MINUTES
LITCHFIELD SCHOOLS BUILDING COMMITTEE
LITCHFIELD INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL LIBRARY
April 20, 2006
A meeting of the Litchfield Schools Building Committee was held on Thursday April 20, 2005 at 7:00 PM in the Litchfield Intermediate School Library.
Present: Jack Healy, Chairman, Stacie Kavle, Mac Bramley, Gary Waugh, Lynn Chapman
Also in attendance: Dr. Dom Vita, Superintendent, Wayne Shuhi and Frank Simone, BOE members, Dr. Timothy Breslin, Principal; Louis Rosenblatt, O&G Project Manager; Melissa Corey, O&G Project Engineer, Cynthia Politano, Finance Director; Richard Munday, Peter Bowman, HSN representatives and members of the public.
Chairman, Jack Healy called the meeting to order at 7:10 PM
Motion was made by Mac Bramley to approve the minutes of the February 16, 2006 meeting. Seconded by Gary Waugh. Motion Carried. All votes were in the affirmative except Lynn Chapman who abstained.
Motion was made by Gary Waugh to approve the minutes from the March 16, 2006 meeting subject to corrections. Seconded by Stacie Kavle. Motion Carried. All votes were in the affirmative.
Communication:
Jack stated that he had received several e-mails that he forwarded to all members. Christopher Canfield has submitted a letter of resignation. Jack will check with Town Clerk, Evelyn Goodwin for the name of the next person to serve as an alternate. He also responded to Betsy Glassman’s e-mail regarding the silt fencing. He did make an inspection of the area in question as well as stating that Louis is keeping a report on his inspections which are being done a minimum of three times per week.
Finance Update:
Mac Bramley presented bills to be paid:
Mac Bramley made a motion for payment to D.T.C. as presented. Seconded by Gary Waugh.
Discussion began with Gary questioning how they were involved in whatever was discovered and were they the responsible contractor? DTC is the contractor who was the low bidder for the monitoring contract. Louis explained that DTC is the sub-contractor, Eagle Environment, is the contractor. He has sent a letter to Eagle to question why in the NESHAP/FORENSIC------------ report the boiler room, scope of project and areas in LIS were not included. We realize suspect materials exist or unforeseen material (i.e. behind walls) but why we are notified after the fact is puzzling. It is costing more money because it was not scoped. Mac felt the total so far that has been paid is $46,579.00. Jack advised this was from the Eagle invoices for DTC. Gary asked if this amount was from the original work of plan. Mac responded in the affirmative and that the plan is 100% paid, and in the scope they were to identify and define the procedure for the bid. Gary asked if the other areas behind walls etc should be done? Jack advised yes but the concern in the band area was clearly marked but not done. Louis advised the scope document vs. the Neshap report and that the contractors are stopping us when find new spots. Peggy asks if all was encapsulated and was told yes. Jack explained the invoice is for clearance work done in January was approved when done and Louis added the work was completed as three different projects (1-LIS, 2-LHS) for reoccupancy and analysis. Jack expressed if the work was done there is an obligation to pay the invoices. Vote was taken and motion carried. All were in the affirmative. There were no abstentions.
Motion made by Mac Bramley for payment to Atty. Peter Herbst in the amount of $180. Seconded by Stacie Kavle. Jack explained the entire amount should go to LHS only because it was for the survey of the area not being staked properly. He asked Peggy to correct the invoice. Motion carried. All members in the affirmative. There were no abstentions.
Seconded by Gary Waugh. Jack asked what the work was for and Louis responded that it is their obligation to send a special inspector to check both building. Motion Carried. All votes
were in the affirmative. There were no abstentions.
the LIS project.
Motion made by Stacie Kavle to authorize payment to the Town Of Litchfield in the amount of $3,320.00, seconded by Lynn Chapman. Motion carried. Affirmative: Gary Waugh, Stacie Kavle, Lynn Chapman, Jack Healy. Against: Mac Bramley.
Mac Bramley motioned to authorize payment of invoice # 15787 in the amount of $14,945.47 for contract administration and for copies to Herbert S. Newman, seconded by Stacie Kavle. Discussion was centered on the amount of $3,602.92 for copies. Richard stated the copies were printed about one month ago. These drawings were done to incorporate the addendums and changes, the trailer and bus turn-around locations. Jack requested a copy of the drawing. Louis stated he went thru the drawings with the contractor and the addendum was not incorporated. He will talk to Bruce about this. Richard stated the purpose was to expedite the project. Lynn asked why the contractors didn’t have a copy? Louis stated they had just the 9/23/05 bid set and was labeled for December 5th. Jack then asked where the sets are and suggested talking to Brook to see who got them. Lynn moved to amend the motion on the floor to pay the monies owed to Herbert S Newman minus the printing cost because of the missing drawings and to empower the Chair to pay the amount of the coping if the drawings are found and distributed. Seconded by Gary Waugh. Motion Carried. All votes were in the affirmative. There were no abstentions.
Technology Update:
Dr. Vita advised the committee that the tech team had planned on coming on April 6th but because of the cancellation they did not, however they will present at the next meeting. He is still checking on the location of the outlets, CAT6 vs Cat5, where the old cable will be used and where the new will be and what to do with what is left. The equipment etc. is being resolved and several RFI’s have been issued and Louis has responded to them. Louis explained his understanding is that from the design people CAT5 will be used as a supplement only and CAT6 will be used. Jack question what is being used now, Dom advised CAT5. Wayne Shuhi recalls LHS receiving all new CAT6 and LIS remaining on CAT5. Jack question if the school had any intention to become wireless. Wayne explained the term of a wireless infrastructure and that the schools will stay hard wired and he does not know of any resolution to date on the CAT5or6 issue and will ask the technology department what they recommend. Wireless is more difficult in an education environment, it does have security issues, auto-video is not fast enough etc.
Architect Update:
Richard stated there was not much to report and presented a packet on change orders and on Change Order #1. He then went on to explain the package making the following points:
The scope of the actual work is less, the realization that more of the work was in other areas in the document, that in every project construction contingency is not defined but carries as a percent. He also gave a memo from their consultant (CES) explaining each item in the recent proposed change orders. Richard stated they do not get involved in phasing or the issue of keeping three classrooms open at LHS during construction.
Study/NE
Gary asked why these things were missed on the Forensic/Neshap and Richard stated he was not prepared to discuss that because he did not know how it was stated in the contract. He felt the existing conditions survey work was done and did do some forensic work but didn’t include digging up, so it was not preformed during the design and not paid for. He then asked if the contingency in the construction budget would be able handle this type of discovery? Richard then stated if the school was not occupied it would be cheaper but he was told the students could not be moved out so there was the need to relocate the data closet.
Jack commented that the committee wanted to know what this was about even though has been already approved and not holding anything up. He then explained it is the committee’s responsibility to the town to minimize change orders and to be sure we are getting the best for the dollars spent.
Richard stated he believes there is a misinterpretation of the original document and distributed drawing of the old location showing pipes that they missed but claims they were never there, demolition of heating lines and relocation of these are part of the change order and partially caused by phasing. He felt that at times people are not aware of certain language in their contract that addresses such issues. They want to take responsibility, feels their drawings are solid, not perfect and not expected or required to be error free. Will work with the committee to identify problems. Contract also states substitutions & changes are additional services and therefore allows for them to ask for additional compensation. Our intention is when other issues come up and we feel we will be seeking additional compensation we will notify you and give you time to respond. Jack stated we decided to have both signatures (Arch. & CM), and Richard stated from this point, if change order is of significance, he will notify Jack if more money will be asked for. Mac asked if notification will include time & materials and the answered was yes either time & material or a lump sum number. Jack asked for a means of communication. Richard suggested e-mailing, and Mac questioned if 5 days are given for the change order to be acted on because the committee are volunteers and would need that as a minimum time frame. Richard agreed. Jack stated he does not want the project to stop because of a request for more details and would like the rate of the person on the job included in the request. Richard assured it will not stop the project just will put the issue on the table for the record & review. Mac stated do have procedures but still needs a clarification to us.
Richard gave samples of materials for Lynn & Peggy to choose from.
Louis stated the CM log has been issued and on handout #6, courtyard utility cost issue is being negotiated with the contractor. Number 2 on O&G handout the suggested money was $9,280 which he handed back with a return of a lesser cost and once he gets that back he will give the information to the architect for their commentary, will then renegotiate and then will issue change order request. The contract has two means of accepting, change order by contract unit price, or lump sum amount that is mutually agreed on. Their goal is to resolve the change order to the least amount the relocation of utilities, has come in at $119,000 and will renegotiate.
Jack requested a meeting between O&G, Newman and himself and will set that up later together. Mac motioned to empower the chair to meet with HSN & O&G at his earliest convenience and report back to the committee so we can discuss and define change orders. Seconded Lynn Chapman. The motion carried. There were no abstentions.
Jack asked if an update on the budget analysis was ready and was told not yet.
Stacie advised the group that a tie of a motion is a failed motion.
Stacie then motioned to change the material on the outside of the LIS addition from metal to glass at a cost of $28,000. Seconded Gary Waugh. Jack requested comments from the BOE members as to the spending of the additional $20,000. Dom, Don Falcetti and Wayne all agree they are more motivated to have the money spent on educational issues and early in the project to start spending extra money. Gary stated at the BOE meeting in April it was discussed and the majority was in favor of the glass siding. Mac feels the timing is terrible for this one and questioned if something that could support either metal or glass could be put up and allow us more time to make this decision. Lynn feels the esthetics is important to people and making it more attractive is important. Richard states their view is very considerable and the savings from the floor issue could offset the extra glass cost. HSN strongly recommend going with the glass. Jack questions because of the conversation about the wiring in the building that might be a better location to spend that money. Gary is hoping to revisit money issue because other items were removed from the project would rather see those put back in those that have more of an educational benefit. Jack stated Bill said at the first meeting he would like to have a menu of items to think about, FF&E) and know how and when to let the contingency go. Stacie feels we need to decide tonight, either it is valuable or it isn’t. It will be no less valuable in the future. Gary feels glass does make a difference in how the school will be viewed. Mac asked to call the question. Vote for: Stacie Kavel, Lynn Chapman, Gary Waugh, Against: Mac Bramley, Jack Healy. Motion carried.
Future Agenda Items:
None
Motion to adjourn was made by Mac Bramley at 9:15 PM, seconded by Gary Waugh. Motion Carried. All votes were in the affirmative. There were no abstentions.
Respectfully submitted,
Elisa C. Bauer
Recorder