Minutes of the special meeting of the Public Building and Site Commission held on Tuesday, August 19, 2008 at 31 Pecks Lane, Newtown. CT. Chairman William Furrier called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Present: William Furrier, James Juliano, Robert Mulholland, Thomas Catalina, Anthony D’Angelo, Robert Mitchell, Peter Samoskevich,. ABSENT: Craig Ansman, John Cunningham.
Also Present: First Selectman Joseph Borst, Town Attorney David Grogins, Superintendent of Schools Dr. Janet Robinson, Schools Director of Business Ronald Bienkowski, Board of Ed members Kathy Fetchick, Lillian Bittman and David Nanavaty, High School principal Chip Dumais, Fletcher-Thompson representatives Joe Costa and Matt Holst, Morganti representatives Ed Barrett and Arthur Linley, Tai Soo Kim representative, four members of public, one member of press.
REVIEW OF BIDS FOR HIGH SCHOOL EXPANSION PROJECT. Mr. Barrett distributed “NEWTOWN HIGH SCHOOL Public Building and Site Commission Meeting, August 19, 2008 Discussion Items” (Attachment A to original minutes). He noted that the amount available for construction on the project is $32,194,720.00 and the base bids came in at $36,099,725.00, which is $3,904.986.00 over budget. He noted that the bids for mechanicals, general trades and steel were the most significantly over. This does not include the four or five alternates.
Mr. Costa said that Fletcher-Thompson would like to develop a value engineering list to determine what items the Town wants and what could be eliminated. Mr. Mitchell advised that items that cannot be put back in later not be considered for elimination but that if possible some items be deferred until later in the project. Mr. Furrier noted that we may have to go back to the School Facilities Unit (SFU) which could take another year. He noted that if we delay an item in the project but complete it before the project is closed, we still could get reimbursement from the State, such as when the High School fields were done with the last addition.
Mr. Barrett suggested that stairway four and the bridge from the main entrance that crosses back to the auditorium might be items that could be eliminated; they are not on the list but could be entertained. He said that the bids are good for ninety days, or until October 26.
Mr. Barrett explained the following options:
Option A would be to accept the bids as is, determine alternate selection and go back to referendum in October for additional funds. Also to accept uncomplicated value engineering.
Option B would be to rebid some selected trades: demolition, glass and general. Referendum should be planned for mid October.
Option C would have a goal of no additional funding. Full re-bid, select value management. There would be some re-design which could take three months. Mr. Mitchell noted that if ed specs are changed, we would have to go back to SFU. He feels that we cannot make significant reductions in cost without changing the ed specs.
Mr. Barrett said that the gym is considered as part of the ed specs. Also if we delay the gym, there could be significant changes in the steel bid. Mr. Costa said that the gym is integral to other spaces and program spaces. It would also create new spaces and provide some maintenance spaces. There would be a cascading effect on other parts of the building if we do not go with the gym. Also the new gym would be used to stabilize the building using transfer loads. He also feels that stair four and the bridge impact programs on other levels.
Mr. Furrier asked what is Option D? Mr. Barrett said a complete re-design. Mr. Furrier said that it could take one year more if we have to go back to SFU. He said that Option D means significant program reductions with no guarantee that we would be within budget. Mr. Barrett said that from March to July steel went up 30-40% and paving asphalt went from $54 to $70 and is expected to increase to $100 soon. He said that the bids in the general trades were high in areas such as drywall, metal framing, locks and doors.
Mr. Mitchell noted that four or five of the alternates are end of the job alternates and would the Town authorize construction if the amount is not known or do we need a fixed price now. Mr. Barrett said that this is not in the structure of the contract now. Mr. Mitchell suggested bidding some items later when the contractors know what their numbers will be. Mr. Barrett said that we may need to finish an area that we planned on doing later in the project, such as painting. Mr. Mitchell asked if we can ask the contractors to pre-buy and store.
Mr. Barrett said that if we re-bid we would have to get the bids out by mid September to come back in early October.
Mr. Barrett said that there may be an option for a different chiller. Mr. Juliano noted that he and Mr. Catalina feel that the existing hot water may be used for the new addition also which would eliminate one boiler and a commercial water heater.
Attorney Grogins noted that a referendum would require a special appropriation, which would have to be authorized by the Board of Finance who would send it to the Legislative Council to authorize the Board of Selectmen to set the date. Also input from the Board of Education would be needed such as the impact of the ed specs. Mr. Furrier said that the intent is not to change the ed specs.
Mr. Borst noted that concerning a referendum, the ballot boxes cannot be used for weeks prior to a national election. Mr. Grogins said that the time is 19 days before the election. Mr. Mitchell suggested that Fletcher-Thompson and Morganti get a value engineering package together as soon as possible.
Mr. Borst suggested that we ask from $3.9 million from the people and amend the existing bid price. Mr. Mulholland said we should give the voters the option to vote on a stadium alternate.
Mr. Borst noted that Attorney General Blumenthal’s office noted that a consumer study group reported that artificial turf is not good. He is concerned that an alternate may be voted down that would prevent ADA access requirements. Mr. Costa said that bleacher access is maintained in the base bid. Dr. Robinson noted that if the track and field are done after the project is completed it is not eligible for reimbursement.
Mr. Mitchell moved to recommend that in order to meet the construction timeline and anticipated occupancy date, that we go to the Town to ask for an additional referendum to cover the overages in the bid items of $3.9 million and 10% for associated soft costs with the proviso that the bid prices for the alternates be added as a separate line item in the referendum. Second by Mr. Furrier. Attorney Grogins noted that the Public Building and Site Commission should make recommendations on structure as the Board of Finance and Legislative Council will finalize the methods of financing. Motion unanimously carried.
Mr. Furrier moved that the design team continue with value engineering on the current time line so that Option A can potentially bring the cost of the project down in a way that is acceptable to the Board of Education. Second by Mr. Mitchell and unanimously carried.
ADJOURNMENT. Having no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
Ann M. Mazur, Clerk
| 
