Lawrence police facility needs assessment and pre-design study

8/16/2019 Lawrence police facility needs assessment and pre-design study

1/61

Treanor Architects, P.A.

City of LPolice DNeeds Assessment and Pre-

wrence, Kansa partment

Design Stdy

s


2/61

City of Lawrence, KansasPolice Department

Facility Assessment and Site Analysis

2

Ta!le of Contents

". #ntrodction ............................................................................................................................................. $

Background..................................................................................... ...................................................................... 3

Steering Committee and Consultant Team ............................................................................................. 3

Existing Facilities ..................................................................................................................................... .......... 3

%. Poplation and Staffing Pro&ections ................................................................................................... '

Planning or !ro"t# ............................................................................................................................... .......... $

Population Pro%ections .................................................................................................................................... $

Personnel Pro%ections ...................................................................................................................................... &

$. Space Needs (e)iew .................................................................................................................................. *

Space 'eeds( 2)*2 'eeds Assessment .................................................................................................... +

Space 'eeds( 2)*, -pdate ............................................................................................................................

+. Pro&ect dget ....................................................................................................................................... "

Statement o Pro/a/le Construction Costs .......................................................................................... *)

Estimate o Pro/a/le Costs ......................................................................................................................... **

'. Site Analysis ............................................................................................................................................ "%

01er1ie" o t#e Process............................................................................................................................... *2

enturePark ............................................................................................................. ......................................... *&

Fairield ................................................................................................................................................. .............. *

. 3*st Street ..................................................................................................................................................... 2) 01erland Dri1e ................................................................................................................................................. 22

4allmark ........................................................................................... .................................................................. 2,

. Appendi/ ..................................................................................................................................................... %*

A. 5e1ised Program o Spaces ................................................................................................................. 2+

B. Building Coniguration Ta/le ............................................................................................................. 2

C. Estimate o Pro/a/le Costs 62)*2 'eeds Assessment7 .......................................................... 28

D. Summary o Additional Site Costs .................................................................................................... 3)

E. Summary o Dri1e Times ...................................................................................................................... 3*

F. 9emo on E1idence Storage ................................................................................................................. 32

!. Enlarged Site :ayout Diagrams ......................................................................................................... 33


3/61



3

".

#ntrodction

ac0grondTreanor Arc#itects; in association "it# ilson Estes Police Arc#itects; "as retained /y City o:a"rence;


4/61



,

EXISTING FACILITIES MAP


5/61



$

%. Poplation and Staffing Pro&ections

Planning for 3rowthT#e primary actor inluencing t#e cost o a ne" acility is gross s>uare ootage 6t#e total areao t#e /uildings loor plans measured to t#e outside ace o t#e exterior "alls7. Total area isdirectly related to t#e num/er o personnel and t#e unctions t#ey perorm in a gi1en space.T#ereore; planning ne" /uildings re>uires t#e pro%ection o uture personnel in order toa1oid premature inade>uacy. Selecting t#e point in t#e uture 6planning #orion7 t#at "illpro1ide t#e /est planning results is a %udgment decision /ased upon experience.

T#e a1erage useul lie expectancy o a pu/lic /uilding constructed today exceeds +) years.Anticipating t#e num/er o personnel "#o "ill occupy t#e /uilding and #o" e1ol1ingtec#nologies "ill inluence acility operations +) years rom no" is diicult; i not impossi/le.E1en i reasona/le estimates or personnel and acility operations "ere possi/le to pro%ectt#at ar into t#e uture; a /uilding sied or e1en ,) years o gro"t# may "ell /e t#ree(>uarters empty "#en irst occupied. Considering t#at lie cycle costs 6#eating; cooling;maintenance and repair7 can ar exceed initial construction costs; t#e economic sense o/uilding at todays prices "ould /e out"eig#ed /y t#e cost o maintaining unused space.

0n t#e ot#er #and; personnel gro"t# patterns in a acility planned only to meet todays needs"ill lead to a condition o o1ercro"ding t#at starts at initial occupation. =n act; "it# t#etypical occupancy o a ne" acility occurring more t#an t"o years ater t#e actual /uildingplanning #as taken place; a space deiciency can result rom t#e outset "it# a gro"ing la"enorcement agency. T#e /est planning allo"s t#e user to gro" into t#e space; not out ot#e space.

T#is space needs program looks at space re>uired to meet current needs; and t#e space needsin 2) years. Planning /eyond 2) years is not recommended. A planning #orion o a/out 2)years pro1ides a reasona/le degree o longe1ity; unding practicality; and predicta/ility ooperational met#ods and re>uirements. =n planning to a 2)(year time rame; t#e increase inre>uired loor area "ill allo" or expected gro"t# and c#ange "it#out unreasona/ly large

areas o initially unused space.

it# t#e 2) year planning #orion; "#at #appens ater t#e year 2)32 At t#at time t#e/uilding structure s#ould still #a1e many years o useul lie remaining. At t#e year 2)32; t#espace in t#e acility s#ould pro1ide a perect it or t#e /uildings personnel and t#eirunctional re>uirements 6in planning t#eory7. Due to limitations in t#e ser1ice population;personnel increases /eyond t#ose identiied in t#e Space 'eed Ta/les are not anticipated.4o"e1er; uture c#anges in t#e demand or police ser1ices could unexpectedly demand morepersonnel.

Poplation Pro&ections

0ne met#od to /enc#mark current personnel 1ersus personnel pro%ections is to re1ie" t#ecurrent and uture ratio o sta to population. #ile t#is is not a met#od to measure stainggro"t#; it is a standard measure to indicate t#e current le1el o ser1ice desired "it#in acommunity to t#at o a population in t#e uture.

T#e consultant team "orked "it# t#e City o :a"rence Planning Department to utilie currentpopulation num/ers used /y t#e city along "it# t#eir accepted met#od o pro%ectingpopulation. T#ese population num/ers "ere recently used to assist in t#e de1elopment oot#er pu/lic "orks pro%ects in t#e City.


6/61



&

City of Lawrence4 %"" Poplation Pro&ections

2)2) 2)3) 2),)

:o" 6A1erage !ro"t# 5ate .$G7 8+;,&8 *)2;,$, *)+;&83

9edium 6:inear 5egression 2)))(2))87 *)&;&&+ **8;$28 *32;38* 4ig# 6A1erage !ro"t# 5ate *.8G7 ***;83) *3$;*** *&3;)82 Source: City of Lawrence, Planning Department.

= t#e a/o1e medium num/ers are pro%ected to t#e planning year o 2)32 t#en t#e population"ould /e approximately *23;*) people.

Personnel Pro&ectionsT#e primary determinant o t#e sie o a /uilding is t#e num/er o occupants 6personnelassigned and 1isitors7 t#at use a space; acti1ities t#at occur "it#in t#e space and e>uipmentt#at supports t#e personnel and acti1ities. T#ereore; a properly sied /uilding re>uirespro%ecting t#e appropriate num/er o personnel "#o "ill occupy t#e /uilding. #ile our goalis to /e as accurate as possi/le; minor inaccuracies in t#e pro%ected personnel re>uirements

"ill not result in a decreased le1el o operational eiciency. =t "ill; #o"e1er; mean t#at t#eHperect it@ pro%ected to occur in t#e ade>uacy year "ill occur earlier; or per#aps later; t#anpro%ected depending upon "#en t#e total num/er o personnel pro%ected or a planning periodis reac#ed.

T#e intent o t#is space need program is not to conduct a managementIstaing analysis andany discussion o personnel pro%ections is not to /e taken as a recommendation or #iringadditional personnel. 4o"e1er; prudent planning dictates making an allo"ance or pro/a/lesta gro"t#. Arc#itects "orked "it# department managers in ascertaining likely personnelgro"t# in t#e department o1er t#e next 2) years. T#e current staing le1el is *.8$ ull(timesta per *;))) :a"rence residents. Typically; as noted a/o1e; t#e ratio pro%ected s#ould /eclose to t#e current ratio to maintain a compara/le le1el o ser1ice to t#e City o :a"rence.T#e /elo" num/ers "ere used in t#e pre1ious 'eeds Assessment Study.

5ear Personnel Poplation (atio6",

2)*2 ** 82;+2+ *.8$

2)32 2,) *23;*) *.8$


7/61



+

$. Space Needs (e)iew

Space Needs- %"% Needs Assessment=normation contained in t#e Space 'eeds Ta/les represents t#e net total s>uare ootage ort#e proposed /uilding pro%ect. T#e sum o all di1isions is t#e 'et Area Su/total; representingt#e total usa/le space in eac# room; and is indicated in t#e Summary Ta/le.

Areas not programmed /y unction include circulation space suc# as #alls; stair"ays; andele1ators and unusa/le space deined /y and "it#in "alls. T#ese are added to t#e total netarea /y t#e use o a multiplier t#at is esta/lis#ed t#roug# #istorical precedence "it# reerenceto similar /uildings constructed in t#e past. T#e result is t#e gross s>uare ootage o t#e/uilding; "#ic# is t#e total loor area o all loor le1els measured to t#e outside ace o exterior"alls.

T#e space needs ta/le t#at ollo"s is t#e summary o t#e space needs presented in t#e 2)*2'eeds Assessment. T#is ta/le "as used as t#e /ase or t#e space needs re1ie".


8/61



Space Needs- %"+ 7pdateAs part o t#is study t#e consultant team "orked "it# t#e stake#olders to re1ie" eac# o t#eprogram areas documented in t#e 'eeds Assessment. T#e ollo"ing ta/le represents asummary o t#e modiications rom t#is update.

%"+ Spaces Needs (e)iew

D#8#S#9N P(18#97S T9TAL (18#S1D T9TAL

* AD9='=ST5AT=0' *;++$ *;$2$

2 ='F059AT=0' SE5=CES &;&$ ,;$3$

3 C099-'=TJ SE5=CES +;))) &;)3)

, PAT50: ,;$8$ ,;3&)

$ ='EST=!AT=0'S ;$2$ +;**$

& E=DE'CE P50PE5TJ &;)$8 $;8*2

+ F05E'S=CS 3;8+$ 2;&3$

B-=:D='! S-PP05T *2;) **;&+)S!-Total '",*+ +$,*:%

Accessory Support 63G7 *;$$) *;3*3

Circulation 62+G7 *,;3+* *2;*+&

alls and unusa/le 68G7 &;), $;*$,

ilding Total *$,*: %,+%

T#e c#anges noted a/o1e represent t#e outcomes o t#e meetings "it# stake#olders to re1ie"t#e program o spaces. T#e reductions indicated do not c#ange t#e a/ility to increase staingpro%ections or reductions in necessary program spaces. Detailed c#anges o t#e speciicdi1isions can /e ound in t#e Appendix.

Also re1ie"ed during t#is process "ere specialty spaces. T#e ollo"ing is a summary o t#osec#anges.


8 !A5A!E *;$2) *,;33)

alls and unusa/le 68G7 *;&&+ *;28)

3arage Total %,":* "',%


*) F=5='! 5A'!E 3;&$) 3;&$)

alls and unusa/le 68G7 328 328

3arage Total $,;*; $,;*;


9/61



8


** 0-TB-=:D='! 6propertyIe1idenceIetc7 $;8,) 3;&+$

alls and unusa/le 68G7 $3$ 33*

3arage Total ,+*' +,

For comparison; t#e ollo"ing relects t#e existing net program areas currently used /y t#e

police department compared to t#e proposed program areas or expansion to 2)32.

(e)iew of Crrent S2 )erss Proposed S2

D#8#S#9N 1 $*,+:; +$,*:% ,%;$

T#e signiicant increaseIdecrease in t#e proposed s>uare ootage rom t#e existing s>uareootage can /e identiied as ollo"sK

*.

Community Ser1icesK Creation o dedicated training spaces; including; a dedicatedtraining classroom; a deensi1e tactics training room; Academy trainingIcomputer la/;and associated storage and support spaces.

2.

PatrolK Dedicated open oice area or patrol sergeants; enlarged patrol roll call room;report "riting areas; and e>uipment and lockers or t#e Critical 5esponse Team.

3. E1idence and PropertyK A reduction o s>uare ootage is proposed as t#e currentallotment is ineicient and di1ided into t#ree locations. T#e proposed amount is anincrease to t#e current actual used s>uare ootage /ased upon a report pro1ided /yt#e police department 6see appendix.7 T#e proposed s>uare ootage "ill utilie #ig#density storage to /etter utilie t#e a1aila/le s>uare ootage.

,. ForensicsK =ncreased space or a orensics la/oratory; computer and electronics la/;and 1e#icle processing.

$.

Building SupportK =ncludes t#e s>uare ootage or patrol locker rooms and locker

space or uture sta. =n addition; t#is includes an allotment or a secure 1e#iclesallyport; itness area; general storage and dataIser1er rooms.


10/61



*)

+.

Pro&ect dget

Statement of Pro!a!le Constrction CostsPreliminary ne" construction cost can /e estimated /y utiliing a1erage ne" acility s>uareootage construction costs or typical police acilities /uilt around t#e country. By ad%ustingt#ese num/ers to t#e local construction market and actoring in inlation; t#e total pro/a/lecost can /e de1eloped or t#e :a"rence police acility or a predetermined point in time.

T#e process /egins "it# a re1ie" o t#e cost o a typical ne" pu/lic saety acility. Costinormation and ot#er sur1ey data #a1e /een collected rom o1er 2)) ne" acilities. T#eacilities #a1e /een constructed in many locations and /idding climates o1er many years.T#ereore; t#e cost igures rom t#e data/ase #a1e /een ad%usted or inlation and regionalcost dierences to de1elop t#e a1erage.

Construction acti1ity at t#e time o /idding can #a1e a dramatic aect on costs. :o" acti1itymeans more competiti1e /ids. =ncreased acti1ity results in e"er /idders and #ig#er pro%ectcost.

Site de1elopment typically comprises approximately ( *)G o t#e total s>uare ootage cost;and t#is is relected in t#e Statement o Pro/a/le Construction Cost ta/les on t#e ollo"ingpages.

A1erage /ase construction cost or Pu/lic Saety Centers constructed in late 2)) "as L2+$per s>uare oot. Since t#at time; construction costs steadily decreased t#roug# 2))8; le1elingo in t#e irst >uarter o 2)*). T#e Turner Construction Cost =ndex currently s#o"s a nationala1erage construction cost decrease o approximately 8G since late 2)); placing t#e nationala1erage or police acility construction cost at L2$3 per s>uare oot.

T#e :a"rence area /eneits rom proximity to multiple near/y municipal areas "#erepotential /idding construction companies originate. T#e Topeka area dri1es construction costslig#tly lo"er t#an typical construction cost in ot#er near/y metropolitan areas.

0t#er pro%ect costs #a1e /een identiied under t#e category o MSot CostsN. T#ese include; /utare not limited to; proessional ees; geotec#nical exploration; site sur1eys; construction p#asetesting; and urnis#ings. T#e costs do not include site ac>uisition costs or unkno"n sitede1elopment costs depending on t#e selected site

Total pro%ect cost is a com/ination o t#e #ard costs re>uired to p#ysically construct a /uildingas "ell as t#e sot costs needed to support pro%ect de1elopment and to ready a completedacility or occupancy. T#e total pro%ect cost is esta/lis#ed around t#e current constructionmarket or a /uilding constructed in 2)*,.


11/61



**

1stimate of Pro!a!le Costs

Constrction Costs =%"+ dollars>

#tem 7nit Cost ?antity 7nits S!-Total

Building Construction( A/o1e

!rade L 2*& $$;&8+ s L *2;)3);$$2Building Construction( Basement L *,+ 2&;32 s L 3;+);2*&Building Construction(0ut/uilding L ) ,;))& s L 32);,)Site De1elopment Allo"ance L 2) 2;)2$ s L *;&,);$))

P#oneIData L , &*;&)& s L 2,&;,2,Security L $ &*;&)& s L 3);)3)

:andscape *G *+;&*;+,/ldgI

site cost s L *+;&*+Firing 5ange L 2*) 3;8+8 s L 3$;,$

S-BT0TA: L *8;,3);3),

Design Contingency *)G L *;8,3;)3)

T9TAL @ %",$*$,$$+

Soft Pro&ect Costs

#tem S!-Total

Proessional Fees L *;*&;+33ConstructionI0"ners Contingency L *;)&;&&+!eotec#nical and Sur1eying L 2$;)))Construction Testing L +$;)))Furnis#ingsIFixturesIE>uipment L *;*8;$))Percent or Art 2*3;)))

T9TAL @ +,$:*,;

Total Pro&ect Costs

Construction Costs L *;3+3;33,

Sot Costs L ,;3+;8))

Total Pro&ect Costs @ %',*",%$+

A summary o t#e estimated costs in t#e 2)*2 'eeds Assessment can /e ound in t#e

appendix.


12/61



*2

'.

Site Analysis

9)er)iew of the Processit# preliminary /uilding program esta/lis#ed; an assessment as to t#e minimum site to

support t#is de1elopment scenario "as conducted under t#e 'eeds Assessment Study.

T#e /uilding ootprint along "it# t#e #ard surace areas suc# as parking; dri1es; and

miscellaneous pa1ing; and open area make up t#e minimum site area re>uirement. =n addition;

it may /e desira/le to consider some acreage to support t#e de1elopment o needs /eyond t#e

t"enty(year planning #orion. Typical open areas range rom orty to sixty percent in

su/ur/an de1elopments. Forty percent open area is suicient; /ut "ould not /e considered

excessi1e. #ile ero lot line de1elopments are more common in some ur/an planning;

especially "#ere land is in #ig# demand; "e "ould recommend against it as it greatly

minimies design lexi/ility and uture expansion.

=n an initial step; to gain an understanding o site needs under ideal conditions; "e looked at

typical site planning re>uirements t#at could /e expected to meet t#e needs o our program;including an additional 3)G expansion /eyond t#e current t"enty(year planning #orion; and

a inal open area o &)G. T#is is reerred to as a lo" density site de1elopment; and is

represented in t#e diagrams used on eac# site study.

T#e ollo"ing ta/le "as presented in t#e 2)*2 'eeds Assessment Study as minimum site

re>uirements.

During t#is study a Mlong listN o potential sites "as de1eloped and studied /ased upon t#eollo"ing criteriaK

Historic environs. =s t#e site "it#in t#e en1irons o a #istoric property

Flood Plain. =s t#e site "it#in or ad%acent to designated lood plain

Ownersip. =s o"ners#ip pri1ate; pu/lic; City; or a com/ination

!de"uate #reen Space $ !creage. Does t#e site meet t#e minimum arc#itecturalrecommendations


13/61


14/61



*,

OProposed Site 9ap

For t#e purpose o t#is e1aluation; t#e ollo"ing items "ere studied and documentedK

• Ac>uisition

o Current o"ners#ip.

o

Costs associated "it# land purc#ase.• oning

o Current oning o t#e property.

o

oning o ad%acent properties to re1ie" compati/ility.

• Flood Plain

o Does t#e site contain a designated lood plain and its impact to t#e site rom

usa/ility to site de1elopment costs

• !rading

o 5e1ie" t#e existing grades o t#e site; /ased upon grades a1aila/le t#roug#

City !.=. S system and site 1isits.

o Determine t#e a/ility to access a lo"er 6/asement le1el7 using existing grades

o 5e>uirement or Mcut or illN 6t#e amount o eart# t#at "ould need to /e

remo1ed or /roug#t to t#e site to make t#e land usea/le.7

• -tilities

o :ocation o existing "ater; sanitary se"er and storm se"er ser1ice.

o :engt# o extension re>uired to ser1e pro%ect.

o Potential costs associated "it# extension.

• Access I 5oads

o Existing access to t#e potential site. 69ultiple entry Iexit points are desired

rom a security perspecti1e.


15/61



*$

o

A/ility to access collector or arterial streets to respond to dierent areas o

t#e City.

o

Traic lo" to and rom site.

o

=mpro1ements re>uired or additional roads re>uired de1eloping t#e site.

• Potential De1elopment Costs

o

Costs associated "it# de1eloping speciic site outside construction costso =ncludes range o costs or "ater ser1ice; sanitary se"er ser1ice; additional

roads or dri1es andIor anticipated rock exca1ation.

• Accessi/ility I Dri1e Times

o

E1aluated t#e distance 6miles7 and time 6minutes7 rom t#e proposed site to

t#e ollo"ing areas.

:a"rence 9emorial 4ospital

:a" Enorcement CenterICourt#ouse

Douglas County ?ail 6ser1ed as t#e east >uadrant o City7

Sout# Quadrant o City 6al(9art7

'ort# Quadrant o City 6:a"rence Airport7

est Quadrant o City 65ock C#alk Park7o

Eac# site "as studied using !oogle maps and directions.


16/61



*&

8entrePar0


17/61


18/61



*

2airfield


19/61



*8


20/61



2)

. $"st Street


21/61



2*


22/61



22

9)erland Dri)e


23/61



23


24/61



2,

Ballmar0


25/61



2$


26/61



2&


27/61



2+

. Appendi/

A. (e)ised Program of Spaces


28/61

ann ng or zon pace ee s

or s a on an ar

Plannin Horizon Wor%s$a$ions Re #ired WS!

annng or zon ersonne

C#rren$ S ace Needs S&

#rren re"#en ea cc#pan s

Wor%s$a$ion S$andard WST&

C#rren$ Personnel P&

'

+ NAME P& WS& WST& O& S& P! WS! WST! O! S! S2

'

&'(! Assis$an$ $o $,e C,ie- & & PS1 1 &0( & & PS1 1 &0( &0(

'

' 3 n s ra )e #ppor

'

&'(. S$a-- A$$orne2 ( ( ( ( & & PS0 * &!0 (

'

' ersonne es '

1, 2' on erence oo3,

= 8 8 8

. .

. .

JUN 12, 2!1" #A$ ".%&


29/61

FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS AND SPACE NEEDS

Planning Horizon Space Needs - S2

-

LA$%ENCE POLICE DEPA%TMENT

Planning Horizon Personnel - P2

C!rren" Space Needs - S&

$or#s"a"ion S"andard - $ST2

Planning Horizon $or#s"a"ions %e!ired - $S2

C!rren" Personnel - P&

C!rren" $or#s"a"ions %e!ired - $S&

C!rren" Fre!en" Pea# Occ!pan"s - O&

$or#s"a"ion S"andard - $ST&

'

, NAME P& $S& $ST& O& S& P2 $S2 $ST2 O2 S2 S2

2'(& Inor.a"ion Ser*ices Cap"ain & & PS-+ / &0/ & & PS-+ / &0/ &0/

2'(2 %ecords Ci*ilian Manager & & PS-1 + &/( & & PS-1 + &/( &/(

2'(+ %ecords Cler#s && PS- &2 3+/ && && PS- &/ &4&0/ 3+(

2'(1 S"a %ecords Co!n"er ( ( - 2 1( ( ( - / 1( 1(

2'(/ Teleser*e + 2 PS-3 1 &2( 1 + PS-3 5 &( &(

2'(5 %ecords $or# %oo. ( ( - 2 ( ( ( - 2 ( (

2'(0 Ac"i*e %ecords S"orage1 ( ( - 2 21( ( ( - + 2/ &(

&

- -' - 4 - 42'(3 %epor" Ta#ing ( ( PS-&0a + 0/ ( ( PS-&0a + 0/ 0/

2'&( %epor" Ta#ing 7 8oo#ing 7 Fingerprin"ing ( ( PS-&0a + 3( ( ( PS-&0a + 3( 3(

2'&& %ecei*ing 7 Cen"ral S!ppl9 7 Mail %oo. ( ( - 2 &2( ( ( - 2 &+( &+(

2'&2 Ani.al7Par#ing Con"rol Ci*ilian Manager & & PS-/ + &2/ & & PS-/ + &2/ &2/

2'&+ Ani.al Con"rol Oicers2 +:;&< + PS-&+ + &5( /:;&< / PS-&+ / 2/( 2/(

2'&1 Par#ing Con"rol Oicers2 / + PS-&+ / &5( 5 1 PS-&+ 5 2+/ (

2'&/ Me"er Tec6nician 7 $or# %oo. & & PS-3 & /(( 2 2 PS-3 2 0(( (

2'&5 Crossing =!ards ;&1< ( - ( ( ;&1< ( - ( ( (

JUNE 12, 2014 PAGE 4.54


30/61



Planning Horizon Fre!en" Pea# Occ!pan"s - O2





-


2'(( INFO%MATION SE%)ICES %e*ised


2(&2 2(+2



2'&0 Proessional Acco!n"a>ili"9 Sergean" & & PS-1 + &/( & & PS-1 + &/( &/(

2'& Proessional Acco!n"a>ili"9 Conerence ( ( PS-&0d 1 &(( ( ( PS-&0d 1 &(( (

2'&3 C6aplains ;1< ( PS-&0> / &(( ;1< ( PS-&0> / &(( (

2'2( Cri.e Anal9sis 2:;&< 2 PS- 1 &5/ 1:;&< 1 PS- +/( +/(

2'2& Inor.a"ion Tec6nolog9 + / PS- 5 1/( / / PS- 0 /+( /+(

2'22 Inor.a"ion Tec6nolog9 $or# %oo. ( ( - / &2( ( ( - / &2( &2(

2'2+ Inor.a"ion Tec6nolog9 S"orage ( ( - & ( ( ( - & &&( &&(

2'21 Tec6nolog9 7 Media 7 E!ip.en" ( ( - 2 // ( ( - 2 0( 0(

23 /410/ 1& 545/ 14/+/

2. Report writing style workstations wit a s!all "on#eren"e ta$le.

1. %ig &ensity Storage

To"als 'Areas( Net S)*are +eet

JUNE 12, 2014 PAGE 4.55


31/61








-


'()) COMMUNIT* SE%+ICES %e,ised


2)&2 2)'2



'()& Co..!ni"/ Ser,ices Cap"ain & & PS-' 0 &10 & & PS-' 0 &10 &10

'()2 Manage.en" Anal/sis" & & PS-0 ' &0) & & PS-0 ' &20 &20

'()' Ad.inis"ra"i,e S!ppor" & & PS-0 ' &20 & & PS-0 ' &20 &20

'() Training Sergean" & & PS- &0) & & PS- &0) &0)

'()0 Training O33icers 2 2 PS-4 &5) PS-4 4 '0) '0)

'()5 Training Files ) ) - & &&0 ) ) - & &2) )

'()1 %eso!rce %oo. 6 E!ip.en" ) ) - 2 &20 ) ) - 2 &10 )

'()4 Acade./ Training 6 Co.p!"er La7& ) ) PS-&2d ') 820 ) ) PS-&2d ') 820 1))

2( ran ng oo. - a 9 - a 9 9

'(&) Training %oo. :alle/ ) ) - & 5) ) ) - & 5) 5)

'(&& Training %oo. S"orage6 Files6 E!ip.en" ) ) - 2 '20 ) ) - 2 '20 ))

'(&2 De3ensi,e Tac"ics Training ) ) - 20 8)) ) ) - 20 8)) 8))

'(&' De3ensi,e Tac"ics S"orage ) ) - 2 4) ) ) - 2 &&) &&)

'(& F(A(T(S( S"orage ) ) - 2 &2) ) ) - 2 &2) &2)

'(&0 Ar.orer 6 :!n Cleaning ) ) &0 ) ) 5 &4) &4)

'(&5 A..!ni"ion S"orage ) ) - & 5) ) ) - & 4) 4)

'(&1 ;!ar"er.as"er ) ) - 2 &2) ) ) - 2 &2) &2)

JUNE 12, 2014 PAGE 4.56


32/61








-


'()) COMMUNIT* SE%+ICES %e,ised


2)&2 2)'2



'(&4 Special Pro


33/61


34/61




-





-


'()) IN*ESTI+ATIONS %e,ised

NAME P& $S& $ST& O& S& P2 $S2 $ST2 O2 S2 S2


2)&2 2).2



'()& In,es"iga"ions Cap"ain & & PS-. ' &/' & & PS-. ' &/' &/'

'()2 In,es"iga"ions Sergean" & & PS-0 0 &') & & PS-0 0 &') &')

'(). In,es"iga"ions Sergean" & & PS-0 0 &') & & PS-0 0 &') &')

'()0 In,es"iga"ions Sergean" ) ) - ) ) & & PS-0 0 &') &')

( n,es ga ors - 4 - 4 4

'() A5inis"ra"i,e S!ppor" & & PS-' . &2' 2 2 PS-/ 2&' 2&'

'()/ Ac"i,e Files ) ) - & &&) ) ) - 2 &') )

'()3 $or# %oo5 ) ) - 2 3) ) ) - . 3) 3)

'()6 De"ec"i,e E!ip5en" ) ) - & 3) ) ) - & &&) &&)

'(&) Con7erence %oo51 ) ) PS-&. 20 '.) ) ) PS-&. 20 '.) '.)

'(&& So7" In"er,ie8 %oo5 ) ) PS-&/9 0 &)) ) ) PS-&/9 0 &)) &))

'(&2 In"er,ie8 %oo5 ) ) PS-&/d . &)) ) ) PS-&/d . &)) &))

'(&. In"er,ie8 %oo5 ) ) PS-&/d . &)) ) ) PS-&/d . &)) &))

'(&0 In"er,ie8 %oo5 ) ) PS-&/d . &)) ) ) PS-&/d . &)) &))

'(&' In"er,ie8 %oo5 ) ) PS-&/d . &)) ) ) PS-&/d . &)) &))

'(& In"er,ie8 %oo5 ) ) PS-&/d . &)) ) ) PS-&/d . &)) &))

'(&/ In"er,ie8 %oo5 ) ) PS-&/d . &)) ) ) PS-&/d . &)) &))

'(&3 In"er,ie8 %oo5 ) ) - ) ) ) ) PS-&/d . &)) &))

JUNE 12, 2014 PAGE 4.59


35/61




-





-


'()) IN*ESTI+ATIONS %e,ised

NAME P& $S& $ST& O& S& P2 $S2 $ST2 O2 S2 S2


2)&2 2).2



'(&6 In"er,ie8 %oo5 ) ) - ) ) ) ) PS-&/d . &)) )

'(2) In"er,ie8ee %es"roo5 ) ) PS-&09 & ' ) ) PS-&09 & ' '

'(2& Dr!g En7orce5en" Uni" Sergean" ) ) - ) ) & & PS-0 0 &') &')

'(22 Dr!g En7orce5en" In,es"iga"ors1O77icers .:;2< 3 PS-3 3 /)) 0:;.< 3 PS-3 &) 3') 6)

'(2. Dr!g En7orce5en" Ad5inis"ra"i,e S!ppor" ;&< & PS-' . &2' ;&< & PS-' . &2' &2'

'(20 Dr!g En7orce5en" Files ) ) - & '' ) ) - & /' /'

'(2' Dr!g En7orce5en" C(I( Prep %oo5 ) ) PS-&/c 0 3' ) ) PS-&/c 0 3' )

'(2 Dr!g En7orce5en" E!ip5en" 1 $or# %oo5 ) ) - & 3) ) ) - & &&) &&)

'(2/ Dr! En7orce5en" Processin = S"ora e ) ) - 2 &&) ) ) - 2 &') &') '(23 Tra77ic Uni" Sergean" ) ) - ) ) & & PS-0 0 &') &')

'(26 Tra77ic Uni" O77icers PS-3 '.) 6 ' PS-> 6 //' .')

'(.) Tra77ic Uni" S"orage ) ) - & ') ) ) - & /) /)

'(.& Cri5es"oppers S"orage ) ) - & .' ) ) - & ') ')

4 4 4

1. Additioa! seati" at side o# $o#ere$e roo%.

JUNE 12, 2014 PAGE 4.&0


36/61


Planning Horizon Frequent Peak Occupants - O2

-

FUNCTION! "!"#"NTS N$ SPC" N""$S

!W%"NC" PO!IC" $"P%T#"NT

Planning Horizon Workstations %equired - WS2


Current Space Needs - S&

Current Frequent Peak Occupants - O&

'()) "*I$"NC" + P%OP"%T, %eised

. N#" P& WS& WST& O& S& P2 WS2 WST2 O2 S2 S2

Current Workstations %equired - WS&

Workstation Standard - WST&

Current Personnel - P&

2)&2 2)/2

'()& "idence O00icers + Tec1nicians / PS-3 ' /)) 4 4 PS-3 5 24 /4)

'()2 "idence Intake ) ) PS-&' / 3) ) ) PS-&' &24 &24

'()/ "idence %eie6 ) ) PS-&/ ' &54 ) ) PS-&/ ' &54 &54

'() "idence %estroo7 ) ) PS-&8 & '4 ) ) PS-&8 & '4 '4

'()4 "idence + Pro ert - :eneral Stora e1 ) ) 2 &;5)) ) ) / 2;/)) 2;/))

'()' "idence + Propert9 - Firear7s2 ) ) & &/) ) ) & &


37/61


-

FUNCTIONA !!"!NTS AN# SPAC! N!!#S

A$%!NC! POIC! #!PA%T"!NT

$orkstation Standard - $ST2

Planning Horizon $orkstations %equired - $S2


Current Space Needs - S&

Current Frequent Peak Occupants - O&

$orkstation Standard - $ST&

Current $orkstations %equired - $S&

Current Personnel - P&

(

, NA"! P& $S& $ST& O& S& P2 $S2 $ST2 O2 S2 S2

'()& Oicer Processing .Unsecured/ ) ) 0 1)) ) ) 0 1)) +))

'()2 Forensics aorator3 ) ) + ')) ) ) + ')) 4))

'()+ #NA 5 Clean %oo6 ) ) 2 22) ) ) 2 22) 22)

'()0 P7oto a ) ) 2 &2) ) ) 2 &2) )

'()1 Farada3 %oo6 ) 2 2 '1 ) 2 2 '1 '1

'()4 Co6puter Forensics ) 482 9 91) ) 98+ &) &:&2) 4))

'()' Supplies ) ) & 9) ) ) & &&) &&)

('();


38/61

8.00 BUILDING SUPPORT Revised

# NAME P1 WS1 WST1 O1 S1 P2 WS2 WST2 O2 S2 S2

8.01 Publi !es"ibule 0 0 2 80 0 0 2 80 80

8.02 Publi L$bbies 0 0 12 %00 0 0 12 800 &00

8.0' W(i"i)* L$u)*e 0 0 8 120 0 0 8 120 0

8.0+ Me),s Publi Res"-$$s /2 0 0 PS1+( + 2% 0 0 PS1+( + '0 20

2012 20'2

u--e)" S3(e Needs S1

4UNTIONAL ELEMENTS AND SPAE NEEDS

u--e)" 4-e5ue)" Pe(6 Ou3()"s O1

W$-6s"("i$) S"()d(-d WST1

u--e)" W$-6s"("i$)s Re5ui-ed WS1

u--e)" Pe-s$))el P1

Pl())i)* 7$-i$) Pe-s$))el P2

LAWRENE POLIE DEPARTMENT

Pl())i)* 7$-i$) S3(e Needs S2

Pl())i)* 7$-i$) 4-e5ue)" Pe(6 Ou3()"s O2

W$-6s"("i$) S"()d(-d WST2

Pl())i)* 7$-i$) W$-6s"("i$)s Re5ui-ed WS2

8.0 W$e),s Publi Res"-$$s /2 0 0 PS1+( + 2% 0 0 PS1+( + '0 20

8.0% Me),s L$6e- R$$ 0 1920 PS18b 2:000 0 1;;9'0 PS18b 2:8 2:8

8.0& Me),s S"(


39/61

8.00 BUILDING SUPPORT Revised

# NAME P1 WS1 WST1 O1 S1 P2 WS2 WST2 O2 S2 S2

2012 20'2

u--e)" S3(e Needs S1

4UNTIONAL ELEMENTS AND SPAE NEEDS

u--e)" 4-e5ue)" Pe(6 Ou3()"s O1

W$-6s"("i$) S"()d(-d WST1

u--e)" W$-6s"("i$)s Re5ui-ed WS1

u--e)" Pe-s$))el P1

Pl())i)* 7$-i$) Pe-s$))el P2

LAWRENE POLIE DEPARTMENT

Pl())i)* 7$-i$) S3(e Needs S2

Pl())i)* 7$-i$) 4-e5ue)" Pe(6 Ou3()"s O2

W$-6s"("i$) S"()d(-d WST2

Pl())i)* 7$-i$) W$-6s"("i$)s Re5ui-ed WS2

8.18 De$)"(i)("i$) S=$>e- 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 2

8.1; us"$di() 9 Su33lies9 M(i)"e)()e 0 0 0 110 1 1 PS; 2 10 1&

8.20 4(ili"@ M(i)"e)()e 0 0 0 0 1 1 PS; 2 12 0

8.21 ()i"$-s l$se"s /' 0 0 2 10 0 0 2 10 10

8.22 EC"e-i$- E5ui3e)" S"$-(*e 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0

8.2' DEMAR R$$ 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0

8.2+ 4ile Se-ve- R$$ 0 0 2 100 0 0 2 10 2;0

8.2 D("( l$se"s /2 0 0 2 100 0 0 2 100 100

8.2% Me=()i(l R$$s 0 0 2 2:000 0 0 2 2:&0 2:%10

8.2& Ele"-i(l R$$s 0 0 2 10 0 0 2 200 200

8.28 R(di$ E5ui3e)" 0 0 1 80 110 110

8.2; Re@li)* R$$ 0 80 0 100 0

0 10:0' 2 12:880 11:%&0T$"(ls (Areas= Net Square Feet)

JUNE 12, 2014 PAGE 4.64


40/61


41/61

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

10.00 FIRING RANGE

# NAME P1 WS1 WST1 O1 S1 P2 WS2 WST2 O2 S2

0

0

0

CURRENT

SPACE

0 0

10.01 Secure Entry Vestiu!e 0 0 0 " 2 0 0 0 " 2 0

10.02 Firin$ R%n$e 0 0 0 " & '()00 0 0 " & '()00

10.0' R%n$e C*ntr*! R**+ 0 0 0 " 2 100 0 0 " 2 100

10.0) R%n$e St*r%$e 0 0 0 " 2 100 0 0 " 2 100

0 0 0 1) '(,0 0 0 1) '(,0T*t%!s (Areas= Net Square Feet)

JUNE 12, 2014 PAGE 4.66


42/61


LAWRENCE POLICE DEPARTMENT

Planning Horizon Space Needs S!

Planning Horizon Fre"#en$ Pea% Occ#pan$s O!

Wor%s$a$ion S$andard WST!

Planning Horizon Wor%s$a$ions Re"#ired WS!

Planning Horizon Personnel P!

C#rren$ Space Needs S&

C#rren$ Fre"#en$ Pea% Occ#pan$s O&

&&'(( OUT)UILDIN* Re+ised

, NAME P& WS& WST& O& S& P! WS! WST! O! S! S!

CURRENT

SPACE

( (

C#rren$ Personnel P&

Wor%s$a$ion S$andard WST&

C#rren$ Wor%s$a$ions Re"#ired WS&

,, Flee$ -e.icles

,, Mo/ile )rea$. Tes$ -an &0!(( ( & & 11( ( & & 11( 11(

,, CRT -e.icles

,, E+idence -ans in 9.02 ( ! ! 22( ( ! ! 22( 22(

,, S#r+eillance -e.icle in 9.02 ( & & 11( ( & & 11( 11(

,, Underco+er -e.icles

,, Speed Trailer in 9.02 ( & & 11( ( & & 11( 11(

,, Pa$rol )ic3cles 45 per s$all6

,, Pa$rol Mo$orc3cles 4! per s$all6

,, ,, Siez#re -e.icles in 6.10 ( 2 2 &089( ( 2 2 &089( (

,, E-OC Trailer ( ( & & 11( ( & & 11( (

,, Mo$orc3cle Trailer in 6.10 ( & & 11( ( & & 11( (

,, *a$or ( ( & & 11( ( & & 11( 11(

,,

,, )l#e San$a Progra7 S$orage 5;<

&05(( ( &< &9


43/61



2

. ilding Configration Ta!le


44/61

NET GROSS NET GROSS NET GROSS

1.0 1,525

2.0 800 1,855 1,880

3.0 260 5,770

4.0 240 4,120

5.0 7,115

6.0 5,912

7.0 2,635

8.0 3,420 6,525 1,725

4,720 21,047 18,015

Accessory Support Space 3% 142 631 540

Circulation 27% 1,313 5,853 5,010

Walls and Unusable Area 9% 556 2,478 2,121

6,730 30,009 25,686 6

9.0 14,330

10.0 3,650

17,980

Walls and Unusable Area 9% 1,618

19,598 1

26,328 30,009 25,686 8

BUILDING CONFIGURATION - OPTION #3

LAWRENCE POLICE DEPARTMENT

FUCTIONAL ELEMENTS

BASEMENT 1STFLOOR 2ND FLOOR G

T

3.01-3.11, 3.14, 3.17-3.20, 3.22

ADMINISTRATION

INFORMATION SERVICES

2.08, 2.15

2.01-2.07, 2.09-2.14, 2.17-2.20

2.21-2.24

COMMUNITY SERVICES

3.15, 3.16

3.12, 3.13

INVESTIGATIONS

EVIDENCE & PROPERTY

3.21

PATROL

4.12, 4.14

4.01-4.11, 4.13

GARAGE

FORENSICS

BUILDING SUPPORT

8.14, 8.19, 8.20, 8.21, 8.22, 8.25-8.29

8.01-8.12, 8.15-8.18, 8,21, 8.25, 8.27

8.02, 8.04, 8.05, 8.07, 8.10, 8.13, 8.21, 8 .24, 8.27

NETSPACE SUBTOTALS

1.00 - 8.00 GROSS SUBOTOTALS

9.0 - 10.0 GROSS SUBTOTALS

GROSS TOTALS FOR ALL FLOORS

Ta b le 6.3

9.01, 9.03, 9.08, 9.09, 9.15

9.02, 9.04-9.07, 9.10-9.14

FIRING RANGE

NETSPACE SUBTOTALS

J UNE 25, 2014


45/61



28

C. 1stimate of Pro!a!le Costs =%"% Needs Assessment>


46/61

U n i t C o s

Q u a n t i t y

U n i t

C o s

B u i l d i n g C o n s t r u c t i o n - A b o v e G r a d e

2 1 6 . 0

$

5 8 , 8 3

S q . F

t .

1 2 , 7 0 8 , 7 9 2 . 0

$

B u i l d i n g C o n s t r u c t i o n - B a s e m

e n

1 4 7 . 0

$

3 5 , 8 1 1

S q . F

t .

5 , 2 6 4 , 2 1 7 . 0

$

B u i l d i n g C o n s t r u c t i o n - O u t b u

i l d i n g

1 0 0 . 0

$

8 , 5 9 1

S q . F

t .

8 5 9 , 1 0 0 . 0

$

N o r m a l S i t e D e v e l o p m e n

2 0 . 0

$

1 0 3 , 2 3

S q . F

t .

2 , 0 6 4 , 7 8 0 . 0

$

P h o n e / D a t a W i r i n g

4 . 0

$

1 0 3 , 2 3

S q . F

t .

4 1 2 , 9 5 6 . 0

$

S e c u r i t y S y s t e m

5 . 0

$

1 0 3 , 2 3

S q . F

t .

5 1 6 , 1 9 5 . 0

$

L a n d s c a p i n g / I r r i g a t i o n S y s t e

m

1 . 0 0

$ 2 0 , 8

9 6 , 8 8

B u i l d i n g / S i t e C o s t

2 0 8 , 9 6 8 . 0

$

F i r i n g R a n g e E q u i p m e n t & A c o u s t i c

2 1 0 . 0

$

3 , 9 7 9

S q . F

t .

8 3 5 , 4 8 5 . 0

$

2 2 , 8 7 0 , 4 9 3 . 0

$

2 , 2 8 7 , 0 4 9 . 0

$

2 5 , 1 5 7 , 5 4 2 . 0

$

S O F T C O S T S

P r o f e s s i o n a l F e e

2 , 0 1 2 , 6 0 3 . 0

$

C o n s t r u c t i o n P h a s e C o n t i n g e n c y

2 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0

$

G e o t e c h n i c a l a n d S u r v e y i n g

2 5 , 0

0 0 . 0

$

C o n s t r u c t i o n T e s t i n g S e r v i c e

5 0 , 0

0 0 . 0

$

F u r n i s h i n g

9 1 4 , 8 1 9 . 0

$

H i g h D e n s i t y S t o r a g e S y s t e m

1 7 5 , 0 0 0 . 0

$

A u d i o / V i s u a l S y s t e m

2 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0

$

E v i d e n c e I n c i n e r a t o

3 4 , 5

0 0 . 0

$

U n k n o w n S i t e D e v e l o p m e n t C

o n t i n g e n c y

5 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0

$

4 , 1 6 1 , 9 2 2 . 0

$

P R O J E C T C O S T

2 5 , 1 5 7 , 5 4 2 . 0

$

4 , 1 6 1 , 9 2 2 . 0

$

2 9 , 3 1 9 , 4 6 4 . 0

$

3 0 , 4 9 2 , 2 4 2 . 0

$

3 1 , 7 1 1 , 9 3 1 . 0

$

L A

W R E N C E P O L I C E D E P A R T M E N T

S T A T E M E N T O F P R O B A

B L E C O S T - B U I L D I N G C O N F I G U R

A T I O N O P T I O N # 1

E s c a l a t i o n C o s t 2 0 1 3 ( 2 0 1 2 + 4 % )

E s c a l a t i o n C o s t 2 0 1 4 ( 2 0 1 3 + 4 % )

B U I L D I N G A N D

S I T E D E V E L O P M E N T

M I S C E L L A N E O U S

H A R D C O S T S

T O T A L S O F T C O S T S

H A R D P R O J E C T C O S T S

S O F T P R O J E C T C O S T

T O T A L P R O J E C T C O S T S

T O T A L H A R D C O S T S

1 0 % B I D C O N T I N G E N C

S U B T O T A L

M A Y 1 ,

2 0 1 2

P A G E 7 . 2


47/61



3)

D. Smmary of Additional Site Costs


48/61

City of Lawrence, KS

Police Facility Study

Additional Site Costs (does not include grading of site)McDonald Drive

Item Qnty. !lf su"#totalWater 3705 70.00$ 259,350.00$

Sanitary 61 70.00$ 2,9!0.00$

Stor" se#er 0 6.70$ $

%oads 1130 00.00$ 52,000.00$

Su&'otal 75,330.00$

ontingency 10 75,33.00$

$otals %&',()*.++

verland Drive

Item Qnty. !lf su"#total

Water 97 70.00$ 6,790.00$

Sanitary 33 70.00$ 2,310.00$

Stor" se#er 50 15.00$ 6,750.00$

%oads 630 00.00$ 252,000.00$

%oc* e+caation allo#ance $

Su&'otal 267,!50.00$

ontingency 10 26,7!5.00$

$otals &'-,)*.++

*/ st Street

Item Qnty. !lf su"#totalWater 112 70.00$ 7,!0.00$

Sanitary 117 70.00$ !,190.00$

Stor" se#er 0 6.70$ $

%oads 0 00.00$ $

Su&'otal 16,030.00$


$otals /(,)**.++

0enturePar1

Item Qnty. !lf su"#totalWater !51 70.00$ 59,570.00$

Sanitary 510 70.00$ 35,700.00$

Stor" se#er 70 6.70$ 3,19.00$

%oads 35 00.00$ 13!,000.00$

%oc* e+caation allo#ance 3!,000.00$

Su&'otal 67,19.00$


$otals (-/,%)+.'+


49/61

Fairfield

Item Qnty. !lf su"#total

Water 120 70.00$ !,00.00$

Sanitary 1050 70.00$ 73,500.00$

Stor" se#er 0 6.70$ $

%oads 0 00.00$ $Su&'otal !1,900.00$

ontingency 10 !,190.00$

$otals '+,+'+.++


50/61



3*

1. Smmary of Dri)e Times


51/61

City of Lawrence, KS

Police Facility Study

Drive Times

McDonald Drive

Location Distance (miles Time (minutes)

LMH 1.4 3

LEC 2.8 8

Jail 6.7 16

Sout !alma"t 6.8 1#

$oc% Cal% &a"% #.2 11

La'"ence i"o"t #.# 1*

Average 4! "#$

%verland Drive

Location Distance (miles Time (minutes)LMH 4 1*

LEC # 13

Jail 8.8 22

Sout !alma"t 8.# 11

$oc% Cal% &a"% 2 #

La'"ence i"o"t +.1 1+

Average &' "((

(" st Street

Location Distance (miles Time (minutes)LMH 4.6 13

LEC 4.2 12

Jail #.2 12

Sout !alma"t *.7 2

$oc% Cal% &a"% + 14

La'"ence i"o"t +.7 22

Average $& "'$

)enturePar*


LMH 4.7 14

LEC 3.1 8

Jail 1.3 3

Sout !alma"t 6.4 16

$oc% Cal% &a"% +.# 23

La'"ence i"o"t 8.# 1+

Average $& "(+


52/61

Fairfield


LMH 4.+ 13

LEC 3.2 8

Jail *.7 2

Sout !alma"t 6.6 16

$oc% Cal% &a"% +.6 23

La'"ence i"o"t 8.+ 2*

Average $! "(!


53/61


54/61

Police Department FacilityInformation

Evidence Division; Current Footprint and Utilization

Investigative Evidence, Found Property, and Personal Property vary in size and amount in unpredictable

ways depending on factors tat are difficult to estimate! "ne case may consist of one piece of

evidence te size of a Driver#s $icense wile anoter case may necessitate te collection of one

undred or more pieces of evidence!

In order to assist in te determination of wat potential Evidence %pace te $awrence Police

Department will need in te future we ave assessed our current space available and indicated ow

muc of it is used! %ome estimation was necessary to identify ow muc of a given space is currently

used! &e Department currently occupies four primary sites to store evidence; &e $aw EnforcementCenter 'eneral Evidence %torage, te ()orton *loc+ *uilding, te (County %op, and te $aw

Enforcement Center 'arage! -dditionally, evidence as been temporarily stored in an Investigations

and &raining Center secured room as well as several small temporary storage loc+ers!

General Storage at the LEC:

&e 'eneral %torage room consists of a large (cube of space divided into tree levels, eigt feet in

eigt, tat measure ./ feet by 0/ feet and a one story room ad1acent tat measures .2 feet by ./

feet!


55/61

&e two lower tiers wic total 34/2 s5uare feet eac are at 6/7 capacity! &e tird tier is at

appro8imately /27 utilized due to duct wor+ and no room for proper selving! &e side section wic

totals /22 s5uare feet is appro8imately /27 utilized at tis time!

First floor side 9/22 8 !/2: ./2

First floor self area 94/ 8 !6/: 03!./

%econd floor self area 94/ 8 !6/: 03!./

&ird floor self 94/ 8 !/2: 04!/

%econd Floor 9/2 8 !6/: 24!/

Total Used 1445

East 3/t )orton *loc+ *uilding=

&e )orton *loc+ building located on East 3/t %treet measures 6 feet by 0!/ feet totaling 0440

s5uare feet! &e Police department currently uses appro8imately 3?0 or 304. s5uare feet of tis space!

&e items stored in tis space, a veicle, bicycles, and a trailer, are larger tan average items stored

at te $aw Enforcement Center and don#t lend temselves to many of te ig capacity storage

solutions!

Total Used (large items) 1372

'arage %torage at te $aw Enforcement Center=&e evidence division utilizes a portion of te garage space on te ground floor at te $aw

Enforcement Center! &is area is ad1acent to te (%ally Port and contains a andful of cages tat can

be secured! &e occupied area as grown and sran+ trougout te years depending on pro1ects

ta+ing place in te Center! Currently evidence occupies 0./ s5uare feet! &e storage is a mi8ture of

all sizes of items and te use of (@ig Capacity storage systems would not be practical!

Total Used 352

Investigations and &raining Center, )isc!=

- room at te I&C, between .22 and 022 s5uare feet, is currently being used to store items related to a

single investigation! &e items are not selved in an efficient manner due to te lac+ of storage in te

$EC %torage area and so tey can be readily accessed for an ongoing court proceeding! &is area is alsonot secured properly as an evidence storage area sould be! %ince tese items were not part of our

(normal storage needs and not stored in a manner consistent wit te oter items I did not include

tem wit our totals!

The deried n!m"ers are not e#a$t and onl% re&resent a $onseratie estimation o' s!are 'ootage

$!rrentl% USE "% the de&artment and ma*e no ass!m&tions a"o!t '!t!re needs+

Captain -dam @effley


56/61



33

3. 1nlarged Site Layot Diagrams


57/61


58/61


59/61


60/61


61/61

Documents

Lawrence police facility needs assessment and pre-design study