Travis County Commissioners Court
February 14, 2006
Item 9
Number 9, consider and take appropriate action on request to approve the schematic design for the 5501 airport boulevard building, phase 2.
>> good morning, judge, Commissioners. On November 8, 2005, the Commissioners court approved a program and directed facilities management to begin design on the phase 2 facility. And since then we've been working hard on that and meeting with the department head and the users, and the schematic design has been completed. And endorsed by the users for the construction of phase 2. Which is the buildout of the metal building addition on the north side of the property. Each user group provided all the information and participate in a design. Sign off from each department head has been done and as you can see, the signature is on the 11 by 17 sheet you have the plan, have you in your backup. And the floor plan with signature, as I said, indicating the approval of the space indicated on those plans. The first thing is on the first floor we added all the cs -- the clients that come for the classes. Right now we have about 10 classes, classrooms. We added about three more for any overflow and for the requirement by the cs. They have about 18 instructors. So as you can see, it's lots of classroom on the first floor, but that's as required by the cs to conduct their business. On the second floor, if I may get some plan -- just is a second. Okay. I have with me jim barr. He's the senior project manager working on this project and also tim is associate architect working on this project. I will go ahead and let jim go ahead and tell you about the space allocation and the requirement. Go ahead, jim.
>> [inaudible - no mic].
>> it's going to have two floors. The first floor --
>> we will need you on the mic. Otherwise media will not like us.
>> the first floor is going to be occupied totally by the ces department. There will be a public entrance here which is adjacent to an existing public or an existing private entrance that's controlled by a key pad. This existing private entrance goes into -- and when I say private, it's county staff who have key card access. Goes into this corridor, which is a service corridor that leads back to where the print shop and imaging is. The county clerk's activities are here, predominantly their election storage. And then the tax office is down at the far end of the building. There will be no connection between the new project, the phase two project, no physical internal connection, so that access will be an external connection into a lobby or a secure staff access in the back, which is also an emergency exit out of the back. There's an elevator located here at the lobby, a set of stairs. The first floor, as I said earlier, is ces, so clients will come into this lobby and then proceed to a waiting area where they can get processing for their initial consultation. There are 13 classrooms s located back in this area. Administrative offices up on the front. This being the western side which faces the parking lot. The second floor is all used by county staff. And under the program that we developed, access to the second floor will be through that same public lobby that the ces lobby is -- is off of the ces. You can either use an elevator or stairs to get to the second floor. Up on the second floor is emergency services, criminal justice planning, wellness clinic, hrmd training center. Back here the i.t.s. Training center and the i.t.s. Disaster recovery cold site. There's an expansion space in the center that can be utilized in the future by either of these activities or by a new activity that the court may choose at a later date.
>> will you be able to get to the expansion space without going through one or the other areas?
>> yes, sir. That's a lobby -- there's actually corridors that surround the expansion space. We'll have an access door that will remain locked. So the space will be just vacant with minimal environmental controls to save energy. The expansion space would be able to be used by a different department at a later date.
>> could you go back to floor number one for a second? Because I need to talk about one little thing here. If I知 reading my little symbols correct, the restroom facilities are way imbedded inside. And it seems to me that if you have a waiting area where people may be waiting, that they are going to need to use the restroom facilities, and it seems like we ought to -- I知 going to say it out loud -- think about moving that whole restroom complex that's way in there to be -- flip it with something else that is closer to the front of the building where you are going to have people sitting, having a drink, doing the kinds of things that might necessitate that they need to use the restrooms as opposed to that they've got a long distance to go into what we hope are more controlled, secured areas, kind of wandering around on their own simply to use the restroom, which they ought not to have hall monitor passes to get there. Is there any way that we could basically just flip something around here? I知 just kind of seeing one general section here that could be flipped over here, kind of move it around so that the restrooms are really closer to the front as opposed to way in the back? That's just the first thing that came to my mind.
>> we could do that, Commissioner. One of the reasons we located the restrooms back here is that the entire -- there's a six-inch slab that currently exist on this first floor. There's no water or sewage supply that goes anywhere into this area, so we kind of pulled it as far back as we could to avoid trenching this slab all the way to the front, which was a cost saving decision. We did have discussion with ces about the access that these folks would have to here and about those very security concerns, how do you keep track of the folks that go back there and come back. We had discussion about installing some security cameras in these corridors, so you can kind of watch what happening back there, but I壇 say it is possible to move these things forward. It's just probably an increase in cost.
>> I think this is one of those things that we need to think about very carefully because it may be an up front one time cost, but it will create some operational issues that I think will be very difficult for this department sto have to deal with. And I知 just looking at it in terms of there's just too much of a distance between a waiting room and where the restroom facilities are located. And that concerns me. Also, the administrative staff, the people that are going to be there all the time, are also more located to the front of the building whereas the other stuff is near the back where you may or may not have people in those classrooms. It just seems like we ought to have less of a distance as opposed to Moore of a distance between people and where they'll be hanging around and facilities.
>> I知 carol colburn, ces director. And I hear what you're saying, Commissioner Sonleitner, and I do agree with that, that there's nothing up front; however, I think one of the reasons that we did put the restrooms where they were or were okay with that is when the classes are being held, those people are going to be using the restroom as well and that's when it's -- a lot of people are going at the same time. So I guess our meendz were thinking of the classes and it would be more convenient for them to use it where they're located now. However -- I don't know if this alternative would be easy or not. It would be easy if we had Austin unisex restroom up front. We had that at one of our other locations so anyone could go and use it, but the larger ones with several different stalls and whatever are in the back for when we have our larger number in our classrooms.
>> I think that would work a lot better. And I like it, a unisex something, take care of business, literally. Yeah, up closer to the front.
>> okay. We can go ahead and do that --
>> bathrooms are a big deal in these buildings.
>> we'll modify the plans to show one small restroom in the front.
>> what about the cost?
>> well, I don't have the cost right now, but I値l find out what the cost is and I値l send you an e-mail on that. If if
>> 10,000 or 100,000?
>> no. It's going to be around, you know, like 20, $30,000, because you've got to cut through the slab. And sometimes when you cut through the slab you don't know what's under the slab, where the beams are and all. So that's what kind of give us the structural beams, beam on grade. You really don't want to cut through them, but we will work it out somehow, but it going to cost like 25 to $30,000 to have a restroom in the front.
>> I think it's a good investment. It's just one of those things that I go crazy every time I go to the erwin center and think don't have enough restrooms. More is better than less.
>> I think we need y'all's expert opinion on that. Get with whoever on is that floor and if that makes sense to do it, do it up front than to do a retro fit, but if we think the recommended design is fine -- where is the restroom now? Right there? And the classrooms are --
>> all those.
>> look where the waiting room is.
>> well, we don't expect you to wait a long time, do we? We expect you to have an appointment and come --
>> they might fill out paperwork that takes about a half hour.
>> whatever the on answer is, I do dprea that we need to land on it now. If we're going to do it, it makes sense to go ahead and do it now. Let me make sure that I understand that -- so at the bottom it's really the west side.
>> this is the west side, judge.
>> okay.
>> this is the north side here. There's actually a drainage creek along here. So the rest of the building is located here.
>> okay.
>> so how are we going to handle the restroom thing? I知 personally not wanting to spend $25,000 to bring a restroom up there, but if they have to walk back to where the restrooms are, from a security standpoint there's probably nothing that prohibits them from doing that, but it a little farther to have to go, right? If it's $10,000, that's one thing. If it's 25 or $30,000, just let me know.
>> it's kind of like the trenching on the concrete and also constructing an actual restroom with all the fixtures. So it is about 25, $30,000.
>> can we have the recommended fix next week or were you hoping to get action today?
>> I知 hoping to get an action today. If it's a small fix we can do it and go forward if that's okay with the courtment.
>> we may need a vote on whether to do it or not. I知 in favor of doing it if we're thinking there's reason to do it.
>> I guess my question is if they're waiting and they need to go to the restroom, what is there between them and the restrooms that would break security?
>> they're wandering around by themselves.
>> but would they be wandering around by themselves here?
>> well, that's really kind of the issue from our perspective is if we have to have someone walk them back, because that happens not as a service center, but at the intake facility right now where someone kind of escorts them, which it can be cumbersome. I mean, they'll be going by those are the counselors' office. If they went on the south side there. You know, it would -- we would just have to have either someone escort them or not. I mean, I don't think there's anything that they're going to be able to get into that's confidential or anything like that, but I think that is a good concern that was brought up because it is kind of a long way and we don't really have the staff to be walking them to the restroom.
>> but doesn't everybody kind of take steps to secure purses, that kind of stuff automatically?
>> yes, ma'am. And if someone's not there their office should be locked.
>> I just know that in this building in terms of how many people are served by each of the floors, the restrooms are insufficient. And we are not having people coming in for classes into this building and we are not -- we have lots of multiple bathrooms on each floor, and they are insufficient. It just -- when there's a break in a class, that's not going to be enough. It just seems like it's something you do up front and you just -- it is what it is. The bathrooms are bathrooms. They're part of what we need to provide.
>> I think everybody needs to kind of make sure they secure their belongings. Let's not be under the false sense of security that somebody else is looking out for our things.
>> I think on the restroom you're looking at later this afternoon or next Tuesday. The question is can you -- do you think you can land on it as a recommendation one way or the other by 2:30 this afternoon, 2:30 or 3:00?
>> I think we can. I need to check one engineering item on that. If we want to put the restroom in the front, we have a little problem on the back side of the buildings, because it is shallow line and our site. So I would like to see from an engineer perspective if we could do the fall or the gravity -- the grade from the front of the building to the end of the building. So I will come back at 2:30 with that.
>> okay. Mr. Barr, is that it? We cut you off with some questions.
>> I believe Commissioner Davis was about to ask a question.
>> I wanted to know the actual distance between the existing restroom and the proposed restroom that's being discussed in the front. What is the actual distance?
>> this distance from the public waiting area up at the front of the building back to the restrooms that the clients would be able to use, I知 going to guess at that distance -- I don't have a scale on me at the moment, but I would guess that distance is perhaps 150 feet.
>> 150 feet?
>> the total distance of the building from front to back is about 234 feet. So that's 150 or 175 perhaps.
>> thank you.
>> what separates this from the county clerk?
>> these outside doors. This corridor here is the service corridor with the card key access entry right here. And there is no access internally between this part of the building and this part of the building. So anyone wanting to access this building would have to go outside and come in these public entrances.
>> jim would give you a chance to finish?
>> I believe I知 finished, if throor no further questions.
>> ms. Dana debeauvoir?
>> thank you, good morning. Am I on? Thank you, good morning, judge, members of the Commissioners court. Happy election day and happy valentine's day. I have just a couple of comments, and one of them is a request for some consideration when we're working on this project. The first is let me make just a brief comment about your issue, your grappling over the need for a bathroom. Both the tax office and the county clerk had to deal with the issue that the only way to get that kind of water service was in the back of the building. And so for all of us we had to build a special hallway for our customers to be able to get so that there wouldn't be a security issue. For both of our offices, all of our staff have to walk about 175 yards -- feet, excuse me, 175 feet from where they are to the bathroom. You have to plan for it. So we already are having to deal with this long trek, and I sympathize with people who will have to go through that. It is not all that convenient, although I want to say that this building is a fabulous facility and so we just sort of take that with a grain of salt. But I would encourage you to think about the pathway because we had to do that for security reasons. Our pathway could have gone straight through the east side room had we not been careful about how we did our security. The second thing I would like to ask you for, and the real reason why I知 here today with this particular item is I知 concerned, along with the voter registrar, I知 concerned that construction not create any disruption in the conduct of elections. We have elections back to back as fast and hard as we can turn them out over the next few months and I知 concerned about trerchling, electrical work, a number of issues that might be disrupt either water, telephone, electricity, security, any of those systems while we're in the middle of trying to conduct election. So I致e given roger and alicia some dates that are critical for us. It's like please don't be messing with the electricity and stuff during these dates. And then we've also given them dates where it's quiet and if you needed to do something really loud or potentially might shut down the building, then there are some good dates for that. So I would ask for consideration from facilities management and Commissioners court that we be very, very careful about how the construction might affect our ability to conduct the elections. We will have for the very first time in Travis County's history more than 50 jurisdictions taking part in the may elections. I知 overwhelmed. We've never done this before. It's a lot. And I certainly don't want our customers, our clients to experience any turn down -- downturn or lack of good customer service because we ran into a construction issue. We're going to have enough challenges as it is.
>> you've given the dates to roger already?
>> they were sent to him yesterday along with alicia.
>> look at those dates and if there are issues let us know this afternoon,, how's that?
>> thank you.
>> what is the -- there's further design work that needs to be done or are we at the construction sedate stait?
>> let me answer that. We just finished the schematic design and we're a little bit in the development design, call it dd phase. And I think the design will take about three more months or four more months to finalize. So this way we're going to be in the construction in the summer.
>> okay. So we would expect the first construction workers to arrive --
>> sometime in the summer. At this time probably in August.
>> so we're looking at construction -- it would be after the may election.
>> that's correct.
>> so the next election would be November.
>> correct.
>> so the window seems to be late may, November. Do we get most of the heavy construction --
>> we should. We should get all the construction before -- not all of the construction, but the heavy work done by October, but there's a lot of finish and fit inside the buildings that has to happen so we can be on schedule by the end of January '07 that we promised the court back in November.
>> okay.
>> but we'll look at the window.
>> so we heed nooed to look at the November election especially and make sure that we don't have a whole lot of construction that's going on that may interfere with our ability to do the election. It seems to me we ought to be able to do that.
>> sure. We can work on that.
>> let us know about this afternoon if you anticipate any problems.
>> okay.
>> how's that?
>> anything else on this item today? If we need to bring it back up this afternoon. When we see the different departments have signed off on the design, schematic design, that means basically they're on board with the changes that are recommended.
>> that's correct.
>> and if there are reservations or issues that should be called to the court's attention, those departments know they should be' here right now.
>> that's right.
>> ms. Colburn?
>> we're happy with the design, sir.
>> thank you.
>> I知 suggesting 2:30 or 3:00 this afternoon. Right, court?
>> yep.
>> all right. You have another one, don't you, the next one?
are we ready for that item we -- and -- involving the one or two questions that we had this morning.
>> yes.
>> that is item no. 9. 9. Consider and take appropriate action on request to approve the schematic design for the 5501 airport blvd. Building, phase 2.
>> okay. Good afternoon, roger el khoury, facilities management department. We went back and looked at the -- from the engineering perspective, yes we could do it. We could put a small restroom in the front. We drafted the location. It's -- it's in the front next to the lobby area. And the cost is to include all of the fixtures and the -- and the -- and the water, bring the water in and the sewer line and all, it's about $24,000. So -- so that's how much it costs to put together restaurant -- restroom in the front.
>> once you go into a slab --
>> no. [multiple voices] we look from an engineering perspective, perspective, we going to go ahead and put a system that will have a -- will have a -- a pumps to take it -- to the wall all the way down to the sewer line. So we don't have to cut through the slab. So this is cheaper and we do it all the time. It's a -- yeah. [indiscernible] system. It works.
>> we believe this in the long haul we will get that much value from this improvement?
>> I think so. The -- the concern that yes, they have to travel 150 feet from the front to the -- to the back, it's about 150 feet, we count it three times. It's -- to have one restroom in the front you know for -- for visitors, you know, and that would be fine. But the majority of the people that are going to use the restroom are the guys in the class, that we concentrated the -- the restroom around the classes.
>> ms. Coleburn didn't have any issues with this?
>> yoption, I知 not sure if she does. Today she says she's welcome to have a restroom in the front.
>> judge that will -- [multiple voices]
>> > the usage of the restroom, front one, the proposed, will be the majority of the -- the uses will be -- will be by whom.
>> for the public sitting in the lobby area you know going to the classroom, or -- or the -- or the -- the employee to have their own restroom down to -- down the hall, that should be all right.
>> it's going to be unisex, roger?
>> yes, a.d.a. Compatible, all of that should be all right.
>> judge, I think we will also bypass some security issues related to offices that while somebody might very well lock down their office while they leave, if they are just darting around the corner to go to the bathroom or to a file room or the copy room, they wouldn't be expected to lock down their offices when they are going to be out just for a minute. This just he is proactive in not having a lot of problems. For the comfort of our clients and our workers, it's a good investment.
>> I think the -- the cost would be part of the budget we have. Let's say included in the issues are no problem.
>> judge, I would move approval of the scream matic designs with the change that has been identified by roger related to adding the unisex bathroom at the front and that he will manage it within his existing budget and contingency allowances.
>> yes, sir.
>> second.
>> any more discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote. Thank you all very much.
>> thank you.
>> now, let's move approval of the item. So -- so we would not approve this scream matic design this morning, did we? For -- for 5501 airport boulevard with the change that we just approved.
>> I will make that motion.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, February 15, 2006 11:17 AM