MEMO TO: Members of the City Council
FROM: Mayor Angela Birney
SUBJECT:
title
Envisioning the Future of the Redmond Senior Center Building
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION
recommendation
Update on community outreach and options for Redmond Senior Center Building
body
II. DEPARTMENT CONTACTS
Carrie Hite Parks and Recreation Director 425-556-2326
Dave Juarez Public Works Director 425-556-2326
Rachel Van Winkle Parks and Recreation Deputy Director 425-556-2334
Eric Dawson Senior Engineer 425-556-2867
Lisa Maher Communication Manager 425-556-2427
III. DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND
The Redmond Senior Center building is currently closed due to exterior structural issues. In order to mitigate the impact to seniors, all programs have been relocated to alternative locations, including City Hall and Redmond Community Center at Marymoor Village. A complete update was given to the City Council on December 3, 2019 and can be viewed at this link: <https://redmond.granicus.com/player/clip/1497?view_id=5>.
The Redmond Senior Center mid-life improvements project was identified in the Facilities Strategic Management Plan that was adopted by Council in January 2019, and additionally through the Future of Redmond’s Community Centers stakeholder involvement process. Based on these recommendations, the City has identified the Redmond Senior Center in the 6-year Capital Investment Program for renovation (mid-life repairs and maintenance). The City has set aside $15M for this work which includes the exterior envelope and mechanical systems.
The Redmond Senior Center recently underwent an exterior building evaluation in August 2019 in preparation for long term maintenance and repairs outlined in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). This evaluation conducted by a contracted structural engineering firm confirmed extensive structural damage to the exterior walls and substantial impact to both the lateral and gravity systems. As a result of this evaluation, and at the recommendation of the consultant (Swenson Say Faget), the City closed and vacated the Redmond Senior Center on September 5, 2019, to allow for the ongoing investigation of the building interior, exterior, and roof. Only limited entry for building inspectors and engineers has been permitted to conduct further assessment.
Parks staff have relocated programs, rentals, and events to alternate locations to minimize impact to customers and visitors. Senior activities are held at City Hall in various rooms, the Public Safety Building, the Redmond Community Center at Marymoor Village, the Redmond Teen Center, the Art Studio at Grass Lawn Park, and St. Jude’s church. The City has been able to continue most of the services for seniors at these various locations.
The City’s construction team contracted with HDR Engineering, Inc. to further evaluate the internal and external integrity of the building, roof, roof structure, roof framing. and sheathing integrity. In addition, the scope of work for HDR included a cost estimate for renovation and a recommendation based on their experience and expertise. The final report was submitted to the City on November 25, 2019.
The consultant (HDR Engineering, Inc.) investigation found extensive water damage in the exterior walls. The damage was not evident without multiple investigation openings cut into the tile, stucco, roof, and interior walls under HDR’s direction. The roof and interior wall structures are not damaged. The water intrusion comes from the wall penetrations (windows, vents, doors, trim, etc.) and caused significant damage to the structural stud walls and the plywood sheathing behind the stucco and tile. The consultant determined this damage compromises the safety of the building and it should not be occupied until all structural repairs can be made to the entire building. There is no way to make partial repairs to the building and re-occupy while remaining repairs are taking place. The consultant also determined the cost of the structural repairs combined with the cost of the renovation already programmed in the 2019-2024 CIP are comparable to the cost of a new building and suggested a new building warrants further consideration.
Staff presented to the City Council and received direction to seek community input about the future of the Redmond Senior Center.
Community Outreach
The City has contracted with EnviroIssues to conduct community education and outreach to provide input about the City’s options. The City has also contracted with Patano Studio Architecture to help develop concepts and costing for each option. Both of these efforts will stay within a three-month timeline (January -March 2020) to bring recommendations to the City Council.
The Redmond Community Stakeholder group, originally engaged to complete the Redmond Community Centers Report that was adopted in 2017, has been re-activated to help guide this process and make recommendations to the City Council. In addition, the City has engaged the Senior Center Advisory Committee to assist in the public engagement strategy.
In the December staff report to the City Council, four options for consideration were identified. Patano Studio Architecture and EnviroIssues are working with the City to help shape the conversation with the community and explore these options:
1. Repair the existing senior center building
2. Demolish and build a similar senior center (same square footage)
3. Demolish and build a community center (may increase square footage) with dedicated spaces for seniors and additional spaces for all ages.
4. Demolish, partner, and build a mixed-use building with a community center and collaborating partner space.
Marketing materials and strategies to inform the public about meetings and how to engage include: posters, postcards, fact sheets, flyers, senior newsletter, social media advertisements, digital newsletters, emails to partner organizations and meetings will be streamed on Facebook Live. Following are key dates:
• Website updated with Project Information Ongoing
• Survey Launched January 7 - January 27
• Press Release to Community January 10
• Stakeholder Conference Call January 10
• Senior Advisory Committee January 16
• Senior Outreach/Bytes Café January 16
• Open Public Meeting January 23
Planned:
• Open House Public Meeting February 10
• Survey Launch February 10
• City Council Study Session February 11
• Stakeholder Meeting February 24
• City Council PHS Committee March 3
• City Council Study Session March 24
• City Council Business Meeting April 21
Alternative Project Delivery
In preparation of a Council policy decision in April, staff have been researching options to expedite either the renovation or rebuild of this valued community space. Design and construction of the selected option could consider alternative delivery methods such as Design-Build (DB) or General Contractor-Construction Manager (GC-CM). In order to opt for an alternative delivery method, there is a state approval process that needs to be implemented. The City could begin the process of approval parallel to the community engagement process and prior to the Council policy direction. Once a policy decision is made, this would give the city a jump start on either the renovation or the build process.
Design-Bid-Build
The traditional delivery method for public works construction projects is Design-Bid-Build. In Redmond, this has consisted of hiring an architect or engineer to prepare the design and bid documents. Once the bid documents are complete, the City solicits bids for the construction work and awards the project to the lowest responsive bidder.
The advantages of this process include industry familiarity with the time-tested process and the award of the project to the responsive bidder with the lowest bid price. However, in this process there is little contractor involvement in the design and the designers must make assumptions about how the project might be constructed. Contractor involvement can be utilized to review plans and project scope, but many contractors are resistant to participate due to concerns of not being able to bid the project. At the award process, if the low responsive bidder meets the minimum qualifications, they are awarded the project and there is no opportunity to consider other bidders that may have better qualifications.
Design-Build
One alternative delivery method that is common locally is Design-Build (DB). In the DB delivery method, the owner agency prepares preliminary design documents, usually about 30% complete, and solicits proposals from Design-Builders to complete the design and construct the project. The proposal includes the contractor’s design and construction qualifications and a price for the project. The owner considers both qualifications and price in their decision on whom to award the project.
The primary advantage of DB is the project risk generally shifts from the owner to the design-builder. Since the design-builder completes the design, they are responsible for design conflicts and constructability issues. There may also be an acceleration of the project as the design-builder can begin certain construction elements if they are finalized early in their design process.
The risk of DB is that the owner agency must have a solid decision on the project’s end goals at the 30% design level, and any changes are costly. Another risk is that the owner agency relinquishes control of the design team to the contractor. If changes are required, the contractor’s design team has often moved on to other projects and it can be difficult getting them back on board to design the changes. Sound Transit uses DB for the current and future phases of light rail through Redmond.
General Contractor-Construction Manager
General Contractor-Construction Manager (GC-CM) is a hybrid between Design-Bid-Build and Design-Build. GC-CM utilizes a contractor as a member of the design team who works cooperatively with the architect and the owner throughout design. The owner hires both the architect and the contractor and retains control of the team throughout the project. The architect is hired in a qualifications-based process as would be done in traditional Design-Bid-Build. Hiring of the contractor is similar to DB in that the contractor is hired based on a combination of price and qualifications. However, the difference from DB is that instead of the contractor assuming control of the project at 30% design completion, the owner agency retains control and the contractor is a design team member until the design is complete. This fosters cooperation within the team, and the designer benefits from the contractor’s knowledge of scheduling, cost estimating, materials availability, and constructability.
At approximately 90% design, the owner agency negotiates a Maximum Allowable Construction Cost (MACC) with the GC-CM. If a MACC cannot be agreed upon, the City would always have the option to issue a bid for a different contractor. This isn’t ideal, but it is an option under this alternative method. Once the MACC is finalized, the design documents are completed and construction begins. Any construction costs over and above the MACC are the responsibility of the contractor. If the final construction cost is less than the MACC, the owner and GC-CM share the savings.
The current City Hall was built with a version of GC-CM
Preliminary Findings
Staff have considered the three delivery methods described above and believe GC-CM warrants further consideration. GC-CM includes these benefits:
• Contractor expertise on the design team, contributing knowledge on scheduling, cost estimating, constructability.
• City retains control of the design - for a project such as the RSC, the design process will be fluid and will adapt as user needs are uncovered and evaluated. The City needs to be able to consider many options as the design progresses and the contractor’s input would be valuable in evaluating those options. GC-CM will would work well with any of the options currently under consideration for the RSC.
• Qualifications based selection - evaluating both price and qualifications helps ensure that GC-CM projects are of high-quality construction and include appropriate materials and workmanship for the desired result.
• Reduced schedule - the designer and contractor work together to determine if any construction elements can be moved forward and completed early. Additionally, the contractor’s scheduling and construction expertise can help the design team balance schedule needs with construction needs and determine the best final result that can be built with the project’s schedule requirements.
Next Steps
1. Analyze community outreach data.
2. Support stakeholders with a recommendation for the City Council.
3. Create potential concepts and costing for the City Council consideration.
4. Recommend a project delivery method to the City Council. If the recommendation is for GC-CM, the following steps would be followed:
• Council holds public hearing on GC-CM to solicit public comment.
• Council would then authorize this project to pursue permission to utilize GC-CM from the Construction Project Advisory Review Board (CPARB).
• Staff prepares an application and submits to CPARB. Staff attends a CPARB meeting and presents a case for the City to use GC-CM.
• CPARB approval and staff solicits contractor proposals.
5. Council discussions on March 3, March 24, with possible policy decision in April 2020.
IV. PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS HELD
There have been email communications sent to Council throughout this process.
• City Council staff report: September 17, 2019
• City Council staff report: December 3, 2019
• Mayors Weekly: January 10, 2020
• Mayors Weekly: January 24, 2020
V. IMPACT
A. Service/Delivery:
In an effort to maintain service to senior participants, City Hall first floor has been activated and activities have been expanded to the Redmond Community Center at Marymoor Village, Grasslawn Pavilion, Redmond Teen Center, and the Redmond Public Safety Building. Some interest groups and drop-in activities have been discontinued or are meeting off site due to space restrictions. These activities include Chorus, Just Reminiscing Band, Pipe Organ Group, Sophisticated Swing Band, Computer Corner, and Billiards. Holiday events have been combined to a December 4 celebration at City Hall. Lunch program participants are being directed to Bellevue and Kirkland on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday. On Thursdays, Redmond hosts lunch at the Bytes Café. The monthly Indian Lunch program has been relocated to St. Jude’s Church. Space rentals for large groups have been redirected to Redmond Community Center, the Public Safety Training Room and other internal spaces. Staff cannot accommodate all large rental requests at this time. A pilot transportation service started in January and takes seniors to Bellevue for lunch once a week and to the Redmond Community Center once a week. Staff is monitoring the lunch and transportation program for possible expansion. Staff estimates that 80% of Redmond Senior Center activities have been preserved at new locations.
B. Fiscal Note:
There is currently $15M set aside for renovation of the Senior Center. This original scope of work includes replacement of all exterior cladding, roof/coping/flashing, windows, HVAC replacement, seismic retrofits, electrical and plumbing repairs, and a fire alarm upgrade.
VI. ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
No recommendation, briefing only.
VII. TIME CONSTRAINTS
Stakeholders and staff will bring back community outreach data on March 24, 2020.
VIII. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Envisioning the Future of the Redmond Senior Center Building- PowerPoint Presentation
Attachment B: Community Priorities for the Future of Redmond’s Community Centers, April 2017