item 9.1 - accommodations study sub-committee meeting ... · appendix ‘a’ to march 18,2002...

APPENDIX ‘A’ TO MARCH 18,2002 ACCOMMODATIONS STUDY SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT

COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENTDesign and Construction Division

.

Report to: Chair and Members of Submitted by: Domenic Lunar-do, Directorthe Accommodations Design and ConstructionSubcommittee Rom D’Angelo, Acting Director

Corporate Buildings & RealEstate

Date: March 12,2002 Prepared by: Domenic Lunardo 646-3982

SUBJECT: City Hall Accommodations and Renovations ReviewPhase IA - Review of Options(CS02017b) (City Wide and Ward 2)

[ RECOii/lMENDA?lON: 1

a) That the verbal presentation from staff with respect to the City Hall Accommodations,Review of Options, be received.

b) That, the comments received from the Committee be referred to staff for considerationin the review and analysis of options as per the Phase IA work plan.

J&b

Domenic Lunardo, Director,Design and Construction

Rom D’Angelo, Acting Dir-ectorCorporate Buildings & Real Estate

A verbal presentation will be made by staff and MHPM Project Managers which willsummarize the options identified in May of 2001 as well as incorporate the commentsreceived from the Special Committee of the Whole meeting of March 4,2002.

WJUJlzG I : Gity Hall Accommodation and Renovations Review Page 2 of 4,Phase IA - Review of Options(CS00217b)(City Wide and Ward 2)

The purpose of this report is to summarize and consolidate all the information received bystaff and provide members of the Accommodation Subcommittee with a verbal presentationfor input and confirmation of the options and schedule for Phase 1A.

In addition, staff has identified a schedule whereby interim status reports on the options willbe presented to the Accommodation Subcommittee prior to completing the Phase IAanalysis.

This report has City Wide implications and specifically Ward 2.

At the meeting of March 6.2002, that with respect to the Award of Contract Cl I-52-01,Request for Proposal, Project Management Services for the Renovations of Hamilton CityHall, Council approved, in part:

-a) “That $150,000, (including 7% GST, contingency, disbursements and specialityconsultanfs allowance), be awarded to MPHM Project Managers for Phase 1Abased on the Request for Proposal (RPP), Contract Cl l-52-07 process. fl

b) “That the terms of reference for Phase IA (as identified in recommendafion ‘a ‘3,include buf not be limited to the following: . . .

i. Analysis of alternafive options for the renovations of Hamilton City Hall;ii. Cost, schedule and operational impacts of above noted alternatives and

options;iii. Analysis of immediafely health and safety concerns including cosfs and

potential action steps;iv. Co-ordination of design options for the redevelopment of the Cify Hall

forecourt with fhe redesign of Commonwealth Square, Main Street adjacent toCity Hall, the grounds surrounding fhe School Board, Hamilton Place andConvention Cenfre properties and the district heating initiatives for thedowntown area.”

In addition, a Special Committee of the Whole meeting was held on Monday March 4,2002.At this meeting, staff received a number of comments from the Committee.

Staff has reviewed the direction of Council on March 6,2002 and the comments receivedfrom the Committee of the Whole meeting of March 4,2002 and provide a verbalpresentation, which consists of the following:

Review of Initial Options

A review of options initially presented to the accommodations subcommittee in May2002, refer to attachment IA and. 1 B. The tables in attachments IA and 1 Bare annualcash flow schedule for each original option amortized over 10 and 20 years.

i’l

SUBJECT: City J-fall Accommodation and Renovations Review Page 3 of 4Phase IA - Review of Options(CSOO217b)(City Wide and Ward 2)

Consolidated Options

A table entitled: “CXv Hall Accommodation Options”, refer to attachment 2. (Thisattachment will be available prior to the Accommodation Subcommittee meeting). Thepurpose of this table is to identify the options that will be evaluated during the Phase 1 Pof the project as identified in the above noted March 6,2002 Council direction. :ltincludes the original options presented in 2001 as well as a summary of options raisedfrom the special Committee of the Whole meeting of March 4,2002, refer to attachment2

The above noted table is a draft for discussion at this time and includes preliminaryestimated costs and advantages and disadvantages. As part of the verbal presentationto the Accommodation Subcommittee, staff will be seeking direction with’ respect tofocusing the scope of work by confirming and or potentially deleting options.

Work Plan

A preliminary work plan is also provided indicating a schedule for Phase lA, refer toattachment 3.

Therefore the purpose of this report is to summarize and consolidate all the informationreceived by staff and provide members of the Accommodation Subcommittee with a verbalpresentation for input and confirmation of the options and schedule for Phase 1A.

The analysis of alternatives will be developed as a result of comments and input providedby staff. The analysis will be completed as part of the terms of reference as identified inPhase 1A of this project.

There are no financial, staffing and legal implications at this time.

SUBJECT: City Hall Accommodation and Renovations Review Page 4 of 4Phase IA - Review of Options(CS00217b)(City Wide and Ward 2)

The following departments and agencies were consulted in the preparation of this report:

= Design and Construction Division, Community Services Department= Corporate Buildings and Real Estate, Community Services Department= Purchasing Division, Finance and Corporate Services= Finance Division, Finance and Corporate Services

The recommendation in this report is consistent with the objectives of Vision 2020 and theapproved document entitled “Putting People First: A New Land Use Plan for DowntownHamilton.” This report is consistent with the following specific Vision 2020 goals.

= Local Economv: To promote Hamilton-Wentworth’s environment as a desirable place tolive and work;

= Land Use in the Urban Area: To redevelop Hamilton’s central core as the regionalcentre;

n Communitv well-beina and Caoacitv Buildina: To develop cultural institutions, publicfacilities, and parks and open space which inspire community pride and a sense ofplace.

Attachments

IA. Original - APPENDIX G - Annual Cash Flow Schedule (IO years)IB. Original - APPENDIX G - Annual Cash Flow Schedule (20 years)2. City Hall Accommodation Options (Draft) (to be provided prior to the Subcommittee

meeting)3. Phase IA preliminary schedule (to be provided prior to the Subcommittee meeting)4. Minutes of Committee of the Whole report 02-010, Monday March 4.2002.

Ca ItallP-Interest

APPENDIX G Annual Cash Flow Schedule (IO Years)Attachment ?B .m

OPTIONS .I0 YEARAMORTIZATION

costsRate‘ofYearly Payments-Originalc o s t sSite cbstsof Years for Silt-3

Status Quo A 0 C D E F F lSlahIl auoh Rem Rm/Replrc~Some ’ Renal New Leased Renovrte 6 New RenolAddlUon KkWJ* New 6uildlnQ Lsase New Bulldino

Bulldingr Sph%0.0621 0.0621 0.0621 a

$24.170.0030IO 10

$24.7$6.704.000 t6,7

I Tower I I I1.0621 0.0621( 0.06211 0.062Ij 0.0621

I Yearly Cash Outlays

Operating! Capital Cash FlowsBuilding Financing CostsExterior Financing CostsLeasehold Financing CostsTOTALFINANCINGCOSTS

($3.316.679) ($3.399.013) (63,409.991) (83.415,480)($919,943)

($6,544.874) ($7,028,550)($920,766) ($920.766)

($7.293,400) $0($920,766) ($2.095395)

(34.236.6;)($342,920)

($2.095.305)(8306,437)

($2,095,395)($600.425)

($4.682.609) ($4,727,194) ($5.035671) (510.640.2& (.s9,123.0~) ($0.388.7::):iso

Operating Costs(Gwned Buildings)Facility RenewalExisting Leasing CostsAdditional Lea&gEtL Larva mvenue (Sconsy Cmck~50,000x$8ncl)

TOTALONGOINGCOSTS

($3.429,206) ($2,430,350) ($1.922.936) ($1,768,093)($704.325)

($2.886.148) ($2.658.403)($533.775) ($387,141)

($2,637,489)($351,000) ($844,685)

($557.000)

($746.152)($573.525)

($678.448)($572.685)

($678,448) ($188.400) ($188.400) ($188,400) $0(S85.OOOy

f

($878.136) ($1,570,704)S O

(S660,5OO)ii :Fl

$0

($4.520.7::) ($4.568.2:)

(811,460.000)

($4,879,773) ($3.108.7& ($3,710,233) ($3.420,418) ($3.210.1~~) ($12.102.0&

CASHlNFLOW(OUTFLOW)YearI ($0,116,305) (50.163.406) ($0.205.423) ($0,234,464)2 ($0.116.305)

($14.350.601) (812544.373)($0,183,408)

($12,508.940)($0,205,423) ($8,234.464) (814,350,501) ($12.544.373)

($12,102.000~

3 ($0.116.305) ($0.183.408)($12,508.040)

($9295.423) ($8.234,464) .4

($14,350,501) ($12,544,373)($12.102.000~

(90.118.305)($12.508.040)

(SO.183.408) ($9295.423) (888234,484)($12.102.000)

($14.350.501)5 ($0.116.395)

($12.544,373)($9,183,408)

(tl2.508,040)($0.205,423)

($12.102.000)($8,234,464)

($0,116.395)($14,359.601)

6 ($0.183.408)($12.544.373) (.Sl2,508.040)

($9,295,423) ($8,234,464) (%14,350,501) ($12.544,373) ($12,508.040)($12,102.000~

7 ($0.118.305, ($0.183.408) ($9295.423) ($8.234.464) ($14,350,501)(812.102.000)

($12,544,373)8 ($0.118,305) (fO.183.408)

(SI2.508.040)($0.205.423) ($8,234,464)

($12.102.000)($14,350.501)

9 ($0.116,305)($12,544,373) (Sl2.508,040) ($12,102,b00)

($0,183,408) ($0.205,423) ($8,234,484) ($14.350.501)10 ($9.116.305)

($12.544.373) ($12,508.940)($0.183,408) (89,205.423)

($12,102.000)($8,234.464)

T O T A L G R O S S O U T F L O W($14.350.501)

($91,163.047)($12.544,373)

f($91,834,080)

(tl2,598.049)($92.054,228) ($82,344,640)

($12.102.000($143,505,014) ($125.443,727) ($125,980.400) (t121.020.000~

NNUALIZEDPROPERTYTAXIMPACT I 3.51%1 3.63%1 3.56Kj 3.17%1 5.52r.l 4 .8231 4.85%1 4.85%

3/12/02 P a g e l o f 3 Appendix G

The New City of HamiltonCity Hall Accommodation Options MHPM Project Managers Inc.

/DRAFTpnachmey 2 March 15,2002

I I

Options’ Description Capital Cost Net Present Advantages Disadvantages Rating of(2001!q2 Value: Options3

10 years I20 years’

Status Renovate City Hall as per Trow $34,576,167 $70,560,515 Lowest capital cost No provision for improved

Quo recommendations, plus: $91,163,837 Maintains downtown City Hall workspace environment forLimited exterior site improvements location staff

Significant disturbance to staffand functions duringrenovations

A As Status Quo plus: $40,025,687 $ 7 1,079,195 Maintains downtown City Hall Significant disturbance to staff 1 6New furniture $92,449,5 17 location and functions duringUse of all existing municipal renovationsfacilities Continued dispersion of Cityl Leasehold improvements staff across multiple sites

B As Option A plus: $37,086,167 $71,946,185 Maintains downtown City Hall Significant disturbance to staff 5Dispose of: $90,06 1,056 location and functions duringAncaster Town Hall renovationsDundas Town Hall Continued dispersion of CityStoney Creek City Hall staff across multiple sites

C As Option B plus: $41,863,327 $63,734,408 Maintains downtown City Hall Significant disturbance to staff 4Dispose of: $78,957,725 locationFlamborough Town Hall Lowest 10 year total cost

and functions /duringrenovations

Glansbrook Town Hall Lowest 20 year total cost Continued dispersion of CityHamiton Eaton’s Centre staff across multiple sitesParking Summer’s LaneAdditional leased space, leasehold <improvements and furniture

D As Status Quo, plus $82,363,927 $111,141,942 Maintains downtown City Hall Highest Capital Cost 3Construct a new office tower on $125,493,542 locationexisting City Hall site Provides all requiredComplete exterior site improvements accommodation at existing CityDispose of municipal facilities as Hall siteOption C No incremental leasing costs

Additional on-site parkingNew tower used as swing spaceduring City Hall reno

Options’ Description Capital Cost Net Present Advantages Disadvantages Rating

(2001%)* Value: of10 years Options”

20 years2E As Status Quo, plus $71,656,327 $97,092,922 Maintains downtown City Hall No additional parking 2

Construct an addition above the 2”d $111,320,771 locationfloor of City Hall Provides all requiredComplete exterior site improvements accommodation at existing CityDispose of municipal facilities as Hall siteOption C No incremental leasing costs

New tower used as swing spaceduring City Hall reno

F Demolish the existing City Hall, and $73,794,327 $97,515,340 Maintains downtown City Hall Additional parking 1

build a new City Hall building and new $111,020,472 locationparking garage at the existing City Hall Provides a modem, purpose-builtsite, plus City Hall facilityComplete exterior site improvementsDispose of municipal facilities asOption C

Fl Lease New Building $5,374,327 $93,668,976 May contradict approved$145,713,638 provisions of Land Use Plan for

Downtown Hamilton if remotefrom Downtown.

I Highest 20 year cost

G Construct new City Hall on new site, $61,625,800 $88,519,353 May contradict approved

and dispose of existing City Hall $98,85 1,945 provisions of Land Use Plan for

facility Downtown Hamilton if remotefrom Downtown.

yges:, . “Options ,” “Capital Cost”, and “Net Present Value: 10 years, 20 years ” as per Accommodation Review for City of Hamilton Facilities, 2001,

81052-1000

Attachment 3CITY OF HAMILTONRENOVATION OF CITY HALL

PHASE IA SCHEDULI81052.307i

12Mar-O:

I D Task Name S t a r t Finish1 Pro ject Manager Appoin ted a t Counc i l Meet ing Wed Feb 27, ‘02 Wed Feb 27, ‘022 Meet with Mayor & Committee of the Whole Frl Mar 1, ‘02 Fri Mar 1, ‘023 Develop Alternative Implementation Options Thu Feb 28, ‘02’ t&n ktar 18, ‘024 In format ion Gather ing Thu Feb 28, ‘02 h;lon Mar 11, ‘0213 Al ternat ive Implementa t ion Opt ions Mon Mar 11, ‘02 Mon Mar 18, ‘0224 MEET WITH ACCOMMODA T/ON SUB-COMMITTEE Mon Mar 18, ‘02 Mon Mar 18, ‘0225 Presenta t ion o f A l te rna t ive Imp lementa t ion Opt ions Mon Mar 18, ‘02 Mon Mar 18, ‘0226 Ident i fy Opt ions fo r Deta i led Cons idera t ion Mon Mar 18, ‘02 Mon Mar 18, ‘0227 Analyze Selected Implementation Options Tue Mar 19, ‘02 Mon May 20, ‘0228 Fina l ize In format ion Gather ing Tue Mar 19, ‘02 Fri Mar 29, ‘0232 Eva lua te Se lec ted Imp lementa t ion Opt ions The alar 19 , ‘02 Fri’kpr 12, ‘6243 MEET WITH ACCOMMODATION SUB-COMMITTEE Mon Apr’i ! ? , ‘ 02 Mon’ Apr 15, ‘di4 4 Presentation of Draft Report Mon Apr 15, ‘02 Man Apr 15, ‘0245 Agree on Approved Options to be Presented to Councii M&I Air 1 k, ‘02

with Recommendation for Preferred Qptiont&n Apr .i 5, ‘02

46 Finalize Implementation Options for Submission to ~ork-kttke . iloi Ap; i 5, ‘02.̂

of the Wholevan May 20, ‘02

47 Final ize Repor t Mon Apr 15, ‘02 M o n M a y 8 , ‘6248 MEET WITH ACCOMMODATION SUB-COMMITTEE Mon May 8, ‘02 Mon May i& ‘di49 Presentation of Final Report Mon May6 , ‘ 02 Mon May& ‘Oi50 Approval o f F ina l Repor t Mon &lay 13, ‘02 ~ ““klon May 13, ‘0251 Ref ine Repor t on Implementat ion Opt ions for Commit tee o f the Tuk May 14, ‘02

WholeMdn t&y 20, ‘02

52 PRESENTATION TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FORAPPROVAL

Tue May 2 1, ‘ 02 Tue May 2 1, ‘ 02

‘02 1 Mar 3, ‘02 1 Mar 24. ‘02 1 Apr 14. ‘02 1 May 5, ‘02 ( May 26, ‘02

Page 1

Committee of the Whole

Attachment 4

---

REPORT 02410I:00 p.m.

Monday, March 4,2002Council ChambersHamilton City Hall

71 Main Street West, Hamilton

IPresent: Mayor R. Wade

Councillors A. Bain, 0. Braden, M. Caplan, C. Collins,F. D’Amico, L. Dilanni, M. Ferguson, A. Horwath, T.Jackson, 8. Kelly, M. McCarthy, S. Merulla, D.Mitchell, R. Powers

Absent with regrets: Councillor B. Morelli - City Business

Also Present: J. Rinaldo, Acting Cii ManagerR. Rossini, Acting for General Manager, Finance andCorporate ServicesG. Peaace, Acting General Manager, CommunityServicesR. Caterini, Deputy ClerkM. Gallagher, Co-ordinator, Council/Committee of theWhole

THE’ COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE PRESENTS REPORT 02-010 ANDRESPECTFULLY RECOMMENDS:

I. Renovations of Hamilton City Hall and Accotimodations Update(CSO2017a) (Ward 2 and City Wide)

(a) That report CSO2017a respecting Renovations of Hamilton City Halland Accommodations Update, be received;

Committee of the Whole -2- ReportO2-010 .

@)

03

w

(e)

(0

(9)

That comments received from this Special Committee of the Whole,respecting the renovation/accommodations issues at City Hall, bereferred to staff for inclusion in the analysis of alternative options asidentified in recommendation “2b” of the Committee of the WholeReport 02-007 as revised and approved by Council on February 27,2002;

That comments received from this Special Committee of the Wholerespecting the permanent relocation of ITS and Furniture andFurnishing be referred to staff for consideration during the 2002Capital Budget deliberations.

That comments received from this Special Committee of the Wholerespecting the interim landscape enhancements for the City Hallforecourt be referred to staff for report to the AccommodationSubcommittee meeting of March 18,2002.

That council recommit to staff exploring options for remedial repairsto city hall (indude costs);

That staff prepare an accommodation plan which addresses leasingof additional space in the downtown;

That staff further investigate private/public partnership options.

FOR THE INFORMATlON OF COUNCIL:

a) Declarations of Interest

None

b) Staff presentation

Oomenic Lunardo provided a power point presentation for members ofcouncil which outlined the following:

Purpose of the discussion - three discussion matters includingPhase IA - revisiting renovation/accommodation scenarios andoptions as it related to RFP process, costs, pros and cons,schedule, impact;Accommodation recommendations - items for consideration in 2002budget process;Interim Landscape Plan for Forecourt

The following comments were noted by Members of Council:

Council - March 6,2002

I Committee of the Whole 4% Report 02-010

Suggested New civic complex close to harbourExplore Railway lands - use and value of propertyExplore long term lease move into Jackson Square - maintainingonly the ceremonial aspects of City Hall and building a new CiiHall through time.Proactive rather than reactive year by year basisPrice tag - looking at a new city hall is unaffordable. - - - -40 million is too high, whittle number down - go to half or a quarter -of amountneed to deal with health and safety issuesstaff to explore purchase of space outside of this building - to see ifit is financially viablereview costs of purchasing in this area at a view of reducing costsBare minimum that needs to be pursued, conducive to a healthy -working environmentMinimum dollars for forecourt - i.e. health and safety repairs .Relocation of ITS to 6’ floor - where are they currently? Can we -wait a couple of months7600 employees to be bringing into city hall - are they in currentpositions somewhere? - total number of staff requiring a desk to dotheir job.What do we have in leased space in other area facility offices.Renovation/accommodation scenarios: can there be overlap .Staff to explore combination of options - consolidation, leasing,immediate repairs outlined on page 5,8 and 1 IDeal with repair immediate operational and buildings systems onlyReview the garage option againGo slow approach - do what needs to be done in an affordablemanner, but look outside the box - i.e. harbour, or locationdowntownDo what’s necessary to provide affordable outside ambianceInvite people to come in to vision with usHow many can be accommodated in garage - 150 peopleapproximatelyRepair immediate operational and building systems onlySet the reseweExplore the federal building optionDo what we can with this buildingOperational systems - some 15 or 20 year life span have beenreplacedStoney Creek Hydro building - can staff explore? Lease or sell atmarket rates.Where are the different departments and how much we are payingfor leases? - include leasehold improvements - staff to provide theinformation to council.If there are safety issues, they need to be addressed.

Council - March 6,2002

Committee of the Whole -4- Report 02-010 ,

When we first began discussions, finance accommodations byselling off excess properties. - explore surplus assets anddetermine what is needed to do day to day options and utilize otheroptions.We shouldnY forget that there are some efficiencies for movingforward - art gallery - board of education across the street - teamUP. -_.

Go slowly unless there is something physically wrong with thisbuilding.What are the throw-away costs?Explore leasing or purchasing - qualii office space in goodconditionExplore public/private partnerships - Understand the players outthere and what they may want to do for the redevelopment of thisfacilityOpen to a competitionWhat is in fact affordability? -Take a step backIf its less expensive to move everyone one have we explored theoption to class a office space in 2003?Have we explored any potential ten to twenty year leases? Staffadvised that we- have received unsol.icited proposals to date willingto negotiate a deal. No one has quoted a specific rate, butindicated that space is available.Do least expensive thing in the forecourt.Relocate IT to libraryDo minimum’renovations to make forecourt appropriate

The meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Mayor R. Wade

R. Caterini, Deputy ClerkMarch 4,2002

WARD 2 ANDCITY WIDEIMPLICATIONS

APPENDIX ‘6’ TO MARCH 18,2002 ACCOMMODATIONS STUDY SUB-- 1. . COMMITTEE MEETING REPORT

COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENTDesign and Construction Division

Report to: Chair and Members of Submitted by: Domenic Lunardo, Directorthe AccommodationsSubcommittee

Design and ConstructionBryan Shynal, Director ofParks

Date: March 8,2002 Prepared by: Domenic Lunardo 546-3982

SUBJECT: City Hall ForecourtInterim Landscape Enhancements(CSOO2028) (City Wide and Ward 2)

1 REC0MMENDATfQ.N: ,” 1

a) That, together with comments received from the Accommodations Subcommitteeand the Committee of the Whole, this report be received.

b) That Council endorse Concept “A” as the preferred conceptual design for theinterim landscape enhancements to the City Hall forecourt and that final approvalbe referred to the 2002 budget deliberations.

cl That the Cycling Championship organizers be requested to provide Staff with theplans and requirements for the staging area by April 30,2002.

t

LJn?Nti/

Domenic Lunardo, Director,Design and Construction

\ynal, Dirbctor of Parks

. . .

SUBJECT: City Hall ForecourtInterim Landscape Enhancements

Page 2 of 6

The purpose of this report is in response to the December 11, 2001 Council resolutionrequesting a report on improvements to the overall aesthetics of the City Hall forecourt.Options have been provided to address aesthetics, access and safety issues as apriority. New urban design features, recreational amenities and major infrastructureimprovements were considered to be premature given the immediate future .redevelopment plans for the forecourt area.

The following four options were identified and evaluated.

Option A: Soft Landscape EnhancementsOption B: Soft and Basic Hard Landscape EnhancementsOption C: Soft and Broader Hard Landscape EnhancementsOption D: Same as Option 3 with Enhancements to East Walk Area

Both capital and two-year operating cost impacts have been identified for each of theabove noted options. These costs are summarized in Table 1, below.

Based on the analysis of options, the requirement for a large open staging area for thecycling championships and minimizing potential “throw away” costs, option “A” has beenidentified as the preferred option for interim landscape enhancements. The totalestimated net cost for this option is $246,000 derived as follows:

Capital costs $230,000.00Two-year operating costs* $ 16,OOO.OOTotal $246,000.00* represents increase to base maintenance program costs

This report has City Wide implications and specifically Ward 2.

At the meeting of December I 1,2001, Council approved:

4 “That Staff be directed to report back to Committee of the Whole on renovationsto the forecourt of Hamilton City Hall;

b) That the report include a review of suggested beautification modifications suchas planting of trees, grass, fountain, ice rink.”

Based on the above noted direction staff proceeded with an assessment of the existingsite as well as identifying potential options for interim enhancements to the City Hallforecourt which could be implemented in 2002 and 2003 in time for the cyclingchampionships. The interim enhancements would remain in place until the final designof the forecourt is completed, (anticipated to be in 2004), as part of the. City Hallrenovations.

. . -


Page 3 of 6

The analysis section of this report provides detailed options, including capital costestimates and operating cost impacts for two years.

As part of the City Hall renovations project approximately three (3) million dollars hasbeen identified for the long term redevelopment of the forecourt. The re-development ofthe forecourt square is seen as part of a large “Civic Precinct” consistent with the City’s“Putting People First: The New Land Use Plan for Downtown Hamilton” document. Theredesign of this “Civic Precinct” includes Commonwealth Square, the streetscaperedevelopment of Main Street as well as the lands surrounding the School Board,Convention Centre, and Hamilton Place properties. Staff is currently in the process ofestablishing a design team with the above noted interest groups.

The analysis of this project consists of two parts. The first part involved the preparationof an existing site condition report that outlines key issues. The purpose of this initialanalysis is to summarize the existing site conditions and identify those areas orconditions that could be enhanced or improved in order to make the forecourt a morepresentable urban space during the World and Canadian Cycling Championshipsscheduled for 2003.

General Observations

The site consists primarily of hard landscape composed of asphalt, concrete and unitpavers across the main entrance of City Hall. The western portion of the groundsincludes a grove of mature trees generally in good condition. Staff note the followingobservations:

. Many areas have been paved with asphalt squares defined with concrete bands. Inmost areas the asphalt is cracking and the concrete is heaved.

. Unit pavers have also heaved creating localized low points and poor drainage areasm Light fixtures are in poor condition.9 Walls are generally in poor condition and in some cases wall face panels and caps

are falling off or have been reinstalled.n Hand railings require refinishingn Areas next to the building are devoid of vegetation.n Existing trees on the west side are in good condition, asphalt paving around trees is

not conducive to healthy tree growth.n Site furniture is substandard and requires replacement.

While it is recognized that the ultimate goal is to develop a new and comprehensivedesign for the forecourt, the recommendations in this report relate directly to creatingtemporary enhancements in the overall aesthetics of the site.

In this regard the solutions or recommendations in this report should .NOT beconsidered as the “best” or “final” solution towards the overall redevelopment of theforecourt. Emphasis in the interim solutions focus on aesthetics, access and safety, as

. -

SUBJECT: City Hall Forecourt Page 4 of 6Interim Landscape Enhancements

well as minimizing any potential conflicts or costs with the future redevelopment of thesquare. Therefore, major urban design considerations, recreation or infrastructureimprovements to the forecourt were considered premature at this time.

Staff has had initial discussions with the organizers of the cycling championship. Giventhat the forecourt area of City Hall could act as a staging area for the media, spectatorsand cycling teams, staff has requested from the cycling organizers an overall plan whichclearly identifies their goals and objectives for the staging area.

The initial response to this request is that such plans will not be ready or available untillate March or early April 2002. However, organizers did advise that there will be a needfor large open and unobstructed areas associated with the staging area for tents,bleachers, and other support facilities for the championships. They advise that theforecourt area could potentially be filled with such facilities and therefore some of theenhancements may not be visible.

Interim Enhancement Ootions

Given the above noted discussion and assumptions with respect to the cyclingchampionships and future redevelopment plans, the following concept options havebeen developed as interim solutions.

Preferred OptionOption A - Soft Landscape Enhancements, (refer to attachment 1)

Highlights of this option include:n Minimal hard landscape enhancements.= Create soft landscape areas be removing hard asphalt, concrete and unit paving

areas and introduce sodded areas.n Fill in the existing water fountain with topsoil and plant trees and annual flowers.. Repair walls and replace light fixtures and introduce new banner or flagpoles.m New handicap access ramp from Main Street.n Plant trees and shrubs in sodded areas.m Sand blast concrete areas.

Refer to table 1 for a summary of capital and operating costs for this option.

Option B - Soft and Basic Hard Landscape Enhancements, (refer to attachment 2)

Highlights of this option include:n Similar to Option lwith hard landscape enhancements.. Enhancements to paved areas.n Removal of one of the fountains.= Extensive sodding area in front of entrance.



Page 5 of 6

Option C - Soft and Broader Hard Landscape Enhancements, (refer to attachment3)

Highlights of this option include:n Similar to option 2 with broader hard landscape enhancements.= Removal of second fountain.n Two extensive sodded areas adjacent to main entrance.


Option D - Same as Option 3 with Enhancements to East Walk Area (refer toattachment 4)

Highlights of this option include:n Same as option 3 with improvements to east walk area between City Hall and the

Football Hall of Fame.


Conclusion

Based on the above noted analysis of options, the requirement for a large open stagingarea for the cycling champions and minimizing potential “throw away” costs, option “A”has been identified as the preferred option for interim landscape enhancements.

A preliminary project schedule is provided for reference, refer to attachment 5.

Financial:

Table 1 is a summary of the estimated capital and operating costs for each of the optionidentified in the above noted analysis section.

I Item ITable 1: Summary of Estimated Capital and Operating CostsI

. Option A Option B Option C Option DCapital Cost $ 230,OOO.OO $ 376,OOO.OO $ 400,OOO.OO $ 456,OOO.OOTwo Year Operating Impact* $ 16,OOO.OO $ 16,OOO.OO $ 16,OOO.OO $ 16,OOO.OOTotal Cost % 246.000.00 $ 392.000.00 $ 416.000.00 % 472.000.00* represents increase to base maintenance program costs

Staffing: N/A

Legal: N/A

I. .


Page 6 of 6

N/A ,

The following departments and agencies were consulted in the preparation of this report:

Culture and Recreation Division Community Services DepartmentParks Division, Community Services DepartmentDesign and Construction Division, Community Services DepartmentCorporate Buildings and Real Estate, Community Services DepartmentTransportation, Operations and Environment DepartmentFinance and Corporate ServicesCycling Championship CommitteeHamilton Community Energy (Downtown District Heating Project)

The recommendation in this report is consistent with the objectives of Vision 2020 andthe approved document entitled “Putting People First: A New Land Use Plan forDowntown Hamilton.” This report is consistent with the following specific Vision 2020goals.

m Local Economv: To promote Hamilton-Wentworth’s environment as a desirableplace to live and work;

n Land Use in the Urban Area: To redevelop Hamilton’s central core as the regionalcentre;

n Communitv well-beina and Capacitv Buildina: To develop cultural institutions, publicfacilities, and parks and open space which inspire community pride and a sense ofplace.

Attachments1. Concept Option A2 . Concept Option B3 . Concept Option C4. Concept Option D5 . Preliminary Project Schedule

ATTACHMENT 1

All e&mg teas tobe I-etalned Maln S t r e e t E a s t

WOE:PI IO-EO-ZOOZ :PWld rv!tl Jw!ak

I?

Fleisher Ridout Partnership Inc. File: E:\2002\02768 Hamilton City Hall\Presentation\Option B.dwg

r-

Platted: 2002-03-01 14:32:41

Fleisher Ridout Partnership Inc. File: E:\2002\02768 Hamilton City Hall\Presentation\Option D.dwg Plotted: 2002-03-01 14:33:26

r

AITACHMENT 5

City of Hamilton - Community Services DepartmentDesign and Construction Division

INTER.lM LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENTS - CITYHALL FORECOURTPrelimhwy Schedule

TaskI

April May June July August September11 8(14121129 6113120127 3110/17)24 11 8114121129 5112119126 21 9116123130

I Detail Design *l

I Tender call

IAnalysis and Award *2

I Construction

I Final inspection and hand over I

*l - Based on Budget approval by April 1,2002*2 - Based on bids received being within budget and utilizing Policy 6 of the Purchasing Policy and Procedures

item 9.1 - accommodations study sub-committee meeting ... · appendix ‘a’ to march 18,2002...

Documents