the Public Defender, Probation/Parole,the 158 Bar Association, etc.will be solicited at appropriate times during the design process as well. Upon Board approval of the process,the Request for Proposal for architect selection will be prepared and solicited during the fall,with a recommendation from the selection committee anticipated by the end of January 2002. Cvn�nrlcrl Mactor Plan Wnrk cassinn nn 4-30-02.max c7Z FINANCIAL IMPACT:The indirect effect of approval of this matter is as follows: • Cost of construction for building only is estimated at$8 million.This cost would be funded through alternative funding mechanisms, such as Certificates of Participation (COPS)or a private placement loan. • Although design considerations for River Park will be included in the scope of this work, any recommendations regarding the 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 $800,000-$700,000. These funds have been appropriated over the past two 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 Board approval,as they become known. RECOMMENDATION(S):The Manager recommends that the Board: • Approve the expanded master plan work and authorize the Director of Purchasing and Central Services to negotiate a contract for Board 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. • Exnanded Master Plan Work session on 4-30-02.max 30 M 3: Seo ember 4 20 .1 BOCC m eetlna k Hilisborouah Judicial Facilities ExDanston Planning Process The Board considered approving a planning process to be used in the design/construction of the justice facilities expansion project. John Link said that he is asking County Commissioners to approve the next phase of the justice facility expansion. A Jail expansion and a new courtroom were added in 1998. However,there are additional needs for justice facilities. Pam Jones said that a task force was appointed in 1994 to develop a needs assessment for the court needs. As an interim measure beds were added to the jail to bring the capacity up to 128. In July 2001 the average daily population was 125. The Federal Marshal's Office stills uses our jails for federal prisoners. A year ago, a master plan was developed by architects to determine how much could be built on the judicial facilities site. They laid out two options for that site. Each project would be built in four phases and each would have specific parking options. One of the options is to have a six-level parking deck,which would be in the location of the Sheriff's office. The other option had the parking incorporated in the building and would be built in phase two. The scope of the master plan is Stilihouse Creek to Margaret Lane to Churton Street to the edge of the courthouse parking lot. A long-term study of County space needs was conducted recently through the Space Needs task force. One of the recommendations is to add to the Government Services Center on Cameron Street. It seems prudent at this point to look at the entire site as a whole. The staff has requested that the Board of County Commissioners approve an expansion of the master plan. She would propose to ask Freeman White to update the previous master plan,then move forward with the planning process. Pam Jones then spoke to the planning process. Knowing that there will be an impact on downtown Hillsborough,the process has three components. The first is the selection of the architect and designer of the building and River Park The second is a programming group that would look at the exterior of the building to make sure that it does not overpower the downtown Hillsborough area. The third is a programming group that would focus on the interior of the building. These are limited to judicial officials, County staff,and County Commissioners that would be operating within the building. Other users could also give input. Commissioner Carey asked about the Sheriffs office and Pam Jones said that it could be torn down to make room for needed parking. There are other options, but this is the best plan. Commissioner Brown confirmed that the first phase would be a building adjacent to the present courthouse. Commissioner Jacobs asked to have visuals for the citizens present when information is presented. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the Sheriff's building and said that the building should be left intact if possible. He said that it was nice to have to presupposition that we will use what we have. He suggested inviting Freeman White to the work session on space studies. A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Carey to endorse the assumptions as listed on page three adding Commissioner Jacobs' words about being prudent for the Sheriff's office and respecting the space needs study recommendation as stated by Pam Jones as follows: "The expanded master plan would consider and leave intact the recommendation for potential expansion of the FYnanriPCi Master Plan Work session on 4-30-02.max 3i Govemment-Services Center and Government Services Center Annex as proposed by the Space Needs Task Force in March 2001." Commissioner Jacobs mentioned that he and Chair Halidotis met with some people from Hillsborough and one of their concerns was that they be able to see the River Park from Margaret Lane. VOTE: UNANIMOUS • vnanHod Mactar Plan Wnrk sPssinn on 4-30-02.max J • --tats of UO2th CatQLi,ta 61enL taE eou'ct o� �ustie� 15:13 bl tti_t Cvutt Cultist JOSEPH MOODY BUCKNER DISTRICT COURT JUDGE CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE C T. L. ANOERSON ALONZO BROWN C M. Orange County Board of Commissioners PATRICIA DEVINE PO Box 8181 Hillsborough,NC 27278-8181 August 5, 1999 • Dear Commissioners. We sincerely appreciate the efforts Orange County has made on behalf of our justice facilities. And we are confident you are aware of the remaining short term and long term security and space issues we still have to face. This letter is to voice our unified support for Orange County to move,forward with action to address these immediate and prospective capital needs. Without action we will soon face multiple and perhaps insurmountable problems delivering timely and safe justice to the tens of thousands of citizens who use the Orange County justice facilities every year. Joe Buckner has volunteered to be our spokesperson to provide any information you or your representatives may need in making these important decisions. Of course, we all are willing to serve this process in any way the Commissioners deem appropriate. We are anxious to work with you, the staff and the planning professionals involved to achieve a safe, efficient and economical justice facility for the people of Orange County. Sincerely, The Hon.Charles T.L.Anderson District Court Judge Go t.rs..•.✓ e '. • •h M. uckner The Hon.Alonzo B.Coleman,Jr. Ch. District Court udge District t ourt- /` ' • The on.M.Patricia Devine on.Carl Fox Disu i curt Judge District Attorney . 1 - . Lunsford Long nett:.Joan Terry District Bar Counselor Clerk of Superior Court w Jiamst Public Defender (`r.i,4 nffini�le lof+nr of eIITnnrf few r% A,fmrilitioe R_11_0Q mw 53 1"-) cStatL of ditott4 (atoCina gE 2aL p C nt �foult(H�of lu tiiez WADE SAPPER G``JU/iLtiot COUtt ! ilttict /03 TFLLPNONt: 19191 732.6161 Rt1tOtNf SUPtw1Ow Cower JUOat 19191 907.9231 104 EAST KING S ORANGE AND CHATHAM COUNTIES FAX: (9191 644-3026 HILLS909OUaN. N.C. 27279 August 5, 1999 The Honorable Margaret Brown Chairwoman Orange County Commissioners • Hillsborough, N.C. • Re: Orange County Court Facilities Dear Ms. Brown: Since the Orange County Commissioners engaged John Berry to design and build the courthouse in 1845, the people of Orange County have long benefited from having this outstanding expression of the ideal of justice, the authority of law, county identity and the pride of citizens. This Old Courthouse, the 1956 courthouse, and the Battle Courtroom reflect our continuing commitment to an open, dignified, and equal democracy and justice system. Commissioners, citizens, and court officials have worked together to build and maintain facilities that play a critically important role in seeking a just society. Growth and new services now stress our court facilities. We have immediate needs that daily affect the administration of justice. We must seize the opportunity to build on our historical commitment to judicial facilities by addressing present and future needs. • One of my highest priorities as Senior Resident Superior Court Judge is to work with you to address immediate facility needs and develop a long-range plan. I am confident that our cooperative effort will result in the improvements that will benefit both the public and the courthouse staff I whole-heartedly support our Wade Barber letter of support; court facilities.max 3 Li Page Two The Hon. Margaret Brown ongoing effort to improve our facilities in a way that will enhance the court's mission. Chief District Judge Joe Buckner and I would be pleased to address the Commissioners and work with you in this important matter. Sin ere , Wade Barber cc: Members of the Orange County Board of Commissioners The Hon. Charles Anderson The Hon. Joseph Buckner The Hon. Alonzo Coleman The Hon. Patricia Devine The Hon. Carl Fox The Hon. Joan Terry Mr. Lunsford Long Mr. James Williams Mr. John Link. Ms. Pam Jones • Wade Barber letter of support; court facilities.max