HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Minutes - 07/07/1998 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
July 7, 1998
The regular meeting of the Committee of the Whole was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by
Council President Orr. Present: Councilmembers Amodt, Brotherton, Epperly, Woods
and Yingling, Operations Director/Chief of Staff McFall, Parks Director Hodgson, City
Attorney Lubovich, Planning Director Harris, Police Chief Crawford, Fire Chief Angelo,
Employee Services Director Viseth, and Information Services Director Mulholland.
Approximately 35 people were at the meeting,
Staff Present: Public Works Operation Manager Chu, Governmental Affairs Manager
Laurent, Assistant Facilities Manager Sigsbee, Assistant Finance Division Director
Hillman, Employee Services Benefits Administrator Fowler, Finance Budget Analyst King,
and Recording Secretary Swaw.
Public Present: Jim Merritt and Jennifer Mundee, Merritt & Pardini; Tom Beckwith,
Beckwith & Associates; Jackie Rees, South County Journal.
• Approval of Minutes. WOODS MOVED to approve the minutes of the meeting of
June 2, 1998. Epperly seconded and the motion carried.
Soace Study Consultant Report. Parks Director Hodgson noted that by the year
2010 Kent will probably be a city of approximately 130,000 people if the Growth
Management is followed with inclusion of all the potential annexation areas. He noted
that the Council had incredible foresight to include in the 1998 Budget funding for a
space study to find out how the City will meet the needs of its citizens, how it can
provide good government services efficiently, and provide the necessary space to do it.
He explained that a consultant has been hired to look out to the year 2010 to see what
needs city employees will have in order to meet those needs and services of citizens.
Hodgson noted that the consultant has also been requested to consider the City at a
100,000 population because, if the other potential annexation areas are annexed, the
City will be close to that mark very soon. He noted that the consultants were asked to
look at all aspects of City services, look at the geographic areas of Kent, how services
should be provided, how staff is transported and moved, how goods are moved, where
should the goods be put, and where should the Police Department be located so they
are as close to citizens as possible.
Hodgson introduced Jim Merritt of Merritt & Pardini, the consultant, who provided the
study to the Committee. Hodgson noted that it was a very interesting process to arrive
at the results as shown on the boards displayed around the room. He noted that
department heads along with various key staff have been working for the last four
months with the consultants to come to this point in the process. He noted that this is
1
Committee of the Whole • July 7, 1998
• just one giant step in getting the City to a point of where they need to be in terms of
facilities to provide services to citizens. Jim Merritt then introduced Jennifer Mundee
from Merritt & Pardini, who is the coordinator for the project, and Tom Beckwith of
Beckwith &Associates. He noted that another member of the team who couldn't be
present tonight but played a heavy role in the Law and Justice and Police Planning
areas is Dave Wilson.
Merritt explained the approach used to have a good dialog with all of the departments
and staff members involved in this study, and then he explained the various options
available. He noted that the study is not a solution but a series of alternatives for the
Council to review and decide which one would make the most sense for the City of Kent
to move forward for the next 20 years as it grows. He explained that the study was
approached as a 3-step process of: (1) gathering information, looking at facilities, and
holding a couple of workshops known as a brain-storming process; (2) looking at
alternatives, refining and challenging program notions and then looking at how these
ideas might come together; and (3) Strategizing and narrowing down to some choices.
He noted that there are approximately 6 different strategies available on the City Hall
Campus which includes City Hall, the Centennial Center, the Parking Garage, and the
Police Department.
Merritt reviewed the different displays and charts for the Committee. He explained that
steps 2 & 3 require the definition of what the target is and how to make choices. He
noted that the foundation for any decisions made are based on the goals of: (1) what
is trying to be accomplished, (2) what are the influences on the decisions (constraints &
opportunities), and (3) what are the criteria for making a decision . He suggested that
for the first step it is best to highlight customer service, efficiency, sharing spaces
wherever possible, improving security, and minimizing relocation by moving only once.
He noted that a very critical influence is that Kent has become a different kind of city
over the last decade, particularly over the last 3-4 years, and that it will probably
change dramatically again over the next short period. He noted that timing will have a
big influence on the decision, public access to information, Centennial Center lease
income, and the good and bad of the City Hall Building which has some inflexibility as
the city moves forward into a different kind of city. He noted that even though there
are some constraints and inflexibilities with the building it is not unusable but how the
use is approached is very important. Merritt stated that for Step 3, "Decision Criteria",
it is important to note that no department can stay "as is" because the city is
responding to new needs with a different size constituency. He also noted that the City
Center Campus has a great amount of history and that it is the heart of the services for
the community so there is investment in this area. He noted that certain departments
need to stay in the City Center Campus, particularly the Mayor and Administration. He
also noted that the diagrams illustrate the pieces and relationship of all the
departments, and that there is considerable interaction between certain departments so
it is important to keep those functions as close in proximity as possible. He noted that
the center of gravity needs to be thought about particularly in response to the
2
Committee of the Whole • July 7, 1998
maintenance and Public Safety needs. He went through the current layout of the City
Hall Campus and explained some of the options available. He noted that the
Committee may want to consider whether or not the City continues leasing out portions
of the Centennial Center or uses it for staff, since more than 50 % of the building is
currently being leased.
Merritt explained that there are four different variations in the approach used. He
noted that Option No. 1 shows all of City Hall and the Centennial Center being used for
office space which would cover a population of between 100,000 to 130,000. He noted
that Option No. 2 still looks at using the full footprint with a reconfiguration. He
explained where the different departments might be located. He noted that this option
suggests that the courtyard area on Floors 2, 3, and 4 be infllled which will not change
the massiveness of the building but will make it work more efficiently and would serve
the different departments sufficiently. He added that the infill space will not provide a
great amount of floor space but it will make everything else just more usable. He noted
that Option No. 3 would be a little more controversial because it does not fulfill a
couple of the goals set forth. He noted that the floor plate of the Centennial Building
takes away some of the influences of the constraints on City Hall . He noted that
consideration was given to locating the Police Department at City Hall but that more
than 2 stories for the Police Department would begin splitting the functions
unnecessarily which would not be too good. He noted that diagram 4.1 shows a
synthesis of some of the other elements and carries forward a counter of two variations
which may solve some of the issues and give the Council a very clear choice. He noted
that 4.1 shows utilization of all the existing City Hall to the best function possible
including certain departments and that this option links the two buildings with a
pedestrian walk leaving the 4th Floor of the Centennial Building for leasing and possibly
to be used for City staff when the population is +130,000. He noted that this option
marries the Centennial Center into City Hall with an element that will respect each of
the components but may have its own addendum. He noted that the choices are to be
under construction, marry these two buildings or stay in the existing use with a
possible pedestrian link. Upon Yingling's question, Merritt explained where the citizens
would interact with the city under Option 4.1. He also noted for Yingling that the City
Clerk's Office would probably be located on the 4`h Floor with Administration. Merritt
noted for Brotherton that, based on criteria in other communities, the amount of
increase on impact from 100,000-130,000 is not as great and the curve is probably
lessening as the City approaches the 150,000 mark. He noted, however, that this issue
was not evaluated. Brotherton expressed the importance of finding out just how the
public interacts with the City before the Council decides which plan would work the
best.
Merritt noted that there are a couple of variations suggested for the Police Department.
He noted that there are options IA, 1B, 2 & 3 for the Police Department. He then
explained that Option 1 is to expand the downtown campus for a population of up to
130,000 but that more space would be needed if the population increased to over the
3
Committee of the Whole July 7, 1998
130,000 prediction. He noted that this proposal is for a facility of approximately 50,000
sq. ft. and that the existing facility covers only 18,000 sq. ft.. He noted that Option 1A
is suggesting that a precinct be set up on the East Hill but that a little more site
evaluation would probably be needed. He went through the different options that
would be available for an expanded Police Department building. He noted that Option 2
recommends using the existing station for Administration only with perhaps another
precinct in two different parts of the City. He noted that the reason this solution came
up was to show how the existing building can still be utilized. He noted that the first
step is for a 25,000 sq. ft. facility and the second step is for a 16,000-18,000 sq. ft.
facility. Merritt explained for Yingling that the reason it is more costly to have separate
precincts is primarily because of staffing, movement and duplication of services. Merritt
noted that Option 3 would require a site evaluation for a new facility and that the
facility would probably require 4-5 acres in size. He noted, however, that if this option
were chosen one of the goals requesting that Police Administration remain on the City
Hall Campus site would have to be reviewed. He noted that where the new location
should be, on the East Hill or West Hill, or in the Valley, would have to be determined
and that there is a little more challenge in making this criteria work. He emphasized
that the key issue is the more that police functions can be consolidated the simpler it
will be. He noted that any of these options render police presence in the area but it
does take a little more logistics to work out.
Merritt noted that maintenance has a number of different variations and that the
existing facility on James Street has some investment. He explained that they looked at
dividing the diagram into a new location of approximately 25 acres with the building
containing roughly 200,000 sq. ft. , and a little more than 300 staff. He noted that this
site would also have material stockyards which could be on 1/2 acre sites with 2-3 areas
designated and spread out. He noted that Option B would be to use the existing James
Street facility with a new base built on the East Hill. He noted that if a split facility were
used then the Parks and Home Repair would stay on the existing site giving a little
more excess property and the one on the new base hill would go up to 17 acres and
about 136,000 sq. ft. with all of the maintenance ending up on the East Hill. He noted
that the 3rd Option is to do multiple sites, James Street in the Valley, a West Hill site,
and an East Hill site. He noted that this option splits the site in roughly people portions
which is like doing a James Street site on the West Hill and on the East Hill at the same
time. He noted that the geometry doesn't seem to be worthwhile with this option but it
does mean that the sites used could be smaller than the existing one.
Tom Beckwith explained that one facility would be completely centralized and the other
one would have everything completely dispersed. He noted that the centralized facility
would be the cheapest to build and provides the most effective management control
but if there is a large area to cover and the city continues to grow, then it will cost
more to get staff out to the different areas to work. He noted that one way to
0 compensate for the increased cost is to provide dispersed storage sites so once the
crew is out in the field they wouldn't need to come back until the end of the day. He
4
Committee of the Whole • July 7, 1998
r, explained that, on the other hand, a completely dispersed site would reduce the drive
time to the work site but it is the most expensive to build and staff because duplicate
facilities would have to be built. He noted that the real truth is somewhere in between
these two types of facilities but finding a site for a centralized facility is a good option.
Merritt noted that the Fire Department stations are well distributed but just need
assistance in maintaining to keep them from slipping and to improve them to help serve
the constituencies. He noted that under Section 5 in the report it shows the specific
needs of the different fire stations and that overall there is currently a reasonable
quality in the Fire facilities but it could be easily ignored and slide into an unacceptable
state.
Upon Amodfs question, Merritt noted that the criteria just adds to the reinforcement of
why it is good to keep things consolidated. He noted that it was quite remarkable to
find linkages between different departments and that the diagrams reflect those
linkages as well as the intensity of them for the departments. He explained that when
departments are dependent on one another for information and are dispersed, the
amount of travel time for those departments to function internally becomes a big
number resulting in lost time trying to move the information from department to
department. Merritt noted for Amodt that the employees have not given a response
to the variations but many of the staff were involved in all of the discussions building up
to the results before the Committee now. Upon Yingling's question, Merritt noted that
people using the designs were encouraged to give input and then Merritt and Pardini
tried to be as creative as possible with their thoughts, get them involved and use their
experiences to bring into the plan a challenge. Tom Beckwith explained for Yingling
that with the very first sessions the consultants sat down with the departments and the
goals were set through brain-storming and then the criteria was developed through this
process. He noted that the assumptions were built into the space requirements. He
also noted for Yingling that no city is exactly the same so it would be hard to ask
another city what their staffing requirements are, what are their organizations solutions,
and what are their goals. He noted that 3 bench rule standards were used in the very
beginning of this study to determine the help needed in terms of the ratio of staff to the
population, the ratio of space to staff, and the ratio of all building costs to all staff
costs. He noted that generally as a city gets larger the ratio of staff to population
should decline because the city should get more efficient and be able to handle a bigger
service area but initially there will be a bump because the city has taken on areas that
have never been serviced. He noted that the second area is the ratio of space to staff.
He noted that generally the amount of space that should be provided in an efficient
building is somewhere between 200-225 sq. ft. per staff person, but right now the City
of Kent is at 180 sq. ft. He noted that, after walking through the City facilities, it's easy
to see that it lacks conference, storage, training rooms, and space needed to effectively
support itself. He noted that initially in all of these scenarios you bump up the stakes
as you apply for those and then you will get more efficient as you can add more people
without having to add more functions. Beckwith noted that the last issue they looked
5
Committee of the Whole July 7, 1998
at was billing costs to staff costs. He noted that the issue is not in the facility costs but
in the type of environment that is made for the employees.
Merritt noted for Amodt that a cost model has been prepared and submitted to the
Administration Department. He noted that the next step will be to test them to see
how they come together. He explained that in some areas there are pleasant surprises
because the costs are not as great a magnitude and that the City has made some nice
investments with the purchase of the Centennial Center which is a good foundation for
this campus. He noted that there will be some tough issues as to how to centrally
locate a site that is found. He noted that the next steps are to: (1) Initiate a site
selection process to determine where the maintenance department will go; (2) Whether
or not to renew leases in the Centennial Center; (3) Study potential for expansion of
downtown police station; (4) Look for opportunities to deal with an increasing need for
employee parking; (5) Look at some of the specifics in the Fire Department. . He noted
that to do long term lease agreements on the first, second and third floors of the
Centennial Center do not seem to be in the best interest of the City. Upon Yingling's
question, Merritt noted that these steps should probably be initiated sometime this year
but that some criteria should be developed to look at the next step and see how the
Council perceives it. He noted that these are really eminent things and that by the 3rd
Quarter of this year some of these could be in motion. He noted that these are not big
ticket items but are just setting the ball in motion and probably in 1999 there are some
divergence and forks in the road that need to be dealt with. Merritt explained for
Amodt that the staffing to space utilization pressure is very great right now with
employees almost working and standing on top of each other. He noted that this type
of working environment affects efficiency, moral, and the ability to do a job
appropriately, and that the spirit and relationship to constituents are all factors involved
in such an atmosphere. He noted that it will only get worse in the next two years as
the population grows because the City is at 75,000 people now and staff is already
feeling the pressures.
Tom Beckwith noted that the maintenance yard questions involve sites so a site analysis
needs to be done first to determine where the City needs to be and the site needs to be
secured right away. He also noted that any more annexations will impact and affect
the levels of service because the City will fall further and further behind in the ability to
deliver the facilities for staff to provide the services. Hodgson noted for Orr that the
City has been looking for property but that there aren't very big pieces of property
around the City. He noted that the intent, after tonight's meeting, is to move this item
to one of two committees: 1) the Operations Committee when they start dealing with
some of the financial sides; and 2) the Parks Committee because this is part of the
Facilities Department. He explained that this study was referred to as the bubble study
in the different committees because it Is really just getting ideas of where departments
might be located in the future. He noted that the study was not designed to get down
to the fine pieces of how much space will be needed, etc. He noted that it will probably
be budgeted in 1999 to move into the next series of fine tuning the plan but some
6
Committee of the Whole • July 7, 1998
decisions will have to be made as to which idea the Committee and Council like. He
noted that these decisions need to be made within the next 2-3 months. He reiterated
that annexations will drive some of this and if there is no place for adding new staff it
becomes a challenge. He suggested that this item be sent to either the Operations
Committee or the Parks Committee as soon as possible because they are going to have
to make some hard decisions. Yingling requested that a copy of the bench rule
standards showing the before and after ratios be provided to the Committee. Woods
requested that staff provide the Operations & Parks Committee members with
information as soon as its available instead of waiting until there is too much to review
so that it can be discussed, reviewed incrementally and then make an educated
decision in an expeditious manner. She also requested that an update be added on
each committee agenda until a decision has to be made. Woods then directed staff to
supply each councilmember with the same information as the committee members
receive even though they may not be on the Operations or Parks Committee.
Orr suggested that if, at some point, an additional Committee of the Whole meeting is
needed to get everyone informed to just let her know. She then thanked Jim, Jennifer
and Tom for their hard work in making this presentation.
The meeting wasadjourned at 6:28 p.m.
Donna Swaw
Deputy City Clerk
7
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
July 7, 1998
The regular meeting of the Committee of the Whole was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by
Council President Orr. Present: Councilmembers Amodt, Brotherton, Epperly, Woods
and Yingling, Operations Director/Chief of Staff McFall, Parks Director Hodgson, City
Attorney Lubovich, Planning Director Harris, Police Chief Crawford, Fire Chief Angelo,
Employee Services Director Viseth, and Information Services Director Mulholland.
Approximately 35 people were at the meeting,
Staff Present: Public Works Operation Manager Chu, Governmental Affairs Manager
Laurent, Assistant Facilities Manager Sigsbee, Assistant Finance Division Director
Hillman, Employee Services Benefits Administrator Fowler, Finance Budget Analyst King,
and Recording Secretary Swaw.
Public Present: Jim Merritt and Jennifer Mundee, Merritt & Pardini; Tom Beckwith,
Beckwith & Associates; Jackie Rees, South County Journal.
• Approval of Minutes. WOODS MOVED to approve the minutes of the meeting of
June 2, 1998. Epperly seconded and the motion carried.
Soace Study Consultant Report. Parks Director Hodgson noted that by the year
2010 Kent will probably be a city of approximately 130,000 people if the Growth
Management is followed with inclusion of all the potential annexation areas. He noted
that the Council had incredible foresight to include in the 1998 Budget funding for a
space study to find out how the City will meet the needs of its citizens, how it can
provide good government services efficiently, and provide the necessary space to do it.
He explained that a consultant has been hired to look out to the year 2010 to see what
needs city employees will have in order to meet those needs and services of citizens.
Hodgson noted that the consultant has also been requested to consider the City at a
100,000 population because, if the other potential annexation areas are annexed, the
City will be close to that mark very soon. He noted that the consultants were asked to
look at all aspects of City services, look at the geographic areas of Kent, how services
should be provided, how staff is transported and moved, how goods are moved, where
should the goods be put, and where should the Police Department be located so they
are as close to citizens as possible.
Hodgson introduced Jim Merritt of Merritt & Pardini, the consultant, who provided the
study to the Committee. Hodgson noted that it was a very interesting process to arrive
at the results as shown on the boards displayed around the room. He noted that
department heads along with various key staff have been working for the last four
months with the consultants to come to this point in the process. He noted that this is
1
Committee of the Whole • July 7, 1998
• just one giant step in getting the City to a point of where they need to be in terms of
facilities to provide services to citizens. Jim Merritt then introduced Jennifer Mundee
from Merritt & Pardini, who is the coordinator for the project, and Tom Beckwith of
Beckwith &Associates. He noted that another member of the team who couldn't be
present tonight but played a heavy role in the Law and Justice and Police Planning
areas is Dave Wilson.
Merritt explained the approach used to have a good dialog with all of the departments
and staff members involved in this study, and then he explained the various options
available. He noted that the study is not a solution but a series of alternatives for the
Council to review and decide which one would make the most sense for the City of Kent
to move forward for the next 20 years as it grows. He explained that the study was
approached as a 3-step process of: (1) gathering information, looking at facilities, and
holding a couple of workshops known as a brain-storming process; (2) looking at
alternatives, refining and challenging program notions and then looking at how these
ideas might come together; and (3) Strategizing and narrowing down to some choices.
He noted that there are approximately 6 different strategies available on the City Hall
Campus which includes City Hall, the Centennial Center, the Parking Garage, and the
Police Department.
Merritt reviewed the different displays and charts for the Committee. He explained that
steps 2 & 3 require the definition of what the target is and how to make choices. He
noted that the foundation for any decisions made are based on the goals of: (1) what
is trying to be accomplished, (2) what are the influences on the decisions (constraints &
opportunities), and (3) what are the criteria for making a decision . He suggested that
for the first step it is best to highlight customer service, efficiency, sharing spaces
wherever possible, improving security, and minimizing relocation by moving only once.
He noted that a very critical influence is that Kent has become a different kind of city
over the last decade, particularly over the last 3-4 years, and that it will probably
change dramatically again over the next short period. He noted that timing will have a
big influence on the decision, public access to information, Centennial Center lease
income, and the good and bad of the City Hall Building which has some inflexibility as
the city moves forward into a different kind of city. He noted that even though there
are some constraints and inflexibilities with the building it is not unusable but how the
use is approached is very important. Merritt stated that for Step 3, "Decision Criteria",
it is important to note that no department can stay "as is" because the city is
responding to new needs with a different size constituency. He also noted that the City
Center Campus has a great amount of history and that it is the heart of the services for
the community so there is investment in this area. He noted that certain departments
need to stay in the City Center Campus, particularly the Mayor and Administration. He
also noted that the diagrams illustrate the pieces and relationship of all the
departments, and that there is considerable interaction between certain departments so
it is important to keep those functions as close in proximity as possible. He noted that
the center of gravity needs to be thought about particularly in response to the
2
Committee of the Whole • July 7, 1998
maintenance and Public Safety needs. He went through the current layout of the City
Hall Campus and explained some of the options available. He noted that the
Committee may want to consider whether or not the City continues leasing out portions
of the Centennial Center or uses it for staff, since more than 50 % of the building is
currently being leased.
Merritt explained that there are four different variations in the approach used. He
noted that Option No. 1 shows all of City Hall and the Centennial Center being used for
office space which would cover a population of between 100,000 to 130,000. He noted
that Option No. 2 still looks at using the full footprint with a reconfiguration. He
explained where the different departments might be located. He noted that this option
suggests that the courtyard area on Floors 2, 3, and 4 be infllled which will not change
the massiveness of the building but will make it work more efficiently and would serve
the different departments sufficiently. He added that the infill space will not provide a
great amount of floor space but it will make everything else just more usable. He noted
that Option No. 3 would be a little more controversial because it does not fulfill a
couple of the goals set forth. He noted that the floor plate of the Centennial Building
takes away some of the influences of the constraints on City Hall . He noted that
consideration was given to locating the Police Department at City Hall but that more
than 2 stories for the Police Department would begin splitting the functions
unnecessarily which would not be too good. He noted that diagram 4.1 shows a
synthesis of some of the other elements and carries forward a counter of two variations
which may solve some of the issues and give the Council a very clear choice. He noted
that 4.1 shows utilization of all the existing City Hall to the best function possible
including certain departments and that this option links the two buildings with a
pedestrian walk leaving the 4th Floor of the Centennial Building for leasing and possibly
to be used for City staff when the population is +130,000. He noted that this option
marries the Centennial Center into City Hall with an element that will respect each of
the components but may have its own addendum. He noted that the choices are to be
under construction, marry these two buildings or stay in the existing use with a
possible pedestrian link. Upon Yingling's question, Merritt explained where the citizens
would interact with the city under Option 4.1. He also noted for Yingling that the City
Clerk's Office would probably be located on the 4`h Floor with Administration. Merritt
noted for Brotherton that, based on criteria in other communities, the amount of
increase on impact from 100,000-130,000 is not as great and the curve is probably
lessening as the City approaches the 150,000 mark. He noted, however, that this issue
was not evaluated. Brotherton expressed the importance of finding out just how the
public interacts with the City before the Council decides which plan would work the
best.
Merritt noted that there are a couple of variations suggested for the Police Department.
He noted that there are options IA, 1B, 2 & 3 for the Police Department. He then
explained that Option 1 is to expand the downtown campus for a population of up to
130,000 but that more space would be needed if the population increased to over the
3
Committee of the Whole July 7, 1998
130,000 prediction. He noted that this proposal is for a facility of approximately 50,000
sq. ft. and that the existing facility covers only 18,000 sq. ft.. He noted that Option 1A
is suggesting that a precinct be set up on the East Hill but that a little more site
evaluation would probably be needed. He went through the different options that
would be available for an expanded Police Department building. He noted that Option 2
recommends using the existing station for Administration only with perhaps another
precinct in two different parts of the City. He noted that the reason this solution came
up was to show how the existing building can still be utilized. He noted that the first
step is for a 25,000 sq. ft. facility and the second step is for a 16,000-18,000 sq. ft.
facility. Merritt explained for Yingling that the reason it is more costly to have separate
precincts is primarily because of staffing, movement and duplication of services. Merritt
noted that Option 3 would require a site evaluation for a new facility and that the
facility would probably require 4-5 acres in size. He noted, however, that if this option
were chosen one of the goals requesting that Police Administration remain on the City
Hall Campus site would have to be reviewed. He noted that where the new location
should be, on the East Hill or West Hill, or in the Valley, would have to be determined
and that there is a little more challenge in making this criteria work. He emphasized
that the key issue is the more that police functions can be consolidated the simpler it
will be. He noted that any of these options render police presence in the area but it
does take a little more logistics to work out.
Merritt noted that maintenance has a number of different variations and that the
existing facility on James Street has some investment. He explained that they looked at
dividing the diagram into a new location of approximately 25 acres with the building
containing roughly 200,000 sq. ft. , and a little more than 300 staff. He noted that this
site would also have material stockyards which could be on 1/2 acre sites with 2-3 areas
designated and spread out. He noted that Option B would be to use the existing James
Street facility with a new base built on the East Hill. He noted that if a split facility were
used then the Parks and Home Repair would stay on the existing site giving a little
more excess property and the one on the new base hill would go up to 17 acres and
about 136,000 sq. ft. with all of the maintenance ending up on the East Hill. He noted
that the 3rd Option is to do multiple sites, James Street in the Valley, a West Hill site,
and an East Hill site. He noted that this option splits the site in roughly people portions
which is like doing a James Street site on the West Hill and on the East Hill at the same
time. He noted that the geometry doesn't seem to be worthwhile with this option but it
does mean that the sites used could be smaller than the existing one.
Tom Beckwith explained that one facility would be completely centralized and the other
one would have everything completely dispersed. He noted that the centralized facility
would be the cheapest to build and provides the most effective management control
but if there is a large area to cover and the city continues to grow, then it will cost
more to get staff out to the different areas to work. He noted that one way to
0 compensate for the increased cost is to provide dispersed storage sites so once the
crew is out in the field they wouldn't need to come back until the end of the day. He
4
Committee of the Whole • July 7, 1998
r, explained that, on the other hand, a completely dispersed site would reduce the drive
time to the work site but it is the most expensive to build and staff because duplicate
facilities would have to be built. He noted that the real truth is somewhere in between
these two types of facilities but finding a site for a centralized facility is a good option.
Merritt noted that the Fire Department stations are well distributed but just need
assistance in maintaining to keep them from slipping and to improve them to help serve
the constituencies. He noted that under Section 5 in the report it shows the specific
needs of the different fire stations and that overall there is currently a reasonable
quality in the Fire facilities but it could be easily ignored and slide into an unacceptable
state.
Upon Amodfs question, Merritt noted that the criteria just adds to the reinforcement of
why it is good to keep things consolidated. He noted that it was quite remarkable to
find linkages between different departments and that the diagrams reflect those
linkages as well as the intensity of them for the departments. He explained that when
departments are dependent on one another for information and are dispersed, the
amount of travel time for those departments to function internally becomes a big
number resulting in lost time trying to move the information from department to
department. Merritt noted for Amodt that the employees have not given a response
to the variations but many of the staff were involved in all of the discussions building up
to the results before the Committee now. Upon Yingling's question, Merritt noted that
people using the designs were encouraged to give input and then Merritt and Pardini
tried to be as creative as possible with their thoughts, get them involved and use their
experiences to bring into the plan a challenge. Tom Beckwith explained for Yingling
that with the very first sessions the consultants sat down with the departments and the
goals were set through brain-storming and then the criteria was developed through this
process. He noted that the assumptions were built into the space requirements. He
also noted for Yingling that no city is exactly the same so it would be hard to ask
another city what their staffing requirements are, what are their organizations solutions,
and what are their goals. He noted that 3 bench rule standards were used in the very
beginning of this study to determine the help needed in terms of the ratio of staff to the
population, the ratio of space to staff, and the ratio of all building costs to all staff
costs. He noted that generally as a city gets larger the ratio of staff to population
should decline because the city should get more efficient and be able to handle a bigger
service area but initially there will be a bump because the city has taken on areas that
have never been serviced. He noted that the second area is the ratio of space to staff.
He noted that generally the amount of space that should be provided in an efficient
building is somewhere between 200-225 sq. ft. per staff person, but right now the City
of Kent is at 180 sq. ft. He noted that, after walking through the City facilities, it's easy
to see that it lacks conference, storage, training rooms, and space needed to effectively
support itself. He noted that initially in all of these scenarios you bump up the stakes
as you apply for those and then you will get more efficient as you can add more people
without having to add more functions. Beckwith noted that the last issue they looked
5
Committee of the Whole July 7, 1998
at was billing costs to staff costs. He noted that the issue is not in the facility costs but
in the type of environment that is made for the employees.
Merritt noted for Amodt that a cost model has been prepared and submitted to the
Administration Department. He noted that the next step will be to test them to see
how they come together. He explained that in some areas there are pleasant surprises
because the costs are not as great a magnitude and that the City has made some nice
investments with the purchase of the Centennial Center which is a good foundation for
this campus. He noted that there will be some tough issues as to how to centrally
locate a site that is found. He noted that the next steps are to: (1) Initiate a site
selection process to determine where the maintenance department will go; (2) Whether
or not to renew leases in the Centennial Center; (3) Study potential for expansion of
downtown police station; (4) Look for opportunities to deal with an increasing need for
employee parking; (5) Look at some of the specifics in the Fire Department. . He noted
that to do long term lease agreements on the first, second and third floors of the
Centennial Center do not seem to be in the best interest of the City. Upon Yingling's
question, Merritt noted that these steps should probably be initiated sometime this year
but that some criteria should be developed to look at the next step and see how the
Council perceives it. He noted that these are really eminent things and that by the 3rd
Quarter of this year some of these could be in motion. He noted that these are not big
ticket items but are just setting the ball in motion and probably in 1999 there are some
divergence and forks in the road that need to be dealt with. Merritt explained for
Amodt that the staffing to space utilization pressure is very great right now with
employees almost working and standing on top of each other. He noted that this type
of working environment affects efficiency, moral, and the ability to do a job
appropriately, and that the spirit and relationship to constituents are all factors involved
in such an atmosphere. He noted that it will only get worse in the next two years as
the population grows because the City is at 75,000 people now and staff is already
feeling the pressures.
Tom Beckwith noted that the maintenance yard questions involve sites so a site analysis
needs to be done first to determine where the City needs to be and the site needs to be
secured right away. He also noted that any more annexations will impact and affect
the levels of service because the City will fall further and further behind in the ability to
deliver the facilities for staff to provide the services. Hodgson noted for Orr that the
City has been looking for property but that there aren't very big pieces of property
around the City. He noted that the intent, after tonight's meeting, is to move this item
to one of two committees: 1) the Operations Committee when they start dealing with
some of the financial sides; and 2) the Parks Committee because this is part of the
Facilities Department. He explained that this study was referred to as the bubble study
in the different committees because it Is really just getting ideas of where departments
might be located in the future. He noted that the study was not designed to get down
to the fine pieces of how much space will be needed, etc. He noted that it will probably
be budgeted in 1999 to move into the next series of fine tuning the plan but some
6
Committee of the Whole • July 7, 1998
decisions will have to be made as to which idea the Committee and Council like. He
noted that these decisions need to be made within the next 2-3 months. He reiterated
that annexations will drive some of this and if there is no place for adding new staff it
becomes a challenge. He suggested that this item be sent to either the Operations
Committee or the Parks Committee as soon as possible because they are going to have
to make some hard decisions. Yingling requested that a copy of the bench rule
standards showing the before and after ratios be provided to the Committee. Woods
requested that staff provide the Operations & Parks Committee members with
information as soon as its available instead of waiting until there is too much to review
so that it can be discussed, reviewed incrementally and then make an educated
decision in an expeditious manner. She also requested that an update be added on
each committee agenda until a decision has to be made. Woods then directed staff to
supply each councilmember with the same information as the committee members
receive even though they may not be on the Operations or Parks Committee.
Orr suggested that if, at some point, an additional Committee of the Whole meeting is
needed to get everyone informed to just let her know. She then thanked Jim, Jennifer
and Tom for their hard work in making this presentation.
The meeting wasadjourned at 6:28 p.m.
Donna Swaw
Deputy City Clerk
7