Loading...
02/10/1994 (2) :, ., J .. ., ,., , . ~~' , , ~~f~.~~'II~C ". \ r;I" ,. , l . ':, J .;.' H'. :' " \ . .~. " .. ' ., ' . .' , " " . , " , : ~ '. .' .'l' : " . , ~ '. . ~\':, i ., . ~ . .:, , ' , , " , . . ~ ./~:. ~ , . ...) " , : t':~::~..:.;." .;"~ ,:"t~:;~..;~~;,:,,:~: ','~\.':.,;', 0',',\',:':'. ..' : '. ,.' ~~~'"'t:..t;j *"j(,"'~-" : ~. ... qf.J:; ~T<j-..~...'I., ~ .~{""'h~'j' ~~..~ .' " ' ..j " ." .( ,I .' . . , , . ./ t.:," ., ,. ' ~ ....;:..'1":. ,.' ".. ,', , .. .ii; ~ .~. ". ~.. ! t~/,";':~;.~\: . ....~ ll' , .:~*-~~~~ .;.~ i, ~ .~ ~."tn"~'''''''Ioo... ~ I ~1'I1:""""f."'ft'J.Ir.~'.... I. "r~' {if I> . ':~. " . " ~~~fiti;t~~:. ; r.', , . ~.,rl'.n}i-l',~!..>I"-\~.., ,., { I ,:.1'mt:~~',{:.r',. - .~~ '~f:~~(';J:;..'" "'"\.,- 't. , ~.:.~;::.il.~;.. 4.... 'r . . . ,r. ~~~... . " , . :~"' .\' '~- '. ~ L .;:~::. I ., , I :'C,O.MMISSION ,. City C~ml11ission ., " '~ !/t;/ttL) DATE . '.~'{'k' c j..} , i'l ';"'1, ~ ~:'~',' c \";../' l'..~'~ ~ ...':;.. ~~~ (.::'\ . ,j , *~~~~ '. 10,31 ...t.: .~..' I .~::;... :[1~;~.:' ;:::: '.l~Kq: .',: ~~-.~;. t!~?'':,., . ' " ... ! , '.:" ~. ~, .' > ~ ,. , , ,. '. I, , , " ' ,., ,: :':-.i.' ., I. ..~:::...: ~ ;l.. :. ._, "'I' . , . " , ,. .1 ", '4,' .1 . : ~~.:. :.: .... .r. '. . <~ " ,ri. .. , . .' ". J, .' ., I, ,...\ ,', '.', ' :r ,,1 ~ , I,::: .; " I.: ',' ',I T ;:?:;'!~\:~.r' >.> ': ,~..;.. .~'~f ~.t I! , 1. . " , .' . . ii, l' CITY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING CITY HALL February 10, 1994 The City Commission of the City of Clearwater met in a special meeting at City Hall,. Thursday, February 10, 1994 at 9:00 a.m., with the following members present: , ' . . Rita Garvey Arthur X. Deegan, II Richard Fitzgerald Sue A. Berfield Fred A. Thomas Mayor ICommissioner Vice~Mayor ICommissioner Commissioner. Commissioner Commissioner "Also present: , . Elizabeth M. Deptula Kathy S. Rice William C. Baker M.A. Galbraith, Jr. Cynthia E. Goudeau Interim City Manager , Dep'uty City Manager ,Acting Assistant City Manager City Attorney City Clerk The Mayor opened the meeting stating this was to be a brainstorming session regarding the .'City Hall project. ji'., ~~ I' Commissioner Fitzgerald indicated when this process started, the driving force was to have a consolidated City Hall. He stated his view has not changed and the goal is to consolidate which will be efficient and produce cost savings in the long run. He did not feel the legislative branch should be separated from the rest of City government. He. stated, the employees' working conditions need to be addressed as soon as possible. He ,c'ould not see going forward with any plan that does not achieve consolidation. Commissioner Deegan indicated when he first joined the Commission he was not convinced' a consolidated Ci.ty Hall was needed. As he listened to the arguments, it appeared the majority of the Commission felt it was needed and there seemed to enough cost savings. arid reasons to proceed. He stated, however, the public was not convinced of this need. He felt if the Commission could once more verify the need and communicate it to. the public, it would then be a' matter of when and how to proceed. Commissioner Deegan stated consolidation could mean juxtaposition or all in one geographic location and not necessarily one building. However, it He stated the real issue , requiring attention is the need to replace the Annex and the Utilities building and what to do with those properties. , Commissioner Deegan stated he is back to square one regarding the location of a City Hall. He'is coming to the brains'torming session with no preconceived .ideas. He {. < ~' minSP02b.94 2/1 0/94 1 , . , I ,.. '. I, . ('. .' ." t \ c l. c (:;.:. !.' ':. ~ ? , :~ ' . t . . ! ~ . ~.. . 'I. ' < . " ,. . ; , I . . :;~( :<:' , . i ,).; , . {.r 11-, , , , ' .1. " !, ' . . 1"""; \. . requ~sted the Commission see if they could agree on certain principals they wish to protect: 1) the efficiencies of consolidation in the sense of juxtaposition or all in one geographic location; 2) returning the East End property to a commercial use and back on the tax roll would take precedence over putting a City building at that location; 3) what to do regarding citizens' opinion and if a referendum should be held on this issue; 4) the cost . effectiveness of the project 8S the citizens' main concern is cost. Commissioner Deegan referred to a St. Petersburg Times telephone poll with 140 votes to do nothing and 142 votes to consolidate. .He stated this points out there is not a consensus on the part of the community on any of the points.. Commissioner Thomas indicated the decision to consolidate was reached prior to his coming c>n the Commission. He stated the question was, how to accomplish this. He said he never saw a cost justification for the consolidation. He felt it was being pursued, not'from a cost point of view. but f~om a need, perceived by man~gement, for the convenience of locating all City employees together. He stated technology never entered the equation and felt'the electronic highway could address these concerns. He noted a city of .Clearwater's'size would never truly be consolidated. . Mayor Garvey stated she was definitely still in favor of a consolidated City Hall. She stated the building needs to meet fire codes and needed to address ADA requirements, not modern technology. She stated there was a need to do something about the working environment of the employees. From the calls she is receiving, citizens . ar'e not against consolidation, they are against the cost and the location that had been proposed. She stated .the Commission needed to make it easy' for citizens to have access to City services. It was suggested there be a list of priorities of what is hoped to be accomplished in order to make decisions regarding whether or not to go forward with the City Hall project. . Ms. Deptula. Interim City Manager, introduced the City team which has been . brainstorming on this issue: Kathy Rice, Deputy City Manager; Katherine Pryor, Dean Rowe; Debbie Costello and Stewart Donnell, Consultants hired to help with the project; Bill Baker, Acting City Manager; Peter Yauch, Acting Public Works Director; Bill Baird, General Services Director. ' .c:. . minSP02b.94 2/10/94 2 J . ~' I~ ' f . : ~ ~ : , I . ~ . }:~;';:~.'"..,::: ..~.\ ""~ " . 1.'", c,, ." . ( , ' I,. . . ' , . I, i ."' '( c Items listed that needed to be addressed were: no purchase of new property; public , convenience; parking; ,safety; fire code; ADA conditions; cost; referendum; operational efficiencies: effect on others/benefit to surrounding areas; image conveyed; storm , proofing; combining the Police Department with City Hall; a campus environment; a flexible design to meet changing needs; accommodating growth; scheduling; interim location; necessity of consolidation.. Dean Rowe, reading from the goals established by the Commission for the City Hall project in January 1993, added the need to be energy efficie'nt. ,Commissioner Thomas suggested the commission and staff ,choose the issues most important to them to see if there was a commonality in focus. Commissioner Berfield said the most important thing to her was that the Commission agreed to work together on the decision. Commissioner Thomas agreed on~e a conclusion is reached, the Commission should support that conclusion. , . Ms. Rice indicated technology was an important issue. Commissioner Thomas felt this was something that needed to be address farther down the road. . ~ ~ .', Commissioner Deegan felt public support was paramount. Ms. Deptula indicated. when talking to citizens, she was hearing requests for the City to make the best use of pres'ent assets. ., "('::'.\ t.-' .-. Al Galbraith indicated consolidating City Hall is not a new idea. He reported when Boca Raton built a consolidated City Hall, the city went to the voters, who approved it based on convenience to ,the public and the resulting efficiencies. He noted efficiencies are difficult to measure. He reported in Boca Raton, a team work atmosphere developed, there was convenience to the public, apd operational efficiencies. Staff were requested to give their opinions regarding what they felt were the most important issues. Ms. Deptula said operational efficiencies were most important in being able to manage the City. Ms. Rice felt long term cost and public convenience were major issues.. Katherine Pryor indicated, from her professional experience, the current conditi~ns are not operating efficiently. She felt the priority was the operational efficiency of the organization.' Mr. Rowe felt public and management convenience should be the number one priority. Debbie Costello named operation. efficiencies for the staff and public. Mr. Donnell said one stop shopping. Mr. Baker suggested operational efficiencies. Mr. Yauch recommended public and management convenience. Ms. Goudeau named public .and management convenience. Mr. Baird recommended identifying public concerns. Mr. . Galbraith named operational efficiencies. Commissioner Fitzgerald felt public support was the major issue. Mayor Garvey named public and management convenience. Commissioner Deegan said public support. Commissioner' Berfield questioned the need for consolidation. Commissioner Thomas named public support. .' l~- minSP02b.94 211 0/94 3 I . " ", ., (1/. '.", . . \ r) The three recommendations with the most votes were public and management convenience, operational efficiencies, and public support. Ms. Deptula indicated the recommendations. were not mutually exclusive. Mr. Galbraith felt public support would evolve from the other two points. Ms. Deptula indicated that doing nothing was not an option as it subjects employees to potentially dangerous situations. Staff suggestions were requested. Ms. Deptula asked how important cost was to the City Commission. Mayor Garvey indicated most of the negative comments she received related to the project's cost. Commissioner Deegan agreed cost effectiveness was extremely important. Ms. Deptula indicated her sense was once the cost reached a certain point, it became a negative. She questioned the importance of parking. Commissioner Fitzgerald indicated parking convenience was important. Commissioner Deegan indicated the best use of the City's current assets was part of the cost. Mr. Donnell agreed there was a need to spend dollars wisely. Commissioner Thomas agreed if the cost was out of line, public support would not be forthcoming. In response to a question, Ms. Deptula indicated the projected operational savings resulting, from consolidation is $300,000, a year. This does not include significant capital costs. ., ., I , "d'~":'1 . ~,;.. Mr. Baker questioned if the pubHc would support a new City Hall at a reasonable cost if they knew the cost of doing nothing was $1 million. Commissioner Deegan felt the public would not support the City not making use of . what it already has and abandoning the current City Hall. A question was raised regarding the degree of consolidation that was hoped for. Mr. Baker indicated he has been involved with consolidation in three different cities and it is actually a myth: He stated the fire and police departments remain separate. He felt administrative efforts should be consolidated and preferred they all be in the same building. C,ommissioner Deegan questioned .if the Commission agreed that cost effectiveness includes use of current assets and property back on the tax rolls. I Ms~ Rice questioned how important is location. Commissioner Fitz'gerald indicated the best use of assets does not necessarily mean using the current situation or location. Commissioner Thomas agreed. Mayor Garvey questioned if the Commission accepted this expansion of the meaning of the best use of assets. It was agreed. . Commissioner Deegan pointed another concern fisted was the effect on surrounding areas. Commissioner Thomas questioned if the Campbell property had all been used. Mr. Baker indicated it had been. Commissioner Deegan felt location needed to be addressed. .l.. minSP02b.94 2/10/94 '4 ., , ' " . , , . " , , , ~_;"l~;.(~;,:.:~.'t.~... . ,., .~ ~ ~ '. , Mayor Garvey stated if public convenience was apriority, Downtown may not be t~e,ideallocation. Ms. Deptula indicated the PinellasSuncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) terminal is Downtown as well as the Jolley Trolley. , Commissioner Fitzgerald stated he did not agree with not buying new property. He said what the Commission should be trying to decide is the impact on the City in thirty years. He felt this priority is too limiting. He said the City should be able to sell an asset . and buy new property. Mayor Garvey stated the purpose of the priority was foJ' the City not to set out to purchase new p~operty. Commissioner Thomas questioned staff if the Citi did not own any property and was starting from scratch, where would they place City Hall. Mr. Baker indicated location would be the prime factor, no't whether or not to purchase new property. Commissioner Deegan stated in the cost consideration, there should not be a net addition to City owned property. , , Commissioller Tho.mas again questioned where staff would recomroend placing the City Hall if there were no restrictions on location. Mr. Baker indicated the geographical center of the City would be ideal, however, traditionally City Halls and Downtowns have . been married to each Qther. Ms. Deptula indicated her perspective was that the administration of the City should be Downtown. Mayor Garvey pointed, out the courthouse was also located in the Downtown area. "(' , .. 't , > The meeting recessed from 10:52 to 11 :03 CI.m. Commissioner Berfield asked if the Commission would reaffirm. its vote. to consolidate. Commissioner Thomas stated he did not feel it' was necessary to consolidate and he did not see an economic driving force. He,felt there should not be any investment in the Annex building, the Utilities building, or the Purchasing building. He suggested . relocating those employees to a new building, the location of which is a second consideration. He felt.it was wasteful to spend. $1 million on those ,buildings to meet minimal code. Ms. Deptula reviewed some of the issues: 1) It would take $1 million to fix and make safe City Hall, the Annex, the Utilities building, and the Purchasing building; 2) It would cost $3,565,000 to improve those buildings for extended use. Ms. Deptula noted both alternatives separate the City's Administrative functions into four different buildings. ., Th13 Commission agreed they, did not support either alternative because the priority issues delineated earlier in the meeting would not be addressed. Commissioner Deegan returned to the subject of location and felt it important to 'consider the benefit'to others in the area and, therefore, felt City Hall should be in the Downtown area. " l" minSP02b.94 211 0/94, 5 .' ' . .-', 'I ' ~ ,. ~,~:. ,\. . ~ .,." ' . ~., . L , J, ~ I.":j: '. I.....' , .,. 1""', Commissioner Fitzgerald asked him to define the Downtown limits. Commissioner l.L. Deegan stated it would not include the entire Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) district but the area between Myrtle Avenue and the bay. Commissioner Fitzgerald stated he would not limit the location to the area west of Myrtle. He felt the East End properties were still an option. He further elaborated that he is not emotionally attached to the current City Hall building and suggested it could have other City uses. Commissioner Thomas stated he did not agree with any limit on where to locate. He stated other City services are at the City's center. He felt the Commission should remove all emotional and political attachments regarding the building's location. He felt the Commission should support the best location and buHding plan. Mayor Garvey felt Downtown begins at Missouri Avenue. She agreed there. was nothing "sacred" regarding the current City Hall facility. Commissioner ,Berfield agreed with Ms. Deptula, indicating the main Police Station and Fire Station are in the Downtown area.. She stated when the discussion of , consolidation began, one of the pluses noted was that it would help Downtown. She was not certain about limiting the location of City Hall to the Downtown core. She. spoke against considering the East End as' a location for City Hall. She felt that property should be sold and returned to the tax rolls. She agreed City Hall should remain near its present location: (' 'c. " . , c. it...;. Commissioner Deegan indicated it was difficult to keep tile East End as an option as a decision needs to be made regarding that property being available. . . Mayor Garvey requested staff opinion. Ms. Deptula indicated when the team met Friday, February 4, 1994, she challenged ,the group to determine what would be thf) most cost effective and best use of the currant facility. She said she had some sense that tile present City Hall building had identity and should ue used. She recommended building an Annex .on the Bilgore property. She felt the Bilgore property was the least marketable of City and eRA owned properties. She stated the present City Hall could be used as an , administrative complex with 40 to 42 staff members remaining in the building. The remail)ing administrative functions would be consolidated in the Annex. She stated the cost estimate for this plan is slightly more than $9 million. Commissioner Thomas questioned sharing parking with the Police Department and whether 300 spaces would be enough. Ms. Deptula indicated a total of 500 spaces would be needed. . Commissioner Deegan felt there was a need to look at several alternatives. He expressed concerns that the Silgore property is currently owned by the CRA. Ms. Deptula agreed the City would have to purchase the property from the eRA and she would have to check on any constraints on the CRA in giving the land to the City. . l,1 minSP02b.94 2/10/94 6 .' Ms: Deptula indicated there were significant parcels along Cleveland .Street if the City wished to consider a land swap. Commissioner Deegan reported a citizen presented an idea to place City Hall on the Kravas lot' on Cleveland. He questioned if the property is large enough: Mr. Baker indicated he felt it would be. ~,.::,: ~,~.\.~< .:':.'.;' . : ' ..,' I . ~~ ,>,. . \ ~<. '. i . i. I '~.. ' , '. . I '> . ,j <' :. . ~ c, . .. ,<' I .. ~ . I. . } I" .. ,. E:,,;... .,' . ".".' :,."l~ ~ ". cc:;c~} ":; ~i J '. . ., ... I ~., ' , , . 'c:' Commissioner Fitzgerald stated he had reservations regarding the proposal and the parking that would be provided. He stated the proposed facility is to be placed in a comp'act location. He also 'expressed concerns about the image this would project. Mr. Baker indicated the Committee felt since plans for a new Police Department building are in the formulative stages, an Annex building could be accommodated. Mayor . Garvey noted that was one of the pluses in the plan. She was still frustrated the plan did not call for total consolidation. Commissioner Deegan questioned how far the Bilgore property is from City Hall. It was indicated that corner to corner, the distance is three City blocks; office to office it , would be four to five blocks. Mr. Baker indicated a building large enough for total consolidation on the Bilgore site would increase the estimate to a little more that $11 million. Commissioner Thomas questioned the viability of.using the Maas,~rothers site or the congregate living facility next door to the current City Hall. C~'\ ."' Mr. Baker indicated, while the Maas Brothers site was viable, renovation costs would not make it cost effective. He stated the Oak Cove building should be disposed of . if it were to be placed in City hands. It will not a~commodate a City Hall. Commissioner Fitzgerald felt a revenue producing activity should be considered for the Maas Brothers site. It was the consensus to remove both these locations from the table for consideration. Mr. Rowe presented examples of buildings on various sites, Commissioner Thomas questioned if a two story building was the most efficient. Mr. Rowe indicated a three story. building probably met th~t criteria. .1 i Commissioner Fitzgerald questioned if a total consolidation would fit on the Bilgore property. Mr. Rowe indicated it would. Mr. Rowe indicated his concern with the current proposal for an Annex on the Bilgt)re site was leaving the Commission Chambers in the current City Hall facility. Commissioner Fitzgerald expressed concerns about there not being' total consolidation. . Commissioner Deegan questioned if added levels could be attached to the Garden Street Parking Garage. It was indicated they could be, Commissioner Deegan felt the Commission should consider the Kravas site option along with adding spaces 'to the Garden Street garage. ..l> minSP02b.94 2/10/94 7 , . ., , , .. ;', I '" ~ .,...," )1 \,..' , " . ~:1 '. : I . C . ~ " " ~'> ~. . Commissioner Thomas questioned the impact of total consolidation on staff's proposal: Mr. Donnell indicated increasing the building's size to 90,000 square feet and adding a Chambers would increase the estimate by a little more than $2 million. Commissioner Fitzgerald felt there were other ways to use the current City Hall. He felt the building could be leased or used as a cultural center for the City. He indicated he would entertain the. Bilgare proposal if the project included a plan for total consolidation. Mr. Rowe suggested the top floor of the current C.ity Hall could accommodate the Chamber of Commerce. Commissioner Thomas stated if functions in the current City Hall were rel,ocated, he would want the 'current facility to become a revenue generator. Ms. Deptula reiterated total consolidation would cost an additional $2 million and would not include institutional grade construction. Commissioner Deegan agreed com!11ercial quality should be considered for comparisons. Ms. Deptula presented a rendering of a proposal by a citizen who felt the best use of. the entire bluff area was to consolidate City Hall and other facilities from the City Hall's current location to Drew Street. Commissioner Fitzgerald expressed concerns regarding its exposure to storm damage. . t.... . . .... ;.1 Commissioner Deegan indicated another issue to consider if the Commission is not concerned abo'ut having a referendum,. is to consider the current bluff proposal but locating, parking below the bluff. He questioned the cost estimate for that plan. Mr. Rowe indicated he would have to calculate it. Discussion ensued regarding whether to design the building at commercial or institutional grade. Mr. Donnell indicated institutional quality would increase the estimate by $1 million. He stated a total consolidation in 9'0,000 square feet would add $2.5 million to the estimate and upgrading to institutional quality would add another $2 million, increasing the estimate to $13.4 or $13.5 million. Commissioner Thomas stated building a City Hall Annex on the Bilgore property seemed to be the most pragmatic alternative and he could support it. Commissioner " Deegan indicated he would like to see some figures for using the current site as well as' the Kravas property on Cleveland Street. Mayor Garvey indicated she had no problem with obtaining more information.' However, she was comfortable with the 8ilgare alternative. " , . Commissioner Fitzgerald expressed concerns that the Commission was doing what it had done previo,usly and they would still not obtain public support. He stated he would not support the Bilgore alternative. as it did not achieve consolidation. Commissioner Berfiel~ questioned if the Commission agreed on the Bilgore alternative if Commissioner Fitzgerald would support moving forward. He indicated not necessarily. (';' minSP02b.94 2/10/94 8 .' .\ , '. &w;~\ /'" ;", ,,', '." :"'1- ' . . , , " ~ I' }.: ..,~.o~" .",:' .., . . I '.. l-: . .. ',~ , : '< ..., '.< ~ , , ,. ,: . ,. ';.J. " , , ~( . . ~ :i .. ~ , .. ~ j.. :' '> ~ '.". ' I' : !. }J>~.;.;:~;)": /:;,~I;:;,:,:....,<".:".:;;j'/:: :,' .., . ."j ). . , ' () Commissioner Thomas agreed with the suggestions to bring forward additional information regarding the Bilgore site, the bluff site, and the Kravas site and to include Commissioner Fitzgerald's version of 100% consolidation on those sites. He stated he would like to review the options' on the earliest date. ' Mr. Rowe indicated he would try to have the information available for the Commission for action at the March 3, 1994 meeting. (It was later found this was not possible and a Work Session was scheduled for March 3, 1994, with action to be taken on March, 17, 1994.) ~" , . . L '1, Mr. Baker questioned Mr. Rowe if he felt commercial grade was acceptable. Mr., Donnell indicated it was acceptable. However, he recommended upgrading the mechanical systems. It was agreed this alternative was to be presented as long as it was presented (or all options. . Mr. Baker questioned if the Commission wanted staff to hold off proceeding with the Police Department due to this direction. It was indicated that this should not be a problem. It was emphasized that the first step regarding the Police Department was to determine if the present facility could be rehabilitatetl. Mr. Baker indicated Mr. Donnell had been retained for that determination. .~; Ms. Deptula stated information would be brought forward with the Bilgore property as proposed for an Annex and total consolidation at 90,000 square feet, the Kravas property at 70,000 and 90,000 square feet with added parking on the Garden Avenue , Garage and,the, current City Hall site with parking below. All estimates will include commercial grade finishes. I. Ms. Deptula indicated the fire code and ADA regulations would have to be addressed at the current City Hall. .J,' , The, meeting adjourned at 12:25 p.m. ..' ." ,ATTEST: c ~~ 2.. ~\~~ . . V City, C~erk, . " : ., " , / ~ ,', .,' ), ., ininSP02b.94 2/10/94 L 9