Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-03-18 School Committee MinutesReading School Committee Reading, Massachusetts Regular Session March 18.2003 Chair Griset called the regular session to order in the Superintendent's Conference Room at 5:35 p.m. Present were School Committee members Cavicchi, Russo, Twomey, Griset, and McFadden. Mr. Dahl arrived at 6:00 p.m. Mr. Russo asked if he could speak regarding compromising the designer selection process. He stated that he felt the process was on the fast track. He wanted to know why we were not doing due diligence. He stated that there was not enough time thus compromising the designer selection process. Mr. Russo suggested that four School Committee members were found in violation of the designer selection process. Mr. Griset stated that there was enough time and this is an honest difference of opinion. Mr. Griset clarified that four School Committee members were not found in violation of anything. There was a technical violation only and the courts found that the School Committee acted in good faith. All of which is long over and done with. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mrs. Cavicchi moved to enter into executive session for the purpose of discussing the deployment of security personnel or devices. Mr. McFadden seconded the motion. The vote was 5 -0. Mrs. Cavicchi, Mr. Russo, Mr. Twomey, Mr. Griset, and Mr. McFadden. CALL BACK TO ORDER Mr. Griset called the regular session back to order at 6:05. Mr. Griset explained the purpose of the meeting is to interview three architectural firms for the high school project. The first firm to be interviewed is Drummey, Rosane and Anderson, (DRA). Owen Beenhower, Principal for Contracts and Administration, introduced himself and stated that Drummey, Rosane and Anderson was formed in 1923 and 85% of their business is public school construction. He introduced the other people from the firm. Mr. Carl Franceschi is the Principal in charge of Design, Mr. Vladimir Lyubetsky, Project Manager, Mr. Paul Moore, Programming and Planning and Mr. Paul Brown, Project Architect. Mr. Franceschi stated that he had respect for the work Flansburgh did and they could carry it out. He said that he meets with Christine Lynch from SBA on a regular basis so that he is familiar with the process. They gave a power point presentation. The firm is quite familiar with phasing. Mr. Lyubetsky gave an overview of the phasing, demolition and new construction/renovation. He stated that DRA has a history of issuing a very small percentage in change orders. Contract bids currently have been coming in very close to budget. They have the ability to do this job. Regular Session 2 March 18.2003 Mr. Paul Moore has been an architect at DRA for 23 years. He would bridge the gap between the educational specifications and the customer. Mr. Paul Brown would detail the construction documents. Mr. Griset thanked them for their presentation and asked if there were any questions. Mr. Twomey thanked them for coming. He asked them to summarize their phasing schedule and to describe the benefits of it. Mr. Franceschi stated their phasing schedule would have the auditorium out of commission for one year. He suggested a rental possibility for the one -year and testing other locations. Mr. Twomey said it was very important to have the auditorium and we did not want to be without it for a year. Mr. Lyubetsky stated part of the boiler room would be demolished and the building would be redesigned slightly. Mr. Beenhower stated that DRA had a twelve -phase project in Peabody. Safety was very important. They turned the courtyard into usable space during the construction. That is a possibility here. Mr. Russo asked if the firm had any pending litigation or negative publicity in the last five years. Mr. Franceschi said there was pending litigation but not active litigation. In Gloucester there was an air quality complaint. There were fumes from athletic flooring. The chemicals used on the floor created sensitivity issues. They are very close to settling. There was improper curage and ventilation. Mr. Russo asked how much money was involved. Mr. Griset told him that was irrelevant and an inappropriate question to ask. Mr. Russo asked if the firm had had more time would they have been able to put together a better proposal/presentation. Mr. Franceschi stated that they had enough time. They would like to have spent more time with the staff but that they could do that at a later date if they were awarded the work. Mr. McFadden asked what was different this time as opposed to the feasibility study DRA performed in 1996. Mr. Beenhower stated that in 1996 they were asked to put together a plan for a cheap renovation ($12 -15 million) with minimal disruption. We are now looking at a major renovation. Mr. McFadden asked if DRA could meet the June 1, 2003 SBA deadline. Mr. Franceschi stated that they would not be here if they could not meet the deadline. Mrs. Cavicchi was concerned about the temporary structure in the courtyard. Did we really want to spend money on a temporary structure? Mr. Dahl asked what did DRA think was the most difficult design issue. Mr. Franceschi stated that the construction of the auditorium caught their eye. Mr. Beenhower stated that they had two Regular Session 3 March 18.2003 connectors (walkways) on a Weymouth project and that they were use working with them. Mr. Moore was concerned with the boiler room being too close to the construction. Mr. Russo asked how many of them were architects registered in the state of Massachusetts. He was told four. Mr. Russo asked how expandable is the project. Mr. Franceschi stated that it was very expandable. The space at the high school seems appropriate for the enrollment. Mr. Griset thanked them for coming and explained the Committee had to interview two more firms before narrowing down the list to two firms. Mr. Griset called for a five - minute recess. Mr. Griset called the meeting back to order at 7:10. The second presentation of the evening was Strekalovsky and Hoit. Mr. Hoit introduced the people from his firm and gave an overview of what they did. He gave a power point presentation. He stated that Strekalovsky and Hoit opened on the first day of the blizzard in 1978. He stated that they had an intimate knowledge of the building from doing a feasilility study in 1999. The building is interesting in that it slopes up a hill with elevations as high as forty feet. He stated they were ready to do Reading. They have worked in seventy communities and have done 175 schools. The courtyard may be a constructability issue. They feel they could divide the job into three phases. Mr. Walter had a three - dimensional model to which he added parts and took parts away. They stated they had no problem with the June 1'` 2003 submittal date. Their phasing schedule would take three years. Mr. Hoit stated they did four schools last year and eleven schools this year. Mr. Griset thanked them for their presentation and asked if there were any questions. Mr. McFadden asked Donald Walter if he had a resume because it was not included in the proposal. Mr. Walter stated that he would fax his resume the next morning to the attention of the Superintendent of Schools. Mrs. Cavicchi asked about the two -story media center. She stated that the top floor presently was not a very usable space. They said they would mirror the academic space across the way. Mr. Dahl asked if they had done many schools with someone else's plans. They responded that they had Wachusett High School and Algonquin Regional High School with someone else's plans. They have a lot of experience taking on feasibility studies from other firms. Mr. Hoit stated that they could jump right in. Mr. Walters stated that he thought we needed a fresh set of eyes. Mr. Russo asked about energy efficiency and value engineering. Regular Session 4 March 18.2003 Mr. Hoit stated that they hire the best consultants in those areas. He introduced Manuel Garcia, a plumbing specialist from the consulting firm Garcia, Galuska, DeSousa. Mr. Garcia gave an overview of a "green" high school in Woburn and described the benefits of energy engineering. Mr. Russo asked Mr. Garcia that when he looked at Flansburgh's plans did he see anything he could do better. Mr. Garcia stated that they would review the plans in great detail and take a fresh look at the mechanics. Mr. Twomey asked if they could sum up their proposal, their proposed changes to the schematic design and the changes to the phasing. Mr. Walter gave an overview of how the "main street" in a school should work. If there is no "main street" the school falls apart. They would like to encapture the fieldhouse instead of having it off to one side. They would like to give the building an identity. They would do the project in three phases. They would definitely challenge some of the ideas to make sure that we would be getting what we need. Mr. Russo asked if they had any pending litigation in the last five years or negative publicity. Mr. Hoit responded that they have never been sued. He stated his firm sticks around no matter what. They have been in business twenty -five years. In summary they are committed to Reading. They have good relationships with contractors. The first order of business is safety. They would have no trouble meeting the June V% 2003 submission date. The project is a challenge and they are up for it. Mr. Griset thanked them for coming. Mr. Griset stated that they hoped to make a decision on a short list possibly tonight. Two firms would have the opportunity to have a second interview. Mr. Griset stated there would be a ten - minute recess. Mr. Griset called the meeting back to order at 8:15. Flansburgh and Associates is the third firm to be interviewed. Mr. Griset welcomed them. Mr. Sid Bowen introduced the people from his firm and gave a description of what they did at the firm. He explained that Flansburgh is dedicated to the process, spending inordinate amounts of time in Reading. Mr. Bowen gave a power point presentation. Flansburgh focuses on the educational needs of children. He spoke to two teachers currently at the high school who were there in 1966. He shared the conversation. He stated the staging area for the construction would be out back where the old pool was. Mr. Griset thanked them for the presentation and asked if there were any questions. Mr. Twomey thought it might be helpful if they could explain why the cafeteria and the auditorium were located where they were. Regular Session 5 March 18, 2003 Mr. Bowen stated that Option 3 included the auditorium. They wanted to keep the auditorium separate from the field house. If you have two events on the same night the logistics could be tricky. The high school would have four levels. Moving the entrance to the auditorium up would make it more accessible. There is a strong desire to keep things open but still maintain control. Mr. Russo asked how many of the people were registered architects in the state of Massachusetts. Mr. Bowen told him three were and two were not. Mr. Russo stated he was concerned with the energy design. Mr. Bowen explained air handling. Mr. Bowen stated studies show students get higher scores with natural daylight. Mr. McFadden asked if Robert Pierce would be on site. Mr. Bowen said Robert Pierce would be on the project but not on site. Larry Tomlinson would be the architect on site. Mr. McFadden asked about the $100,000 asbestos budget. Mr. Bowen told him there is more asbestos removal money in the demolition part of the budget. Mr. McFadden asked about billing and invoices. Mr. Bowen stated the billing system is not customized for every client. Mr. Cavicchi stated that all the other firms took Flansburgh's plans and tweaked them. She asked if Flansburgh would tweak the plans. Mr. Bowen stated that everything would be reviewed four times and it is possible that things could change. They could be reviewed many more times too. He said he would have liked to hear the other firms. Mr. Russo asked if Robert Pierce was registered in the state of Massachusetts as an architect. Mr. Bowen said he was. Mr. Russo expressed his concern with having the same architect on two projects. Mr. Bowen stated that Earl Flansburgh would step in if he were to leave Flansburgh for any reason. He said he was not going anywhere. The firm has a core of skills. Mr. Russo asked if there was any pending litigation against Flansburgh in the past five or six years. Mr. Bowen told him in the past five or six years they have bid and constructed thirty - seven projects. They were named in Barletta Construction vs. the City of Everett and the City of Everett vs. Barletta Construction. There have been other minor things over the years. Mr. Bowen stated -that Flansburgh constructs more schools than any other firm in Massachusetts. At Ipswich High School/Middle School there was a broken pipe. The contractor made an error in the insulation of the pipe. Flansburgh made sure the error was corrected. It did not matter whose fault it was. Regular Session 6 March 18, 2003 Mr. Griset stated that in construction litigation, the plaintiff's attorney would be careful to name everyone that touched the issue. They always name the architect. It is legal malpractice not to name the architect. Mr. Griset thanked everyone for coming. It was a great presentation as they all have been. There will be a five- minute recess. At 9:35 Mr. Griset called the meeting back to order. He stated that unless we are prepared to make a decision tonight on two firms we would have to have another meeting. There was discussion regarding the evaluation form. Dr. Harutunian stated that the answer to the first three was yes. Dr. Harutunian drew a chart on the easel. Each member could vote for two or three firms. The result was as follows: TMG OMR TDPC DRA. S &H FLANS. SO .M The Design Partnership of Cambridge and Flansburgh and Associates will have a second interview. Mr. Russo stated that Strekalovsky and Hoit have not had a lawsuit in twenty -five years. They could use Flansburgh's plans and have three phases instead of five. Mr. Twomey stated that you are not comparing apples to apples. They all made changes to the plans. Mr. McFadden remarked that the project manager from Flansburgh should be here. He was told that Mr. Pierce was at a town meeting in another town. Mr. Dahl moved to direct the Superintendent to contact The Design Partnershin of inform them we are moving forward. Mr. McFadden seconded the motion the vote was 5- 1. Mr. Russo voting against. Mrs. Cavicchi, Mr. Dahl, Mr. Griset, Mr. McFadden, Mr. Twomey voting for. Mr. Griset stated that he does not know how much we will benefit from a second interview. Regular Session 7 March 18.2003 Mr. Dahl moved to direct the Sunerintendent to contact Joan Lanesam of Brackett and Lucas and Gadsby Hannah to obtain council regarding contract information and contract cost information. Mr. McFadden seconded the motion. The vote was 5 -1 with Mr. Russo voting no. Mrs. Cavicchi, Mr. Dahl, Mr. Griset, Mr. McFadden, Mr. Twomey voting for. The Superintendent asked the Committee Members to submit to him in writing by Friday afternoon a list of things that the firms to be interviewed needed to be prepared to do. He in turn would forward the list to the firms. B13LS & PAYROLL There were no bills and payroll. GIFTS There were no gifts. CITIZEN'S INPUT Mrs. Phillips stated that three finalists are required. Dr. Harutunian stated that Mr. Flaherty from the Inspector General's Office and Town Council stated there was no mandate to do this. Mrs. Mandell asked if the "vote yes poster" was paid by Flansburgh. Mr. Dahl stated that no Reading funds were used to pay for the poster. At 10:30 Mr. Russo made a motion to adiourn. Mr. McFadden seconded the motion. The vote was 6 -0. Mrs. Cavicchi, Mr. Dahl, Mr. McFadden, Mr. Griset, Mr. Twomey, Mr. Russo. Respectfully Submitted, Harry K. Harutunian, Ph.D. Superintendent of Schools