South Windsor Public Building Commission
Minutes – Regular Meeting – June 30, 2014
Members Present: Howard (Hap) Fitts, James Neary, Carol Kelley, Charley Lyons, Tim Wentzell and Edward O’Connell
Also Present: BOE Representatives, Dr. Carter, and Patrick Hankard; Strategic Building Solutions representatives Marc Sklenka and Jon Winikur
Chairman Fitts called the meeting to order at 4:00 PM.
SBS provided the commission with a listing of proposed questions as well as a scoring rubric for the firms’ presentations and facilitated the interview process.
In response to a question posed by Mr. Wentzell, Mr. Warrington described the scoring matrix and its relation to the architect selection. He indicated that the commission would rank each interview presentation with a score of 1-5 and that information would be populated into the existing rating, deriving at a score for the architects. Mr. Wentzell relayed his understanding that at the end of the evening, the PBC would select one of the firms based on its consensus. Mr. Warrington stated that the town attorney advised the commission use the established rating system, making its selection based on that system.
The commission heard presentations from four architectural firms, Tai Soo Kim, JCJ Architects, SLAM Collaborative and DRA. Each firm introduced their architectural team and provided the commission with information based on criteria provided by SBS in their invitation to interview. Each of the four firms interviewed visited the site for the Orchard Hill elementary school prior to the interview. The firms answered questions from commission members and Strategic Building Solutions representatives, Jon Winikur and Chuck Warrington. Following each of the interviews SBS facilitated conversations regarding reactions to the firms’ presentations.
Mr. Wentzell stated his concern with the PBC utilizing the rating system, noting that although it was good guidance and very useful in selecting the firms to be interviewed, the points system was not created by the PBC and he was not under the impression that it would be used for choosing the architect. He noted the subjectivity for the rating of past performance which could have a net effect on the commission’s decision. Chairman Fitts noted his agreement and understanding that the rating process was established to narrow the field to four firms to be interviewed and that the interview process would determine the architect.
Members provided their thoughts on the next steps and Mr. Neary stated that he would like to have time to go through the materials presented and suggested that the commission hold off on making a decision until the next meeting, while Mr. O’Connell was prepared to move forward. Mr. Wentzell suggested that members determine if there was a clear consensus as to one architect and if so, the commission may be able to move forward, otherwise would delay until the next meeting.
Commission members discussed their views on each of the firms to determine whether there was a consensus among the group. The majority of the members placed DRA and JCJ Architecture in the top two based on their presentations. School administration, Patrick Hankard, Chris Chemerka and Kate Carter were requested to provide their input to the commission regarding the firms represented and also placed DRA and JCJ as the top two firms. It was determined that the commission would make its selection at the next PBC meeting.
Mr. Warrington noted that SBS received a letter from DRA in which there were two exceptions to the contract that would need to be reviewed by the town attorney if they were to be considered. He indicated that he would work with the town attorney regarding the exceptions and bring the information back at the next meeting.
The next meeting will be held on July 9 at 6:30 PM in the library board room.
There being no other business to come before the meeting, the meeting was adjourned at 9:05 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Ann M. Walsh
Clerk
| 
