Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 6A_3/7/1996 v' 1114 vz A , ,-, - VILLAGE TQA Post Office Box 3273OF 357E ToquesUEST ta Drive Tequesta,Florida 33469-0273 • (407)575-6200 t(Ilk ,� Fax:(407)575-6203 VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 29, 1996 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The` Redevelopment Committee held a . regularly scheduled , meeting at the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Monday, January 29, 1996. The meeting was called to order at 9: 17 A.M. by ,Chairman Ron T. Mackail . A roll call was taken by Betty .Laur, Recording Secretary. . Councilmembers present were: Chairman Ron T. Mackail, Co- Chair Joseph N. Capretta, and Co-Chair Carl C. Hansen., Also in attendance were: Village Manager Thomas G. Bradford, Village Clerk Joann Manganiello, and Department Heads . II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Co-Chair Hansen made a motion to approve. the agenda as ' submitted. Chairman Mackail seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: 1 Ron T. Mackail - for Carl C. Hansen - for ' Joseph N. Capretta - 'for The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the Agenda was approved as submitted. J • REDEVELOPMENT CCt44ITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 29, 1996 PAGE 2 III. REVIEW OF PRELIMINARY , DRAFT OF VILLAGE' S MASTER PLAN AND FACILITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM (Phil Crannell, AIA, and ' Lisa Lemanowicz, R.A. , .Gee & Jenson) Co-Chair Capretta questioned whether this update was consistent with current thinking, and asked what changes had taken place since the last review. Village Manager Bradford explained that per the Committee' s instructions ' at the last meeting, the architects and staff had come back with drawings placing all .Village operations except Administration at the site of the current Municipal Complex, with the idea that the Village Hall would be placed in the central business district, • and the Building Department would move with Administration. At the present site, facilities would house all Public Safety operations . Architect Lisa Lemanowicz explained that several different schemes had been developed as alternative ways to develop the , Public Safety facilities, and that the differences in the various' schemes • reflected, whether buildings were demolished- or renovated, and their different uses . The following schemes were discussed: • • Scheme A-1 : Proposed demolition of all existing structures on the site and new construction of a new public safety facility to• house Fire and • Police Departments. Part of the site would. utilize the existing park. The water tank • would remain as is, and. a tower would be • constructed in the rear of the site for the Fire Department. Scheme A-2: Same as A=1 except there would be a second • story addition on top of, the Police station to be used as Public Safety apartments, which • could also be done as a ' later addition. Architect Lemanowicz explained that the Fire • Department would have shift .quarters on site. Village Clerk Manganiello - explained that the Public Safety apartments would be utilized for the concept presented at the last meeting, • REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 29, 1996 . PAGE 3 • wherein the Village might be able to lure FAU students to work as police officers and fire - fighters in exchange for room, board, spending money while attending college, and a bonus of • money for 'college at the end of their 4-year commitment. Scheme B: . In Scheme B., the existing, structure in the back of the site would be renovated and a second story added to be used as a dormitory for Public Safety. ' The existing Village Hall would be demolished and a- new Public Safety building erected in its place. • Scheme C: In Scheme B, the existing Village Hall would be renovated with additions to the front and • • rear and an apparatus bay and Fire station would be added to the east. A 'second .story would be added to the existing Building Department structure for use as Public Safety apartments. . Scheme D: In Scheme D, the existing building in the rear would be demolished. The existing Village Hall would be added to only in the rear and • the . apparatus bay and fire station would be added to the east. Architect Lemanowicz explained that Scheme A-2 would be the most expensive, and Scheme D the least expensive, with all others falling into mid-range between the two extremes, with square footage the same in all. . Village Manager Bradford explained that in the present building, Administration had approximately 1, 500 square feet, the Police Department had approximately 1, 500 square feet, and the remaining 2, 000 was used by the meeting hall. . • Co-Chair Hansen commented that very often politicians were criticized for making projects too large and too costly, and, questioned whether the Village could: defend the space . requirements based on Tequesta' s population. Architect -Crannell stated that the square footage was very defensible, • • • REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES • JANUARY 29, 1996 , • • PAGE 4 • and was as tight as they could make it based upon services offered to the community, staff, file area, and support functions area. The outside observer would perceive the big expansion as permanent :Public Safety .facilities, which the architects had tried . to make sure were first class, efficient, and dedicated to provide. the critical element of . support to Tequesta' s citizens. Co-Chair Capretta suggested • that another defense would be comparison with the town halls of Juno Beach, Jupiter, 'and other small municipalities, to determine comparable square footage per employee to see if that figure was close to that in the proposed schemes for Tequesta. Co-Chair Capretta suggested that after the character of the buildings 'had been determined to ,conform to Village requirements for other projects within Tequesta, that an amount to spend per square foot could' be calculated. That price per square foot could then be compared to the square foot cost of the Juno Beach town hall for reasonableness. Architect Cranhell advised that the architects had worked very hard to squeeze out all of the • possible space that might have been wasted, and that the cost per square foot averaged under $100, and the other • public spaces recently constructed had been in excess of $115 to $125 per square foot;r therefore public perception of the budget, considering level of detail and aesthetic treatment, would be much more conservative than for other public buildings in Palm Beach County' and in the State. CO- Chair Capretta suggested that a space analysis could also be done. Architect Lemanowicz explained that the lower cost of Scheme D resulted from renovation of the existing building with' an •addition •on the rear, demolition of the building at the rear of the' site, and addition of the apparatus bay and fire . station to the east. Village 'Clerk Manganiello questioned phasing for . the project. Architect Lemanowicz explained that costs would need to be considered, . however, trailers • could be purchased for relocation of operations during construction. Co-Chair Hansen questioned whether construction 'of Administration facilities should be done first. in order to clear those operations from the construction site, and to possibly save the $75,000 minimum cost for the present • • REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES • JANUARY 29, 1996 PAGE 5. facility to comply with ADA requirements, and questioned how •• long those code requirements might be postponed. • Co-Chair Capretta left the -meeting at 9: 30 A.M. In response to Co-Chair Hansen, Architect Crannell explained . . that Administration would be moved out into temporary facilities before construction of Public Safety facilities began, that the time for ADA compliance had expired two years ago, and that a program needed to be started for ADA if it might be 9 months to a year before the present building was vacated, since without such a program the Village was placing, itself at great risk. Co-Chair Hansen favored establishing a master plan,' which could be studied and changed as necessary. '. Co-Chair Hansen listed projects slated for 1996 as possible upgrading and • ADA improvements for, present facilities; central garage construction, and Constitution Park improvements'. Co-Chair Hansen proposed the following course of action: In 1996 a time frame and financing be established for new Village facilities;, with construction of Administration facilities in 1977 and 'Public Safety facilities in 1998-1999. • Village Clerk Manganiello explained that at the last Finance and Administration 'meeting, direction had been to focus' on the present site for 'Public Safety and to. relocate Administration temporarily, and 'to focus on Public Safety • first. ' Co-Chair Hansen questioned whether trailers or rental space would be less' expensive for relocation, to which Architect Crannell explained that the architects could not comment since that was determined by market forces. Architect Crannell verified Co-Chair, Hansen' s comment that the annex building would not need to be torn down before the - new facility was complete. Chairman Mackail questioned what feedback had been received • from Department heads. ' Village Manager Bradford responded that the Fire Department wanted permanent facilities suitably sized, with living quarters and sufficient parking for vehicles, with vehicle parking to point toward the ' street. The Police Department had a long list of things , ,that they did not presently have, including proper evidence • • • REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES • JANUARY 29, 1996 PAGE 6 storage, proper holding cells, extra rooms for sobriety testing, interrogation rooms, - etc. • Architect Crannell verified that the proposed space would be sufficient for the next 15-20 years., . and that the existing . site was ideal for' . a Public Safety complex. It was also pointed out .that the • Village owned the parking lot next door, Village Manager Bradford commented that his assumption -was that the undeveloped land at the rear of the existing site was to be banked for future use. Chairman Mackail suggested a pert . chart, and that Administration move off the site before construction of Public Safety facilities . Ensuing discussion included the fact that the present site was the geographical' center of the Village which was best for Fire . , Department response, and that politically the majority of residents wanted the Fire Station to be west of the railroad tracks . Co-Chair Hansen questioned whether it would be • . advantageous to have all facilities on one site or whether • it would make no difference if Public Safety and Administration were half a mile apart . . Village Manager • Bradford responded that although proximity was always good, that separation was very common and .it 'would not be a • problem for the Chiefs to travel to Administration facilities for meetings. Co-Chair Hansen commented that fewer parking spaces would be needed if all facilities were 'on the same site; -however, Architect Crannell clarified that the only combined parking utilization possible would be for . night meetings. Mr. Crannell advised that placing administrative functions in another location would allow more 'flexibility for the Village ' to take a more entrepreneurial' approach by partnering with other businesses or to find a large enough site to be able to add other municipal functions later. Mr. Crannell reported that the ' existing site was limited as to the circulation space needed . for combined facilities, and that space for movement of vehicles .and .conducting training programs for Public Safety would be very limited. Both Chairman Mackail and "Co-Chair Hansen stated their preference for Administration in another location. The possibility was mentioned that the Administration building could - help with redevelopment if • located in the centralibusiness. district, and ways in which . other municipalities had developed their facilities was ' discussed. Chairman Mackail favored the ideas' expressed by the staff since they would be working there. Village Clerk REDEVELOPMENT COM4ITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 29, 1996 PAGE 7 Manganiell'o commented that . one of the aspects of establishing the Public Safety facility was that it would become disaster headquarters for the entire Village and would meet hurricane specification, and that Administration could come to that facility during a disaster. Chairman . Mackail commented there had been no place for people to go during the October flood. Village Manager Bradford pointed out that Scheme D utilized • approximately half the' land now used as the Village Green, as well' as land owned by the Water Department, which could not be used for that purpose until the bonds had been paid off during 1996. Chairman Mackail commented that the Village Green could be recreated in another location. • Co-Chair Hansen requested input from the architects regarding whether Administration or Public Safety should be considered first. Architect Crannell responded that a Public Safety complex was most important, and that .it would be approximately 1-1/2 years before a new Administration building could be finished, which would mean construction of a Public Safety facility could not be finished for . 2-1/2 years. Chairman Mackail commented that time was money and construction costs were money,' and the • construction would have to be financed to some degree; therefore, dollars would play a part in his decision as to which facility would be constructed first. Mr. Crannell commented that their research showed an increase of construction cost inflation of 3% over the Consumer Price Index every year; and also pointed out that since Administration was now in such cramped quarters that moving into temporary facilities would probably be a relief to them rather than a hardship. Village Manager Bradford commented that bonding the entire program .could be done either upfront or when total .cost was • known. Discussion ensued of the relatively low cost of financing, now available. Village Manager Bradford suggested the possibility of a revenue note . for Administration and a General Obligation bond for Public Safety; the difference being that- the revenue bond would not require voter • approval, had a slightly higher .interest rate, and assumed that 'the capacity for covering debt service was available; while a General Obligation bond had lower interest rates, the full faith and credit of the Village would be pledged to , REDEVELOPMENT COt.MITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 29, 1996 PAGE 8 pay debt service, and a line item would be added to property tax bills . The residents would probably have more inclination to support Public Safety than an Administration facility; however, since issuance costs would have to be paid for both the revenue note and the General Obligation - bond, those would have to be considered against any interest savings. Village Manager Bradford commented that he liked Co-Chair Hansen' s idea of putting forth a proposed schedule because of the many needs of the Village which were competing for resources, and that the schedule should take into account everything including public works problems so that costs to taxpayers could remain stable, and should encompass a 3-5 year period. Village Manager . Bradford requested direction regarding compliance with ADA requirements and Ordinance 377 landscaping at the present Village Hall site . During discussion of ADA requirements, Architect Crannell advised that the Village was vulnerable to anyone filing a complaint with the U. S. Attorney General, and that the Department of Justice would want the Village to demonstrate that they had a program for compliance. Mr. Crannell commented that the Department of Justice had generally worked with people to effect programs, but it was better and more prudent to have a program in place which was being implemented. Mr. Crannell commented that the best defense for the Village against any ADA complaint was that the Village planned to occupy new or renovated facilities within 1-1/2 years with construction to begin in 6 months, which would make modifications to the existing structure impractical, and stated that there were other reasonable modifications which could be done. Co-Chair Capretta rejoined the meeting at 10: 10 A.M. Village Manager Bradford commented that every alternative for facilities would translate into a tax increase, and the Committee would need to be cognizant of the fact that the cost must be as reasonable as possible for the best facility, and suggested that phasing might minimize the cost increase. Chairman Mackail mentioned that Co-Chair REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE • FETING MINUTES JANUARY 29, 1996 PAGE 9' Capretta' s goal of increasing the Village tax base could provide some cost offset, and that this investment should be the community' s investment for the next 50 years . Co-Chair Hansen commented that residents must be made to understand that there really was no choice, since new facilities were so desperately needed. Co-Chair Capretta proposed that calculations be done on ,a $400, 000, 000. tax base to see how much revenue would be generated to handle debt service, and how that would affect the millage rate. Other alternatives suggested by Co-Chair Capretta were comparison with municipal facilities in other communities, and to determine the lowest cost for providing strictly functional facilities. Village Manager Bradford advised that a one- mill tax increase would be 15. 7%, and Finance Director Kascavelis explained that an increase of approximately 1-1/2 mills would be needed to provide debt service on the $5, 000, 000 to $6, 000, 000 in improvements proposed. Co-Chair Capretta suggested the possibility of placing all Village operations temporarily at the old K-Mart and Publix site to leave the existing site clear in order to facilitate construction. • Village Manager Bradford requested that staff be informed of ' which scheme each committee member favored ,so that a pert chart could be created, and cautioned that any Village Green space which was encroached upon would have to be made up in 'another location to comply with the recreation open space requirement of 'the Comprehensive Plan. . Village -Manager Bradford requested direction whether to proceed with Landscape Ordinance 377 requirements, which would total approximately $38, 000. Chairman Mackail stated that landscaping could always be moved. Chairman Mackail requested that the projected tax base for each year be shown on the pert chart along with. project proposals in order to help make the decision on what type of financing to pursue. Co-Chair Hansen asked for the architects' comments regarding any negatives perceived with renovation of the present building. Mr. Crannell commented that Scheme A-1 offered the most freedom of circulation for apparatus use and • • REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 29, 1996 PAGE 10 • maintenance, and .was the architects' . first choice, however this scheme required construction of a new building. If - using the existing building, then the architects would choose Scheme D because - an addition would only , be constructed at the rear of the exi-sting structure, and an • apparatus bay and Fire Station would be added on the east side. Architect Crannell verified that the architecture of the addition would be complimentary with that of the existing building. Village Clerk Manganiello commented that • a west-facing fire station would project noise toward the existing commercial area rather than residential. Architect Lemanowicz commented that, in Scheme A-1, classrooms and meeting rooms were shared for utilization at' different times, while Scheme D proposed two, isolated structures. Mr. Crannell explained there would not be much difference in the completion schedule for either scheme. Co-Chair Capretta suggested a completely different concept • for consideration in which the existing site and the parking lot next door would be sold, and one of the old shopping centers downtown purchased as a municipal complex site, which would provide plenty of room for everything. Since the land could be purchased cheaply, more money could be spent on renovation, and the whole job might be done for • half the money. If Tequesta Plaza .were used, then the Fire trucks might access the site from Bridge street. Another possibility suggested by Co-Chair Capretta was to place the • Fire Department . on the existing site and move both Administration and Police downtown. After further , • discussion, ' Co-Chair Capretta requested that all alternatives be considered, and that staff come back with a small site plan and cost estimate - for acquisition of Tequesta Plaza and site improvements. Co-Chair Hansen requested that the Committee reach agreement at today' s meeting to ' come up with a Master Plan for the .existing site including what to do with Administration, total cost, and financing. • Village Manager Bradford suggested that another alternative would be to expand the existing garage for Fire Department . administration and living quarters, to house the Police Department in the current Village Hall, and to relocate • • REDEVELOPMENT COtrl4ITTEE MEETING MINUTES • JANUARY 29, 1996 PAGE 11 • Administration to another site. Chairman Mackai.l left the meeting .at 10: 44 A.M. Architect Lemanowicz cautioned that there would be maneuvering difficulty at the present site, to which Village Manager Bradford responded that he would discuss other circulation ideas with the architects . IV. ANY OTHER MATTERS V. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS Wade Griest commented that from the public' s point of view all of the plans sounded terrific, however, Tequesta was a small town facing many other additional expenses, and _ recommended trying to expand the present facilities . TV. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:47 A.M. • Respectfully submitted, C54"`"" ) etty our Recording Secretary ATTEST: • Joann Manganiello Village Clerk DATE APPROVED: .