3/5/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

and skirting of the structure(s) at $13,820. In addition to these charges there would be the normal utility and transportation impact fees that would have to be paid for new structures. This would be the only cost if located at the Road and Bridge site with the continued use of the existing warehouse. Or, additional structures could be obtained to provide storage at a different location with the office facilities such as behind or adjacent to the Purchasing Warehouse. Advantages: Disadvantages: Close proximity to current administration facilities; cost appears to be affordable at $5.94 per square foot ($37,251 annually); three year lease available; could relocate into a new facility if one is built in the near future; delivery can be made to accommodate the Supervisor's time constraint subject obtaining a timely site plan and building permit approval; accessible to county fiber optic network. If located at the Road Bridge complex, it may not be desirable for public access such as voter registration. It could be reduced in scope and provided just for the Supervisors technicians but that could present a problem during elections especially with recounts, the canvassing board etc. Another alternative is to locate the structure along with a storage facility some where in the vicinity of the Purchasing Warehouse. That would require additional space and cost to accommodate the storage of the voting machines. The cost of the additional space would be estimated to be about 50% more resulting in a cost estimated to be at least $55,875 with an additional $13,820 in set up costs. A major issue is getting all the required regulatory approvals such as site planning approvals and permits in advance of the units to have everything in place by the time needed. The 43rd Avenue Trade Center is another viable alternative located within the boundary of the Vero Beach Airport fronting on 43rd Avenue. This is a steel type structure that is about to be built and can be available in the late April or early May time period. The initial quote was for 6,400 square feet but 8,000 square feet can be provided. The cost per square foot is $5.50 per square foot plus $L25 per square foot for common area maintenance resulting in a an over all cost of $6.75 per square foot. This is an annual cost of $54,000 per year. There is a build out allowance of $37,500. It is estimated that it would cost about $150,000 netting out at $112,500 after the allowance is deducted. Advantages: This project has already received regulatory approvals and is about to be built which provides the owner the opportunity to make the propose facility available as early as sometime in May. The annual cost of this proposed facility is extremely affordable and would be new. It is offered with a three-year lease with options which makes it easier to relocate from if a new County facility is constructed in the near future. The site has relative easy access and is on a collector type roadway; accessible to county fiber optic network. It is located within the County Seat. Disadvantages: While located within the County Seat, it is located near the approach of a runway at the Vero Beach Airport. This may be noisier than other locations and certainly would not be recommended as a long-term use for the type of location that would be needed for the Supervisor of Elections. The location may be somewhat difficult in describing for directions on behalf of the general public. The decision as to where the Supervisor is ultimately relocated is both an economic decision and one as to the degree of permanency. If there is no concern about relocating the Elections office into a new county administration building, then a more permanent facility either owned or leased may be appropriate subject to cost and proper location. RECOMMENDATION: As of the writing of this transmittal memo, staff is offering no recommendation, but due to the sort time frame identified by the Supervisor of Elections, staff is seeking comment and direction in order to foimulate a final recommendation for the Board. March 5, 2002 52 BK 1 2 ? P3 553