HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-05-2015 C7 ACM Codron-'� Council Memorandum
RECEIVED
April 30, 2015 MAY p 1 2015
TO: City Council Si -a CITY CLERK
FROM: Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager COUNCIL MEETING: - 7
ITEM NO.:'`� --
VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
SUBJECT: Councilmember Questions on May 5 Item C -7 with Staff Response
The following questions were received from a Councilmember regarding Item C -7 on the May 5
agenda. Staff response is included in italics after each question.
When this $250,000 budget item was approved on February 18, 2014 it was explicitly
stated in the Council Agenda Report that the improvements were to: "begin the city hall
reconfiguration to provide an elevator for public use and to consolidate two public
service counters on the main floor." (emphasis added). These plans still do not provide
for an elevator; nor is there any indication as to where an elevator would be located in a
future remodel. Please explain.
Staff response: Preliminary design of an elevator to be located in the existing public
stairwell outside the current Council and Mayor's offices was completed. It was included
as a 2015 -20 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) submittal and was not recommended for
funding at this time by the internal CIP committee due to its estimated project costs
($660, 000). This project does include several ADA upgrades including, power - assisted
entry doors to the Finance Department, upgrades to the ADA path of travel from the
parking lot to the Administration offices, and upgrades to the main bathrooms in City
Hall.
2. On Sheet D1.1, there is a symbol for an item 7" but no keynote that explains what is to
happen to that item (the existing public service counter in the Clerk's office).
Staff response: Staff will include this direction to the project architect as part of the
customary plan check review process.
3. On that same sheet, our Economic Development Manager's title is mislabeled: I've
never seen a reference to him as "EGOA Redevelopment Manager." Please update this
with his correct title - or correct my understanding of it! (His title is shown correctly on
A2.1)
Staff response: Staff will include this direction to the project architect as part of the
customary plan check review process.
4. On Sheet A2.1, please explain the "hoteling counter" in the Admin open office (201).
Discussion with staff last fall had centered on the possibility that this wall space could be
envisioned to have a large flat- screen terminal mounted there displaying the City's web
site, possibly live feeds from the "open government" web site when active, and /or the
enda Correspondence — May 5"' Item C -7
Page 2
"performance dashboard" when completed. Additionally, such a screen could be used for
training or as an active staff "vertical working surface" in that space. Did staff consider
this recommendation, and could we still consider whether purchase and install such IT
equipment with this remodel?
Staff response: The curvilinear surface in the Admin Open Office (Note 2) is designed
for two temporary staff workstations. A wall - mounted flat - screen above these
workstations is part of the Furnishings Plan after construction. There is adequate budget
in the Administration operating program to cover purchase of the screen independently
of the project budget.
5. Again on Sheet A2.1, please explain the imbalance in the configuration of the two
Council offices (105 and 106). One of these offices is proposed to be only 5- 1/2'x9'. The
current Council office has almost 8'x10'. That's a reduction in floor area from 80 s.f. to 50
s.f., not enough space to accommodate any meeting if there is to be furniture with any
type of working surface or storage space. The two proposed Council offices together
have a total width of 14' between them, however. Given that fact, why is the larger office
given 8 -1/2' and the smaller office only 5 -1/2'? Is there some intention by this
configuration that implies a more intensive management of these two spaces among the
four Councilmembers? Can we consider re- balancing these spaces, thereby avoiding a
situation where Council members feel that they must compete for the larger space?
Staff response: An objective of the project was to create two Council offices since there
is only one office now that all Council members must share. The proposed larger Council
office is intended for meeting with up to three constituents (an improvement over the
existing office). The proposed smaller Council office is intended for independent work
time such as phone calls, reviewing emails and agenda reports. The hope is that each
Council member will reserve an office based on their day's events.
6. On Sheet A6.1, the signage plan does not include a note to indicate placement of the
existing free - standing kiosk in the center of the foyer. Is it our intent that this item be
restored to its location, albeit with the new directional indications, after the remodel is
completed?
Staff response: Yes. The free - standing kiosk will remain in its existing location and be
updated.
7. There is no reference to the need, nor any budget for, any art work for this remodel.
What would be a reasonable budget for purchase of new art work to be installed with this
remodel? How could we engage the City's Public Art Committee in this process?
Staff response: The City allocates one percent of eligible capital projects to the Public
Art fund. In conjunction with developer paid public art in lieu fees this has proven to be
an effective way of aggregating funding for public art throughout the City. Staff would
distinguish between art work selected as an enhancement to work spaces and public
areas from a public art project in City Hall, which would be a separate project from the
remodel. The Parks and Recreation Department is developing a Public Art Master Plan
and City Hall could be identified as a receiver site during the Plan's consideration and
adoption by Council.
Agenda Correspondence — May 5t" Item C -7 Page 3
8. Finally, can we consider improving the exterior signage of City Hall in order to improve
the ability of first -time visitors to locate the building? If not in this remodel, then as a
separate item for Council and staff consideration?
Staff response: In the next phase of the City's Directional Sign Program (Wayfinding) a
new kiosk is being designed to replace existing signage on Palm Street at the bottom of
City Hall steps.
Please contact James David, jdavid e,slocity.org or (805) 781 -7151, with any follow -up
questions or concerns.
T: /Admin/2014 Admin Reorg /MemoCouncilResponseApril30