Loading...
08-18-2003 - Workshop ; . o <) CITY COUNCIL OF EDGEWATER WORKSHOP AUGUST 18, 2003 6:00 P.M. COMMUNITY CENTER MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Schmidt called the Workshop to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Community Center. ROLL CALL Mayor Donald Schmidt Councilman James Brown Councilman Myron Hammond Councilwoman Harriet Rhodes Councilwoman Judith Lichter City Manager Kenneth Hooper City Clerk Susan Wadsworth Paralegal Robin Matusick Present Present Present Present Arrived at 6:04 p.m. Present Present Present INVOCATION, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE There was a silent invocation and pledge of allegiance to the Flag. MEETING PURPOSE The purpose of the meeting was to hear presentations by Katie Gierok, Gierok Engineering and Dana Smith, D.J. Designs, regarding Regions Bank and Tracy Crowe and Mark Stehli, Land Design Innovations, regarding beautification of SR 442. Katie Gierok, Gierok Engineering, made a Powerpoint presentation regarding a proposed Edgewater City Hall Feasibility Review that was done for the Regions Bank building located on u.S. #1. (Attached) Ms. Gierok made mention of the portion of the report which includes all the different firms' reports along with a cost analysis done by each firm for their portion of the project. (Attached) Ms. Gierok presented her recommendations of things she feels would need to be changed on the site. Dana Smith, D.J. Designs, made a Powerpoint Presentation regarding the architectural improvements that would need to be done to the Regions Bank Building. (Attached) ~ o u Ms. Gierok finished up her presentation by discussing what the findings were of the other firms and the costs related to them. city Manager Hooper commented on the appraisal that was done on Regions Bank. The appraisal was $2 million. On the regular agenda later there is a letter he will be asking for Council approval on to authorize the Mayor to send them making an offer of $1.8 million. There is also adjacent property that is open for discussion. Ms. Gierok and City Manager Hooper answered questions presented by Council. Tracy Crowe, Land Design Innovations, made a Powerpoint presentation regarding the study that was done for the SR 442 Corridor for Conceptual Beautification. (Attached) Ms. Crowe went over the Beautification Concepts they came up with for the I-95 Gateway, the Mission Road Intersection, the Air Park Road Intersection, the u.s. #1 Intersection and the Riverside Drive Intersection. Ms. Crowe then went over the Preliminary Cost Estimates for the Concept Designs and the Overview of the Design Guidelines. City Manager Hooper informed the Council they have $100,000 of the $500,000 that was given to the City by the DOT. DOT has made him a commitment that anything over and above is a 50/50 match. He further spoke of assessments to get money to put this into effective. The money to build it is the easy part. The money to maintain it is very long term and expensive. Ms. Crowe and City Manager Hooper answered questions presented by Council. City Manager Hooper explained the Council will be asked to adopt this as a plan and they will be asked that the guidelines of how development will occur be adopted. City Manager Hooper informed Council at the Regular Meeting after this Workshop they will tell him whether they want to spend money for this beautification. The Council will tell him how much money they will let him spend with these folks to design how to implement that landscaping. Page 2- Council Workshop August 18, 2003 :' o <.> city Manager Hooper assured the Council this can be brought back at 60% design to make sure they are on the right track. ADJOURNMENT At this time, Mayor Schmidt recessed the meeting at 7:03 p.m. He informed Council they would reconvene with the Regular Meeting at 7:15 p.m. Minutes submitted by: Lisa Bloomer Page -3- Council Workshop August 18, 2003 PROPOSED EDGEWATER CITY HALL FEASIBILITY REVIEW CITY OF EDGEWATER, FL CURRENT REGIONS BANK BUILDING 1011. 01 " 111.111111.111.111111111.1..".1.111.111 7 . 4t !..."."..." 1404 '# , VIIIIIIIIPOW EtF, PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY: 40.3i....7„. CO Gierok ti . Engineering, Inc. �"^�1 Civil Design and Construction Services 'S' + O � A �rA AUGUST 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Structural 3.0 Site /Civil 4.0 Architectural 5.0 Electrical & Technology 6.0 Mechanical 7.0 Cost Summary City of Edgewater Proposed Edgewater City Hall Feasibility Review SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction In December of 2001 the City of Edgewater contracted with Dickens and Associates, Inc. to complete a City Hall /Police Complex Master Planning Report. This report was developed to determine the long term goals for the City Hall Complex. It was the intent at that time to review the existing conditions of the City Hall and Police Department facilities and determine the future needs of this growing City. At such time the City began preliminary planning of a new City Hall Complex. In December of 2002, the City became aware that the Regions Bank building located at 1404 South Ridgewood Avenue (U.S. 1) in Edgewater, Florida was placed for sale. Upon review by City Staff and consultants the current bank facility appeared viable as a new City Hall based upon the layout and size of the existing facilities. The City retained its continuing engineering consultant, Gierok Engineering, in conformance with its proposal for continuous services with the City, to complete an on -site review of the building to determine the building's ability to satisfy the City's needs as a City Hall. 1.2 Purpose As a preliminary planning tool, the City requested an initial analysis of the building to determine its current condition and potential use as a City Hall. Consideration to costs is also provided. In April of 2003, Gierok Engineering along with its subconsultants visited the Regions Bank building to review the existing conditions, receive the as -built drawings of the building and obtain any other pertinent site information. The purpose of the review was two -fold. The City needs to be aware of any "defect" of the property and conceptual plans of the facility needed to be developed to determine the feasibility of using the site as a City Hall Complex. The building was reviewed by the following disciplines and corresponding consultants. Structural — McElroy Engineering, LLC Civil /Site — Gierok Engineering, Inc. Architectural — DJ Design, Inc. Electrical and Technology — Dickens and Associates, Inc. Mechanical — Energy Systems Design, Inc. Each of the disciplines has developed a report defining the deficiencies and requirements of the building for use as a City Hall. The reports are presented in the succeeding sections with a cost summary and analysis in the final section of this report. 1 -1 8/11/2003 'r''' � - IP *2 � t;� - `. P Ott z. �∎iv S]1 r� 591 4 L. cC 1 %, " \ „ 1 G -- ' .4 0 H a�A9 ks Park r. , aC+ r . '_ e rrl etar y \ -1 ` ' '�� re f ,:� � �� .+ L 45 C , , gy p s "'"�� 4 ^ � 7 alit �i ,P , ; ti �' j SIT �G� --- t _ � e „�. � + �'� 4 �� LO CAT I O A f ay y :51 �,, � ~ n •~ in 1 . -' ''. - '.. \ . 1 2' 0 k 0 q. 9 ,,, c..t. 0 illi {v im S r''' r.1 . . ` SI P �,, 6 -` '' i � Ca �e D .1, M a . ` : 3, .r a Rho' ° ly e St 'rr. '." -. ". Oard.'in P'i, , ., ID 4 'y F�gnt Lt o 6) ,,-- w 0:/ 4 Ein d St 15th St u > ' . Virginia St a ni 16th t [ � _ Duck L.y. k ' G- f5 tai ci 1 S6 ,�+ „ ��4 1. 0 s -1 � -�; ti� i 9th St 7, . --' . '', .a IN, `�" % ra C_ �''� 4� 'S +�' ! �' W � X 1'1 `'� , 0 s j k 'icso ' ' tip r� g ti , - " ti " P I it �� a ° yRp b t 145, s k yy 1 r ' S DRAWING TITLE: LOCATION MAP 0 1835 Edgewater Drive PROJECT TITLE Gierok Orlando, Florida 32804 EDGEWATER CITY HALL Phone: 407/244 -8580 DATE: PROJECT NO Engineer Inc. Fax: 407/244 -8581 06.24.03 EW 11 1 DRAWN BY DESIGNED BY CHECKED BY. PROJ. MGR.'. =ivil Design and Construction Services email: gierok @cfl.rr IDB IDB KNG KNG SCALE SHEET NO MWBE Certified NTS 1 OF 1 McElroyEngineering ; STRUCTURAL DESIGN GROUP '' f July 15, 2003 Ms. Kathleen Gierok Gierok Engineering, Inc. 1835 Edgewater Drive Orlando, FL 32804 Re: Edgewater City Hall Investigation - Structural Review Dear Katie: As requested, I have visited the site of the proposed City Hall Building for the general observation of the existing structure. My observation was limited to a visual inspection. The structural investigation also included the review of the construction drawings of the existing structure. The structural drawings provided are "S I" through "S6" dated March 15, 1989. The structural design engineer is noted as Stephen J. Sacco from St. Louis, Missouri. OBSERVATIONS The following items were noted based upon the structural review: , (1) There are several locations where the floor and roof joists are supported by 5/8" diameter x 4" embedment sleeve /expansion anchors. See Details 5/S -6, 9/S -6 and 13 /S- 6. There are two (2) problems with these anchors. A) The distance from the center of the anchor to the edge of masonry is less than the minimum 4 inches, which is recommended by most manufacturers. B) Many manufacturers recommend the use of epoxy type anchors in lieu of the expansion type noted. Based on Hilti Kwik Bolt Technical Data, the expansion anchors are overstressed. This condition will reduce the floor capacity and the roof capacity at these anchors. (2) No uplift bridging is present at the discontinuous ends of the roof joists. This condition will reduce the ability of the roof system to resist uplift pressures. (3) The masonry walls and the connection of the floor slab and the roof deck to these walls provide the lateral stability of the building. The use of 5/8" diameter expansion anchors and edge distances less than 4" into the masonry reduces the capacity of the building structure to resist wind forces. (4) The structural drawings require all metal deck to be fastened at 12" o.c. The diameter of the weld is not specified nor are side lap screws specified. It appears there may be one (1) side lap fastener per span at some areas. The connection spacing in high wind velocity regions is usually six (6) inches on center at the perimeter beams and at all shear walls. This condition will reduce the capacity of the building's structure to resist wind forces. 1835 Edgewater Or Orlando FL 32804 1 P:407 245 8775 F. 407 245 8744 1 mcelroy @cfl rrcom Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation - Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 2 (5) The L3x3x3/8 diagonal braces above the concrete vaults per Sections "9/S5" and "10/S5" could not be observed. A more detailed field investigation is required along Column Line F. If these braces are not present, this condition will reduce the lateral capacity of the structure. (6) The exterior metal stud framing is noted as 6" 20 gage studs at 16" o.c. and 1-1/2 inches of EIFS over 1/2 inch gypsum board. No fasteners were specified on the drawings. Most of the exterior wall connections are not visible and therefore could not be reviewed. We have estimated the capacity of the exterior wall to be between 20 PSF and 25 PSF based on a maximum deflection of L /360. Heavier gage studs and connections are required for high wind velocity regions. Damage to the existing exterior wall is possible during a storm with high wind velocities. (7) The new Florida Building Code (FBC) 2001 requires openings for high wind velocity regions to resist the impacts of a 9 lb. 2x4 missile with a velocity of 50 ft. per second. The window system must have a debris protection system in order to satisfy this requirement. There is no indication that the windows are protected as such. This protection can be provided with the addition of storm shutters or the replacement of the windows and doors. The new windows and doors must satisfy the new FBC. All jambs, headers and sills-will most likely need new reinforcement to support the shutters or the new doors and windows. (8) The slope roof framing is not visible. The construction drawings note 6" — 20 gage metal studs at 16" o.c. with no connection details. The capacity of the roof to resist high wind velocities therefore is suspect. (9) Per Sections "4/S -5" and "1 1 /S -5" the exterior masonry walls that bear on the 3" floor slab are doweled into the 2 %2 deep concrete topping. This condition will provide little resistance to high wind forces. Exterior walls at these conditions have a higher probability of suffering damage during a storm. (10) There is a typical mechanical unit mounting frame detail on Drawing "S3 ". This detail does not specify anchors at both the connection o f the mechanical unit nor the curb. The capacity of the roof top units to resist high wind velocities therefore is suspect. DISCUSSION The slab on grade and the second level appears to have 100 PSF live load capacity except at the second floor vault, which has a capacity of 125 PSF. The structural drawings provided note a basic wind speed of 100 mph per the 1985 Standard Building Code. The Standard Building Code is based on the "fastest mile ". Therefore, the 100 mph is equivalent to 120 mph in the Florida Building Code 2001. See Table 1606.1.6.1 in FBC 2001. The City of Edgewater is located in the 120 mph wind velocity, which is in the High Velocity Hurricane Zone requiring debris protection for all exterior openings. Based on Exposure B per ASCE 7 -98 and a wind velocity of 120 mph, the maximum pressures as required by FBC 2001 are as follows: Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 3 Zone 1 — Roof Interior 27 PSF (10 SF area) Zone 2 — Roof Edge 44 PSF (10 SF area) Zone 3 — Roof Corners 66 PSF (10 SF area) Zone 4 — Wall Typical 27 PSF (10 SF area) Zone 5 — Wall Corners 30 PSF (10 SF area) Based on the above information, the existing structure and the exterior wall system will be overstressed in the event of the design storm as required by FBC 2001 (ASCE 7 -98). RECOMMENDATIONS The following is recommended: (1) Provide anchors at all roof top units. (2) Provide new welding and side lap fasteners at all roof deck. The welding of the roof deck cannot occur until a new roof is installed. It may be possible to add additional fasteners below the deck. (3) Provide new uprlift bridging at ends of roof joists. (4) Provide engineered debris protection system for all exterior wall openings. (5) Field investigate exterior wall framing connections and the exterior windows and door connections. Rate the building exterior framing capacity to resist high wind velocities. (6) Reinforce metal stud framed jambs, heads and sills to carry new debris protection system. (7) Reinforce ledger conditions with 5/8 diameter epoxy anchors placed into masonry. Filed test ledger conditions. COSTS Exact modifications and related costs would require further investigation including testing to determine exact conditions inside the walls and behind coverings. Additionally, for these recommended improvement costs we also have considered the conditions of the existing City Hall facilities. For budgetary purposes only we have reviewed the known conditions based both on the visual inspection of the building and the construction drawings and have estimated the following improvement costs. (1) Immediate Hardening of the Existing Structure - $75,000 These costs include improvements as recommended above to accessible areas of the structure. (2) Future Hardening of the Existing Structure - $25,000 These improvements would be completed coincident with a re- roofing project which is not anticipated to occur at this time. These improvements include areas which are inaccessible until such time. (3) Hardening of the Exterior Wall Openings - $100,000 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation - Structural Review 0 July 15, 2003 f d Page 4 This cost includes required reframing to anchor the shutters and cost ofaluminum panel shutters which must be mounted prior to a storm event. (4) Hardening of All Exterior Structures - $200,000 - $500,000 These costs would provide overall structural hardening of thetiuilding to more closely follow current structural standards. This may include new windows and doors which are impact and wind resistant. It has been our pleasure to assist you and the City of Edgewater. Please contact us if there are questions concerning this report. Sincerely, McELROY E GINEERING LLC c Craig . McEI oy, P.E. Principal • Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 5 PHOTO #1 PHOTO #2 1 PHOTO #3 PHOTO #4 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 6 . "•� _ j " a ! • • , • 1 Ili , . , ,, ANA J { Y PHOTO #5 PHOTO #6 _� g _! PHOTO #7 PHOTO #8 € 6 i 4 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 7 f IA, • PHOTO #9 PHOTO #10 1 f µ. 4 s { <4,r_ PHOTO #11 PHOTO #12 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 8 PHOTO #13 PHOTO #14 PHOTO #15 PHOTO #16 1 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 9 ., « :i i 4 4 ,.� . . PHOTO #17 PHOTO #18 � v ..._.__.. w•n- ,.•,.- erlv.... .'...' PHOTO #19 PHOTO #20 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 10 ' 2116..., y PHOTO #21 PHOTO #22 .4‘. ____________ . fik ■1111111M PHOTO #23 PHOTO #24 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 11 t _ fi —„.....-t0 j 1j t r o • • ■ PHOTO #25 PHOTO #26 ff,T Y 1 PHOTO #27 PHOTO #28 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 12 �\ l PHOTO #29 PHOTO #30 i PHOTO #31 PHOTO #32 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 13 A e • A li" PHOTO #33 PHOTO #34 PHOTO #35 PHOTO #36 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 14 1 f ,_, Ito 1 1 PHOTO #37 PHOTO #38 0 40fre , T- 0 PHOTO #39 PHOTO #40 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 15 � k f J. • 1 PHOTO #41 PHOTO #42 i 7 PHOTO #43 PHOTO #44 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 16 . <"�" aw '9 . M . . J V PHOTO #45 PHOTO #46 .` 7 4 A c., _ ..._ -- i " L v .. r. PHOTO # PHOTO #48 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 17 ii 41 / AP • i PHOTO #49 PHOTO #50 ,„ . ,, ,, . ,. ,„ 4 , , ^ ,,,,, ,„ ., \ ,,,,,,,, 4 Aigif : 1 PHOTO #51 PHOTO #52 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 18 ?,.., * '.; ."-..!',°-- . LI, , \., ,. „..1.: „,,,,. ,.... , Mit A i PHOTO #53 PHOTO #54 p Pro , .. , .... , PHOTO #55 PHOTO #56 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 19 , (k,. . ll P 001, ' , PHOTO #57 PHOTO #58 f PHOTO #59 PHOTO #60 Gierok Engineering, Inc. Edgewater City Hall Investigation — Structural Review July 15, 2003 Page 20 PHOTO #61 PHOTO #62 PHOTO #63 8 m 2 rri cp \ - .23 Zil 0 .0 t,) • V, , . ./, 7Fir 5 71_ .n . . n ?t Il � ` , ' + itii ' r _ �• � \ •' m ��` m � , a ; , ' CR OWN _ •� - - 0.. ° �, , � +� ;s , 1 n CO C.+�ifw'+t .ar4 2 ' 1. I . a. ..�..,,� —_-__ e T H �. O a, V .�► ,.._.. - f .. , ' i i t 1 `a - • � �%c 1 g;.� Zo I © e „ I � 4 -' ? c �• r 24+ m o 0 i " ' . . . aO / v o` a N N p ff G O O •• "•, 1_,c. • _ Y .." ' ., i r / I w m / ' O V T tl� c t 7 co o A b 1 I a 45 ' I I' � O • 3 ✓ N , , , o • e 4 c + �.+ of 9 . l ' ..9 0 M I -+ O. C _ O n t_ 1 1 t�"" m 1 D 0 ' 4 ''� t 1 4 •rt •• .VERTED _ CROWN y .. 0. 40% .. Z1 XI til QC 4b I 1 \'' 0 . Cr - ' I ‘.'• 4 1 • I 7 (0 • Eim / - - 1 -6 2 1 - ' .. t „,. — • i *1 1 at. l• '...; \ , m , ( . I ` i ' �• + mo d !7 m 1 O 3 17 m � 1MC z .c to 1 = D t 1m I �s, �_, ., c t_ ligIl 1 I I . an — ° I e :11 20' 1 ' 24 20' In z G* .b — r t ��J `'d t I I•:: .J �C T • ao in o {n" '■ < I. 1 AA i 1 + 1 `F a ,� V g — — 1 � � 1l1_ - rn — — — . ! t . I e - 2- 10 "D.I.P. RCO o r p 0 ��M1�6� � ,�s ' sJ D �� z b A e = iii'f',, • . d. DRAiN eA O tpiri 1 eR '' e4 ► 'f.... O r 2 i 4, , I 11 C \t ' ....f'‘ , 4' r q m \ \ / N 74 ! ► :; . 0 r°r -4 m'� am � � !h!:: �, ' 8 6.50 ' 1 t il 1 ID -t A / T. 1.�+..w►s� ., 4111.. . /.. IIII III n gip.. T64i111 o c g ° / " , 1 9 t.S O D. o .-.9 n - T — — -- A 1p . 1 11 4 _ " .� tN R d t'm M1 . CROWN N 0.40 % ., � � a 0 nX6 ► - -- G mm l • c-,-,1 n + + • , t .1 -, 0 d n G l n s qe J 3 11 �: cr, LJ / `�� Z n * . e ° --4 - mo � r d ® � 0 71 24.50 20 � ...1. "5.9" g nip 1 1 Cr N Z O = — 44 '� ► ? 1. A .B. - f �x '• B u ? 18.0'y T. C 4� � A r cy "s> t7. B.C. ` .. 0.40 a/. �� �� A. INVERTED _ _I i� CROW _ N f . : OEM " -.\-- a , P- -- - T �_ tf, t . B * I EP& .e.,-. 4 _.e - e - -.%. -- P 'ilk*. ' ° .. .•-.. -, - Z O m m A . !• . M Co O o o m 0 < • 1/• IF .o 'a 22 -3 _ N �'C '. 1 2 , L ' . I . , 3 , I 1 S\ t - , I a" 11) er. I qc .\ \.. - - - 0 • i, City of Edgewater Proposed Edgewater City Hall Feasibility Review 3.3 Required Improvements Proposed improvements for the site are shown on an as -built drawing of the development. Some of the improvements proposed are considered to be somewhat critical while others are considered to be minor. The following descriptions and the site photographs give some indication of the nature of the observed feature and the urgency for remediation. Pavement conditions onsite appear to be in relatively good shape with the exception of two small areas adjacent to the entrance /exit drive accessing U.S. Highway 1. There is evidence of stormwater ponding causing deterioration of the pavement and curbing in those areas. One such indicator is the substantial amount of sand and debris that has visibly settled. It is obvious that repeated attempts have been made to patch the pavement abutting the curb and gutter. It is recommended that this area be slightly re- graded to direct stormwater runoff to the appropriate basin. See photographs #1, #2, #3 and #4. Traffic Circulation onsite appears to be functional and basically non - conflicting except at one intersection where a parking area outlets to the one -way drive -thru. A motorist driving in the north parking area adjacent to the building is allowed to make a right hand turn into the one - way traffic of the drive -thru. This traffic pattern is encouraged by the existence of additional parking to the north of this area. Motorists, both in the parking area and the drive -thru are uninformed of the potential conflict: the drive -thru motorist assuming a right -of -way and the parking area motorist not realizing he /she is turning into one -way traffic. The attached Traffic Circulation Improvement Plan shows two alternatives for possibly eliminating this conflict or at least reducing the current risks. Alternative #1 involves installing directional signs and some minor construction modifications including paving, grading and stripping to reconfigure the problem area. Alternative #1 completely eliminates the existing conflict by not allowing motorists to turn the wrong way into one -way traffic. Alternative #2 involves adding directional signs at the problem areas to decrease the potential for conflict. Although Alternative #2 is more economical, it does not eliminate the conflict. Another proposed improvement with respect to on site traffic is the redirection of the existing truck route used to collect onsite solid waste. The solid waste truck must drive underneath the drive -thru canopy and maneuver into position to collect the trash and then maneuver again to exit the site. This is performed in the drive -thru exit lanes. This is a conflict for customers, and the solid waste truck if the lanes are full. It is proposed that the site dumpster facility be relocated where the truck does not have to interfere with traffic flow and minimize excess maneuvering. It is further recommended that the existing dumpster facility be demolished to enhance aesthetics in the highly visible and accessible area. See photographs #12 and #13. Drainage facilities presently serving the existing site appear to be adequate and seemingly require only minor re- grading at the base of the concrete spillways due to erosion (see photograph #6), re- grading around the existing stormwater management facility outfall structure (see photographs #7, #8, and /or #9), and general cleaning and maintenance of the system. Based on site observations, the outfall structure for the stormwater management facility, located at the southwest corner of the property, has substantial amounts of debris and 3 -2 8/8/2003 City of Edgewater Proposed Edgewater City Hall Feasibility Review sediment collected inside. There may also be debris and sediment clogging the culverts designed to discharge stormwater from the system. These obstructions restrict flow, minimize capacity, and could possibly cause local and /or upstream flooding during a major storm event. The collection of debris appears to be caused from pooling outside of the skimmer allowing garbage to flow over the skimmer and into the structure, since the bottom of the skimmer is buried, essentially causing the skimmer to function as the overflow from the system. As a result, pollutants and debris are being allowed to discharge from the system, which is not the intended design function of the apparatus. It is assumed that the system discharges either directly or indirectly to the Indian River, which is classified as an Outstanding Florida Water (OFW). The current functioning of the system is in violation of state regulations and should be considered as a critical improvement. Corrective measures shall be taken to re -grade around the skimmer and provide for a minimum of 12 inches clearance between the bottom of the skimmer and final grade. It is recommended that a non - vegetative ground cover be used directly beneath and 1 -foot in all directions of the skimmer to eliminate the potential for overgrowth that may restrict flow. Furthermore, it is recommended that the entire stormwater management system be checked thoroughly and cleaned as necessary to remove any debris and sediment from the structure and downstream stormwater piping. There is evidence of erosion at the base of all of the concrete spillways used to convey stormwater runoff to the retention area. The sod and underlying sandy material have been eroded due to the energy of the water flowing down the spillways and suddenly being stopped at the base where there is only vegetation, which is susceptible to erosion from the force of the water. There are a couple of ways to counter the erosive forces of water flowing at high rates, which are practical and fairly economical. One way is to dissipate the energy of the water by adding baffles to the spillways. This way, as the water reaches the vegetative base, the flow rate and energy would have been greatly reduced, hence limiting the erosive forces of the water. Another way to alleviate erosion would be to place a non - erosive material, such as concrete, rip -rap, or gravel, at the base and on the opposite bank directly in front of each spillway to eliminate the possibility for erosion of the vegetation. However, before these preventive measures are taken, corrective action should be taken to regrade the swale. In addition to the proposed modification(s) and immediate maintenance of the outfall structure and the remediation of the erosion at the base of the spillways, routine maintenance should be performed to ensure that the system continues to function properly. The system should be maintained on a regular basis as suggested by the following schedule. Maintenance Schedule: 1. The pond banks and bottom should be mowed /trimmed weekly during the growing season and as needed for the remaining season. Clippings should be bagged and removed to reduce organic loading. 2. A weekly visual inspection of the conveyance system, pond and outfall structure should be made for debris that would tend to limit the intended operation of the system. A check for debris should also occur following each storm. Any such obstruction should be removed immediately. 3. A visual inspection of the pond should be made after each substantial rainfall event (1" or more) for signs of erosion. If detected, repair to the eroded area should be made prior to any subsequent rainfall events. 3 -3 8/8/2003 City of Edgewater Proposed Edgewater City Hall Feasibility Review 4. A semi - annual inspection should be made of the entire system for integrity, proper operation, and sediment build -up. All structures should be inspected for scour, erosion, settlement, and structural failure following major storms as well. Repairs and /or cleaning should be done accordingly. 5. All permanent impoundments and structures should be inspected periodically by a Florida registered professional engineer to insure that they remain structurally sound and mechanically efficient. Utilities are assumed to be functioning properly with one minor observed necessary corrective action. A valve to the watermain in the southwest corner of the site has not been cut and capped and is being utilized as a solid waste facility. It should be cut, cleaned and capped. It is also recommended that pressure and flow tests be performed on the system to determine if adequate fire protection is available per the requirements of the Florida Fire Prevention Code. 3.4 Conclusion The attached "Proposed Site Improvements" plan and "Traffic Circulation Improvement Plan" in conjunction with this engineering narrative address existing site conditions that are required for improvement, to increase efficiency and functionality and prevent potential liability. The more critical site issues include corrective measures necessary to improve the function of the stormwater management system outfall structure and the traffic conflict associated with vehicles entering the one -way traffic movement in the drive -thru area. Other recommended site improvements are of a less critical nature and include: dumpster facility relocation, additional signage and /or pavement markings to improve traffic circulation, minor pavement re- grading, and corrective and preventive total measures for erosion control associated with the drainage conveyance system. The costs of these improvements are estimated to be approximately $30,000. 3 -4 8/8/2003 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS (REFERENCE ATTACHED EXHIBIT TITLED "PHOTOGRAPH LOCATIONS ") APRIL 11, 2003 • `•� "� , . 1 4 y a . . -.. '`- y am.. ....:. . -- PICTURE #1 ! - • , ti , - '''.:-. ----, e rr' �• •- ' ' i. PICTURE #2 1 OF 8 (REFERENCE ATTACHED SITE EXHIBIT TITLED PHOTOGRAPHS "PHOTOGRAPH LOCATIONS") APRIL 11, 2003 (CONTINUED) • w rM " PICTURE #3 • as F ;r ' 1 . • , "max • • e:� r:. c � ` ; i !`' 'LP+,"'°'• mow..:# ,x'�r, -.' ., _• man:: , . PICTURE #4 2 OF 8 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS (REFERENCE ATTACHED EXHIBIT TITLED "PHOTOGRAPH LOCATIONS ") APRIL 11, 2003 (CONTINUED) II - , ,,.. t _______,-..,,,,, ,... t .„, , ......- `. c mac .. 4 ..I- ., r ,, • qiir r 1' f ' 4 r ` PICTURE #5 ilia. iI" 7 4 1 tili 0 . igete't .. j ' J ' - ' ' ,... 1 .-%': -,': ';''''-;::.6 ': .. --:•-..- .- - . J6n �' - � ..'r,.�'i ±ta, 4 ar f ,�.. t .I . �• y ..� ` . PICTURE #6 3 OF 8 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS (REFERENCE ATTACHED EXHIBIT TITLED "PHOTOGRAPH LOCATIONS ") APRIL 11, 2003 (CONTINUED) �, i u t , .,.,. ,...)t,.,_, t x ,:,-,-. 40, .. m mo *,t4 y�. I t PICTURE #7 ,... a1414 . F •..1w �_/A, �9e Y t j� A7 l f , .X ta'Y 1r . • .t.,...;,..7' ;��� - • 11111111•1111111111.11 .. itt•aasssat V „ ��' ��gg LM, X . l " i', . :� / r • * ,,w.4!,, q + it .•.t*d :+G.' is .v,t %; : ' , rt � -- -k.' 1J�' t W y ",�1� :per c . .�t . . 7�.. tt + �' _ ' 1 1..#•• }�' T 'r'y ' '' 1' ' r 'N t .' \ lr,* P'1- ! "` -' '} WA4 } k R Rr r.'y{ ' 4l . ': tr. � j -4‘ + *k� j i . 'f� Vy '� . L ,•, +' 'd , 4-,..., t , r J � t r• J•t ,. ' � ` '� ;t� �. '' ..i"^ 1 � � %,` 1 Y yxy,.•., 1, + ': k . '' '' •i;t F,C'y f .. \. y�3 \I . ' , - w. l •11:::4 f l • ._ w '.• ,' +. l; '-" • _ • PICTURE #8 4 0F8 PHS SITE PHOTOGRA (REFERENCE ATTACHED EXHIBIT TITLED "PHOTOGRAPH LOCATIONS ") APRIL 11, 2003 (CONTINUED) MI .II, n■a . Y t 1 N %. l t •,u PICTURE #9 a }p •�...._ ._ _�;. r . ..; t . • c ' r *N". ...t•�'tP�•PTT7'7'77'� .rwY �! r ., .0 � . ! ,e f+ 'r: ,... ...,s� i„, "awe.., �.. _ t++y. dad " y , 4°'E 4 µ . F M b a G `'' r , # : + o v M s x fi"' �y, .. 7`", ''' R. .,+� '^ : ' fi r t ,w f 7' '+ ". ,w"i a�' :; r PICTURE #10 5 OF 8 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS (REFERENCE ATTACHED EXHIBIT TITLED "PHOTOGRAPH LOCATIONS ") APRIL 11, 2003 (CONTINUED) s k4'` !} t Vin. '''-: - , ;*,,c,,,,,t, .::1'.; ''' eit PICTURE #11 t ifilli A :' ,. ' ';',- ; ri ., , ., ,. 4 „ •44c,_.,ti,i . • : •., • et ,„,,,,,......„...„...„,,-94,, - ' ,: ' ' # ' ' ) - r te ; PICTURE #12 6 0F8 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS (REFERENCE ATTACHED EXHIBIT TITLED "PHOTOGRAPH LOCATIONS") APRIL 11, 2003 (CONTINUED) t . gst . L ' , 1 , T \ 1 r,Lr...,,, i r P "r •-•. , 4 : i 4 0 1 . 4iiii Plf p J 1 4 - 7 1 # I I e i i or . ..f.„. ., . . . . . - PICTURE #13 lIll r----- ..Z _ t. 1 saapwri Mftttsii.- , " ----..- , • . . , . PICTURE #14 7 OF 8 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS (REFERENCE ATTACHED EXHIBIT TITLED "PHOTOGRAPH LOCATIONS ") APRIL 11, 2003 (CONTINUED) stramiommostoramorpr 5404 PICTURE #15 8 OF 8 e — — '' —= I £ ° s � a e _ _ �� r n ■�, 1 ' .. r • r • _ _ _. _ ..... - .. r P P ,10 , ••••• r- . - - z • i ` W N ■ Q .rr-. J ... P • \\\ O \ — ?. e . ". i ; ♦ ` g` RWW W c._ i V 111 l Kll H %p Ob0 N — NM•. � .031 i13nNl r v C • W� O 0 1 O'S OS a l I ,� CI o > Z e` J1 f y m Z m \o o ! dy a . i dy �: CO o u Y o ell c Ka l g N d• .3 �~/ W O a LO `n S e U l ��Y '1' • , •O — ® e c� . r , f > < • � zl 91 ' 7 J ❑ m • .. ] N Y V %0I,0 N •213 n d ltl I N 9. . 2' r � J °, 2� � ligi 1� 0 o Z a ~ CO 0 pA�E s ✓ £ ' :Q ... O w 0 z c. v 0 N J '- O ;C r` - / \ • 5 q g= a Q a 3 u' (2) 111111C1111111111111011211: oliiiii " ( �.a ' ) ' - 'I � t mil / I r a • = 0 4 . .... .... _...__.$. , ..,..., .. 1.,...! . , I 'iri ...I '.3 \ 1 , • *,. „, - 01 Ni \ gi I cc .- d w � ' - Ii 1 - o a • Y H W p QQQ a e- f I=• � - `,. .NI W 1 Z (n 5 W top e� rcr b c ��II 1 `,, I , .. ems- � 3 ..0 LO _ z j� ',An I •.rte �+ s, a c9 .. la l'E V itallirtar 4ratline O a..1 ; . x R w N. e 1 O m Nltl23a e ' _ _� e �R n�• 111/® o J o f CO ar0„OI -z- m ° ' I. ` C - " a ' F , Artilli 1lM6 W N �A�1 R - -J1 -p Zt H c fnZ ,Y' II 1 tit, I r} — _ .. 1 ue I I I _ W . , ii 4 ' l a cg re Z 7111E Cr �I r i1 °'� Ti .,_ t Z N1 It a. m 01 I 1 1 I 0 ,,,, ' I - u a i ',...';k, JA 11 I ( I I 1 _ i _ ... y� l . yyyy pppp • m n • ¢ I 1 1 II 0 .1, A ,. . 6' 1 1 7 I 1 .L N L in .3, • A _ it a i 4 m g 0 M 0p r. ® 1 1 I 1 1 ' - s1 , o Pi - c. c'‘:, c N V g ((((((222��� 'er � n `; ' - -" _ _ - M o£F N IL /� N O y r O O 01, 0 •' 7 N NMO210 031L3nNl , r. "• , � s W - .. W . �, J • . �3°i°, LO O O m L L co E c • N O ,, . Sib •� .bZ 1 '� OO „ e I -, . W �, i. V O ■ W -) .I O �J Cl J ' c 1 q I t e 1 � a. N 1 1 .,. N o. _ _ �: I o �r N • f . � a ., � x :', S711 °p O (�j 4. 4) v I y ('}pI CI, 11� • ..... '££ Y' — '7oDd .. _ N'. / 011 • ` 03ia3A, ”' �,2a. '�il�.`7FJ ' Z � m .."1.r I 1 2 r.. i U : M , T e.„, id . #0 ,„ . e ..,,,, ., , , # . , ....- .4 1.,,„Ipe i.” „ 4.,... ' - '' t 4,, ;.:* 3 G . {` SITE - LOCATION O y u A X, MP \ON . 7 ;0' 4° : .' "4.16:4 n .. * ‘ lit f .. A , ,..., ,,, DRAWING TITLE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH 1835 Edgewater Drive PROJECT TITLE Gierok Orlando, Florida 32804 EDGEWATER CITY HALL Phone: 407/244 -8580 DATE PROJECT NO ng Inc, Fax: 407/244 -8581 06.24.03 EW 11 DRAWN BY DESIGNED BY. CHECKED BY PROJ. MGR.: II Design and Construction Services email: gierok @cfl.rr.co IDg IDg KNG KNG SCALE. SHEET NO MWBE Certified NTS 1 OF 1 t o .e 1 ,� , _— _ T I _ T D ►' .. - I __. !ir�y� �� • t m r rr, to . b p� 3 C0 5 �'S Cj m i m ' ' 'S ' y J VI m ft �. • INVED / CROWN 7C' `moo `�'' F' D c , `.V _ - I .a #, �'� I a '�,•'' .Q: O � mo • r 7 ■ O X 20 • 1 _ _ __ ___ , b , ,. . �, a ° m ��, ' ., : .,.,. .: .::". D O ZZ ��c ° V TN n 1 0 ‘ :— ' /41EW... :.- ' k tii :::: • M ,E\ torn ,,,, 7� !i [ 7 . 4 .. lic k ' Ilp, • ...,4.7., '�^ 7 •.- • 24 . 1 wZ Oyr�. '. .,, mo 'a - 1 , i h 45 ,11_ r ° . p mt w " 0 . • , m O i. � � � � -INVERTED CROWN ..;„ , 0 .40% P '1D m n - I71 TI " vs� F* F, r A 4.x4•,.., r - , , 1 , i m ° ¢ I , - 0 �,� 3 = F. I v _ m co' p • . �� s ,'s I �.. i ro _ 1T Z C7 Z '' I, : ''' I a • � 9 { ° O 'p � R1 " N • o eo 1 I )ZD m ' i I. 'II I I 4 * I I r Eg v Z :: i Q n o 1 �� I m D . I I • ,' �lila . m y -� C� = D .1 m m I 'xi .0:2 ' c • 1 .4.5.c. A r NMI 8 1 r __ p O � i 1 o' — t• r • {`_ - � �'s a 20 24. 1 1 I 5� t m s I a 110 rn O pm m Z ' _ ._ _ _ _ 0D 1 ' m w ' 1 _ _ � I . .. , — Z N tirlfil �' ` • ti *„ al, + a N -2 -10 ROD - m 1 D • p `4 ► s A _ O 'e _ . DRAIN ' ` O �Rl�l ��6 � "' • - 0 — ® X ' s = �' . ° 1 N Ci' e 4•:0 1 9 , o K ,� v N. °� > � m p m c , 7 ` •r p er ' { Z I gy m: g z� � �`�. i1 j . ! . ! '; ` � ' I � �� `gy .50 ' ! J I •,- ' . 19 -.0 xi 2 di , .... ' N r ‘-' - .p ., m o to a-a -I (n ' , � 1 ' " IN RTED ` e - ' CROWN 40 • m m; O 41. • ii �; n I �. .P 0 y ' �'p m j i ' is" •, 171 A m X �_ � 1 4. * g .- ZO s. ,4 R p , mR- _ S � o g I$ F - 1 2' 16 - I2 ''. (n O Z 0.. � `' - a x,� Z v 7C� ■ mp n .� F a {F� a L / B T x 'X/ < '-e d •. m 1 �'.� T , a .Z C > ® N m= 7' 24.50' • 1050 O O * r r C M . f l ea e C _ c O BOO '° ,j M m� r 4 t.' , q '. °�' A.e.'.' ly p'3 CI --I c b � s I 0 t�. e. - m C T ED ' _ �C WN - .0 .40 d /. '- • - I • C-S O rn x 0 A . B .. . Q d7 U) m < -u 2 -i m `" , "' k� a v 1 5 rn r a rm ' • < � 7 10 . O ' , _ •. o ' r r Z 40 v -, D• t� W - m M ir { .aT ' zi r r1 m i ....., • "6 • c: - s' il ' - '1 , . 1 '^ m iI Z p 1 LJ tA p . _ w.n , p p c m D ]p A u e / S I I T O. G GRAD���� S 6 + s ' L' `."`� n•u — �_r„r -- ° �` i g n 7 . . , - ' - ) I \ " 41 ! . 'i , I 0, 1 917) 1 1 1 1 • F • • %N.- alma: --•-•-,.; r•elz,,, 01r •,,, g . to , .... _ .. , . ',.# • . . , rr 4.:„'"N. °: . 1 n 40 A Ott 1 ' . . i LZ LI areorli If? - - __ / . .,,,,, - • - 0. -. -, - . a • (i.- ..*' . C) • ....;• h 0 wp, ,,, .. 1 Z Z ..-. l itg--.0 c CD -4....1, P -4. 2 ct (t) . -4 • ,,, 4 ,,, 4. di N . - ---0 40 _ . 36 .0 a_ 311111110. 2f? 1° - 73 5 1 ( Th a) "N "N z :, i ‘ ..t . t .k --.:.-...... , 4 /6, .. . . ''..".. N ... la '• .7..14 I I ▪ / 1 „ *- ■ 6 ..\, • '4' ■ a Z Z M ' Pa • , ..). .,,, I I . 1 • 00 t i vi iitits /- 1 D ' Lt) a v -. c , z c , ..: a: 0 ! • I i t. '‘N ' a' \ ' 'r ; ° ' ' 24 " I . •••.,.. • re e . "7 tf I. - • ,, •i.ft • ,:,. - VII 0 ' .. o .... 18 z -....) . • .1,____L---t - - -e : -, , , 4i, r, 15' :11. 0 .,..' Z 2 (") ■■ . r • il, C 4.0 (.• op C , ••4 r . • :::, I 0 ot c• • ...• - F.,- . 6 % .. - 1-., 1 '7- iNge#' 4' I . N • • J / F' • T / .D. :4 I 144 II 7 : I 1 '. o P g . .. 1/ R 2. :" r c. 7 0 c T - Z al I r .. • IM 0 1 : 1 / '' ", _ . A • 2 • 4. _ n A : , 7 CD 4.. -.1 N ga 4.1I 40 •4 C) ° f - rill as o zo. I / • 'P , i : * '9 2 . - ‘:1 • . (11 . . 4 ' ' ', • ' '''' - . ‘ .1 .4 I Ti ' ••,. et • : •\ Ay Nlig , II' c 0 • •5 N , ,r A 4 C •■•■■• ..i 0 1 0 .17 . 111 11* 4411 : 1 1 1i 1 , 0 1 0 ' - G) 0 l _ 1. i - • .., ...- ri . . -0 I 1 ',. 1 I • • • , / I O r / . :7 > 0 .... , .. 41,. • 6, INVERTED _, CROWN ..... ,,,.. 0 ..1 :: s 0 0s N. .,.., -I -n agetoraweirmat= ., 7 N ■,,, , I 4 44 t !# * i fi6 ''' 41 , 4 • ,D,.. - \ X - .1 [ • kt CA 4/ k ' - ,-. - • W ' I 11: 1. A I 1 1 , 1 N - \ 0 animil 45 - 4 _ . • .> 4 6 ' r' L • : , 1, 4 -• i f I •• • • . - 1 e I± • ° 4 h, 11111 44, o ' -1 • m t C 1 1 \ . 111 III 111111 II 111111 1111011i VII Illik,, "13 _ O 0 1111111111:111111Plai , I, ., ..- i '''' • r2,31 1 , i- 1 - 1 . ili a. . Ili . • ...... . -. a: t ,.., > > _ 1 MI 23 I..; P - _ 1 . 0' ' 1 , • . -..F-- d Z r- m 1 1 , WO x `g • I . 1 r 11 _.• MINN 1 ___ .4 • . r93 oi Jio ' 1 •■6- '24 20 73 0 to 1 ,..• *Nis f _ O i co --1 O l• I R it I 1 ,... E . 1 rn - , III ‘ .: . co -ci NI 0 IN. ...-. m g 5 2 rii 1' ' 1 1-Le' ; : 1 1 ■ . 1 4 NI mi g.. 6_ a 0 i iiii i& 11111 Z WA IIIN . ' ,. 0 ' .t. i „,, . - -11.4-1.... ..„ n.) -Ti G) r71 -t- ; , el lif„, - 2 -10" D.I.P RCO " 0 r 40_ 0 = i • ',DRAIN 00 0 I VINIIINIMIN '6.'4, kt‘. .• - .1 .6 0 . 41, Illili 1 etas .4, ?- . g . • X '. / Ei r. ' . , 0 , :a 2 $ S 4. I ° x • ..., .0 2 - 01 't0 • 6? • , 1 A • 1 ii > *). 4 r ' - ,.. cn z • -n . I - -1 rn ---1 Pc r ::. \ . 1 z., -- I \ r 0 .4 ..., s tN . o ...9 1 • ' t • • ,k4) i • 's ..._ _ --II' 2 -- - 1> \ in _ • rr l , ..,.. ,:,c ill •49 • ,.,:l.:..,.--- .q A. , ./ 4 ) ..k. . 8 . - . \ ... 1., , 74.16' . li... IN . 4 ,0 : 4!, - •.,, 1 i .., 1 - - * ..4 4 NM C) f o ...,„,. si. s ....., • .. . s' Jai 1 lisigiq \ 11 r `" .J '‘ 86.5d ' .-2 ' \ 1 . • . 1.13 1 " ,,,.■ N % L .... -....- -..... ... III / MINBEIliallirill ''T s i \ 7 .9 I 1 111 - ■ t , • , , (- •• 1 *1) \''"'w" # A nt , 4 /4- t . f li l• . c ei YS ' 0 i 2 8 ° - -- % . , 4 ',...'90 ..., ■ 1 :a ' ‘ ' . I tr, al , s44, / - -- 2 5 ' D 4. 4,-4 ° o ':- • , • ':" m 4 - I' I, 3: ca ;ad . i -., r , ... _ , II 0 _A - A -- -4 - 1 - 1 ■.,, ,, %1,• . .1 ..... --• IN R D " ': i 1 ...„..-, to n ■ . 1 7:. ••••• A 1 'ta. ' .4- liteilikilli: " - • •-.... CROWN 4/44.9 Tz _. ,..., 0:0 % ..". ' ■ . s e ''. 0 O. , ..., "' 49 c . N . , ‘stP -VT a.. • .. . •r• a k •-. • Jr ... <9 V ; 0 0 ' • A :S * 1 • V --._ al' _ Gli r' iSS Cs M _ -I ...., - _ -;.' K - 0,11 . soil ' L •••••' Z • Z ----- -- - __.. . :1) :17 M N r- 7) m . P 12' 16' -' 12" ' '-1 . - - Z ' ' 6 , . In ‘ - '0 .1 .. \ _ , .0 ...4 • ...-- . ..,e. , •--, ■ <s, '' ir - 1 m - o .6. .4.- •.,.. -0 c . 1 ■ i ..P t m Ca 7' 24.50 ' • • 20 „IPA g c.. i t . L -., ,, . ......-6. '•,-., . z / 0). ./. 134 . ,,,, IN) c-• .4 0 • 'e> / 0 , Z d- \ z z „,,_ ,..,,I• t ••,,, , • y A .8._ 1,4? C e i l . . 1 ? 1 1 \,.../ / a "v4'1 '. 4? 4.) II .-18°3 11 e I A.1. " tr, / s" INVERTED CROWN 0 40 • •• it,,,, ro 41 ., c i/.. . ) .. 3 a• - Il■ •.:.... #1111",*, leo . _ .,,_ _ _ , 4Q '. s .., -.%. a - . • ,6, - •■16 y - i - - a .. 41:11°-'1'... c • voi • .,4• -.. - - s ...... .. - • -3. N di A I . 13' N . 1.. . 1 22-3 7 -N. ..sp 0 ,,,, s. -,,, . 1 0 •, - n - •• • • 0 - - . ,.., _ ,, n) lg ., • .e - 7 N e . / j Il th CO < t" . ji) • . ...• %a ■■■■ 1 .' 7 TIM a 1 T a a � 7a � n e © t0 N -� ' TYP: ,b 0 . 1.. q e : • B j i / ( l l (� �•"' w r c .� j i • 10 Z CROWN _ �. 40 %• '3 6' , B' _ /4,11P.,,,, an • ` � f i O 24 s ! ^ . I t : . $ � 0 =p 1 u? � o .�[ a_ N N . 0 is u v 7 y 411.-W p i i t,,, / . 74 9 te',..‘ . ,4 N\ to— 'c' / ;:: ....:: . . 21 77, 4 10 4 J O c. t i• 5' �T 0 ID , ° ~ Z4 ' 6 w I c 45 6 . r . I f O NOS / 1 `` 0 - 0 • ms's r;1 I C 0. ,n 0 1_ ; 1. I j il t -. -- - - '' -:" ri ..0 ; 1 �•' . VERTED C - .. 0.40% / m D Q P * N ; _ n 1. •/' 's t . _ I — 4 ."4. ".3., _ . , ., ....:...::.:...:. :...: ..... ' . 14 4 a . , .„......:..... °3\ ► � a � ' ' .� — -...'.....:.:. r-,, i I 1 •1 — .� n o m I 1 0 • C7 v A ,� �� m I l.<6 \ .iiiiiffi ' ., � _ . ; c A t o , m 1 1 ( 4 A / 1 Si ' n C7 , .. i CD ,. I , . m c 1 \ r 1 b S I r sin 0 3 1 . , .4. I . 0 I Q At r '` s • — 20' ' 24 20 • m . S 1 � 1 _ 11.1 : j :9 '9 t.. • 1 m1' � h . CO 1:1 n IN < �, o m , z- 1 1 1 1 l t . - C '1 m ;,i,'514 z 1 U !I I _ 23 M Z� w 1 ■ rn uviiat b a— mo ' A . o A : ,A = j."7.. , DRAtND.1 P. Ri ' m f— I • tot . ", • e r , s 2 � ,` b O o- m g m $A 1 .,> .0 \V m Q?\ _ I Z • rn ^ �- , n , \J 1 y>'‘ r O N Z 1m 'o o li w 9 6 \ 8 1? • . o \ - N ?4.16 arm. < 1 ,._ -, . '-ce - 11111:11111111Prillinlii e f r. 0 . m �� � 1 � �. `� 86.50 , �c hi h C " 91 \� ' :111 111111 11110111 gip : o ,z0. l i i-: N e` l o , J ' O t 0 �o • . • � < �� _ � 9 � °��I � n - ' �+ - t' R D i� \4„, , CROWN � 0.4 . 0 & tT9 X F �‹ Cl \�� . r� 7. , � ��•,QGF,�'QO 4'1 '4' 4 _ .°\\?. \ p0 r4 q e. c, \ 117 /08/2003 11:06 3862556989 DJDESIGH PAGE 02 V 913 N. Nova Road Vi Holy HAI, Florida 32117 �1 (386) 2558987 (368) 255.8999 FAX Q M29000587 ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST EDGEWATER CITY HALL (Regions Bank Building) DEMOLITION Interior partitions 1,900 Interior storefront partitions 2,100 Cabinetry /millwork 450 Doors/frarnes 1,400 Carpeting 1,700 Ceilings 2,900 Cleaning/dumping l • 500 $11,950 NEW CONSTRUCTION New interior partitions 15,550 New interior storefront 20,800 New council desk/dais 16,000 Doors/frames 12,250 Carpeting 36,200 Ceilings 22,500 Public (fixed)seating 26,000 New HCP toilet room/accessories 4,850 Tile floor/base 1,200 Painting 10.000 $165,350 Demolition/New Construction $177,300 Subcontractor O/H&P 10% 17,730 Contractor's O/H &P 15% 26,595 Bond/Insurance 2% 3,546 Total construction cost S225,171 The existing building envelope was well built and has been well maintained. Much of the existing interior could be left 'as is' and function adequately as administrative space and every effort has been made to incorporate existing components. It has been assumed for the purposes of this exercise that there are no abatement issues. The existing roof is fairly new and does not need replacement. We have assumed no new F.F.E. (furniture, fixtures and equipment), for this opinion. There are furnishings and appurtenances that can be re -used and office equipment that will be re- located from the present City departments. 1 f - . ; ' L . ,�� 7 _: 8 + , w O / 'I O-- - O f C u•rr_ __-T I . cn „ , rt N I f \ , e i 1 I o o o - i O of . 1 i N Vic-°• rhi , k r^ Vi i T • ' i t `+ 'P if f 4 w iN a E g� � i r �? � o Fl i i lu EA g �� 21 p g ) lAil I. m ti tr a RI -' 5 2. i 1! 8 41 1 i A 1 i pi it s 0 gg 111141 EDGEWATER CITY HALL 3 REVISIONS aTI 9 I REGION'S BANK BUILDING 3 . i !gilt 3 EDGEWATER. F.. I 1)E 0,N INC 411.1111.•r 1 i i M y, -C • i 0 1 1 o i r� !I ! i • • 0 TI f • le i L% I al r 31^ 3IA !!. p . N . : 1 ir , i 3 i g i llg gg di i 8 i !I ll :;1 hiehi 09 s Ai 5 . -,,, 9 gsg 1 a i 1111 8 mt. REVISIONS N) > gl * EDGEWATER CITY HALL ;E rg • REVISION DATE 9 �s $ REGION BANK BUILDING g N ; PP • EDGEWATER, FL. N5 DE,IGN INC : = • _ > . _._ -_ I I e iLZ pp a o O I • 1 T III — 1 ■I = .' ■ i ■ of 1 i I , ■ a T 1 / M o o t - -7 _ W i r �. s r +I of � I { I O ono y u r i � _ / I 1 Il i 1 }} I 1 101�a ,u 7 L: i �o���ii N ' f ° �� �+-�{+ S III I t, X 1 3 � , j cy' I � I N • :1,0,1 al �� • JI � /j 0 OI G� • � € t II : I 111 11 • ......,,,.„,,A7.,,,7:, 1 : ,..: , ........• , 1; , 41. ,,,... ,...., I i 1 1 N ' I II x - ' 11 7.-0°' ', �� L -_ -- L ' / IPEr:' : ' '1 ' ....) _ 7- I / 1 0 Fi " % � w r ,� A 1 - + 3 1 .- Y 6. $FFF u ' - mo I - � � . w :� = d - I a____ i - S / r . , 1 g i 1 ii I , , o y i d Ti iv 2 K 0 si ■y ZY r Q g ii / /.> li i 1 i l ''. l 10 i ! I Eta g I / ii N LA D EDGEWATER CITY HALL t' § • HMO REVISIONS DMZ < REGION BANK BUILDING EDGEWATER, FL. Ig DE`,IC,N INC 1 1 i I p _N , mial:c ; o 0 0 1 io 0 r i - - 4. 4 J Q - 6 N a p pJ N Ce ri Le 1 L e i 3 L l m / fi / ~, i / ai iv ✓lP 'm .4 P t1gs.i N IX lay fl i51 § ligil i i ! i i § m 2 ci .4P qg 1 i ' 0 RF i e 1 . _ gip • g w D EDGEWATER CITY H AL L REVISIONS ; � TE 4 q Issiii REGION'S BANK BUILDING 1 P> • EDGEWATER, FL. 1g , i 1� p -- =_ i — vY - 1 1 1 1 1 _ ■ ■ ■■ -- C, — 1 — ■�■ 1 j ■ ■■ ■ ■i inium ■ 111111 I■■■ ■ ■ ■■ /1 1 1.�� 1 ` 1 1 1 ,I Il■■■■■■■ li 1I:�� 1 — 1 ■I•■MIII■IMII■ .1.1111111...10111. 1 O C' 1-- ■ ..111.111111111M ■ �, — .111.11111.01.11101111 _ _ — 1411111r i II S I I N\ ..) I■G ■I 1■ 11 1 I � 117.1111 1 ■..11 \ I — y 1 1 ■r1 ■M\ ■1 � % ml 1 1 II 1 ■LJ ■�LJ ■1 ' � , 11111 -1111 lorommeriimi iiiii�iiii 1 I I r 11 L o � a - -- a o a a 0 D 10111. EDGEWATER CITY HALL ; _ • "w DA,, i REGION'S BANK BUILDING EDGEWATER, FL. ig DE`,IGN INC r -- ; I ---- Y -7 I I I ,i 1 III I t ■■■■ ■■ __��_�_. - -- ■M. 7 ■ 1 i .. i ■ ■ ■ ■■ i i • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ 11 1 1. ■■ ■■ 11 ■ ■ ■ ■■ _ 1 ■ ■' ■ ■,■ . i 1 . 1 1 1. _ __I__ I , 1 _ ' J _ I - i j ii 1, �■�•■III _1 IL 1_1 i I■ ■ ■r,■ r■ _ ii i■ ■'■,■ ! 1■■ 111111 I■ ■■ ■ ■■■ 11 JIHT ■■■■II ■ ■■ ■ , i 1II■ ■ ■�� 1111,111111•1111 ! 1_ Nu= - 4 II I' I I■■■ ■U■ r } = 7 1 I I I u r r v x REV* REVISIONS I 10;11!1 EDGEWATER CITY HALL ; � a • DA� -ci 9 /33pli REGION'S BANK BUILDING 1111 0 EDGEWATER, FL. 1 UE ,ICON INC REGIONS BANK BUILDING EVALUATION of ELECTRICAL and TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS Basis of Review The existing bank building was evaluated based on site visits and review of the original design documents dated 3/15/89. It must be noted that modifications have been made to the facility since the plans were originally produced. Findings Power The existing power systems are in good operating condition. The Florida Power & Light Company serves the building via a 150kVA transformer. Service is 120/208V, 3 phase, 4 wire, Wye. The maximum kW demand on the service recorded by FP &L was 156kWD in March of 2000. Power service enters through a two- section switchboard. Section #1 is a main lug only type rated at 1,000 Amps. Section #2 contains a 600 Amp main disconnect and is rated at 600 Amps. The "as- built" documents show three parallel sets of service feeder conductors rated at 1005 Amps total. On this basis, the service will accommodate more than twice the FP &L transformer nameplate rating. The service size should be adequate but FP &L may find it necessary to replace their transformer. The service switchboards distribute power to the elevator, main ACU #1, main ACU #2 and six panelboards. Panelboards "A ", "B ", and "C" are on the first floor and panelboards "D ", "F ", and "H" are on the second floor. The distribution appears to be adequate in capacity with some modifications necessary for the planned use. Lighting With the exception of the Council Chambers and the renovated second floor spaces, the interior lighting is generally adequate for the planned use. These fixtures are not energy efficient as judged by today's standards. Site lighting is in poor condition. Data and Voice There are two existing data systems in the facility. The primary system serves the general data locations (offices, etc.). The secondary system is one of localized heavy density designed to serve a training area that will become the Council Chambers. The voice system appears to be served through a Category 3 infrastructure. Security The existing security system, if left behind when the bank leaves, has adequate capacity to function for the planned use. Fire Detection & Alarm The existing system is now several years old but appears to be currently working. e� _ , � 523 North Peninsula Drive ' ✓+ ' Daytona Beach, Florida 32118 x� (386) 25 Day -1511 (386) 252-0673 FAX Admin @DickensAssociates.com DICKENS & ASSOCIATES, INC. W WDickensAssCA0es.com Recommendations Power The existing power systems will need modification to accommodate the change in use planned for the facility. Planning should include an emergency generator of adequate capacity to power the entire facility. Additionally, a dedicated clean power system should be provided to serve all data and voice equipment. Lighting Interior lighting in the areas of the Council Chambers will require total replacement with lighting and controls suitable for meetings and multimedia presentations. A dimming system with at least four (4) preset scenes should be installed to control the lighting in the Chambers. The second floor renovated spaces will require new lighting. In all new spaces the fixtures should be energy efficient as appropriate to their task. If the budget permits, the remaining existing fixtures should be updated to be more energy efficient. The site lighting needs complete replacement with appropriate poles and fixtures. Light sources should be metal halide with good energy lumens /watt efficiency, cut -off control to prevent light trespass, and good color rendering. Poles should be spun concrete designed for direct burial. Circuiting should allow for operation at both normal night level and a reduced security level for late hours. Site lighting should be controlled by an automated time clock with photocell input. Data and Voice Current infrastructure standards provide Category 6 for both voice and data. The general use data and voice systems should be replaced with current equipment and infrastructure appropriate for the City's needs. The training area system will be deleted. A "future proofed" system beginning with Category 6 infrastructure is recommended. Consideration should be given to the City's preferences regarding the number and type of communications entrances desired to serve the facility. Security Extensive revision of this system will be required. We recommend replacement of the current system, if budget allows. Fire Detection and Alarm The existing system will require modification in order to comply with current codes and modifications within the facility. We recommend a new system, if budget allows. g•ruf 523 North Peninsula Drive v''`' e i�/ �"' 4,4 Daytona Beach, Florida 32118 x E% {!� "' " - �� (386) 253 -1511 (386) 252 -0673 FAX Admin @DickensAssociates.com DICKENS & ASSOCIATES, INC. "'"n"DickensAssCA000.com Estimated Costs Recommended Required Power • 200 kW Emergency Generator package $ 75,000 • Dedicated clean power system $ 20,000 • Revisions to accommodate architectural changes $ 95,000 Lighting • Revisions to accommodate architectural changes $ 32,000 • Energy efficiency upgrade $ 18,000 • Site lighting package $ 40,000 Data and Voice • CAT 6 infrastructure — w/o active electronics $ 37,800 Security • Revision of existing system* $ 8,500 • Replacement system — equipment and installation $ 28,000 Fire Detection and Alarm • System modifications $ 5,500 • System replacement — equipment and installation $ 25,000 $166,000 $ 213,500 Estimated costs shown are for initial budgeting purposes only. They are based on the estimator's current understanding of the planned project, existing conditions, and experience with other projects. Estimator has no control over undiscovered conditions, changes in project scope, or the costs of labor and material at the time of construction, and makes no warranty as to the final accuracy of the estimate. • This system may not be left in operating condition when the bank leaves. Cost shown is for modifications to a fully functioning system. • 523 North Peninsula Drive -06144,1/0 &""1/"' Daytona Beach, Florida 32118 �� y (386) 253 -1511 (386) 252 -0673 FAX Admin@DickensAssociates.com DICKENS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1NV""DickensAssCA0002396 ENERGY SYSTEMS DESIGN, INC. ESD 250 SOUTH 131:AC'll STREET SUITE 20 EB 3008 DA YTON.1 BEACH, IL 32114 CONSULTING ENGINEERS PHONE & Fax 386 252 - 6703 June 23, 2003 To: Edwin Best From: Alan H. Lundstront, PE 819436 Project: Edgewater City 1 - fall. Subject: Regions Bank Conversion. Building observations made a few months ago, as -built plans dated 3- 15 -89, and proposed architectural schematics dated June 9 2003 were used in the development of this feasibility study. II VAC The building is air - conditioned with two variable -air volume rooftop units. A 30 -ton unit serving the first floor and a 28 -ton unit serving the second floor were observed. The rooftop units were recently replaced and appear to be in very good condition. They should have another 12 years of useful life. The drawings indicate that pneumatically controlled fan - powered air terminals with electric reheat serve zones within the building. A zone is typically comprised of several rooms with similar orientation and usage. The first floor has 13 air terminals and the second floor has nine. The air terminals are probably original, making them about 13 years old, which means they have approximately seven years of useful life remaining. Their pneumatic controls are usually not found in similar buildings built today. Direct Digital Controls, DDC, are now used and constitute state of the art in controls. Examination of the proposed plans indicates that many of the first floor zones remain the same, which could permit minimal change to the air distribution system unless the ceiling layout changes. However, the City Clerk and Finance Clerk office areas will require modification, as will the council chamber. One man trunk duct on the first floor runs over the council chambers. Sections through that area indicate that a higher ceiling might interfere with the duct, which would necessitate relocation. The council chamber seats over 120 occupants. Ventilation rates, in compliance with ASI -{RAE 62 standards, on the first floor more than double due to the council chamber. The increased outside airflow through the rooftop unit approaches the upper limit of its capacity and could cause problems in its operation. Furthermore, meetings held during normal working hours could make the remainder of the first floor uncomfortable. In order to prevent both problems, a means to supplement the air conditioning to the chamber is necessary. A 100 - percent outdoor air unit should be installed and dedicated to the council chamber. The air - handling unit would be installed in a closet, approximately 8' x 8', adjacent to the chamber. Its condensing unit would be installed nearby on the ground. The closet and ductwork would have to be carefully designed to attenuate noise generated by the air - handler. While some of the second floor zones remain the same, the perimeter offices become larger and the open office space becomes partitioned. The air distribution system will have to be modified to accommodate these revisions and more air terminals will be required to adequately air - condition these spaces. Project: Edgewater City Hall. Subject: Regions Bank Conversion. June 23, 2003 2 Recommendations and Estimated Costs Utilize the two rooftop units and provide a dedicated outdoor air unit for the council chamber. Replace the pneumatically controlled air terminals with ones controlled by DDC and increase their number to improve comfort. Add exhaust fans and utilize demand - controlled ventilation techniques to maintain acceptable ventilation rates. Reconfigure the air distribution system as necessary to accommodate the building's new layout, but utilizing as much as of the existing as is practical. Budget costs follow. Item: Mw Cost - $: Nom'l Cost - $: Max Cost - $: Outdoor Air Unit: $21,000 Trunk Duct Relocation: $2,500 Air Terminal Replacement: $21,000 Air Terminal Duct Reconfiguration:* $59,000 $87,500 $116,000 DDC Controls: $42,000 Exhaust System Enhancement: $2,500 • $148,000 $176,500 $205,000 *Air Terminal Duct Reconfiguration cost has a wide range, which depends on amount of duct modification needed for replacement and the amount needed to accommodate modified zones and ceilings. Plumbing Two toilet rooms have been added downstairs and connect into nearby drainage and water piping. There are existing gang toilets upstairs. Unfortunately, they arc up one flight of stairs from the council chamber and down a winding corridor from the elevators. Recommendations and Estimated Costs Use plumbing layouts as proposed and patrons will have to accept the tortuous path to the gang toilets upstairs. Budget costs follow. Item: Cost - $: Two toilet rooms $5,000 Contact me if you have any questions. City of Edgewater Proposed Edgewater City Hall Feasibility Review SECTION 7 - COST SUMMARY 7.1 Purpose The specific improvements as required or recommended by each discipline are listed in their respective section of the report along with the estimated costs of the improvements. This section will summarize the costs associated with the detailed improvements, with some consideration as to how the City should analyze the costs. As each discipline developed its cost for improvements, it became necessary to categorize them to facilitate consideration as to how the improvements may impact the City. Careful consideration was given by all the disciplines and the City Staff to develop categories which would best assist the City with their building purchase and development of the City Hall. 7.2 Cost Categorization The categories and corresponding descriptions which were identified are listed below. Category 1. Building Deficiencies These cost are associated solely with the costs that apply to the building purchase. The consideration given to this category includes those costs which are either related to liability issues or improper or inadequate design or function either initially or as compared to current standards. These costs would apply to any entity considering purchase of the building either as a financial institution, office space or a City Hall. These costs primarily relate to the purchase price of the building. Only as an example, these costs would cover a deficiency of an air conditioning component to condition the building of this square footage under a standard use, but would not cover upgrades required to provide the additional capacity to provide adequate air conditioning for the Council Chambers. Category 2. Required City Hall Improvements These costs include identified minimum standards to meet the City's current needs as a functional City Hall. These needs were identified both by the City Staff and by its Consultants. Various improvements such as offices, conference areas, handicap accessible facilities, Council Chambers, etc. were identified and included under this category. As an example, these costs include upgrading the air conditioning system to accommodate the Council Chambers, but not the cost of improving the system to a completely digitally controlled system, which are commonly utilized in new construction. 2 7 -1 8/11/2003 City of Edgewater Proposed Edgewater City Hall Feasibility Review Category 3. Recommended City Hall Improvements These costs include modifications which would improve the conditions of the building to function as a City Hall at an optimum level. The costs may be related to modernizing the building or equipment but are more subjective, or may be related to a long term goal. Many of these costs, if implemented would preclude a cost in Category 1 or 2. As an example, providing a completely digitally controlled air conditioning system is a non - required City Hall improvement, but if implemented would preclude any upgrade that may be required to the current analog system 7.3 Summary of Costs To facilitate this analysis, Table 7.3.1 lists the costs of the improvements, as identified by the associated discipline, along with the appropriate category to which the improvement applies as defined in their section. If a range price was given for an improvement the average cost was used in the table. It should be noted that these costs are not clearly additive. Many of the Recommended City Hall Improvements preclude an improvement included as a Building Deficiency or a Required Improvement. Table 7.3.1 Cost Summary CATEGORY 1 ($) CATEGORY 2 ($) CATEGORY 3 ($) DISCIPLINE Building Def. Req'd City Hall Imp. Recom. City Hall Imp. STRUCTURAL 200,000 350,000 CIVIL /SITE 30,000 ARCHITECTURAL 225,000 ELECTRICAL & TECHNOLOGY 213,500 166,000 MECHANICAL 176,500 5,000 TOTALS 230,000 615,000 521,000 7 -2 8/11/2003 City of Edgewater Proposed Edgewater City Hall Feasibility Review Category 1 Costs Based upon the analysis of costs provided in the table, there are approximately $230,000 worth of improvements to the existing building. The costs are related to structural deficiencies and site design liabilities. The costs associated with these improvements would be required to the building without regard to its use. The included costs for the structural improvements are subdivided as described in the related section. Based upon the findings, $175,000 could be performed at this time with $25,000 of improvements being completed coincident with a re- roofing of the building. Therefore, with consideration of the site improvements costs ($30,000), the City would need to budget $205,000 for improvements related to building deficiencies costs which should be scheduled presently. Category 2 Costs There exists approximately $615,000 worth of Required City Hall Improvements including architectural, electrical /technology and mechanical improvements. Please note that the mechanical improvements were range - priced and the average number was utilized for the analysis. The costs for all of these improvements should be included presently for the budgeting. Category 3 Costs Recommended City Hall improvements include approximately $520,000 of structural, electrical /technology and mechanical improvements. These improvements are recommended, however due to budget restraints may be difficult to afford at this time and may be foreseeable in future planning in phases. Please note that the structural number used was range - priced and therefore an average cost was used. 7.4 Final Discussion It is recommended that the City complete the Category 1 and Category 2 costs to upgrade the facility to the new City Hall at a minimum. Based upon the cost summary provided, the City should consider the required improvements to be approximately $820,000 (with consideration given to the mechanical pricing). These improvements would provide the City of Edgewater with a functional City Hall as described herein, based upon our discussions with the City Staff. In the future the City should plan for upgrades to the building in the next several years of $520,000 to $670,000. The City's needs may change as it develops, and a more specific analysis should be complete at such time to determine the desired improvements in detail. Gierok Engineering and its consultants have enjoyed working with the City to provide it with this preliminary planning tool and hopes to continue servicing the City as the project develops. 7 -3 8/11/2003