8a - Joint Use OMF Site SelectionJoint Use Maintenan%0%., . %A%0111%.
r
Site Selection
Public Works Department
Parks Department
7/20/2022
1
Policy Question
Should council select the preferred site for the
new Joint Use Operations and Maintenance
Facility and authorize $250,000.00 in
expenditures from unallocated capital
improvement funds to advance preliminary
design?
Project Need — Size and Function
Inefficient
Multiple
Existing
Locations
Park Ranger Station
t
O&M Fatik' s and
storage
4ti 9TMEAI P
+1.CA VA
PGWL-li;.VoLl L ilden
T I
Lakeland
t'. °� Nort17
S l La 'Park
Federa; WayOLF— �
L_
Pacifty bonsai MOse6m
West HyFebos
Wetlands Park
Y�i[d Waves Theme t
and WJ rer Perk �AA�
t!":JU..11 Pe L'IJYL'L'
mi
GO: ale
Equipment
and Material
Access
LOSS OF UP TO 1-
HOUR PER CREW
MEMBER, or $1,600,
PER DAY. (PRE-
COVI D)
.7-p,,roj*eact Need � Size and Function
to F+ {
i
F{
1 4 i
lop
#;• aF rr 'Y4 ice:
IL -
N;
if ON 14 "
1 _
Y k �►
a•21 ss1-� rt ,
�. i •- •; f Y� I I
P rn -1 F
=•
5
000
Project Need — Size and Function
.41.7
4,-
—
4
Y a.
s
.LJI
JL��JL �1
Project Need - Security
• In the past 3 years:
—17 break-ins
— Over $250,000 equipment lost /damaged
— Estimated over 600 crew hours lost due to break-
ins.
Project Need — Asset Protection
• Materials and equipment left uncovered /
unprotected.
— Theft and Vandalism.
• Catalytic converters; batteries; fuel; etc.
— Maintenance issues.
• Hydraulic systems — freeze damage; sun damage (e.g.
cracked hoses).
• Rain — water getting where it is not supposed to be (e.g. fuel
tanks, filters)
— Reduction of lifespan estimated at 5% to 35% (higher
reduction for smaller equipment not designed to be outside when not
in use).
Background Information
• May 2021—Briefed council on programming results.
• Confirmed criteria for site selection.
• May 2021 — February 2022:
— Finalized site evaluation report.
— Completed due diligence on potential property
acquisition.
• May 2022 —Update on final site selection report and
outline next steps.
• June 2022 —Select preferred site.
Current & Future Staff Count
STAFFING TABLE
0112M 1
Des0 Lion
Current
Future
Streets FTE
10
15
Streets - Seasonal
6
6
Traffic - FTE
.01
4
SVVM - FTE
I
10
SWM - Seasonal
6
5
SWM - Inspection—
3
4
Parks - FTE
16
32
Parks - Seasonal
21
30
Fleet - FTE
1
Operations Manager'
0
1
Admin Assistant":
0
1
Construction Ins ectors"
5
6
TOTALS 75 118
Programming
Current Vehicles and Equipment List
Mane
Monr06
Monroe
Pelee it
Pmgm&IL
PaUemit
Scbr Tgdi
Stier Teal
Sobr Tgdi
Sorer Tacit
SWr Tcr*
rl
Sd�r Tacit
oranaon
31cr1ng Mark
Swenaan
$Wnnwn Spr+
Swef*on spro
Tenon
Ti{1er Marren
Ford
SP1*8der
I 213M
PW
ST. SL
2
N4
WA
V-Hopper Sander
2013
PVP
5T- SL
2
NO
WA
V-Hopper Sender
UO 5Yd Dump
9d4 SYd Lump
36r id YD Dump
M82-!L,R-1548
2015
PW
ST- SL
2
NG
WA
20GB
Pyp
ST- SL
2
NO
A6274D
2009
PW
ST- M
2
NO
@75WE
2006
PVP
ST- SL
2
NO
A510D
2015
FW
$T- 5L
2
NG
589W5
MB2-0W 548
2015
PW
87 - SL
2
NO
539640
'd924L1?o1 W
20115
PW
ST- SL
2
NO
589mo
M62-0,1648
2016
PW
ST- 9L
2
NO
58W65
M@21R-1 }I$
201$
PVd
ST -%
2
NO
.59741ID
M62-LR-1548
2015
PW
ST- SL
2
NO
507820
boat
A11950ppvn11;
EX-10D-ld-54 SS
1994
PW
ST- 9L
2
NO
15920o
200.1
PUJ
.ST -SL
2
No
125541D
1993
PW
ST- 9L
2
NO
WA
Sgirbcw
2M
PUJ
ST•51.
2
NO
WA
Steel
26172
PW
ST- 5L
2
N4
I"
TC-12"-42
2002
PYv
ST- SL
2
NO
WA
Bengal Brute
2RW
PW
ST- SL
2
NO
WA
CPS195K04T4
20%
PVv
ST- SL
58"b
F-4504)A
2013
PW
sWM=SL
55D471D
Net Area
13,500
5,280
5,280
5,280
2,800
2,800
2,800
2,400
Programming - Summary
• 10 —12 acre site (assuming flat site)
• Operations and Maintenance Building
— Staff offices, crew rooms, lunch / muster area,
training /conference room space, locker rooms
• Shop
• Parking
• Covered and Open Storage
Programming — Summary (cont'd)
• Identified Needs
— Fleet maintenance
— Fueling
— Traffic Signs
— Traffic Signals
Property Search - General
• Criteria
— West side of 1-5 and centralized to City:
• Between S 304t" Street and S 348t" Street
• Between 11t" Ave SW and 28t" Ave S
— Land use — ideally compatible with surroundings
— Property impacts— minimize impacts to surroundings
— Opportunity Cost (Tax impacts)
• Existing site
• City properties
• 10-11 acre parcels —hard to come by.
• Consolidate multiple — hard to come by and more
costiv.
Property Search -Boundaries
-tic
zwz�,trik
Seaport
Fred Meye r
IM
Lakeland
`1�N ortn
. eel L'ske Parr
�r'.S�P.f�`�d�35' ~
Weil and's Pai v Y-
-ins cies
Ii Gar en
.. 0
HOACO1Sr
T,aca r.0ya
1��ild waves Theme .
and %6)ater Park N
Fife Heo: gle
15 minute travel
time west city
limits to 1-5.
15 minute travel
time south city
limits to north
city limits.
Site 1—Existing Site + more
PROS
-Existing Use
-Minimal natural
environment
impacts
-1-5 one side
CONS
-Property purchase
($8-$10 M)
-Site is not level
-Construction
stag
-Apartments to
south.
FUTURE EXPANSION
S,3
AREA
$9
C�
Al
511
If
Or
I1 1r
If
+� + EXPANDED SITE 70
B2 f + f + f F 12.0 ACRES
Ju r + 1+ 1 F j NEW SOUND TRANSIT
RAIL ROUTE
EA
B
I W
81
1
h3 ss +
--- 0, F
F-- P2 — ——
Pi
VI_��EXISTING SITE
IEl A-'ARTMENTS LANDSCAPE BUFFER
Site 2 - City Property South of 312th
Steel Lake Park
Site 2 — within
Steel Lake
Annex
Site 2 — City Property South of 312th
PROS
• City owned
property
• Flat site
• Compatible
surrounding land
use (school to
south)
CONS
• Mitigate loss of
park amenities.
LAKE PARK
Im
LANDSCAPE U)FFER
ALONG STREET FRONTAGE\ � $ tch, MEET
(E) HISTORICAL
SOCIETY BUtlLDING I I P2
__� I o �18P2
I CDr-
� A4 n r
� H
1 - I f
i�sf I e�
iIJS�E.G 1 H
N7INE �F80 FT. I I ___
NETLh)BUFFF.R J +I �$e ES5 I 04 w
( I I I F-11 (E) SOCCER HELD
EA I am
ARIA REPRESENTS A
ACRE SITE.IL
r I I as
I I ! P4-11
813 I
I! I IF
Ills , M
,s10; 4-- I
Sty Al
�-
n n F1 n sa I 5:� Is3 s6� 41z
LiL1uU c_
0-10
Site 3 — Undeveloped Private Property
PROS CONS
• No impacts to existing developed
• $16+ M property cost.
use.
• Wetland mitigation required.
• Residential use surrounding.
• Good arterial access •
Loss opportunity for other
development.
-- -- -- -- ----- -- ------
C3--=--� uuuu`
- -- — — — —
— — — — — — — _ — —
I
87 I
R2
S / n
n I
nn
:!tB
as
I H
U
H
U
II
iil I
-------
61
— — —
— — ——
—�I
S3
L_J C-----------------
------------------
T--T- S9
— —
81
A,3 so
5 3747H 57
M;D
N ieAWN
REQUIRM
Alternative Sites
After last Council meeting, heard concerns about the preferred site. Since then have looked at acquiring
alternative sites. All costs are acquisition only, not mandatory relocation of businesses, negotiated
concessions, demolition of existing improvements, etc.
Previously reviewed private property (not available)
• Sold for $15 million = $31 / sf
Site east of 1-5
• Bank appraised at $29 million = $40 / sf
Eastwind Area (Parcel Combination)
• Parcel combination appraised at $22,123,600
• Expected combined sale value $73 million = $119/sf
336t" Parcel Combination
• Bank appraisal $28.7 million = $44 / sf
320t" SUR Parcel
• Bank valued at $40 million
All options would escalate the
total project costs to $60.7
million to $106 million
Brook Lake Property
0
� If
Powell loo-d Card
Gar en
9 vVild 04,3,:&
Sr-c- Water
It
I
Preferred Site 2
Brook Lake Property
Brook Lake
Property
Ownership
Property
ID
Total Acres
Usable
Acres
City
1
2.52
0.00
City
2
2.47
0.00
City
3
4.51
0.00
City
4
4.99
2.50
City
5
1.51
0.45
City
6
1.76
0.88
SUBTOTAL
3.83
Fire District
7
1.50
1.50
I&
TOTAL
5.33
r klake Co4mum
1❑z :3] 5 a
th t
� 0 �
Two Separate (smaller) Sites
• Does not address current inefficiencies of
having multiple sites.
• Shared vehicles, equipment, shop space, etc.
• Duplicate equipment in both locations.
• Supervisors in both locations.
• Still need large enough space for winter /
emergency operations.
Construction
— Current
Program*
SITE 1:
Existing Site —
Expand to
North
SITE 2: Steel
Lake Park
Annex
SITE 3: Private
Property
Pridevelope
nary Per site
Land / TOTAL COST DIFF.
Mitigation FROM
Costs PREFERRED
M mild ALTERNATIVE
23
DRAFT Funding Breakdown — Base Program
Prefererd Site 2 - Sell
Existing Shop Property
Prefererd Site 2 - Retain
Existing Shop Property
Site 1- Existing Site
Site X - Property Purchase
TOTAL CASH COST
34,000,000
34,000,000
41,000,000
50,000,000
Property Sale
-6,000,000
0
0
-6,000,000
NET CASH COST
28,000,000
34,000,000
41,000,000
44,000,000
Park Property Contribution
14,250,000
14,250,000
0
0
GRAND TOTAL
42,250,000
48,250,000
41,000,000
44,000,000
1/3 Costs covered by Parks, Streets, SWM
SWM
14,083,333
16,083,333
13,666,667
14,666,667
Revenue Sources
Repayment from Parks
0
2,000,000
0
0
SWM - Bond paid by User Fees
14,083,333
14,083,333
13,666,667
14,666,667
SWM Annual Debt Service
990,918
990,918
961,601
1,031,962
STREETS
14,083,333
16,083,333
13,666,667
14,666,667
Revenue Sources
Repayment from Parks
0
2,000,000
0
0
Bond paid by REET/MVET
14,083,333
14,083,333
13,666,667
14,666,667
Streets Annual Debt Service
990,918
990,918
961,601
1,031,962
PARKS
14,083,333
16,083,333
13,666,667
14,666,667
Revenue Sources
Land Contribution
14,250,000
14,250,000
0
0
Payment to Streets/SWM
0
4,000,000
0
0
Bond paid by General Fund
-166,667
5,833,333
13,666,667
14,666,667
Parks Annual Debt Service
0
410,440
961,601
1,031,962
New Program - Fueling
Required Improvements:
(Site costs, fueling equipment and software, etc.)
Total
$700,000
City Pays $85,000+ per year in fuel surcharge
fees.
*payback in 10+ years AND added security
New Program — Fleet Maintenance
• Required Improvements:
— Site Work, shop, equipment, etc.
Total
$4,200,000
City Pays $220,000+ per year in overhead fees.
*payback in 17+ years AND level of service in fleet
maintenance (especially during snow/ice
operations)
Preferred Site — Site 2
• Least cost — city owned property.
• No property acquisition / displacements.
• Level site.
• Easy construction staging away from existing
operations.
• Compatible surrounding use / buffer.
• Mitigatable park impacts.
Proposed Mitigation
LANDSCAPE BUFFER S. ]12[h SYREE7
A LC N G STREET F RONTAGE
(E) HISTORICAL Y' "• Parking
= SOCIETY BUILDING� � ` P2 �
Maintained
iF11 P2 Added
r «• 1 �u •fl
FPTI; Z?� l Hi Skate Park
wE7C Wo�UPFE vs I U I z •/
(E)SOCCER HELn 4 Replacement
• AREA REPRESENTS I I (• I +r
%0 ACRE SITE
/ 4. 1 1 1 i 1 L3 3 1 •
I I r I iP3HI
s,s �I II
} - •, �1��'; , I I I � ��� �__ Perimeter
Walking Path
;� •! .1 r j�seo� i I I I I IYI r
STEEL LAKE PARK
Baseball Field
)� �;-, rl I Mitigation
L__ Li Li W Lf _ s, S2 53 ass J Est I
Proposed Mitigation
• Skate Park Replacement
• Tentatively proposed across street to
���• minimize impacts
• Upgraded to current safety and design
_J
standards
• Perimeter Walking Path on)
• Improve activation of the area
• Provide a Park amenity that doesn't exist today
• Multiple connections to street network pathway
• Baseball Field Mitigation
• Consolidate field maintenance
° requirements
• Improve lighting and features to increase
playability of other facilities -0-000
Proposed Mitigation
Field Usage
JIBMW $3,140.00 542
$2,890.00 512
$1,815.00 321
0 0
$5,324.00 621
*2021— Revenue increase due to regional select
March — May teams paying the outside of Federal Way rate
• Steel Lake Little League has been the historical user for Steel Lake fields 1 and 2.
• Decline in numbers, and use of South County fields, has led to a decline in usage during
this time.
March — September
• Tournament overflow — Weekends with youth tournaments at Celebration Park we also
reserved Steel Lake Park.
• Averages five weekends a year that Steel Lake 1 and 2 are booked for overflow.
March — September
• Booked sporadically Usage fluctuates each year based on needs and user groups.
October— Februaryjr
• Fields Closed
r
Proposed Mitigation
• 56 existing parking spaces
• Overflow parking for soccer
occurs, illegally, on 281" Ave S
and creates safety problems
LANDSCAPE SUFFER - S. 312c S MFET
AMMALONG STREET FRONTAGE
EFp HISTORICAL
SOCIETY BUILDING \ Pt I 1 \
• Approximately 110 proposed, ' ' _ J I ;� _�PS aP2
public access, spaces I
• Frontage improvements
OUTLINE' Of 60 FL ran I ES6 B7
along 28t" to increase safety VVFTIANDBUFFFR I .SSS
lE1 SOCCER HELD
AREA REP ESENTS A _ I I I B Ir
i Z D AC RE SFTE
I l I l l B3
I I I I i P3H
5t3 I I I I I I
132Ll
j I�
Cost: Base Project + Alternatives
Preferred Site 2
Project Cost — Base Program $34,000,000
+ Mitigation
Alt. 1: Fueling $ 700,000
Alt. 2: Fleet Maintenance $ 4,200,000
TOTAL Base + Alternatives $38,900,000
Options Considered
1. Select "Site 2" (SW corner of S 312th Street and 28th
Ave S) as the preferred location for the new Joint Use
Operations and Maintenance Facility and authorize
$250,000 in expenditures from unallocated capital
improvement funds (Fund 401 and Fund 306) to
advance preliminary design.
2. Select alternative site as the preferred location for the
new Joint Use Operations and Maintenance Facility
and authorize $250,000 in expenditures from
unallocated capital improvement funds (Fund 401 and
Fund 306) to advance preliminary design.
Mayor's Recommendation
Option 1: Select "Site 2" as the preferred
location for the new Joint Use Operations and
Maintenance Facility and authorize $250,000.00
in expenditures to advance preliminary design.
Park Impacts & Mitigation
Legend
-,eetare P—
lot
4
VO.A leiA
r
3'- A
-7V
Proposed Mitigation
LANDSCAPE BUFFER S. ]12[h SYREE7
A LC N G STREET F RONTAGE
(E) HISTORICAL Y' "• Parking
= SOCIETY BUILDING� � ` P2 �
Maintained
iF11 P2 Added
r «• 1 �u •fl
FPTI; Z?� l Hi Skate Park
wE7C Wo�UPFE vs I U I z •/
(E)SOCCER HELn 4 Replacement
• AREA REPRESENTS I I (• I +r
%0 ACRE SITE
/ 4. 1 1 1 i 1 L3 3 1 •
I I r I iP3HI
s,s �I II
} - •, �1��'; , I I I � ��� �__ Perimeter
Walking Path
;� •! .1 r j�seo� i I I I I IYI r
STEEL LAKE PARK
Baseball Field
)� �;-, rl I Mitigation
L__ Li Li W Lf _ s, S2 53 ass J Est I
Questions?