HomeMy WebLinkAboutSS3 - Possible Improvements to the A/V Equipment in Council ChambersQ SEW Pp�T
CITY OF
�m
z NEWPORT BEACH
c�<,FORN'P City Council Staff Report
February 13, 2018
Agenda Item No. SS3
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Dave Kiff, City Manager - 949-644-3001,
dkiff@newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: Tara Finnigan, Deputy City Manager,
tfinnigan newportbeachca.gov
PHONE: 949-644-3035
TITLE: Possible Improvements to the A/V Equipment in Council Chambers
In response to concerns recently raised about the effectiveness of the audio and video
equipment in the City Council Chambers, staff compiled a list of possible equipment
improvements for the Council's consideration.
RECOMMENDATION:
a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because
this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly;
and
b) Provide staff with as specific direction as possible regarding any improvements to the
A/V equipment in the City Council Chambers.
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no current fiscal impact related to this item. Should the City Council wish to move
forward with any or all of the proposed improvements, PEG (Public, Educational,
Government) fee funding could be used toward NBTV-related capital costs and other A/V
costs would be expensed to the General Fund.
DISCUSSION:
During the past year, Council Member Scott Peotter relayed concerns to staff as to the
effectiveness of some of the audio and video (A/V) equipment in the Council Chambers.
His primary areas of concern include:
1. The large projection screen mounted behind the City Council dais is not fully
utilized and detracts from the aesthetics of the Council Chamber.
SS3-1
Possible Improvements to the AN Equipment in Council Chambers
February 13, 2018
Page 2
2. During daytime meetings, light coming from the skylight above the Council dais
can "wash out" and decrease the readability of presentations.
3. Council members must look downward to monitors mounted on their desktops to
view presentations and therefore, are not looking at the person speaking.
4. Council members cannot readily view the live, NBTV broadcast of a City Council
meeting.
After further discussions with Council Member Peotter, staff sought the advice of AN
consultants on possible solutions to the issues raised and compiled a list of options and
cost estimates for the City Council's consideration. (Attachment A) The costs presented
are approximate and would be refined through the City's purchasing process, should the
Council wish to have staff proceed with the improvements presented. The estimates
provided are "all -in", meaning they include equipment, parts, labor, wall or furniture
modifications (if needed), and hardware and software (if needed).
A more detailed explanation of the issues and proposed solutions follows.
Issues and Options
Displaying Presentations
Current system
The current projection system in the Council Chambers consists of two LCD projectors
and a large (27 -feet wide by 8 -feet high) screen, mounted on the wall behind the City
Council dais. This system was installed approximately five years ago, at the time the Civic
Center was built. The intent was to utilize both projectors during meetings — one to display
a presentation and the other to list the agenda item for the audience to follow along, or to
display a map, graphic, or photo to complement a presentation. But one of the projectors
is rarely, if ever, used. It was also noted when the projection system is not in use, the
screen looks like a vast, blank canvas and detracts from the architectural features of the
room.
The Council -member workstations on the dais were designed to enable members to work
"paper free" during meetings. Each member has two computer screens before them —
one to display agenda items and the other to display presentations. Thus, with the large
projection screen overhead and out of the Council's line of sight, Council members must
look downward to their computer monitors to view presentations.
Proposed solution
The projection system (comprised of one screen and two projectors) could be removed
and replaced by two "video walls" — one on the north wall of the Chambers, behind the
staff table and one on the west wall, behind the Council dais.
SS3-2
Possible Improvements to the A/V Equipment in Council Chambers
February 13, 2018
Page 3
A video wall is a set of display devices tiled together to form one large screen. It can be
configured to show one image or multiple images. They are most often found in 2x2 (two
sets of two screens) or 3x3 (three sets of three screens) configurations. The overall
dimensions vary according to the size of the display devices used. Video walls have
increased in popularity in recent years because they produce brighter, better -quality
images than projectors.
Each of the Council Chambers' walls referenced above is large enough to accommodate
3x3 video wall configurations. Comprised of nine, 55 -inch displays tiled together, the total
image size each video wall would be 143" wide by 81" high.
Community Development and Public Works staff reviewed the architectural plans for the
Council Chambers and are confident that the two walls referenced will be able to support
the approximately 700 -Ib video walls, after some minor modifications.
Estimated "all -in" cost for two, 3x3 video walls (equipment, labor and structural
work): $180,000 to $190,000
Option
A 2x2 video wall could be installed on one or both walls. Comprised of four, 55"
displays, the total image size would be 95" wide by 54" high. The approximate
cost of one 2x2 wall is $37,000 — $40,000.
Estimated "all -in" cost for two, 2x2 video walls (equipment, labor and
structural work): $75,000 - $80,000
Alternative solution
If the Council does not wish to pursue the installation of video walls, an alternative solution
would be to replace both of the LCD projectors. Newer, better technology now displays
images brighter than the current projectors produce. Installing new projectors - in the
correct locations — would enable the City to project side-by-side images and use the large
screen the way it was originally intended.
Estimated cost (equipment and labor) for two laser projectors: $54,000 to $57,000
Viewing Live NBTV Broadcast
Current system
The City Council cannot currently view the live NBTV broadcast of its meetings. To see
what is being aired, a Council member must access the streaming video through the City
website, which has about a 30 -second delay.
Proposed solution
Installing a confidence monitor within the Council's line of sight would enable Council
members to view, in real time, what is airing on NBTV.
SS3-3
Possible Improvements to the A/V Equipment in Council Chambers
February 13, 2018
Page 4
Should the Council support this solution, a 55 -inch monitor would be installed on the front
side of the speaker's podium, just above the floor, facing the Council. The installation
would include modifying the podium to screen the back of the monitor and its wires and
cables from the audience.
Estimated cost (equipment and labor): $11,000 — $13,000
Additional solution
The current A/V control system could be reprogrammed to enable the Council members
to toggle between the agenda, presentation and NBTV screens on their existing monitors
at each Council work station on the dais.
Video Improvements
Current system
Four wall -mounted, remote-controlled video cameras are used to broadcast, record and
livestream City Council meetings. The cameras are also used to record Planning
Commission meetings. The NBTV production crew members have voiced frustration over
the location of one of the video cameras. It is located in the back of the room and the focal
length of the lens prevents the crew from getting adequate close -in shots during meetings.
Staff initially looked into moving the camera to a new, pole -mounted ceiling position closer
to the front of the room. The cost was estimated at $6,800-$7,200. However, after
speaking with an A/V consultant, staff recommends replacing the camera with a newer
model. The focal length on the new model is much greater than on the model currently
used and would meet the crew's production needs, without moving it to a new location.
It also has the same footprint as the current camera and we would not need to modify the
existing camera mounts.
Estimated cost for one new video camera (equipment and labor): approximately
$9,000
Option
All four cameras in the Council Chambers could be replaced with the newer model
and the existing cameras could be moved to another City meeting room, to
facilitate NBTV coverage of more community meetings and programs.
For example, the City may wish to add NBTV cameras and equipment to the
Friends Room of the Newport Beach Public Library. NBTV covers a number of
library and other programs in the Friends Room each month. Using a remote-
controlled camera system would reduce labor costs per program, thus enabling
more programs to be covered within the current NBTV budget. The estimated cost
of adding NBTV equipment to the Friends Room is $35,000. Moving the cameras
currently located in the Council Chambers to the Friends Room would reduce that
cost by about $11,000 to $13,000. (Note: the estimate for the Friends Room
specifies a less expensive make and model than the cameras used in the City
Council Chambers.)
SS3-4
Possible Improvements to the A/V Equipment in Council Chambers
February 13, 2018
Page 5
Estimated cost to replace four video cameras in the Council Chambers:
approximately $36,000
Estimated cost to add video equipment, including new cameras, to the
Friends Room: $35,000
Estimated cost to add video equipment to the Friends Room if reusing
current Council Chambers' cameras: $22,000 - $24,000
A list of the various A/V solutions and cost estimates is included as Attachment A.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the City Council find this action is not subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not
result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment)
and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA
Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no
potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
NOTICING:
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of
the meeting at which the City Council considers the item).
ATTACHMENT:
Attachment A — Proposed A/V Solutions with Estimated Costs
SS3-5
Proposed A/V Solutions with Estimated Costs ATTACHMENT A
Item
Description
Estimated Cost
Audio Visual
Confidence Monitor, two 2x2 Video Walls, Remote -Controlled Camera
$ 98,500
3x3 Video Walls
Two (2), 3x3, 3.5 MM bezel built-in video wall processor, receiver & room controller,
output card, misc. hardware, wires & cabling, structural support, labor
$180,000-$195,000
2x2 Video Walls
Two (2), 2x2, 3.5 MM bezel built-in video wall processor, receiver & room controller,
output card, misc. hardware, wires & cabling, structural support, labor
$75,000-$80,000
Laser Projectors
Two 2 LCD laser projectors, hardware, wires, cabling, labor
$54,000-$57,000
Confidence Monitor
One (1) 55" display monitor, scaler & output card, misc. hardware, wires & cabling,
podium modifications $3,000 estimate , labor
$11,000-$13,000
Video
Remote -Controlled Camera
One, wall -mounted video camera, labor
$9,000
Package A
Confidence Monitor, two 3x3 Video Walls, Remote -Controlled Camera
$ 208,000
Package B
Confidence Monitor, two 2x2 Video Walls, Remote -Controlled Camera
$ 98,500
Package C
Confidence Monitor, two LCD Laser Projectors, Remote -Controlled Camera
$ 76,500
Package D
TBD
??
SS3-6