Loading...
2006-05-24 Regular Meeting Minutes Architectural/Engineering Review Board 24 May 2006 6:00pm KIB Assembly Chambers ~IE~IE~WIIE~ AUG - 2 2006 0 I BOROUGH CLERK'S OFFICE A. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by the Chair at 6:02 pm. B. Roll Call ARB Members present were Scott Arndt, Jerrol Friend, Gregg Hacker, Charlie Jerling, Jay Johnston, Reed Oswalt and Brent Watkins. Representing the KIB Engineering and Facilities Department were Bud Cassidy, Ken Smith and Sharon Lea Adinolfi. Representing the School District was Robert Tucker. C. Approval of Agenda It was moved and seconded to approve the Agenda as amended, adding discussion re pool filtration following the interviews. There was a unanimous affirmative roll call vote. D. Presentation/Interview - Porath Tatom - Proposer, RFP#l for Various SeismicIBond Projects on Borough Hill The Chair welcomed the group from Porath Tatom and Bill Tatom, Project Principal in Charge introduced his team members: Dennis Berry, SE, BBFM, Walt Bulloch, Project Architect and Vice President of Porath Tatom and Paul Baril, Technical Assistant from Porath Tatom. B. Tatom reviewed the firm's qualifications noting that PIT is a small firm, approachable and with longtime experience working together on small projects as well as projects up to $14 million. A small firm allows for multi tasking - stem team is cooperative and responsive. PIT has constructed many schools. Mr. Tatom reviewed the Scope of Work indicating that seismic upgrades were the priority - looking at multiple projects to be accomplished over the next 3+ years. He emphasized vocational training as being very important. Key Concems:Establishing programs and solutions Validating cost estimates Prioritization and budget control Construction bid timing Well thought out phasing Dennis Berry continued the presentation speaking to the seismic issues. BBFM would handle the structural side of the Project. He reviewed past projects in Kodiak, reviewed seismic upgrade projects noting that the team had experience understanding, evaluating \\dove\Departments\EF\Architectural Review Board\Minutes ARB 24 May 2006.doc Page 1 of4 and completing seismic upgrades. He noted the key to seismic design/upgrade is accurate detailing and analysis and that building behavior needs to be coordinated w/ architectural/mechanical/electrical engineers. B. Tatom continued, saying D. Berry is a top notch structural engineer in the State of Alaska. He reviewed similarly scoped projects. He noted that the team had become very familiar with the existing Building Code. His team used design rendering 3-D software- allows Owner to really "see" how a design will look. He continued with a review of additions/renovations projects - involving multiple projects - required good phasing approach. He noted that theirs is a versatile office - working on a variety of projects has allowed for the development of varied expertise. His firm is uniquely qualified in rehabilitation of special ed facilities. Integration of mechanical and electrical engineering will be important in this project. S. Arndt thanked the group for their presentation and moved to the question and answer phase. E. Presentation/Interview - Jensen Yorba Loti Inc. - Proposer, RFP#l for Various Seismic/Bond Projects on Borough Hill The next interview group was Jensen Yorba Lott Inc. Tony Yorba introduced Chris Gianotti, Senior Engineer/Principal from PND Incorporated. He began by saying that they are "coastal engineers" and have worked on 69 school projects over the last five years. He reviewed the projects - joint use projects, vocational/technical projects and vocational facilities. He showed a list of other team members - multi disciplinary, included a life cycle costs specialist and an energy engineer. They are experts at distance delivery. Chris Gianotti will lead the seismic engineering aspect of the Project. C. Gianotti reviewed project status and goals - said they would do additional analysis and look for alternative solutions [to seismic upgrade issues]. He said it was his experience that a successful project is in the "details, details, details". His overall goal would be for better seismic performance and life safety at a reasonable cost. T. Y orb a continued the presentation. He reviewed renovation process methodology: confirm conditions, identify financing, prioritize improvements, seek grant agency approval, manage construction documents and manage construction to "move in" [completion]. T. Y orba concluded by recommending a uniform upgraded appearance to all buildings - curb appeal; noted this firms' strong relationship with DEED and their history was one of being on time, under budget and having minimal change orders. They are experts in coastal design, most experienced, most predictable outcome, most reliable service. He thanked the Board for its time. Questions and answers. \\dove\Departments\EF\Architectural Review Board\Minutes ARB 24 May 2006.doc Page 2 of 4 A recess was called at 10:00 pm and the meeting was reconvened at 10: 1 0 pm. Discussion: R. Tucker said that he felt Y orba gave a good presentation and that he had worked with him before. J. Johnston rated Yorba and USKH as 1st and 2nd ["actually pretty even"] Porath Tatom 3rd. G. Hacker ranked them in order - Y orba, USKH, AA C. J erling ranked them in order - Y orba, USKH, AA J. Friend ranked them in order - Y orba, USKH, Porath Tatom B. Watkins ranked them in order - Y orba, USKH, Porath Tatom K. Smith ranked them in order - USKH, Y orb a, AA B. Cassidy ranked them in order - Y orb a, USKH, AA S. Arndt ranked them in order - Y orba, USKH J. Friend moved that the ARB recommend Jensen Yorba Lott Inc. as the Board's first choice and USKH as the second choice. R. Oswalt seconded the motion. There was a unanimous roll call vote. J. Johnston commented that he would like to see the negotiations conducted with attention to "details". F. Pool Filtration R. Tucker said that the UV unit would cost approximately $25,000 - $30,000 and could be easily installed. The electrical requirements were 50 amps or more and he was waiting for additional information on this aspect. R. Oswalt said that using UV with saline is a good arrangement. It would limit the amount of chlorine in the water and the UV would help eliminate the gases in the air. He wants to upgrade to this system. R. Tucker said he was in favor of the UV system, but regarding saline - his contact person was not comfortable with using saline in a school environment - it does not have recovery capabilities [density of use]. J. Johnston asked R. Tucker to speak with the person who runs the Juneau pool- he has indicated no problems with the saline system. He also suggested speaking with the salesperson who \\dove\Departments\EF\Architectural Review Board\Minutes ARB 24 May 2006.doc Page 3 of 4 handles the products and he had a list of pools in Alaska which use the system that he would like to pass to Tuck. R. Oswalt said that more research was needed ASAP before taking this issue to the Assembly. S. Arndt said that the Board needs to be able to give cost information to the Assembly and asked R. Tucker to talk with the contacts on J. Johnston's list. G. Board Member Comments Jay commented that the process [of interviewing for projects] was getting lengthy. Perhaps one architectural firm should be hired to accomplish all the projects. S. Arndt responded that the firm selected this evening will be handling several projects over a multi year time period. He noted that there is a lot happening at the moment, but foresees activity slowing down soon. K. Smith said there was one more RFP to put out for Seismic upgrades - Peterson and Ouzinkie schools. B. Cassidy said that the Fish & Game Building would be next and information on that would be provided at the next meeting. C. Jerling asked ifthe stock questions asked of the interviewees could be revised - would like to see some new questions used next time. R. Oswalt said he felt it had been a good meeting and he would like to see the information on the pool filtration systems as soon as possible - it could be a quick and easy fix [for the existing pool]. H. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 pm. Date:4~~b Sharon Lea , Secretary KIB Engineering/Facilities Dept. S~d#' ~/rf~ Scott Arndt, Chair Architectural/Engineering Review Board Date: R - / - ;L 00-6' Cy placed in RFP#l File \\dove\Departments\EF\Architectural Review Board\Minutes ARB 24 May 2006.doc Page 4 of 4