Report to: General Committee Report
Date:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY: Alan Wolfe, Project Consultant
John Ryerson, Acting Director of Culture
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the report entitled “Markham Museum Ward Building Rehabilitation and Collections Building Schematic Design Approval” be received;
Construction |
$ 7,300,000 |
Furniture Fixtures and Equipment |
$ 840,000 |
Internal*
|
$
1,018,000 |
TOTAL |
$
9,158,000 |
*Internal costs include architectural Fees, signage, insurance, and storage etc
Previously Approved Capital Funding- Collections Building Project |
$ 4,390,000 |
Cultural Spaces Federal Grant and Ward Family Contribution |
$ 954,500 |
Total
Approved Funding |
$ 5,344,500 |
Life Cycle and Capital Reserve |
$ 2,283,500 |
Development Charges Reserve Fund |
$ 1,530,000 |
Total
Additional Funding |
$
3,813,500 |
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
This report is to
seek Council approval of the final design for the Ward Building Rehabilitation
and the Schematic Design for a new
In
Work
The design of the Ward Building Rehabilitation project has been completed. It has been enhanced to include light fixture upgrading, a new accessible washroom, and miscellaneous life cycle work. It is scheduled to be constructed this spring and summer.
Collections
Schematic Design
The Schematic
Design of the new
In order to
remain eligible for the Federal Cultural Spaces Grant, the
The design will be presented to the public for review and comments during the design stage of the project. The results of the meeting will be reported to Council as part of the Site Plan Approval process.
Museum staff and the
In addition, a funding strategy for the full implementation of the Master Plan including the first phase facility and associated landscaping and parking lot works and the remaining Site Development works has been developed.
Lastly, the architect’s fees are recommended to be increased to reflect the increase in complexity and scope of the project.
The purpose of
this report is to request Council approval for the final design of the Ward
Building Rehabilitation and the Schematic Design for the
This project has been evolving based on the November 2004 Lord Museum Master Plan (Master Plan). A point form summary of the background of the project and how it has evolved is included as Attachment “A”.
The implementation of the Master Plan has been divided into two components. The first is the development of a Facility Plan for the new buildings required for collection storage, exhibits, programs, and archives. The second is the development of a Site Development Plan of the grounds of the museum for landscaping, outdoor amenities, site circulation, gathering areas and drainage.
The Museum staff and Board have been working with Asset Management staff on the implementation of the Facility Plan and with the Urban Design staff on the implementation of the Site Development Plan. The two plans have been carefully coordinated.
The Facility Plan is further developed than
the Site Development Plan. Currently,
the Facility Plan includes the rehabilitation of the
A conceptual Site Development Plan has been
developed and presented to the Museum staff and Board. A component of the Site Development Plan is
integral to the construction of the
On this basis, the implementation of the Museum Master Plan has been divided into a number of phases:
The Technical
Advisory Committee (
A)
PHASE 1 FACILITY
WARD BUILDING REHABILITATION
1. The
Council previously allocated $310,000 for
the rehabilitation of the
This amount will finance the building envelope improvements necessary to prevent water leakage, animal incursions, and energy efficiency and include the following items:
· Upgrade Roof including the addition of R30 insulation and a new white roof membrane
· Remove and replace deteriorated wood siding including R20 foam insulation
· Complete mould abatement work
During the design of the work, a number of additional items, that reflect Council’s priorities of improving energy efficiency, accessibility and maintenance of Town buildings, were incorporated into the project as detailed below:
The cost of this additional work is $247,000. This additional work will be funded from MECO, 2008 Accessibility Account, and the Life Cycle and Capital Reserve. The additional work was endorsed by the BPCC and the Museum Board.
The proposed rehabilitated
The project was designed on this basis and “Tender
018-T-08 for the Markham Museum Ward Building Rehabilitation” was issued and closed
on
1. The location of the
The first task was to establish the location of the building. The criteria for determining the location for the building are listed below:
1.
Proximity to the Reception
Centre and the
2. Exposure to Hwy 48 to provide a higher visibility and exposure to the Museum
3. Consistency with the Site Plan to ensure the building compliments the plan
A location, which meets all the criteria, adjacent
to the north side of the Reception Centre was selected. It was strongly recommended by the
2. A Schematic Design for the
The architect originally proposed 3 options for the layout of the building.
1) Option 1 - 14,000 square feet (sf )on one level
2) Option 2 - 12,000 sf on one level with a 2000 sf mezzanine
3) Option 3 - 7,560 sf on one level with a 2000 sf mezzanine and a 4,500 sf basement
The geotechnical study revealed that the top layer of the site consists of a 1.2m of organic material. This material will have to be removed beneath the new building. It would then have to be replaced with either engineered fill to build an above grade level or with a basement to provide a below grade level. Either of these options would make Options 1 and 2 too expensive. Furthermore, the single level options utilize a large amount of the site, thereby reducing the area for the required landscape, site circulation and parking. In addition, it does not provide the desired presence on Hwy 48.
Although Option 3 reduced the above concerns, this option would not adequately meet the Museum’s programming requirements.
These options were reviewed by the
On this basis, the architect developed a fourth option. Option 4 consists of a 16,000 sf split-level building that includes collection storage, archive area and both permanent and temporary exhibition area, with the following floor sizes:
Entry Lobby 1,300 sf
Main Floor Level 6,350 sf
Mezzanine 2,000 sf
Lower Level 6,350 sf
Total 16,000 sf
This split-level option consists of a lower level that is 60 % above grade and 40 % below grade. This elevation ensures all the organic material is removed. It also raises the building to provide a higher building, thereby enhancing the presence on Hwy 48. This has the added advantage of providing an effective unobtrusive delivery access for storage and exhibit areas and also adds windows to the lower level which makes it useable for purposes other than storage.
The mezzanine on the second level provides
an area for the permanent exhibit that will tell the story of
This split-level option has a total floor area of 16,000 sf. which is 2000 sf larger than the 14,000 single level option. The additional space is required to allow for the non-programmable space required for stairs, an elevator, and circulation space necessary for a two-level building. The programmable space remains at 14,000 sf.
The architect estimates that the cost to construct this option would not exceed the amount which is currently included in the project budget.
During the Schematic Design process, however, a number of enhancements were identified that would significantly improve the building. They are as described below.
The architect estimates the addition of these features will add $650,000 to the cost of the building.
This design has been reviewed by the
Therefore, it is recommended that Option 4
be approved as the Schematic Design for the new
The staff presentation of
3. A Schematic Design for the associated Site Development of the
Collections and Ward Building will be incorporated into the project.
Site development works are essential to service and to provide an appropriate setting for the building. Simultaneously with the building Schematic Design, a conceptual site plan for the Collections Building and the Ward Building was developed as part of the independent Site Development Plan.
In summary, this
plan consists of the following elements.
The area surrounding the
This concept has been further refined to provide a Schematic Design for the works that includes a 90 space paved parking lot, lighting, hard and soft landscaping, storm water management, service connections and lighting. It has now been incorporated into the building design to form a project Schematic Design.
As
4. The
The architect has prepared a check list indicating the work necessary to achieve the various LEED certification levels. It is included as Attachment “C”.
Museum buildings have stringent internal
environmental requirements for collection storage and exhibiting that make it challenging
to achieve the higher levels of LEED certification. The architect has advised that currently they
are not aware of any museum building in
On
The design features that will be utilized to achieve LEED Silver certification will be consistent with the Council priorities established in the March 25 Council approval. These priorities include water reduction, storm water infiltration, implementation of the three steam waste program, and reduction of the Urban Heat Island. Features under consideration for this project include geothermal heating and cooling systems, environmental roof systems and building components, plumbing and electrical upgrades and a water recycling system. The architect recommends including a $750,000 allowance for these types of upgrades. This allowance has been included in the overall proposed budget set out below.
Early in the design stage an analysis of each of the upgrades will be conducted to ensure the most cost-effective and environmentally appropriate items are selected. Each environmental upgrade will be assessed to determine the cost and benefits, return on investment, net present value and the impact on life cycle replacement. The estimates for operating savings will reflect the best industry practices for calculating operational savings. A report on these LEED environmental upgrades will be presented to Council.
5. Other additional costs have been identified
for a total additional cost of $3,480,000.
The Museum and Asset Management staff also reviewed the Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment, Exhibit and storage, and the Internal components of the project budget to ensure it is sufficient to support the proposed building. An additional $50,000 has been added to the original budget for the Information Technology equipment necessary for both administration and serving the public.
Lastly, the cost estimates were originally done assuming 2008 construction costs. Based on an escalation factor of 0.5% per month, the architect estimates an additional 5% cost due to escalation from previous 2008 construction to current 2009 construction. This will add $318,000 to the cost of the project and is included in the contingency costs. Any further delay will result in additional escalation costs estimated at $31,000 per month
( $372,000 per year).
The total additional costs are as follows:
Additional Features |
$ 650,000 |
Site Development |
$1,700,000 |
LEED Silver Certification |
$ 750,000 |
IT Costs |
$ 50,000 |
Cost Escalation |
$
318,000 |
Total
Additional Costs |
$3,468,000 |
The construction cost estimates in this section include a 15% contingency and the appropriate consulting fees.
6.
The Federal Cultural Spaces staff has
advised that the current program will end on
A schedule to complete the project to meet the deadline has been developed. This schedule is based on receiving Council approval of the Schematic Design in April and is detailed below:
1. Develop Design (including public input) June 2008
2. Site Plan Review August 2008
3. Detail Design November 2008
4. Apply for Building Permit November 2008
5. Issue Tender December 2008
6. Award Tender January 2009
7. Start Construction March 2009
8.
Substantially Complete
Construction
and Occupancy
9. Final Completion of Construction June 2010
The schedule will be submitted to the Federal Cultural Spaces staff. Council will also have the opportunity to review the design as part of the Site Plan Approval process. Once the design has been approved by Council, the detailed design will then be completed and tendered. A report will be submitted to Council to award the tender.
7. The design will be presented for public
review and comment.
The Develop Design
phase will include a meeting to present the design to the public. The meeting will provide the public
opportunity to comment on the design.
The appropriate changes, based on these comments, will be incorporated into the project. It should be noted that any changes will be limited to design refinements and will not include any items that would increase the size or budget of the facility. The results of the meeting will be reported to Council as part of the Site Plan Approval process.
B)
PHASE 2A
The
Currently
Currently
·
Phase
·
Future
CONCLUSION
Museum staff and Board have carefully reviewed the Museum Master Plan to ensure that the current Facility Plan that includes the Ward Building Rehabilitation (a large multi- purpose room, workshop, and non Class A storage) and the new Collections Building (exhibit space, Class “A” collections storage, and archives) will meet the facility objectives of the plan, and that the Site Plan will address the Museum’s outdoor amenity requirements.
In summary Museum staff and Board concludes that the Facility Plan when
completed will accomplish the following objectives:
·
Provide for the preservation and protection of
·
Provide for the telling of the story of
·
Demonstrates a commitment to the museum to bring it up to
·
Exhibit, in a professional manner, the collections and archives to tell
the stories of
·
Permit borrowing artifacts and exhibitions in support of its goals.
·
Provide effective group handling, arrival experience and public
amenities.
·
Complete the
·
Increase earned revenue to support growth in programs and activity i.e. camps, school and public programs for all
ages
·
Create a sense of place – a gathering place for
·
Contribute to the economic and branding priorities of
Furthermore, they are confident that proposed the Site Plan will address the outdoor aspects of the Master Plan.
A more detailed analysis of the new Facility Plan and the Site plan is included as Attachment “D”. In addition, a description of the Museum’s strategy to establish a Children’s museum focus is included as Attachment “E”.
The Table 1 demonstrates that the proposed Facility Plan is slightly smaller, significantly less expensive and will be completed earlier than the original Master Plan provided for.
Table 1 Comparison of the Master Plan to the Proposed Facility Plan
|
Lord Master Plan |
Proposed Facility Plan |
||||
|
Description of Work |
Size (sf) |
Cost Estimate (2005) |
Description of Work |
Size (sf) |
Cost Estimate (2008) |
Period 2005- 2009 |
Reconstructed |
14,000 |
$1,650,000 |
Rehabilitated |
14,000 sf |
$557,000 |
Period 2009 – 2013 |
|
|
|
|
16,000sf |
$9,158,000 |
Period 2013 plus |
Expansion of Reception Centre |
18,000 |
$9,000,000 |
|
|
|
Totals |
|
32,000 |
$10,650,000 |
|
30,000 |
$9,715,000 |
It should also be noted that the remainder of the Site Plan work is estimated at $5,200,000. Approximately $2,000,000 of this work is scheduled for 2010 – 2013 and the remainder will be scheduled for 2013 plus.
In conclusion, the implementation of the proposed Facility Plan as described in this report and Site Development Plan will provide the Museum with exciting new facilities that will support overall vision of the Lord Museum Master Plan. They provide a cost-effective and efficient plan to meet all the Museum’s current and foreseeable future needs.
FINANCIAL
Funding
The Life Cycle and Capital Reserve includes a $10,000,000 allocation for funding the projects identified in the November 2004 Lord Museum Master Plan (Museum Master Plan). A contribution of $500,000/year is identified in the reserve beginning in 2006 and continuing for 20 years.
The
A)
1. Current Project Cost and Funding
The original cost estimate for the project
was $3,325,000.
The report entitled “Options for a Revised Building Strategy for the Museum Ward Building Reconstruction Project” considered by Council on June 26, 2007 provided six options for a building strategy to meet the Museum’s collection, exhibition, and archival needs.
Although Council did not select an option, it was apparent that Option 6 best satisfied the established selection criteria. This option included a stand-alone building with a Class “A” internal environment, and with one level and a basement. It would have a 7000 sf foot print and thereby provide a total area of 14,000 sf. The preliminary construction cost estimate for this building was for comparative purposes only. It did not include the site development costs or the cost of LEED certification. It should be noted that as the previous report was comparing 6 alternative building and design alternatives it was not feasible to provide final budget estimates at that time.
The
It should be noted that the Federal Cultural Spaces grant was reduced by $242,750 and is offset in the funding request.
2. Proposed Schematic Design cost and funding
During the schematic design stage a number of building enhancements were identified as desirable cost-effective enhancements that should be included as part of the project. In addition, a number of other additional project costs have been identified and are quantified in Table 2. Table 2 summarizes all the following additional costs necessary to complete the building project as described in the body of this report.
Table
WARD
BUILDING REHABILITATION
Project
Costs |
|
Original Costs |
$ 310,000.00 |
Additional Costs |
$ 247,000.00 |
Total
Project Costs |
$ 557,000.00 |
|
|
Funding |
|
Approved
Funding |
|
073-6150-7426-005, 2007 |
$ 310,000.00 |
073-5350-7589-005 Design North Parking Lot & Soil Testing |
$ 30,000.00 |
|
$ 25,000.00 |
2056-6150-8001-005, 2008 Accessibility Project |
$ 50,000.00 |
Sub-total |
$ 415,000.00 |
Additional
Sources |
|
031-222-0034 MECO Funding - Deferred Revenue |
$ 55,000.00 |
Life-Cycle and Capital Reserve |
$ 87,000.00 |
Sub-total |
$ 142,000.00 |
Total Funding |
$ 557,000.00 |
Project
Costs |
|
Original Costs |
$ 5,690,000.00 |
Additional Costs |
$ 3,468,000.00 |
Total
Project Costs |
$
9,158,000.00 |
|
|
Funding |
|
Previously Approved Capital (Projects 8247,
7413-7426, 7004) |
$ 4,390,000.00 |
Cultural Spaces Grant |
$ 854,500.00 |
Ward Family Contribution |
$ 100,000.00 |
Total Approved Funding |
$
5,344,500.00 |
Additional Funding Required |
$ 3,813,500.00 |
Total
Funding |
$
9,158,000.00 |
The funding sources for the shortfall will be a combination of the Capital Reserve and the Development Charges Reserve. The site development work is eligible for a 90% funding from the Development Charges Reserve. The cost estimate for the site works is $1,700,000.00. Therefore, the funding sources for the above amount are as follows:
Life Cycle and Capital Reserve $2,283,500
Development Charges Reserve Fund $1,530,000
TOTAL $3,813,500
B)
The
C)
OTHER FINANCIAL ISSUES
1. Architectural Fees for the
The original project was for the design and
contract administration for a 14,000 sf steel frame pre-engineered building
estimated at the construction cost of $1,870,000. The current project includes the Ward
Building Rehabilitation, a new a 16,000 sf
The Director of Asset Management and the Manager
of Purchasing will negotiate an increase in fees to Ventin Group Architects for
the design and construction administration for the
It should be noted that the architect fees include the cost for the architect and the various expert consultants required to design the building including electrical, mechanical structural, landscape, and civil engineers.
The new Collections building will be designed to achieve a LEED Silver certification
level, the first museum in
The Museum is a key centre for civic engagement by creating a sense of
place and through explorations of identity in
Cultural Services Department
Finance Department
Urban Design
RECOMMENDED BY:
________________________ ________________________
Steve Andrews Peter Loukes, P. Eng
Director,
________________________ ________________________
John Ryerson, Allan Seabrooke,
Acting Director of Culture Commission Lead,
Community and Fire Services
ATTACHMENT “A” - Summary of Background for
the
ATTACHMENT “B” - Staff Presentation
ATTACHMENT “C” – LEED Checklist
ATTACHMENT “D” –Lord Master Plan Update
ATTACHMENT “E” –Road to Children’s Museum
ATTACHMENT “F” –
o:\commission share\operations and asset
management\reports\2008\asset management\facilities\markham museum collection
building schematic design approvaldoc.doc