MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL SARASOTA COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OF FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PRESENT: Chair Richard Clapp, presiding, Vice Chair Kelly M. Kirschner, Members Fredd "Glossie" Atkins, Suzanne Atwell, and Terry Turner, Executive Director Robert J. Bartolotta, Attorney Robert M. Fournier, and Acting Secretary Pamela M. Nadalini ABSENT: None The meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) was called to order by Chair Clapp at 3:16 p.m. 1. APPROVAL RE: MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OF JANUARY 4. 2010 (AGENDA ITEM CRA-1) Vice Mayor Kirschner stated that the minutes of the January 4, 2010, Special CRA meeting should be corrected to indicate "excess" rather than "excessive" in the statement which indicates L will purchase back the excessive electricity generated over a fixed period of time" under Agenda Item CRA-4, Approval Re: Selection Process of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage Design/Build Team. Chair Clapp noted CRA consensus to approve the minutes of the Special CRA meeting of January 4, 2010, as corrected. 2. APPROVAL RE: AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE THE OFFICIAL LEED CERTIFICATION PROCESS FOR PALM AVENUE MIXED-USE PROJECT FACADE SELECTION AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS OPTIONS (RFP #09-67) (AGENDA ITEM CRA-2) Executive Director Bartolotta stated that Staff is seeking CRA direction concerning four different items regarding facades, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification, and other items. Chief Planner Steven Stancel, Neighborhood and Development Services Department, came before the CRA and stated that the CRA recommended awarding the Design/Build Contract to Suffolk Construction with a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) of $10,715,000 at the January 4, 2010, CRA meeting; that the CRA directed Staff to hold a series of public forums to obtain public input regarding alternate facade designs and return to the CRA with alternate facades which do not exceed the originally proposed design costs, provide alternate facade options along the alleyways and entrance drives including associated costs, and review and report the actual costs associated with the commissioning of the project for the official LEED certification; that Staff held three public forums with the Design/Build team holding a neighborhood meeting with residents living within 500 feet of the site in addition to the meetings held with individuals and community organizations; that Staff is seeking the CRA to: Select Option 1, 2, 3, or 4 as the proposed final design option, Retain the previously proposed elevations or select Option 1 or 2 with an increased GMP, Extend facade an additional 58 feet in elevation of the project at an increased cost of $266,237, Pursue LEED commissioning at a cost of $15,000, and Authorize the Executive Director to execute a Change Order to the project's GMP in the amount determined by motions made regarding the aforementioned items. Mr. Stancel continued that green roof design is not included in the Agenda backup material as a green roof design was not included in the original Request for Proposals (RFP) nor did the CRA direct Staff to pursue a green roof; that the public supported greenery along the edges of the roof but whether the public would support an entire green roof is not known; that the architects presented a green roof design at the most recent public meeting at which time an explanation was provided to advise a green roof does not fit within the budget; that Staff and the Design/Build Team are ready to further discuss a green roof if the Book 3 Page 31692 02/16/10 2:30 P.M. Book 3 Page 31693 02/16/10 2:30 P.M. CRA desires; that Staff continues to meet with the Development Review Committee (DRC) and public utility companies in an effort to identify the locations to which the utilities must be relocated; that Staff anticipates receiving permit applications for the foundation and footings of the garage at any time; that further utility construction in the alleyways will commence as quickly as the first week in March 2010 with site work commencing on April 1, 2010. Jonathan Parks, Owner and Architect, Christopher Gallagher, and Chris Slater, Architects, Jonathan Park Architects, and Michael Beaumier, Vice President, Suffolk Construction, came before the CRA. Mr. Gallagher stated that a genuine effort is being made to present real facades to the originally proposed facade; displayed pictures of various facade designs taken during his travels throughout America and Europe; and gave a computer-generated presentation concerning Option 2, a traditional facade scheme for the Palm Avenue Parking Garage including the pedestrian experience and retail space. Mr. Slater gave a computer-generated presentation concerning Option 3, the classic modern scheme for the Palm Avenue Parking Garage including the retail space and stated that an attempt was made to design a parking garage which would not require additional adjustments to the Zoning Code (2002 Edition) (Zoning Code) and create a pedestrian-scale streetscape; that careful attention was given to the design and details of the retail space. Mr. Parks stated that Mr. Gallagher encouraged the public to become engaged in the discussion regarding the facade at the first public meeting; that more responses were received at the second public meeting which resulted in the summarizing of Option 1, the design created by Fleischmann-Garcia, Option 2, the traditional scheme, Option 3, the classic modern scheme, and Option 4, an additional modern scheme designed by himself; and gave a computer-generated presentation concerning Option 4, the sail scheme for the Palm Avenue Parking Garage including the retail space. Mr. Parks stated that the Designed/Build team received comments indicating the sail scheme looked like a modern opera building or sails; that the City could light up the sails which are aluminum panels with different colors if desired. Mr. Beaumier stated that all the various design schemes are within the proposed budget; that the Design/Build team was given the directive to return with alternate facades for the Palm Avenue Parking Garage within the budget presented as agreed by the City and the Design/Build team. Mr. Beaumier and Mr. Parks answered CRA questions concerning the inclusion of the aluminum panels on the north and south facades in the GMP. In response to a request by Member Turner for Mr. Gallagher speak to the width of the right-of-way of Cocoanut Avenue versus the alley on the north facade, Mr. Gallagher stated that what makes the width of the road distinctive from the alley is Cocoanut Avenue is the entrance to the parking garage; that many years can pass prior to any construction occurring on the vacant lot adjacent to the Palm Avenue Parking Garage; that the belief is the design of the facade along Palm Avenue can wrap 10 to 20 feet rather than 60 feet along the facade of the alley from Main Street. Mr. Parks answered CRA questions concerning the maintenance and opacity of the aluminum panels, vehicle headlights shining through aluminum panels on the roof, the ability and expense to change colors of the aluminum panels, and the lighting of stairs. In response to a request by Vice Chair Kirschner for Mr. Parks speak to the pedestrian experience, Mr. Parks stated that all schemes treat the sidewalk the same; that the direction from the public meetings was a facade option; that the winning proposal within the original proposal has codified a very wide sidewalk; that the landscaping is the same for all schemes; however, the use of canopy trees is unique to the sail scheme; that all schemes have an eight-foot awning as required by the City Code. Mr. Parks and Mr. Gallagher answered CRA questions concerning the operation and maintenance costs being equal for all facade options presented, ensuring the safety of parking garage users, the reason a modern design is exciting, the reflection from the aluminum panels, the treatment of walkability elements included in the sail scheme versus the other proposed facade options. The following people spoke: Paul Caragiulo thanking everyone involved in the process to design the Palm Avenue Parking Garage, indicating his relief in which the two contemporary facade designs make a statement, the City must reestablish its own identity, and requesting the Commission to consider reestablishing the identity of the City. Mary Anne Servian indicating she has been involved in the process since the beginning, the conversation became expanded during the public meetings which resulted in the presentation of wonderful alternate facade designs, the sail scheme is a wonderful example of architecture, the aluminum panels can be utilized to project items during events, and seeing more ofi the sail scheme along the side is desired. Bob Malkin indicating the building will be generating a lot of heat, the pedestrian level is somewhat stark, more attention should be given to developing an arbor to increase the cooling effect, and he believes heat will be generated by the aluminum panels. Diana Hamilton indicating the process to design the Palm Avenue Parking Garage has been impressive, citizens are asking the Palm Avenue Parking Garage to serve as more than a parking garage, the parking garage will also be a municipal building, she was originally attracted to the traditional scheme but was later drawn to the design created by Mr. Parks, and the Palm Avenue Parking Garage will be reflecting the time in history in which its constructed. A motion was made by Vice Chair Kirschner, seconded by Member Atwell, and carried by a 5-0 vote to extend the meeting beyond 4:30 p.m. Coots Siegel indicating the sail scheme is exemplary, no one driving by the Palm Avenue Parking Garage will know the structure is a parking garage, the Commission must consider the vacant lot adjacent to the Palm Avenue Parking Garage as the design of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage will set the design standard of what will be constructed. Ellen Berman indicating the architecture of buildings in the Downtown is boring, the City does not have a building which people would want to come and visit, the willingness of Mr. Parks to create three designs for the Palm Avenue Parking Garage at no cost is remarkable, and supporting the sail scheme as video can be streamed on the aluminum panels. Mr. Parks answered CRA questions concerning the flexibility of the aluminum panels, the reapplication of white powder on the aluminum panels, and the design of the sides of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage if the budget was not constrained. In response to a question by Member Turner asking the cost to extend the aluminum panels along the sides, Mr. Beaumier stated that the cost to extend the aluminum panels along the sides of the parking garage will cost approximately $600,000. Mr. Parks stated that the cost to extend the facade design along the sides of the parking garage will be the same for any design scheme chosen. Mr. Parks and Mr. Gallagher answered CRA questions concerning the flexibility in storefront designs, the ability of a new tenant to change the storefront design, the desirability of the uniformity of the sail scheme Book 3 Page 31694 02/16/10 2:30 P.M. Book 3 Page 31695 02/16/10 2:30 P.M. versus the color arrangements of the traditional scheme, the visibility of the concavities and convexities from the west side of Palm Avenue, and the extension of the aluminum panels to 20 feet rather than 60 feet. In response to a comment by Vice Chair Kirschner asking the ability to use private capital to install a more significant solar array on the roof of the top level of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage, Ben Quartermain, West Industries, came before the CRA, gave an overview concerning the professional experience of West Industries with the installation of solar and photovoltaic (PV) systems, and stated that he considered expanding the PV system originally included in the RFP by providing covered parking for perimeter and possibly some internal parking spaces; that the PV panels would be plaçed on the roof of the covered parking spaces; that the proposed design is 200 kilowatts (KW) resulting in a $3,400 monthly savings in energy costs; that a couple of options available to implement the project to install PV panels are for the City to purchase the PV system or lease the PV: system from West Industries; that West Industries would provide the funding, design, and installation of the PV system, provide an immediate savings in energy cost to the City, and use the revenue generated from the majority of the energy produced to repay the loan; that West Industries would venture into an agreement to monitor and maintain the PV system and provide a larger payback to the City once the loan has been paid in full; that economic models and rental agreements available which he can share with the City to assist in the outlining of the agreements and rental periods; that some financial partners have been identified for the City to decide whether the financial partners are acceptable. Mr. Quartermaine answered CRA questions concerning the panels being able to withstand hurricane winds, the locking-in of the price per KW guaranteeing a lower price than what would be paid to Florida Power and Light (FPL), selling the power produced, individually metering all retail spaces, the electric load of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage, the sails interfering with the PV panels, and the PV panels glaring into condominiums. In response to a question by Vice Chair Kirschner asking the total cost for the project to install the PV panels, Mr. Quartermaine stated that the cost would range between $1 and 1.5 million. In response to a question by Vice Chair Kirschner asking the restriction for the future owner of the adjacent vacant lot to purchase air rights if the City enters into a lease agreement with West Industries, Mr. Quartermaine stated that the PV system was designed to be removed as the City will be leasing the PV system; therefore the PV panels can be removed and added to the top of the roof of the structure. Mr. Parker answered CRA questions concerning the thermal heat radiation generated by the aluminum panels and the possibility of making the sails equivalent to the Google homepage in which Google is constantly changing its image. In response to a request by Vice Chair Kirschner asking Mr. Parks speak to the proposed green roof mentioned at a public meeting, Mr. Parks stated that discussions came forth regarding what to do with the top of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage; that condominium owners at 1350 Main Street are interested in making the roof of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage something important resulting in the discussion of a green roof; however, the CRA never directed the Design/Build team to consider a green roof; that the green roof discussion was part of the public process; that the aesthetics of a green roof cannot be justified; that the use of artificial turf was considered; that Mr. Gallagher advised that the engineering of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage is completed and is being delayed by the green roof discussion. No one else signed up to speak and Chair Clapp closed public input. The CRA recessed at 4:57 p.m. and reconvened at 7:23 p.m. Mr. Stancel answered CRA questions concerning the widths of the alley and entrance drive into the Garage, the distance from the tower to the eastern edge of the entrance drive. Chair Clapp stated that Staff recommends five separate motions to select and option for the facade design, maintain existing alleyways and entrance drive facade as originally proposed or select Option 1 or 2 at an increased GMP, choose a facade for Palm Avenue facade only or continue approximately 58 feet along the alley facade located behind the Main Street businesses with an increased GMP, whether to move forward with the LEED certification, and to authorize the City Manager to execute a Change Order. In response to a question by Vice Chair Kirschner asking if Staff has a recommendation for the CRA regarding operating and maintenances costs, Mr. Stancel stated that no specific recommendation is being made other than to move forward with the LEED certification. Mr. Stancel answered CRA questions concerning the price to extend the facade along the north and south facades of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage and stated that Option 4 may require an adjustment to the City's Building Design Guidelines based on the materials used for the facade of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. A motion was made by Vice Chair Kirschner, seconded by Member Atwell, and carried by a 5-0 vote to select Option 4, the sail scheme design for the proposed facade of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Mr. Stancel, Mr. Parks, and Mr. Beaumier answered CRA questions concerning the uniformity of widths of the aluminum panels, the coverage of the cylindrical shape on the northwest corner of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage, the areas discussed for facade design Options 2 and 3, the necessity of the placement of solid spandrels along levels two through four, the cost for the placement of full spandrels and extension of front facade, and the use of cables on the east side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Mr. Bartolotta stated that the Palm Avenue Parking Garage is anticipated to have higher occupancy during daytime hours than the night; that the likelihood of using the top parking levels of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage during night hours is not likely. Mr. Parks answered CRA questions concerning wayfinding signage for the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Mr. Bartolotta stated that the CRA should focus on the issue of cable versus spandrels for the east, north, and south sides of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage; and requested CRA direction regarding the placement of cables or spandrels on the east side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Vice Chair Kirschner and Members Atwell and Turner stated that the top two parking levels should have spandrels and the lower levels should have cables. Chair Clapp and Member Atkins stated that no spandrels should be installed. Vice Chair Kirschner and Members Atwell and Turner agreed to install spandrels on the top two parking levels and cables on the lower parking levels on the east side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Mr. Stancel stated that he and the Assistant to the City Manager went inside several condominiums located at 1350 Main Street to see the view of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage; that anyone living on the third floor and several floors above the third floor will be looking straight into the Palm Avenue Parking Garage; therefore, Staff recommends installing spandrels on the top two parking levels on the south side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Mr. Stancel answered CRA questions concerning the number of condominiums which have a direct view into the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Chair Clapp stated that he would rather allocate the money which will be saved on the south side to the north side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage and the Palm Avenue facade. Book 3 Page 31696 02/16/10 2:30 P.M. Book 3 Page 31697 02/16/10 2:30 P.M. Mr. Parks answered CRA questions concerning reconciling the different opinions of the CRA regarding the southern facade of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Chair Clapp requested CRA direction regarding the installation of spandrels versus cables on the south side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Member Turner stated that no spandrels should be installed. Vice Chair Kirschner stated that he would rather expend the money to extend the facade 25 feet along the south side as well as extending the facade beyond 25 feet on the north side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Chair Clapp noted CRA consensus not to install spandrels on the south side of the Paim Avenue Parking Garage and requested Commission direction regarding the installation of spandrels versus cables on the north side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Mr. Bartolotta stated that the proposed design already includes spandrels along the north side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage; that for clarification purposes, spandrels will be installed on the top two parking levels and cables on the lower parking levels on the east side, spandrel will be installed along the entire north side, and no spandrels will be installed on the south side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. In response to a question by Vice Chair Kirschner asking the cost for the installation of spandrels on the top two parking levels on all sides, Mr. Beaumier stated that he does not have the calculation of the cost at this time. In response to a question by Vice Chair Kirschner asking how to move forward with motions without knowing the dollar amounts, Mr. Bartolotta stated that the City would still want to remain within the budget; that budget will depend on how far the CRA would like to extend the facades on the north and south sides of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Mr. Beaumier stated that the calculation will be approximately less than half of $144,000; that the CRA can make a motion indicating the cost cannot exceed the previously proposed cost; that he can work with the Design/Build team to determine the cost of the items the CRA desires to include into the design of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Chair Clapp requested CRA direction regarding the extending of the facades along the north and south sides of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. In response to a question by Member Turner asking whether extending the facade 20 feet on the south side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage is sufficient, Mr. Parks stated that the rendering shows the facade extending one bay which is 58 feet; that extending the facade 58 feet on the south side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage as depicted in the rendering is preferred. In response to a question by Chair Clapp asking the cost for extending the facade to one bay and two bays, Vice Chair Kirschner stated that the cost for one bay is $266,000. Mr. Beaumier stated that the $266,000 is a straight calculation; that the straight cost of $266,000 must be divided by two to determine the cost to extend the facade approximately 29 feet. In response to a question by Member Turner asking if extending the facade 29 feet on the south side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage is supported, Mr. Parks stated yes. CRA agreed to extend the facade 29 feet on the south side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage and not to extend the facade on the east side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. In response to a question by Mr. Bartolotta asking if the rendering is showing the facade extending 60 or 120 feet on the north side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage, Mr. Parks stated that the rendering shows the facade extending 60 feet; however, the north side seems incomplete; that whether construction on the adjacent vacant lot will begin in 2 or 22 years is not known; that the funds can be utilized to extend the north facade beyond 60 feet by not installing spandrels elsewhere. Mr. Stancel and Mr. Parks answered CRA questions regarding the length from the cylinder facade to the eastern edge on the north side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage, the placement of cables rather than spandrels if the facade is extended to the eastern edge on the north side of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage, and not exceeding $600,000 for the cost of screens for the facades. Mr. Stancel gave a presentation concerning the approved budget for the construction of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage. Mr. Bartolotta and Mr. Stancel answered CRA questions concerning having sufficient funds in the budget to make the desired additions and changes to the design of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage, clarification of items listed as extra costs such as the parking management system, and the ability to waive County impact fees. A motion was made by Member Turner, seconded by Vice Chair Kirschner, and carried by a 5-0 vote to include spandrels on the top two parking levels on the east facade and no spandrels on the south facade of the Palm Avenue Parking Garage and add approximately 29 feet of aluminum panels on the south facade and approximately 90 feet on the north facade with the total of the inclusion of spandrels on the top two parking levels on the east facade and the addition of approximately 29 feet of aluminum panels on the south facade and approximately 90 feet on the north facade not to exceed $600,000. A motion was made by Vice Chair Kirschner and seconded by Member Atkins to move forward with the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification at a cost not to exceed $15,000. Michael Carlson, AIA, LEED Accredited Professional, came before the CRA and answered CRA questions concerning the LEED certification process, the value in the $15,000 expenditure to obtain the LEED certification, the payback period, and the benefits of a 200 kilo watt solar array. Chair Clapp called for a vote to move forward with the LEED certification at a cost not to exceed $15,000 at a cost not to exceed $15,000. A motion was made by Vice Chair Kirschner, seconded by Member Atkins, and carried by a 5-0 vote to authorize the City Manager execute a Change Order to the Guaranteed Maximum Price for the Palm Avenue Parking Garage in the amount determined by the previous motions. Book 3 Page 31698 02/16/10 2:30 P.M. Book 3 Page 31699 02/16/10 2:30 P.M. 3. ADJOURN Chair Clapp adjourned the meeting at 8:17 p.m. ladd Cbp RICHARD CLAPP, CHAIR ATTEST: PAMELA M. NADALINI, ACTING SECRETARY