FARMINGTON – Architects outlined preliminary renovation plans for a medical office building Wednesday evening, turning it into a police station in the event residents should accept of the property as a gift.
The Franklin County Health Network has offered to donate the building, located at 116 Franklin Avenue, to the town for the purposes of providing more space to the Farmington Police Department. The current occupants, a family practice with a staff of four healthcare providers, will be relocated to the ground floor of the Medical Arts Center on the Franklin Memorial Hospital campus in March. The building is less than half a mile from the site that had been proposed for a 9,000 square foot police station voters narrowly rejected in November 2009. The $2.75 million price tag for the new station in a downward-trending economy was the major reason given by voters for its defeat.
The space issues of the 14-officer department, currently operating out of 1,575 square feet in the municipal building, have persisted despite the vote. The potential donation of the 6,173 square foot building offers the selectmen and town a second look at the issue.
Farmington has employed the firm Bunker & Savage Architects, who developed the proposal that eventually was voted down at referendum, to look at the medical office building and see what improvements would need to be made. Architects from the firm presented a $652,000 basic construction budget to a room full of selectmen, budget committee members and residents Wednesday night. The preliminary figure includes basic renovations to the heating, electrical and insulation systems, as well as improvements the department and architects feel are necessary to turn the medical office building into a police station.
“It’s a medical office building with exam centers and it’s served that purpose very well,” Architect Craig Boone said, “but we’re looking at changing it to a police station.”
Of that $652,000, roughly $100,000 is made up by fees for engineering and architectural work, a contingency and other related expenses. The construction portion, $555,000, is dominated by work to replace or retrofit heating and electrical systems throughout the building. Specifically, Boone recommended replacing two, aging oil furnaces with a more modern system, as well as removing a supplementary electric baseboard heating system which runs around the perimeter of the building. That would be replaced with a hot water system, although architects acknowledged that insulation and weatherization work might reduce the necessity of any supplemental system. Heating ducts which run through the attic would be moved down into the ceiling cavity.
Electrically, the architects are recommending a fire alarm system be installed, as well as a security system. The building currently has two meters, as it was formerly divided into two units, and those would be merged into a single system. They also recommend $25,000 to purchase a 35 kW generator, tying into the electric system in the case of a power outage.
The other 45 percent of the construction costs would be used to pour more insulation into the attic and tighten up the building’s envelope by removing vinyl siding and adding a layer of foam. There is also some internal construction work, generally the removal of interior walls to create larger interview rooms and offices. The lobby walls would be tightened up which, along with the installation of a bulletproof reception window, would create a secure entrance. Some work would also be done on interior doors and bathrooms to make the building handicap accessible. Windows would be replaced with energy efficient models.
Most interior walls, counter tops and lighting would remain the same. Boone characterized the general condition of the building as “excellent.”
The architects have also included another $152,000 of additional possible expenses. These include $21,000 allowances for eventual paving and roof work, although neither of those are currently an issue, as well as $76,000 for the construction of a three-car, heated garage. According to Police Chief Jack Peck, that would allow the officers to work on vehicle or vehicle-mounted equipment issues out of the cold, as well as provide a third space for the use of impound. The attic area above the garage would provide additional storage, and the building in general has significantly more storage space than what the officers have access to at the municipal building.
The total budget for construction, associated costs and the allowances would be $804,000. Selectmen will be meeting with architects to discuss the budget in greater detail, and they will decide what figure appears on the March town meeting warrant. Both the architects and some selectmen noted that contractor bids would likely come in lower than the budget, given current economic conditions.
The cost per square foot comes down to $89.90, for the basic construction budget. With the garage and allowances, it rises to $105.62 per square foot.
Town Manager Richard Davis noted the cost was less than a third of the $2.75 million project, which failed to pass in 2009 by a little more than 120 votes. He said that bonded over 20 years, assuming a 4.5 percent interest rate, the project would cost voters roughly $61,000 annually. He estimated that would impact the tax rate by .155 mills, or an additional $15.50 on a $100,000 piece of property.
“I’d call it a good deal,” Davis said.
Voters can expect two articles addressing the issue on the March town meeting warrant. One will ask if the town should accept the donation of the building, while the second will ask if some amount of money should be raised to pay for renovations.
Some at the meeting brought up the possibility of moving town administrative functions to the new site, using the space freed up at the municipal building to address the police department’s space needs. Resident Bill Crandall, who has been serving on the space-needs committee, said he felt it was important to consider the benefits of leaving emergency services together, in the same building.
The issue with that reversal, according to the architects, would be that it wouldn’t save significant amounts of money at the new site and would greatly complicate matters at the current municipal building. Any renovation exceeding $50,000 in cost, according to the architects, would trigger Americans with Disabilities Act requirements for the building. This would require the installation of expensive elements, such as an elevator, which would make significant savings through the reversal unlikely.
Selectmen plan on meeting with the architects in the near future to flesh out a funding proposal for the town meeting warrant. If approved, construction could begin in August, with the department moving in sometime in October.
My Taxes are high enough now, any more and I well be forced to move
JHC !! They have no problem spending $$$, do they ? $ 100,000 for engineering and architectural work is a total waste of taxpayer’s money… Hire a good local contractor and have at it. New floors, new walls… It would be nice to replace everything in our home, but gues what ?? We make due with what we have !!
Do we not have anybody with a brain who can figure out how to remodel? You can build a whole brand new building for less than $ 200,000!
WE NEED TO STOP INCREASING OUR TAXES !! LISTEN TO THE TAXPAYERS… THEY ARE OUT OF MONEY!!
If most of that half million being spent is for heating and electrical systems, why isn’t a ‘green’ system being considered? Let’s get some figures on a windmill or geotherm system to heat and cool and provide electricity.
$652,000 renovation? Are you out of your minds? You were GIVEN a building FREE!
You were turned down in 2009 because it was too much money!
You will be turned down again by the voters because this is too much money for renovations!
Where has common sense gone?
That is outrageous! The Heating and electrical systems worked fine for the medical building. And if they are old and may need to be replaced in the future, then do it in the future when they stop working. How do you eat an elephant?, one bite at a time. You go to the voters and ask for that much money all at once it will be voted down. Go to the voters with the basic stripped down version of a renovation and with the idea that over the next 5 to 10 years you will add to the request a new heating and electrical system, then maybe you stand a chance of getting it approved. Be happy and feel blessed to have received such an amazing gift as a building. Work on making it perfect for your needs over the next 10 years. A little at a time.