Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fleet Facility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Marion County to advance new fleet maintenance facility; board defers ISO building and asks for cost-allocation plan
Summary
County staff and contractors presented a 58,600 sq ft fleet facility program and a funding package near $22 million; commissioners instructed staff to advance the project to a board agenda for award but to remove the ISO building from the first phase and return with cost-allocation options.
County staff presented a multi-year plan to replace and consolidate Marion County’s dispersed fleet-maintenance buildings into a single facility, and commissioners agreed to move the project to a board agenda for award while deferring one subcomponent.
Angel Rossell, assistant county administrator, said fleet maintains roughly 2,000 assets (about 1,200 on-road units and 800 heavy pieces) with 29 full-time employees and that roughly 90% of the department’s work supports public safety and public infrastructure. She told the board the existing site’s multiple, aging buildings cause inefficiency and safety issues for technicians.
Jared, the county facilities lead, described the program as a 58,600-square-foot main maintenance building, a 2,000-square-foot ISO building for fire operations and a separate fuel island. He said bid-level pricing and value engineering brought the project to an estimated construction budget in the low-$22 million range.
Staff reported they had about $22.5 million available today from general-fund balances and project closeouts to fund construction. Jared and Angel said the package as presented (main building, fuel island and ISO building) totaled approximately $22,000,567 in the handout, with contingency and additional value-engineering still to be resolved.
Commissioners debated phasing and the size/height of heavy bays — several suggested designing most bays for routine vehicles while reserving a small number to accommodate the county’s tallest ladder trucks to reduce overall cost. Contractors and the facilities team agreed to run alternative configurations and specialty-engineer pricing to quantify potential savings, and staff agreed to pursue value-engineering options while protecting long-term capacity.
On funding, commissioners asked staff to prepare a cost-allocation plan that could spread some capital cost to enterprise departments that benefit from heavy bays (utilities, solid waste, fire) rather than relying solely on the general fund. Angel and Jared said staff would return with a plan for capital cost allocation.
By consensus the board directed staff to advance the fleet project to a formal board agenda for award but to remove the ISO building from the first phase (ISO building to be added later as a separate phase) and to return with cost-allocation options and any additional value-engineering findings.
Next steps: staff will conduct the requested value-engineering, price alternate bay configurations with specialty engineers, prepare a cost-allocation plan for affected enterprise funds, and return the project to a board agenda for award and final funding authorization.
