Appendix D - Proposed Public Safety Building and Fire Department (Engine 3) — File 207344

90 Washington Street July 10, 2018 Proposed Public Safety Building and Fire Department (Engine 3)

1. Introduction: Rob King 2. Space needs assessment: Weston & Sampson 3. Site selection: Weston & Sampson 4. Site acquisition: Eileen McGettigan & Tom Galligani 5. Finances: Rob King 6. Next steps: Rob King Agenda

1. Introduction

– Inadequate space for current and future needs – Inadequate space for police vehicles on the site – Inefficient adjacencies – Severe flooding potential: • police and fire vehicles • building generator • flooding led to the relocation of Engine 3 – Inefficient building envelope – Inadequate parking – Scheduling and security conflicts The Need (Existing Challenges):

The Need (Existing Challenges):

The Need (Existing Challenges):

The Need (Existing Challenges):

The Need (Existing Challenges):

The Need (Existing Challenges):

The Need (Existing Challenges):

The Need (Existing Challenges):

The Need (Existing Challenges):

The Need (Existing Challenges):

2. SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Programming Process: 1. Documented existing facility to quantify existing program and identify deficiencies 2. Conducted staff interviews to identify current and future needs 3. Developed room programming sketches 4. Assembled comprehensive space needs assessment Space needs assessment Office and office support Detention facilities Training / shared community space

Police Size (SF) Public / Community Access 12,200 Police Administration 7,900 Staff Support / Training 14,500 Police Operations 19,800 Detention / Detention Support 8,800 Vehicle Storage / Maintenance 14,800 Subtotal Police: 78,000 Fire Department Engine 3 6,500 Total Building Program: 84,500 Space needs assessment

Programming Process: 1. Utilizing the space needs assessment, developed generic conceptual site layouts to define the minimum building footprint for site selection 2. Reviewed 3-story and 4-story schemes 3. Identified minimum building footprint range of 18,000 to 30,000 square feet (varies based on number of stories) Space needs assessment

3. SITE SELECTION

1. City developed an initial list of potential sites 2. Conducted an initial site screening: • Size • Allowable development size • Ownership • Zoning • Permitting challenges • Environmental restrictions 3. Identified six (6) potential sites capable of meeting basic programming and site requirements 4. Developed a detailed site selection matrix to rank the sites Site selection

Conducted a detailed site selection analysis based on criteria developed in coordination with the City: Site selection • Cost of Development (20 points) • Location (15 points) • Physical Features (15 points) • Zoning Consistency (10 points) • Environmental Impacts (10 points) • Infrastructure (5 points) • Permitting (5 points) • Traffic Impacts (5 points) Estimated to be Most Critical Estimated to be Less Critical

Evaluated and ranked each site Site selection

Evaluated and ranked each site Site selection

Final Site Rankings: Rank Site No. / Address Percent Score (raw score) 1 Site 6 (90 Washington Street) 74% (63 out of 85) 2 Site 2 (17 McGrath Hwy) 68% (58 out of 85) 3 Site 3 (185 Somerville Ave) 67% (57 out of 85) 4 Site 4 (501 Mystic Valley Pkwy) 66% (56 out of 85) 5 Site 5 (526 Somerville Ave) 61% (52 out of 85) 6 Site 1 (17 Inner Belt Rd) 59% (50 out of 85)

Recommended Location: • Site is of adequate size. • Site can accommodate Engine 3. • Engine 3 response times would provide 92% less than 5 minutes. • Good orientation for visibility and connection to Washington Street. 90 Washington Street Benefits:

4. SITE ACQUISITION

Recommended Location: 90 Washington Capuano School Future T Station Cobble Hill Apartments

Site Boundaries

Aerial Image

Site Photos

Site Photos

Eminent domain

• Enabled by MGL c. 40 Section 14 – Allowed by 2/3 vote of Board of Aldermen – Required appropriation of funding – Must be for a public purpose – Cannot pay more than 125% of the average of the last three years’ assessed value Municipal property acquisition process

• Process regulated by MGL C. 79 – Conduct appraisal – BOA vote to appropriate and take – Record Order of Taking within 30 days of vote – Notice of taking to owner – Pay Pro Tanto within 60 days of recording Eminent Domain Process

• Date of appraisal: March 15, 2018 • Completed by Mark S. Reenstierna of T.H. Reenstierna, LLC • MA Certified General Real Estate Appraiser #3803 Appraisal

5. FINANCES

• Two items currently held in the FY18-FY27 Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Project List: – Acquisition of 90 Washington St.: $8.745 million • Added as a Critical Project to the June 2018 CIP – Construction of new public safety building • Has been included as a Critical Project since the creation of the CIP Project List in November 2016 • CIP estimate for construction: $36 million (costs will escalate) Current funding request:

6. Next Steps

1. Order of Taking for 90 Washington St. (Agenda Item 206003) 2. $8.745 million bond authorization & appropriation request to purchase 90 Washington St. (Agenda Item 206004) 3. $1.86 million bond authorization & appropriation request for Owners Project Manager (OPM) & project management services for new public safety building (Agenda Item 206005) Items currently before the BOA

Procure Owner’s Project Manager Services Form Building Committee Procure Design Services Design/Development Construction Procurement Construction If BOA approves items, next steps are . . . Timeline: • Design estimated to take one year. • Construction estimated to take 18-24 months.