Memorandum

City of Lawrence

Police Department

 

TO:     Tom Markus, City Manager

          Gregory C. Burns Jr., Chief of Police

FROM: Melinda Harger, Assistant Director of Utilities

Anthony Brixius, Police Captain       

DATE: August 15, 2018

RE:     Police Facility Architectural Services

CC:     Diane Stoddard, Assistant City Manager

          Casey Toomay, Assistant City Manager

          Brandon McGuire, Assistant to the City Manager

          Scott McCullough, Planning and Development Director

          Bryan Kidney, Finance Director

          Derek Rodgers, Director Parks and Recreation

 

Background

The City of Lawrence has been considering a new police facility since 2011 when the facility needs assessment began. In 2016, the City Commission approved $1.5 million dollars in the 2017 CIP for design and professional services of a police facility. The Police Department presented to the City Commission a phased approach to the police facility in April 2017. During the 2018 budget process, the City Commission approved a 1.25 mill levy increase, which included $17 million to construct Phase I of a police facility. In September 2017, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 7222, authorizing the construction of the new police facility and the issuance of general obligation bonds for up to $18.5 million, not including financing costs. City Commission selected 5100 Overland Drive as the site for the police facility in December 2017.

 

In May 2018, the City Commission approved Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) as the construction method for Phase I of the police facility and authorized staff to advertise a Request for Proposal for design services.         

 

Project Funding

The total approved project budget for planning, design, and construction is $18.5 million. The primary goal of Phase I is to construct a new facility that eliminates police use of the Law Enforcement Center (LEC) while developing a site master plan with a multi-phase building approach to eventually move all divisions of the department to the new campus. The City Commission’s decision to use CMAR as the delivery method allows staff flexibility to make adjustments to the project based on accurate cost estimates provided at various stages of design. This flexibility will help deliver a project within budget. Staff will work with the design team and the construction manager to determine how to best meet the intended project goals and objectives. For additional flexibility, the resolution of intent will allow the option to use some project funds for renovations and repairs within the Investigations and Training Center (ITC) depending on the functions that remain within that building.

 

Architectural and Engineering Services

A Request for Proposals (RFP) for architectural and engineering services was developed outlining the project scope and the Expertise-Driven Project Delivery (XPD) process. The scope of work for the professional services agreement includes review and update of the 2012 Space Needs Assessment, site survey, geotechnical report, site plan, rezoning, platting, traffic data, public presentations, master plan for facility and park, and construction documents that incorporate architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, civil, landscape architectural, telecom, and security design services.

 

The RFP stated the importance of a design that considers energy efficiency, life-cycle costs, best management practices, low impact development, and sustainable design elements.

 

Consultant Selection Process

A six-member selection committee reviewed the proposals and scored each firm’s proposals on criteria listed below using the XPD process. Scores were totaled, and firms were ranked by best score in order to select the design consultant. Consultants who submitted proposals included Gould Evans, Hoefer Wysocki, Police Facility Design Group, and TreanorHL. The committee members were: Anthony Brixius, Police Captain; Casey Cooper, Police Captain; Melinda Harger, Assistant Director of Utilities; Mark Hecker, Assistant Director of Parks & Recreation; Amanda Sahin, Transportation Engineer; and Diane Stoddard, Assistant City Manager.

 

The first phase of the XPD process focused on each consultant’s ability to differentiate itself from competing proposals. Consultants were evaluated based upon the ability to identify, prioritize, and minimize project risks, add differential value to the project, show a high level of past performance on behalf of other clients and similar projects, and propose a highly-qualified project team. 

 

Proposals were prioritized based on the categories described below with only shortlisted consultants participating in the interviews. The execution methodology, risk assessment, and value assessment were evaluated and scored without disclosing the names of firms or individuals to the selection committee. The cost proposal and past performance surveys were evaluated numerically.

 

Evaluation Category

Maximum Points

Cost Proposal

10

Execution Methodology

10

Risk Assessment

20

Value Assessment

10

Past Performance Surveys (project team personnel)

05

Narratives of Related Experience

10

Interviews of Project Team Personnel (short-listed)

35

Maximum Total Points Possible:

100

 

Hoefer Wysocki was the consultant with the highest overall score and was selected to move forward into the second phase of the XPD process, which is the clarification phase. A clarification phase is provided to ensure the selected consultant had properly addressed and accounted for all aspects of the scope in their proposal. The selected consultant was required to clearly present their implementation plan for the project, coordinate risk minimization solutions, clarify value assessment options, and identify specific support and resources that will be requested from the City throughout the project. 

 

After the contract is awarded, post-award performance metrics will be measured continuously throughout the contract duration. The awarded consultant will be required to monitor and track all risks (actual and potential deviations to the contract) on a regular basis.

 

Hoefer Wysocki’s design team has extensive knowledge and experience working on public safety planning and design projects, including numerous facilities in the Kansas City area. Hoefer Wysocki designed the Leawood Justice Center, Overland Park Dispatch, and Shawnee Justice Center as well as the Metro Patrol and South Patrol Campus in Kansas City, Missouri. This local experience provides City staff with opportunities to view various building materials and layouts with the project team early in the design phase. Past clients provided positive recommendations on Hoefer Wysocki and stated the success of their projects was related to Hoefer Wysocki’s guidance and management from planning through completion of construction on their facilities.

 

Design Fee and Budget Breakdown

City staff negotiated a fee with Hoefer Wysocki of $1,348,800 for their services for the project.    The design fee represents 7.9% of the total project budget. The fee breakdown is as follows:

 

Phase/Task

Maximum Fee

Pre-Design (survey, planning submittals)*

$75,300

Pre-Design (program verification, geotechnical)

$51,500

Schematic Design*

$194,400

Design Development*

$259,200

Construction Documents*

$518,400

Reimbursables*

$38,000

Park Master Plan

$42,000

Telecom and Security Design

$32,000

Third-Party Cost Estimating

$18,000

Sanitary Sewer Relocation Allowance

$20,000

FF&E Procurement Allowance

$100,000

Maximum Fee (billed based on actual costs):

$1,348,800

          *Basic A/E Design Services per City’s A/E Design Fee Guidelines

 

Comparing the design fee to the City’s design fee policy indicates the recommended fee is appropriate given the size of the project, complexity of the work, planning related activities, the extent of public meetings, multiple phases, and alternative bid options. Basic architectural and engineering (A/E) design services add up to a fee of $1,085,300, which is 6.8% of the construction budget and below the guideline of 6.99% design fee for projects over $5 million.

 

Within the $18.5 million project budget, $1.15 million has been reserved for construction phase services and contingency as well as direct expenditures, including special inspections, equipment purchases, and potential renovation and repairs at the ITC. This provides a construction budget of $16 million for the Phase 1 facility. The City’s future agreement with a construction manager will be limited to this $16 million budget for management and construction of the facility.

 

Budget Description

Budget Amount

Design Phase Services

$1,350,000

Construction Phase Services & Direct Expenditures

$650,000

Project Contingency

$500,000

Construction

$16,000,000

Total Project Budget

$18,500,000

 

Percent for Art

City Resolution No. 6774 provides the authority, but does not mandate the requirement, for the City to spend up to 2% of the cost of certain eligible capital projects on art in public places projects. The Lawrence Cultural Arts Commission makes recommendations to the City Commission pursuant to the resolution and their guidelines and policies.  The City has followed a practice on larger capital projects of modifying the percentage amount (downward) to reflect budget priorities and coordinating any artwork acquisition/installation with the design of the project.  Staff recommends a similar practice is followed for this project and would anticipate the Cultural Arts Commission, architect, and City staff meet during the design process to forward a recommendation to the City Commission on this item. The 2019 CIP included a budget of $340,000 for art related to the Police Facility – Phase 1 project.

 

Construction Manager at Risk Services

City Commission approved the CMAR project delivery method for the Police Facility Phase 1 after finding it’s in the public interest and provides the best value for the project. The Police Facility project is somewhat complex having multiple phases and a park included in the planning process. The facility has unique user needs and technical complexities making input from a contractor early in the process advantageous for both cost and design. Using the CMAR project delivery method provides early collaboration between the design team and the construction manager, includes a GMP contract with open book costing, and maintains a competitive bid process for significant elements of the project.

 

Staff recommends issuing the RFP for CMAR services and utilizing the same XPD process for procurement and post-award metrics. RFP advertisement by early September will allow staff to return to the City Commission with the CMAR award recommendation in November and facilitate construction manager involvement starting in schematic design.

 

Project Schedule

Pre-Design

Aug 2018 – Nov 2018

RFP, Selection, and Award of CMAR services

Aug 2018 – Nov 2018

Schematic Design & Design Development

Nov 2018 – Mar 2019

Construction Documents & Building Permits

Mar 2019 – Jul 2019

Construction (Early Site Bid Package)

Begin in May/Jun 2019

Facility Construction

Jul 2019 – Aug 2020

 

Recommendation

Authorize the City Manager to execute an Architectural Services Agreement with Hoefer Wysocki, in the amount of $1,348,800, for design services for the Police Facility Phase 1, Project PD1803CIP.

 

Authorize staff to proceed with issuing an RFP for Construction Manager at Risk Services for the Police Facility Phase 1 Project PD1803CIP.