Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br />? <br /> <br />Reduced costs for building, fleet parking, and potential staff parking on sites outside of <br />downtown. <br /> <br />While the group’s discussion focused more on locating the facility outside of downtown rather <br />than outside of City Hall, it affirmed the council’s previous decision to locate patrol outside of <br />City Hall – based primarily on site constraints, competition for ground floor space, and issues <br />related to City Hall’s sense of welcome and openness. <br /> <br />Of the 22 sites identified by the Specialized Input Group, sites D, E, and F were evaluated as <br />most suitable for a patrol facility due to their size, reduced land cost relative to other identified <br />sites, proximity to other police functions and other factors. In discussions with Site E’s Owner, <br />the Lane Transit District (LTD), LTD indicated a desire to retain approximately 2 acres of <br />undeveloped site for future expansion of the adjacent RideSource facility, which would leave <br />about 3.2 acres of surplus land available. The patrol facility program currently includes 20 years <br />of future growth for staff and parking needs. While the available site size may require structured <br />parking in the future, site E is a good option for planning purposes, offers the possibility of <br />shared parking, and discussions with property owners are on-going. Site D is well suited but the <br />owner is currently indicating disinterest in selling. Site F is also well suited but availability and <br />willingness have not been confirmed. <br /> <br />Sites A and B were also discussed as possible candidates by the Specialized Input Group and <br />council due to City ownership and their proximity to the Property Control & Forensics Building <br />and the fueling station and Fleet Maintenance facility. However, both these sites were acquired <br />by Public Works to meet their short and long-term needs as identified in the Public Works Facili- <br />ties Master Plan. Public Works is finalizing plans to start using portions of site A within the next <br />six months for additional seasonal and overflow parking, expanded yard storage (for programs <br />such as leaf recycling and the native plant nursery), and a secondary access road for heavy equip- <br />ment. Site B was acquired for a future Fleet Facility—including a new fueling station designed <br />to essential facility seismic requirements—and additional vehicle storage facilities. It will be <br />critical for the efficient use of these sites to maintain connection to the existing Public Works <br />yard and facilities. <br /> <br />Patrol Facility Cost Models <br />Several cost models were developed to compare the relative costs for a generic Patrol Facility <br />built on sites with different characteristics such as size, land cost, density, and parking configura- <br />tion. The costs for a patrol facility ranged from approximately $26 million for a low density <br />facility outside of downtown to almost $39 million as part of City Hall. <br /> <br />Separate cost models were developed to accommodate parking for staff personally owned vehi- <br />cles (POV). Two parking models were developed: one for a structured parking garage and one <br />for a surface parking lot. Both models included land, lighting, and security considerations. <br />Costs for POV parking ranged from $4 million for surface parking outside of downtown to $14 <br />million for a structured parking garage downtown. See Attachment E regarding Patrol Facility <br />cost models. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />