CONSULATE ADANA'S GROWTH SPURT REQUIRES BRICKS AND MORTAR

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 ADANA 000021 SIPDIS OBO/OM/AM/EUR FOR CHRIS WITTMANN EUR-OI/EX/PMO FOR DAVID SAVASTUK E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: AMGT ASEC ABLD TU SUBJECT: CONSULATE ADANA'S GROWTH SPURT REQUIRES BRICKS AND MORTAR (AND SOLAR PANELS) Background -------------- ¶1. (U) Consulate Adana has been a critical platform for USG operations in southeastern Turkey since 1960. The Consulate provides services for Americans affiliated with Incirlik Air Base (IAB) and for regional contingencies such as the 2006 evacuation of Americans from Lebanon. The Consulate also provides reporting coverage of Turkey's volatile southeastern regions, including the Syrian, Iraqi and Iranian borders. The Consulate is a lock-and-leave post and does not process classified information. ¶2. (U) In recent years the Consulate's reporting and outreach role has grown, as has the threat posed by transnational terrorist organizations operating in the region, as illustrated by the 2007 attack on Consulate Istanbul. These factors have increased the staff substantially: in the last five years, the Consulate has added one FSO and six LES positions, an increase of 50%. In the coming two years this growth is expected to continue as a new Regional Security Officer position is in the pipeline and two-to-three LES positions are also likely to be established. Until now, these new hires have been shoehorned into existing space, but that is no longer an option. Without a clear strategy for addressing this problem that is backed by necessary resources, overcrowding and discomfort will undermine efficiency and morale, degrading operational effectiveness. ¶3. (U) In 2003, the Consulate was forced to move on short notice from a leased downtown location due to security concerns and our then-landlord's desire to reclaim the property. The USG purchased a 2.7-acre (11,000 square meters) compound on the highway between Adana and IAB; the site houses two conjoined buildings constructed in the mid-1980s that had been used by a media company as a newspaper office (front building) and print shop (rear building). The original renovation was completed quickly due to time constraints and only the lower floor of the front building was overhauled to USG specs. In the original work, 3,100 sq. ft. were renovated and all operations (consular waiting room, offices, computer server rooms, etc.) were squeezed into this area. A conference room/dining area/reception room and kitchen (about 1,000 sq. ft.) were 
subsequently built on the second floor. In the front building, there is an additional 1,300 sq. ft. on the second floor that could be converted into office space. The back building, meanwhile, has about 6,000 sq. ft. of useable space that could be converted. ¶4. (U) Besides lack of space, the current building has other shortcomings: --perimeter security upgrades are needed, including anti-ram protection and enhanced security measures for the rear vehicle gate (these are being addressed through existing projects). --the offices are located in the section of the building that is closest to the front wall, affording only 64 feet of set-back; earlier this year projectiles hurled by protesters hit office windows. --there is no central HVAC system so the office relies on inefficient wall units and a rudimentary air-circulation system that does not pump in fresh air. --due to sub-par construction standards, as the back building settles, cracks in the plaster appear daily and some pieces of the roof have broken off. --post does not have the capability to process classified ADANA 00000021 002 OF 004 information. ¶5. (U) Given the amount of unused office space in the existing complex, there are numerous options for expanding which would address the need for more office space as well as some of the building's other shortcomings. An explication of the four main options and recommendations for next steps follows. The Ambassador and post favor Option One. Option One: Second-Floor Renovation - Front of Building, No Structural Reinforcement -------------- -------------- -------------- - ¶6. (U) Renovating existing office space immediately above the offices currently occupied would be the least expensive way forward. It would increase office space by about 30% and could be completed for $1-2 million since the necessary security upgrades are underway. Questions have been raised about the load-bearing capacity of the second floor and whether the additional weight of office furniture would pose safety concerns. An OBO-commissioned study completed in 2003 concluded the second floor could be used for nominal office loads without undue safety concerns, adding that the structure had performed well in the 18 years prior to the analysis. Pros and cons for this option: Pros: --minimal disruption to on-going Consulate operations; --relatively modest cost. Cons: --offices would still be with 100 feet of front fence. Option Two: Second-Floor Renovation - Front of Building, With Structural Reinforcement -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- ¶7. (U) If we determine that the second floor requires reinforcement to sustain office operations, then this project becomes far more complicated because operations downstairs could not continue during the installation of shoring supports on the lower level. Pros: --project could incorporate renovation/redesign of downstairs offices as well; --new space could include classified processing area. Cons: --staff offices would need to be relocated during construction to trailers or into rented space. --offices would still be with 100 feet of front fence. Option Three: Second-Floor Renovation - Back of Building ADANA 00000021 003 OF 004 -------------- -------------- -------------- ¶8. (U) About 70% of the total potential office space is currently unused or underutilized. This includes about 6000 square feet of space on the second floor of the back building - nearly double our current office space. Converting this part of the building for office use would take full advantage of the compound's size for set-back considerations, but it would be require that part of the building to be reinforced for earthquakes. Pros: --enlarged area would provide for more representational/meeting space; --set-back problem would be resolved; --no need for relocation of current office during construction; Cons: --Cost: seismic-proofing of existing structure may cost as much as starting from scratch; --current warehouse and vehicle garage would need to be relocated during construction; Option Four: New, Purpose-Built "Green" Consulate -------------- -------------- ¶9. (U) If rehabilitating the back building is too expensive, the final - possibly even less expensive - option is to raze it and build a modern structure on the existing foundation. Such a project may be possible without disrupting operations in the front building. A new building would project a more attractive American presence and incorporating "green" design principles would translate into millions of dollars in energy costs over the lifetime of the building given Adana's solar-rich environment. Pros: --new structure would meet all seismic and engineering codes; --new facility offers more program options (e.g. visa services, classified processing) --using modern design would result in long-term energy savings; --set-back problem would be resolved; Cons: --if project constitutes a "new build," it would require congressional approval; --current warehouse and vehicle garage would need to be relocated during construction. Recommendation -------------- ¶10. (U) The first step in this process is to conclude definitively whether Option One is feasible or whether the second floor of the front building would require enhancements to accommodate additional weight. This can be accomplished by a ADANA 00000021 004 OF 004 formal review of the 2003 report ("Structural Condition Assessment and Seismic Evaluation of the EXSA Building in Adana, Turkey," February, 2003, Wiss, Janney & Elstner Associates) plus additional input from upcoming site visits by OBO personnel in the next four-to-six weeks. If Option One is feasible, then it should be pursued as the most cost-effective and rapid path to resolve the current space issues confronting the Consulate. ¶11. (U) If Option One is not technically feasible, then an OBO design team should visit the site and conduct a thorough analysis and work with post management to determine the best course of action among the remaining three options. ¶12. (U) An email version of this cable with photos is available. Please contact solomonrd@state.gov. GREEN