MINUTES

LITCHFIELD SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE

LITCHFIELD INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL LIBRARY

SEPTEMBER 2, 2004

A meeting of the Litchfield School Building Committee was held on Thursday, September 2, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the Litchfield Intermediate School Music Room.

Present were: Jack Healy, Chairman; Mac Bramley; Bill Buckley; John Mullen Jeff Zullo, Gary Waugh, Kent Gilyard, Stacie Kavle and Lynn Chapmen.

Also Present: Peg Perusse; John Tindall-Gibson; Tim Breslin; Anne Stillman; BOE Members, Frank Simone, Wayne Shuhi, Don Falcetti and Diane Knox; Leo Paul; Richard Munday and Steve Collins of Herbert S. Newman Partners; Greg Oneglia and Bruce Geban of O & G Industries; Public and the Press.

Meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM Jack Healy

Approval of Minutes

Motion was made by Stacie Kavle to approve the minutes of the August 19, 2004 meeting, seconded by B. Buckley.

Motion Carried. All votes were in the affirmative. There were no abstentions.

Public Participation

None

Communication

Jack Healy received two communications from Architect which he emailed to all members of the Building Committee (“BC”).

Jack Healy received an email from Alan Landau requesting a second public participation at the end of the meeting.

Motion was made by Mac Bramley to add item 10A, a supplemental Public Participation to tonight’s agenda, seconded by Gary Waugh.

Discussion

If people want to stay, we should answer their questions. If someone comes in late and misses part of the presentation, we shouldn’t allow them to ask questions.

Motion Carried. All votes were in the affirmative except Bill Buckley and Jeff Zullo who voted in the negative. There were no abstentions.

Architect and Construction Manager Present Estimates for C-5 Design – Greg Oneglia

All members were given the C-5 estimate for Litchfield High School (“LHS”) and the estimate on Litchfield Intermediate School (“LIS”). The cost is over the $33M budget by $3.8M. The BC did their job, as the Architect and BC proposed things the Construction Manager (“CM”) reacted. You now have just about everything wanted by the Town in this plan. If we can afford them, good; if not you can cut back. When the project was conceived a second story addition was in the plan with nothing to the front of the school. There was no reason for the site work in the budget. As the project evolved changes were made. One of the big drivers of the overage is: site work of $1M; sprinkler system, which we were not planning for the entire buildings, of $800K; and the tremendous increase of steel, oil and lumber, 5 – 10% in material price increases.

Greg Oneglia passed out possible changes to reduce the price:

eliminating site and sprinklers in all but the new construction;

using existing stairwell in new addition LIS;

no expansion of the stage at LIS;

change the connector to the cafeteria to a canopy connector.

With ideas like that, the savings was $1.5M over of the LIS budget.

Until this estimate, O & G has never had a set of drawings where we can quantify the materials being used. We estimate what we see on the drawings, but we also carry an Estimate Contingency. As the drawings evolve the Contingency will decrease and costs will increase.

Richard Munday – We know that we are over budget and understand where. He distributed an additional list of items where savings can take place. This list did not have savings estimates and the BC asked that the Architect come back with the list formatted similar to O & G’s list, with the proposed savings next to the suggested cut. The primary suggestion related to Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing systems and they suggested saving money by examining the systems to find out if any can be saved and rehabilitated.

Workshop Session for C-5 design Estimate

Litchfield Intermediate School

Gary Waugh - What is the average age of the facilities in the schools and what is the life span if it is upgraded or rehabilitated.

Steven Collins – The equipment at each school is a different age. At LIS the equipment is the age of the building. At LHS the equipment related to the different additions done on the building. I don’t think we can guarantee a 20 year life span for the equipment that remains.

Bill Buckley – We need to have some idea of how long the rehabilitated equipment will last. Is there a chance within one year that we have to replace the boilers?

Richard Munday – We are only recommending that this is a way to save money. We have not yet evaluated all the equipment. This is what we are proposing, to go down this path.

Bill Buckley – You make these recommendations, we have to have a better answer about life span than what you gave us.

Mac Bramley – The 18 inch drain in the courtyard is not working as it should. I don’t see that drains have been looked at. The roof needs to be replaced. It is in critical condition. There is a warranty and we can negotiate so we can reduce the cost to replace it.

Steven Collins – We can minimize the cost of the roof via state requirements for minimum roof pitches. When you take an existing roof structure such as the one at LIS, a ½” pitch per foot is very costly. A drainage system is not required.

Richard Munday – We need to look at other ways to save money and look for another approach.

Mac Bramley – Because I don’t have the estimate for D-5 I feel uncomfortable talking about LHS. This numbers here at LIS were a surprise. Several of us spoke about locating the administration wing in the front of the building, between just behind the front entrance and the Auditorium, knocking out part of the corridor and building partially into the courtyard. The challenge is getting equipment in to do the work. There is a 12 foot clearance, which is tight but adequate to get equipment in and out.

Jeff Zullo – Mac’s point would save significant amount of construction and site work.

Mac Bramley – The existing stage is as deep as any theatre consultant would recommend. Is it possible to put in a modified lean-to and punch two doors in it? Then you can walk in and out of the building.

Kent Gilyard – I think not putting a roof on this building (LIS) would be a last resort. We have had nothing but leaky roofs for 25 years.

Bill Buckley – The main criticisms that the first building committee received was not doing anything with the roof. I would like to see a built up roof. I have some specs for such a roof.

Jeff Zullo – The LIS expansion as planned at about 7600 SF and now it is 8512 SF. Why?

Richard Munday – Probably because we go from inside wall to outside wall and the estimator goes from outside wall to outside wall.

Stacie Kavle – Looking at what we have and what we are trying to ascertain, what can be reused and what need to be replaced? How quickly would you be able to get back to us so we can make a decision?

Steve Collins – I would like to think it can be done within a few weeks; within three (3) weeks time we can provide a good amount of information to make decisions.

Gary Waugh – How pragmatic is an open air connector [to the cafeteria] and how would it function in the middle of the winter? Will there be indoor access?

Richard Munday – Students at private schools go outside during the winter to travel to classes. In public schools, during the winter, we try to keep students inside. For a health standpoint there is no data about kids who go to private school versus kids who go to public schools. We are also suggesting keeping the stairwell from the gym.

Gary Waugh – The students would have to then walk through the Gym, a learning space, which is not an optimum scenario.

Jack Healy – Did you think about security?

Richard Munday – It would be necessary for the staff to supervise.

Mac Bramley – The students will need coats in the middle of winter. Functionally, an open air connector won’t work. I have always heard concerns about the windows, plumbing and air quality. This project, it has to look new, clean and fresh when completed.

Richard Munday – We are not suggesting that this will look less new than otherwise. We are looking at savings money on the scope of the project. If we can be very forensic in studying the M/P/E systems, we can save money. We may want to do research past renovation on equipment and how they lasted and whether the schools were happy.

Bill Buckley – I would like to hear a better explanation of what we are looking at. Are these choices or are they suggestions.

Greg Oneglia – After generating the budget, we kicked around ideas to realize savings. If you go with C-5, you have a $3.5M problem. What we have to do together is come up with a list to reduce the cost.

Bill Buckley – This is normal activity. We are either going to be over or under budget. The other point that Mac made was very important. This BC went through a public exercise to hear what they have to say. It is important that we listen to their concerns. M/P/E need to be addressed and at the top of the list. What if we didn’t expand anything, just renovate? I would like to see evaluation done, eliminating the office and library at LIS and same at LHS; the guidance office. We are building it at the expense of the students.

Richard Munday – The program requires space for classrooms.

Bill Buckley – If we need classrooms, build and renovate classrooms.

Mac Bramley – Can we get from O & G a list of things we talked about with savings amounts?

Jeff Zullo – In these estimates we are carrying an additional contingency.

Greg Oneglia – When we get to his level of drawings we add this estimate contingency. New addition is $156 per SF, it was prices at $165 per SF historically. As these drawings evolve, the design estimate contingency will disappear and the dollars will go into that SF cost.

Bill Buckley – We should consider not building the office and media center; that would save a lot of money.

Gary Waugh – We are governed by the fact that we need to meet the Ed Specs.

Bill Buckley – Maybe you have to modify the Ed Specs to get the job done.

Greg Oneglia - We are pricing eliminating site work and sprinklers to save money.

Jack Healy – We have to put sprinklers in the new addition.

Steve Collins – If no significant modification is made in the Auditorium we would only need sprinklers in the new addition. The money for the fields was not considered in this estimate.

Greg Oneglia – I thought you were supplying a hose to the fields, I didn’t think we were supplying an irrigation system.

Jeff Zullo – The Playing Fields have decided to tap into the town water; the irrigation demand is more recent.

Greg Oneglia – In the budget we are now carrying $94K for fences for the playing fields. Now, if you are talking about an irrigation system, this is driving the budget up.

Bill Buckley – If we don’t have to do sprinkler work we don’t need to upgrade water line. Site work is eliminated.

Jack Healy – Have you left money in the budget to resurface the parking lots?

Greg Oneglia – No, we will protect the parking lots.

Jack Healy – I hope for the next meeting we can have the two lists of proposed savings put together in O & G’s format.

Bill Buckley – We have to do something for the theater. I like the lean-to idea. I don’t think we want to vote for these ideas now. Let’s get a cost evaluation and then we can choose.

Jack Healy – I think there has to be research done, something like the tank, we may have to remove it after so many years. We also should talk to the Fire Marshall about the sprinkler system.

Richard Munday – The Fire Marshall has a lot of discretionary authority. Even if we don’t need sprinklers, he may require something just as costly to offset it.

Mac Bramley – If the Town wanted to find an alternative way to fund fences at the Playing Fields, we can use this money somewhere else. The main water line can be donated to Aquarian and they could take care of it.

Bill Buckley – We should look at a hydraulic analysis. Is the capacity limited because of size or because of crud inside the pipes. If we clean it out, will that improve the flow enough?

Steve Collins – We have done a flow test. The problem is residual pressure.

Mac Bramley – That is Aquarian’s problem. It is the main pressure that falls off when you open it.

Gary Waugh – I hope when you bring information back to us, I hope you will have talked to the staff in that department before the expansion is eliminated.

Jack Healy – If we reduce the scope of the project, can we reduce some of the consultants?

Bill Buckley – We should carry an allowance for paving the parking lots. I think the Town made it clear that they wanted storage for the theater and a way to move from stage left to stage right. Also, I would like to see the curtain separated from the rigging. I also like Mac’s idea of putting administration up front.

Stacie Kavle – The cafeteria does not have a full working kitchen. The plan shows a full working kitchen. That may be something we can modify.

Peg Perusse – Presently it is operating in a very small space as a full working kitchen.

Jack Healy – I won’t compromise on roofs. We heard air quality is a concern and we have to improve it.

Jeff Zullo – Are you planning to take out the carpeting and replace it with vinyl title?

Gary Waugh – In the areas where there as been water damage, it have been replaced or cleaned. It is premium quality carpet and can be lifted up and put back down anywhere.

Wayne Shuhi – What do we have projected for portable classrooms?

Greg Oneglia - $500K.

Wayne Shuhi – It is not beyond the realm of possibility to move a grade to the Center School during construction.

Litchfield High School

Jeff Zullo– When we made a decision to forward D-5 to cost it out, it was clear then that D-5 was less costly then C-5. We are going to have a lower cost estimate. Working on LHS now is redundant.

Bill Buckley – We have to give O & G an opportunity to give us the price of D-5. I would like to see if we can massage C-5. If we have savings at LHS we can apply it here to LIS. I would like to go through the exercise of looking at cost savings at LHS now.

Richard Munday – It was our intent in July to go with the D-5 plan, with the new gymnasium or a default renovated gym.

Jeff Zullo – C-5 with four cost savings ideas - this cost is with a new gymnasium and new mechanicals

Richard Munday – D-5 was more efficient because of the location of the boiler room. The value of D-5 is that is has the default to a renovated gym. The school administration thought it was a better plan. Estimating C-5 was not for the purpose of pursuing the concept, but to have an estimating exercise.

Stacey Kavle – I voted to switch to D-5 because of the default.

Jack Healy – I voted to switch to D-5 because there was an anticipated savings because of the mechanicals. I think we are within a whisker of coming within budget on C-5; D-5 should be a greater savings.

Greg Oneglia – D-5 creates a separate campus for the 7-8graders, puts the gym where the existing gym is, which creates a default, intellectually we thought there would be savings because of mechanicals.

Bill Buckley – We are in the development stage where we are engineering this . We need to look at costs. To say we have to stay with the D-5 plan, that is ridiculous. We are not going to sit here and go down a road which might be more expensive. We want to see an analysis like we did tonight.

Lynn Chapmen – I am curious how binding the agreement was to go with D-5. You put us in a corner.

Jeff Zullo – My criticism of the Architect, forcing that decision, we do not have estimated to make that decision.

Richard Munday – I think we are having this conversation prematurely.

The BC reviewed O & G’s proposed cost savings ideas at LHS.

Bill Buckley – I would like to see an allowance for site work at LHS. Eliminating sprinkler is okay as long as it is approved by the Fire Marshall. We need the cost of Newman’s narrative and a detailed evaluation of the mechanicals we want to reuse.

Jeff Zullo – We have furniture, equipment, telephone systems and $542K for technology. We are driving program and SF reductions and we have these numbers for technology. We are not sure where they came from. I don’t want to carry numbers that have no meaning.

John Tindall-Gibson – We can cost out number for furniture, equipment , telephone and technology.

Jeff Zullo – We have a bonding plan. I will try to come back in two weeks with that plan.

Invoice Approval Discussion

Mac Bramley – I met with the new Fiscal Control Office and Stacey Dionne today. I should be able to bring back something for consideration at the next meeting.

Schedule

Richard Munday – I can not comment on it at this point. Bill Buckley – Are you proceeding with D-5? Richard Munday – Yes. Bill Buckley – We need the numbers. Jack Healy – In July we gave the Architect the go ahead with D-5 with the default and savings because of the mechanicals. Mac Bramley – D-5 was the preferred plan of the administration.

Motion was made by Bill Buckley to put D-5 on hold until the BC can do a cost comparison with C-5 and make a decision, seconded by Zullo

Motion Carried. All votes were in the affirmative. There were no abstentions.

Playing Fields

Jeff Zullo – The track and lower area will be excavated this fall and the upper fields will be started in the winter. The plan is to have track and lower fields ready for fall of 2005. I will discuss with Tim Callahan and Ed Fabbri about the irrigation system.

Public Participation

Alan Landau – I have been reading the minutes. It seems there is a lot of arrogance and uncertainty about what is going on. It seems that Newman is not doing what is requested of them. I am concerned about maintaining existing mechanicals. If that is the way to go. I am concerned about what the reimbursement will be.

Wayne Shuhi – Thanks, I appreciate everyone’s hard work.

Motion to adjourn was made by Mac Bramley at 9:55 PM, seconded by Lynn Chapmen.

Motion Carried. All votes were in the affirmative. There were no abstentions.

Respectfully submitted,

Kelli L. Green

Recorder