Woodrow Wilson Building Committee

New Middle School Building Committee Special Meeting August 22, 2019 at 7 p.m. Minutes Present: Mary Bartolotta, Chris Drake, Steve Zarger, John Phillips, John Giuliano, Ted Raczka, Richard Pelletier, Phil Pessina. Also Present: Dr. M. Conner, Superintendent of Schools, Peter Staye, Director of Facilities, TSKP RepresentativeRandall Luther, O & G representatives Dan Hertzler, Mark Jepko, and one member of the public. Meeting Called to Order at 7:06 PM. Public Comment was opened. Brian Kronenberger expresses the need to record the minutes; not everything is captured in the minutes. He received monthly updates from the architect and O & G. He received Phase I cost of $3.4 million and since that meeting there are 4 PCO’s and he assumes he heard about 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 are new. He discusses the July 30 meeting and payables to BVH; Staff said payments are in process. Public Comment closes. At 7:09 PM. Discussion of Plans and Specs for Phase II Randall Luther states the State Department of Education requires the Committee and BOE to approve the documents prior to the State review. He hands out the plans for the school which include structure and all systems in the building. He goes through the pages: Pages 1 and 2 are a list of the 380 drawings. Page 3 is a partial floor plan of the pool and gym; shows the temporary offices and shows the building post demolition. P. 4 is typical overall floor plan; bubbles break out to larger pieces. P. 5 is the second level. A1.02A is a blow up of the first level. He states the floor plans have not changed. P.4.22 are wall sections. If you were to cut through the wall it shows what the make up is. They go around the entire building and tag unique sections. He states all the systems are three dimensional models because it helps to show issues; there still may be issues but you have a plan we know that will work. A8.06 shows elevations; it shows the wall of every room if something is on the wall. C5.0 is overall site layout plan; C6.1 is stormwater management and drainage. They cannot increase runoff from the site so there are some under gound detention. They also show the rain gardens where certain plantings occur based on the sustainability workshop. C8.2 is work associated with sitework. S1.02A is the structural steel; FP1.02A and P1.02A and M1.02A are the mechanical and plumbing systems; shows the ductwork for a pod and the chilled beams in the classrooms. EP1.02A is power and circuitry. T1.02A is technology and AV1.02A is AV drawings. He states we can discuss any of the drawings. These went before the local reviewer; they commented and we addressed those comments. They left the drawings with the local building officials for sign off for the State meeting. John Giuliano asks if the water fountains have water bottle fillers; Randall responds all the fountains have them. John Giuliano asks if the committee can get a virtual tour. Randall states that can be done easily at his offices; the file is very large and it can’t be loaded on a dvd. The Chair asks is it a field trip. Randall states they could look at a condensed version loaded on a laptop. Peter Staye asks if it can be done in pieces. Randall responds no. Dan Hertzler states once O & G interfaces during the modeling process they can do it. John Giuliano is interested in the details and would like to do a walk through. Randall will look at a condensed version of the model and Phil Pessina states we could set up a field trip. Randall states it will not include looking above the ceilings; John Giuliano responds he is more interested in seeing what the staff, faculty and students will be seeing. Randall states the motion should read as of August 22 and the numbers have been reconciled. Chris Drake asks about the Clean Energy Task Force and the things that were agreed to; can you review that. Randall hands out a sheet showing 13 areas of sustainable measures that were incorporated into the documents. TSKP confirmed with the Sustainability committee that these were the items they agreed to. Some go beyond discussions and he reviews the list. They improved the thermal envelope based on the thought that utility costs will go up; this includes roof, glass, and wall insulation. Photovoltaics there was a desire for them and they managed to get 200kw on the roof and they made provisions for PV’s on iste like over the parking lots so they adjusted the underground conduits to make it easier to add them. John Giuliano asks what 200 kw power and Randall states he can’t answer that. Randall continues that they rely on daylight in all their projects and made use of it in all areas of the school. They have the conduit infrastructure for 10 EV charging spaces. Plantings will be low maintenance and species that grow in this area to eliminate the need for excessive watering. Grasses are designed not to be cut. The question is asked what that means. Randal states the grass is around the building and on the hill and in areas that are hard to mow. It is a slower growing grass. Chris Drake asks about the charging stations and is there infrastructure to add more. Randall states yes there are empty conduits to the electric room. John Giuliano asks if any of those are handicap accessible. Randall is not sure and it may be possible to do that. John Phillips states it has to be accessible with no curbs and ramps but it doesn’t have to be designated handicapped; they are usually closer to the building anyway and there is no requirement to designate one. Chair Bartolotta states there should be one and does the City have a code; if you took a handicapped spot and made it a charging station would that work? Randall states they have some to cover both buildings so they could make one of those handicapped. John Giuliano asks if the EV’s are mounted to impede snow removal or landscaping. Randall states they should be flush to the ground. John G. states that could matter and is worried about the conduits sticking out of the ground. Peter Staye states he looked at the potential snow removal and they were happy with the layout. Randall states one item on the list they partially satisfied which is mixing tree species. They did the tree groupings as mixed but along the street they have one species and they are spread apart. He continues with the list and states they have rain gardens. Bike racks are on the southside and after meeting with the Complete Streets committee, they widened a section of the sidewalk to accommodate walkers and bikers as well as adding a rack on the north side of the entrance. LVT flooring will be used; it was more expensive, but it got into the package. Peter Staye states they are using LVt at the entrances int he current building and it is no wax, no strip, and buff to shine. John Giuliano asks how it holds up. Peter responds he expects 1 it will be fine. Randall states there is a 20 year warranty. Peter also comments that things can ugly out before they wear out. Chris Drake states no linoleum. Randall states it is quite a bit more expensive and only comes in sheets; you would have to replace a larger area than replacing tiles. Rich Pelletier asks how many colors. Randall responds 3 or 4 colors; there is a field color and accent color and it is different for each pod. There are no further questions. Dan Hertzler comes forward with the reconciled estimate summarized. There are 150 pages of detail; the good news is we are on budget. He shows the DDE estimate and the total O & G current estimate. There is sitework from Phase I left to do. He goes through the estimate. $682,000 electrical work like the generator, it is exterior electrical work. $634,967 is the cost to restore the pool and gym and make it a whole structure. They have to relocate a gas line and some work on the upgrade of the fire alarms. There are not reimbursable costs. The State building permit fee is $19,090 and is in soft costs. The CM staff review is a straight number. They kept two small contingencies of .75% each. Page 2, the first line is a summary of hard costs and the total is $75,346,850 and below that are the soft costs of $11,938,796. He points out savings including the savings for the Builder’s Risk Insurance. Line 22 is the owner’s contingency and it is $3,000,000. All contingencies include 3% in the CM budget and 1.5% in escalation and design so the total of all the contingencies is about 6% There is also $1,000,000 for waste disposal. Total cost is $87,205,646 and budget is $87,350,000. John Giuliano asks about the savings in line 14; Dan replies the savings is in hardware. We carried more and Randall carried it as well in the security budget. Security is well covered. Ted Raczka asks about line 18, short term financing. Dan states they shared these costs with Donna and another individual and she said to hold it. Phil Pessina asks are we using the City vendor for the cameras. Dan states no, it is a spec. Phil states look at the City vendor as they have done all upgrades. Dan states if they are on the State Contract, we can do that, but otherwise for reimbursement purposes, we have to go to bid. Chris Drake asks when they will know who the vendor is. Dan responds Phase II; Phase VI is the software. We have had problems with the boxes and equipment sometimes doesn’t align properly. Phil states you should check with the City Vendor - Contact It Director and City Vendor before you go out to bid. Randall states your local vendors are the basis of the design. If the local vendor is on the bid list we can pull it out and use them. John Phillips states you will double check this. The response is yes. Dan Hertzler states this is some of the detail and he has the entire estimate if you want to see it. Phil asks if red are negative numbers or do they highlight something. Dan states it is a negative variance; red means the value went down. You see a lot that have gone up significantly. We carry a larger design contingency which was $1.9 million. It was used during this last estimate. Certain lines are red across and they represent the community center. Chris Drake asks about the 170,000 square foot number. Randall states the gross numbers being used are not the State numbers. Dan states the building will cost $333.62 per square foot. Chriss states contingency there is your $2.6 million and ours of $3 million so we are looking at $5.6 million. The response is correct plus the $1,000,000 in waste disposal. Chris asks what O & G is taking. Dan explains the various fees like buying bonds and insurance and CM Staff Reimbursables. Contingency is there to use for changes in trade costs. He will send out the 40 page detailed estimate. They want the bids to come in at $75,182,216. They discuss the Guaranteed Maximum Price. 2 Phil Pessina moves to open Public Comment again; his motion is seconded by John Phillips. There is no objection and Brian Kronenberger, member of public, comments. He states it was $3.4 million for Phase I. The budget is 3.7 million and is a 33% increase. This budget sweeps out $1 million. In construction, large unforeseen problems can occur and blow out the budget. Not carrying 5% contingency is not good. And you spent $1 million already. Dan Hertzler responds that the $1 million is covering more than Phase I. They feel it is properly set out. Phase I is 80% complete; they still have to get rid of the steel. They disposed of everything as regulated waste and the exposure to PVC waste is not as great and will be significantly less because of the age of the building. John Giuliano asks if the cost was due to PVC and not asbestos. Dan responds the entire outside of the building had asbestos on it. Chris Drake states what Phase is demolishing the last of the building in. Dan responds there is a Phase IA and a Phase IB and technically it will happen during Phase II but contracted in Phase I B. Phil Pessina asks when Phase IB happens. Dan responds June, 2021 and we only have 3-½ months to make it go away. Peter Staye asks about disposal of the old furniture. Dan responds there are two costs to decommissioning a building. The first is moving expenses and there is $20,000 set aside for that; the second is what the City doesn’t get rid of and for this there is $10,000. If you are not moving stuff, it will cost. Peter responds they usually donate it. Dan responds repurposing, they did that and coordinated with sending it overseas. There are no further questions. John Phillips moves to ​approve the plans and specifications for the Phase 2 of the new middle school dated July 18, 2019, prepared by TSKP Studio, and the associated cost estimate dated August 22, 2019 prepared by O & G industries, for submission to the Department of Administrative Services, Office of School Construction Grants for Review of Final Plans for Construction Authorization. Phil Pessina seconds the motion with the change of date to read August 22, 2019. The vote is called and it is unanimous to approve. The Chair declares the matter approved. John Phillips moves the following: O & G PCO 01: Refeed electrical services for the electrical service change O & G PCO 02 Removal of ACM boiler O & G PCO 03 Existing MEP insulation; add administration mechanical piping and duct insulation O & G PCO 04 Unsuitable soil: replacement of unsuitable soil Phil Pessina seconds the motion. The Chair calls for the vote and it is unanimous to approve. The Chair states the matters are approved. Randal Luther discusses the structural peer review. It is a code requirement; the building is a threshold building and will need a third party review. Its spans, size and occupant load of more than 1,000. It requires a peer review. They have three quotes and he reads them. They would like approval of Macchi Engineers in the amount of $8,500. 3 Phil Pessina moves to hire Macchi Engineers for $8,500 for the peer review. Steve Zarger seconds the motion. There is no further discussion. The vote is called and it is unanimous to approve. The Chair states the matter is approved. Ted Raczka moves to approve the payment of TSKP invoice 15 in the amount of $193,333; his motion is seconded by Rich Pelletier. There is no discussion. The vote is called and it is unanimous to approve. The Chair states the matter is approved. Chris DRake moves to approve the payment of $1,350,824.40 for approval and is seconded by Phil Pessina. The vote is called and it is unanimous to approve. The Chair states the matter is approved. Chair Bartolotta moves to the last item. Dan Hertzler states there is a neighbor with concerns and he is considering fencing, but he is not ready to do anything. Also they need to find a home for two years for the top soil and the site should be within 10 miles. It is 350 dump truck loads. He will check with Park and Rec. It was suggested to contact Public Works as well. They want to store it where there is no runoff and John Phillips states you will seed it. The Chair is glad they are working with the homeowner. Adjournment Phil Pessina moves to adjourn and is seconded by Rich Pelletier. There is no objection and the Chair declares the meeting adjourned at 8:30 PM. Submitted by Marie Norwood 4