Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Nelson Fialho/Dr.David Haglund Page 4 <br /> Preliminary Issues Assessment of Potential Colocation of Maintenance Facilities <br /> Part 1: Issues to Consider Regarding Co-Location <br /> Management Partners reviewed all the information provided and identified 16 issues for <br /> consideration by City and District leaders. Those issues are shown in Table 1 below. <br /> Table 1. List of Issues to Consider <br /> Questions Identified <br /> 1. Which functions are appropriate for co-location at the Operations Services Center? <br /> 2. Can current buildings or outside spaces be reconfigured to accommodate District uses? <br /> 3. Could some functions be coordinated or could some spaces be shared by both entities? <br /> 4. Are there alternatives available other than the Operations Services Center site? <br /> 5. What future needs may the City have for expansion of staff,facilities and equipment at the <br /> Operations Services Center due to population growth and build out? <br /> 6. How will parking needs be accommodated with increased uses at the Operations Services Center? <br /> 7. What changes in circulation may be needed to accommodate the safe movement of an increased <br /> number of vehicles? <br /> 8. What communication and power requirements would be needed for the increased functions? <br /> 9. What hazardous materials may be produced or stored by the District that will need to be handled <br /> on-site? <br /> 10.What clarifications or new guidelines may be needed regarding on-site storage of sensitive records <br /> for either agency? <br /> 11.What will be the costs to move the District's operations to the site and then to maintain the <br /> expanded uses on the site? <br /> 12.What steps will be taken to ensure that the two organizations can work well side by side and who <br /> will manage the center? <br /> 13.What branding will be needed at a co-located site? <br /> 14.What employee relations concerns could arise from any next steps? <br /> 15.What long term policy commitment would such a move mean for the City and District? <br /> 16.Who will take responsibility for implementation of the next steps in the process and for future <br /> project management? <br /> Introduction to the Issues <br /> In reviewing the data provided on current maintenance operations and identifying questions to <br /> be answered, we offer the observations below. <br /> • If the District's non-maintenance operations were excluded, the remaining functions <br /> being moved would require approximately17,000 square feet (plus storage areas and an <br /> auto service bay), workspace for 35 employees, 30 fleet vehicles and additional parking <br /> for staff and visitors. The maintenance functions are similar to what is there now and <br /> could be complementary. <br /> • Both the City and District have insufficient parking now for their needs. It is not clear <br /> that this would be resolved with more employees on site (and assuming no public <br /> serving uses are added). <br /> • The Operations Services Center is a maintenance yard with auxiliary functions that the <br /> City is able to manage because they either occur on the weekend (police and fire <br />