Building Needs Assessment Work Group Minutes
September 2, 2021 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.
Hybrid Meeting in person at 4610 S. Biltmore Lane, Chester Room; masks required
Or Virtual Via BlueJeans
Meeting Documents: https://www.scls.info/committees/building-needs-assessment-work-group
1. Phone: 1-866-226-4650 and use access code: 461-0318-2019.
a. Press the # button to enter meeting as a participant.
2. Web site: https://bluejeans.com/46103182019/webrtc
a. There is no password for participants.
b. If a participant is asked to download software, they can choose to bypass this (join via browser).
10:00: Call to Order: 10:04 am
10:02: Approval of previous meeting minutes: August 12, 2021
M. Ibach moves; J. Stewart seconds
10:05: Reports:
· Feedback from City of Madison on LOIs – D. Haug
o Focused on the Graham Place letter of intent. We have received conditional approval. However, at a DAT meeting, it was discovered that there is a significant water main that goes through the property where we want the building and there is the centennial tree. The hope is that the city will allow us to relocate the building and parking in order to accommodate these issues. The other solution would be to redraw the property line to gain more space on the south side, which then may then mean that we don’t need the second lot. It is desirable for the city to sell that lot to us as it is not developable. It is costly to move a water line. So our best option is to move the site plan off of the water main.
o The key take away is that the city of Madison is very excited about us purchasing the property. We should be as close to final as it should be before submitting it, as it is difficult to change later. Upcoming meeting dates are 9/21, 10/5, 10/19. We want to try and hit one of those. We do not know if there will be issues as we move through the process (hopefully not). The worst case is that we would have to move to the CIC property. They had initially pushed back on price, but D. Haug demonstrated the difference between developable land and undevelopable land; the cost of construction has gone up and therefore property price needs to go down; and we are a not-for profit.
· BCPL loan status – K. Goeden
o The board approved the BCPL loan application on 8/26/21 and K. Goeden drove it down to the loan office with the appropriate documentation on 8/27/21. It will go to their board meeting to be approved at their next meeting on 9/7/21.
· Alder Jael Currie meeting – K. Goeden
o N. Brien made contact with Alder Currie and then looped K. Goeden and M. Van Pelt in on the email conversation. There is a virtual meeting scheduled for 9/9/21 on 9 am for us to meet Alder Currie. This is an introduction of who we are, what we are building.
· DAT meeting highlights – D. Flanigan and K. Goeden
o K. Goeden and D. Flanigan attended a preliminary zoning meeting on 8/13/21 and another full DAT meeting on 8/19/21 where all the representatives were in attendance. See K. Goeden’s notes sent in an email and see notes from above under Feedback from City of Madison on LOIs – D. Haug. We will need a conditional use permit which requires a series of meetings. T. Otto has been part of the conversation. He talked to the Mayor and the Mayor is supportive of the project. They discussed the location of the water main. Zoning requirements such as bicycle parking, landscaping, bird-safe glazing on the windows. Parking must be set back 25’ from the front, but we can have parking in front. There are concerns about fire lanes and sidewalks. We were told that regarding trees we can keep what we want or don’t want on the private part of the property, so we get to choose. There was no discussion of the centennial tree. This will not be considered a public building. They would like more information on MUFN. D. Flanigan acknowledged that we are early enough in the process to resolve issues such as the water main. Most of the issues are pretty straight forward. There was some discussion of fiber, and he thinks that once we get closer to an offer to purchase, we will need to discuss next steps about the fiber. D. Flanigan will start with a list of questions. There is a discussion about not-for-profit and local government. The primary question is whether or not we pay property tax. This will be important for the non-developable property to the west. We would not want to pay property tax on that plot.
10:30: Discussion:
· Bubble diagram and site plan changes:
o City of Madison feedback
§ Centennial tree
· We don’t know if this tree is healthy or if it would survive building around it. K. Williams suggested that we look into UW Extension or foresty for an assessment
§ Water main and easement
§ Fire lane and sidewalk access on north side of building
· Rob’s understanding of the fire lane issue is that based on requirements for length of fire hose, this will not require a fire lane.
§ MUFN fiber – who is bringing this in?
SCLS will keep one office per current staff member as in the plan. There is one extra office between technology and ILS.
Administration
1. Professional Collection: are we going to be able to close that off from the lobby or lock that off from public access to the meeting rooms? Can we install a sliding wall for example, to lock off that collection? BLV model
a. Disregard this. We do not have a concern about this and this disregarded.
2. Will there be a door from the lobby/professional collection space to the hallway with the bathrooms?
3. Would like to see a door or access into the work room on the west side of the room, for easy access to the work room by the administration team.
4. How will we access the main bathrooms? Where will the doors be located?
5. Heidi Moe’s office: Will there be access (window?) to the lobby as well as to the hallway (door?)
6. Will there be an airlock from the vestibule to the lobby to prevent cold/hot air from entering the lobby?
7. Concerned that the main bathrooms are so close to the staff lounge…sometimes it doesn’t smell very good in the bathrooms, not sure we want that near the lounge? Can we ensure good ventilation?
a. Rob is not overly concerned about this. Issues with odor are typically caused by old plumbing or improper plumbing. There are ways to handle this with adjusting when the fans run, etc.
8. Would like to have a direct path from Admin to Delivery so we don’t have to walk all the way around the meeting rooms to get there. Can we add a hallway on the front side of the building between the vestibule and the Delivery offices? This hallway could also provide access to meeting rooms without needing to walk through the lobby/professional collection room. Add windows to the hallway and to meeting room 1 for natural light in the meeting rooms. Admin staff has a relationship with Delivery managers.
9. Where will the doors be to lock off the public meeting space and bathrooms from the rest of the operation?
10. Site Plan: Move the building to the south and east in order to avoid the water main. Add parking, sidewalks and employee entrances on the north side of the building.
a. Rob will do the best that he can with easement issues, etc. Also, if we are not paying taxes on the property, that makes a difference.
b. One option considered today is to totally flip the floor plan
c. There was lots of discussion about reconfiguring the parking lots, etc.
Delivery
1. Garage next to sorting floor
2. Have sort floor closer to garage or at least a short accessible pathway. They load 50% of materials from inside the garage
3. Straight drive thru in building
4. Different location for loading docks
5. Delivery parking shouldn’t be so far away from garage
J. Stewart would like his office closest to the mechanics shop
Technology
1. Concern: large equipment delivery to data center doesn’t appear to be possible; really do need clear access from loading dock for computer pc deliveries – daily for PCs, not too often for large equipment. Prep room, data center, work room need clear access to loading dock deliveries.
a. These direct deliveries that come to headquarters now that need to move through the building
b. As long as hallways are a similar size to what they are at HQ; delivery is prepared to move items through the building
c. Most deliveries are small and can be easily moved through the building
d. Large deliveries do need a loading dock; as long as there is one hallway that is sufficient then it can be moved through the building
e. Standard pallet size is 48” by 40” and delivery is able to maneuver through doors; this will require a six foot door and a 7 foot hallway
f. Summary: Assure that there is a hallway that is large enough and direct enough from the loading dock to the server room
g. If we can move the data center to another part of the building, it would be easier to accommodate. The Tech staff are OK with this concept. The data center does not need to be near the technology offices.
ILS
1. Will doors to huddle rooms be internal to the offices or external to the halls and access to other staff (external to the hallway provides more flexibility). Don’t need answer for tomorrow.
a. Consensus: doors for the Consultant and ILS huddle rooms will face the main shared hallway
2. Soft space. Break room is not for formal meetings. Use space from extra tech office to create open seating area with window on outside wall. The wall facing into the hall could be glass and the wall to the exterior could be glass; all staff could use this space. This space could be converted to an office later if necessary. This could be designated as a quiet, recharging type of space.
Consultants
1. Liked pods idea. Like having 1 office per person
2. Would like to add a dedicated recording space – for all staff to use. Can be smaller than an office. May address this later by converting an existing space to this.
3. Liked each team designing a huddle space
4. Liked the size of the meeting rooms
· Timeline for project
o Meet Alder Currie
o Introduction to neighbors (Vogel, anyone else?)
§ It is a good idea to meet the neighbors as they will weigh in on the CUP
o Notice of and application for CUP
o Land use application form
o Revised site plans and floor plans
o Plan Commission meeting
o D. Flanigan will send a new timeline
· Next steps regarding making an offer on Graham Place site – are we ready?
o Need to redo the site plan and go back to the city for that before writing an offer to purchase
o Go through one more DAT meeting before submitting it (these are every Thursday); D. Flanigan will let K. Goeden know when to submit the new plan.
Topics tabled for future meetings:
· Project plans, cost and new budget - October
· Need to have an industrial ceiling vs closed ceiling aesthetic discussion
o Does not save money to leave open. Open or closed involves different building issues.
· Start discussions with D. Haeffner, Rebekah, D. Flanigan, R. Lindstrum, M. Ibach regarding D. Haeffner’s level of involvement in interior design of new building
· Schedule Admin and Delivery meetings to discuss shared spaces
CONSENSUS (includes newly added consensus points as of 10/28/20)
· Flexibility
· Hybrid of remote and on site - not 100% either way for most staff.
· Design for job needs and requirements not staff member.
· Collaboration and/or individual work can be done at home or onsite as appropriate.
· Set schedules so everyone is accessible no matter where they are working.
· Need to maintain in-person relationships (work and personal).
· The “team” at SCLS is 50+ people with several smaller teams; admin, delivery, tech, ILS and consultants.
· Staff will maintain their individual offices, but offices will be more equitably sized.
· Collaborative space will be added (labs, shared soft spaces) and other common spaces such as the work room, deliverables room and meeting room sizes will be reduced to accommodate the new spaces.
· Staff will be allowed to work remotely and/or in the office as their positions and duties allow with the understanding that there will be times all staff are required to report in person in order to facilitate and maintain staff working relationships.
11:45: Homework for Next Meeting:
· Discuss next steps regarding sites and whether to make an offer
· R. Lindstrom will revise the bubble diagram and finalize site plan
· K. Goeden will contact the city tax assessor’s office to confirm that because the building is deemed not public, will we need to pay property taxes. We are local government and not-for-profit and we are not a public building.
· M. Van Pelt find someone from UW Extension or forestry to look at the tree
· D. Flanigan will email V. Teal Lovely a list of questions about the MUFN fiber and she will initiate the conversation with MUFN folks
·
Vicki
will check with IT to make sure that it is OK to move the location of the
server room away from the IT staff office area (done)
· K. Goeden or M. Van Pelt will reach out to neighbors
· D. Flanigan will contact the city to ask about the easement, the maintenance requirements and whether or not we need the other parcel with the hill
Next Meeting New Schedule: 9/16/2021 at 1:00-3:00 p.m.
· 9/16 Review revised bubble map and site plan and the new schedule
12:00: Adjournment
Parking Lot:
· Create staff workgroup to help select interior furnishings
Members:
Corey Baumann SCLS Delivery Services Coordinator
Nan Brien SCLS Board Trustee
Kerrie Goeden SCLS HR & Finance Coordinator
Mark Ibach SCLS Consulting Services Coordinator
Jesse Stewart SCLS Fleet Manager
Vicki Teal SCLS Technology Services Coordinator
Kristi Williams SCLS Board Trustee
Martha Van Pelt SCLS
Director