Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-1219_SSMINMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION December 19, 2000May 17, 2000May 17, 2000May 17, 2000May 17, 2000May 17, 2000May 17, 2000May 17, 2000 Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street Council Chambers, 1175 East Main StreetCouncil Chambers, 1175 East Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Shaw called the meeting to order at 2:10 p.m. ATTENDANCE Councilors Laws, Hauck, Wheeldon, Reid, and Fine were present. Staff present included City Administrator Greg Scoles, Administrative Services Dick Wanderschied, City Attorney Paul Nolte, Community Development Director John McLaughlin, Mayor-elect Alan DeBoer, Council-Elect Cate Hartzell and John Morrison. ASHLAND LIBRARY PROJECT UPDATE SERA Architects presented a scope of changes totaling $585,715 in the goal of reducing the construction budget. The reduction does not impact library programming, and does allow for the completion of the project. The SERA Architect representative clarified that a perimeter drainage system is planned, and the under-slab drainage system was an additional precaution under the new addition. Removal of the added precaution will not damage the project. The SERA Architect representative explained that the projected goal is 100 years of longevity. With that requirement, a zinc roof was chosen. Reducing the cost of the project required choosing a metal roof with a 20-year longevity. The mechanical needs were met with geothermal wells, reducing long-term maintenance costs, however, the number of geothermal wells that were needed sharply increased costs. This was not anticipated, but had it been, the architects would have designed the plan as it is currently. There is no fundamental change to the heating system. Nolte explained that a negotiation could be made with a low bidder unless the scope of the project is significantly changed. The SERA Architect representative does not believe that the scope of the project has significantly changed. The re-evaluation of the project has resulted in alterations that could have been used in the original plan if the architects had been aware of them. DeBoer voiced his concern regarding the lack of competitive bidding. The roofing changes will not be open to bidding if the contract is signed with the low bidder, even though the roofing system is not the same type as originally bid. He is concerned that there may be a chance for litigation. The SERA Architect representative explained that pre-qualification was set for contracting. Roofing materials will be changed, but the roofing system will remain the same. This does not characterize a significant change. A significant change could be characterized as a switch from a metal to a shingle roof. He is confident that changes in the longevity of the roof will not harm the integrity of the entire project. He answered questions for council regarding savings, including painting alternatives, a temporary wall, and simplification of the sprinkler system. In addition, there is a possible saving by reducing the construction schedule from 18 to 14 months. Nolte explained the time and expense that would be involved in putting the project out to bid again. By sending the project out to pre-qualified contractors, new bids could be received in five days. There is no guarantee these bids would be better. The SERA Architect representative clarified that contingency was set at ten percent, which is more than enough to cover any unexpected expenses. The new bus stop is not part of the project because it requires a substantial change. It is not a reduction, but an addition to the project. RVTD has money to put toward the development of a bus stop at the library. Parking has been an issue from the very beginning. All options have been explored. The proposed plan is the best that can be provided due to the topography of the site. Council engaged in a general discussion of parking in the downtown area. Nolte clarified that there is always a possibility of litigation if the project does not come up for re-bid, but he feels there is slim chance of this occurrence. The SERA Architect representative stated the new library meets the problematic requirements for growth. One way to measure room for growth is how full the shelves are and how much space is available for quiet reading and informational technology. The shelves will be partially empty when this project is completed, which allows for growth as more books are added to the collection. He explained that parking in regard to expected community growth is an issue the people of Ashland will need to decide. One parking space was lost to a diesel generator required for emergency elevator support. Diesel was found to be safer and more cost efficient. Location requirements for the generator were taken into consideration when determining the placement. A flat site is easier to build on than a sloped site during the foundation placement phase, but after it is completed construction is the same. In addition, building around trees is more difficult. Over all cost per square foot is no more and no less than a new building. Growth of the library is parallel to the growth of the community. Parking needs also parallel growth as well. Specific users of the meeting rooms at the library have not been identified. It is possible that community groups using these rooms would require parking in addition to the patrons using the library. Additional parking will be available at the completion of the Fire Station project. Safety needs to be reviewed in regard to crossing Siskiyou Blvd in order to reach the library. If someone challenged the project on the basis that there has been a substantial change, the determination would come from the county bond council. Current requirements state that any change over $25,000 requires a bid process. The proposed changes are over $400,000. Hartzell voiced her on concerns of limited parking. The county representative responded to Hartzell's questions regarding location. Proceeds, in relation to this bond, can only be spent at the Carnegie site. DeBoer supports the Carnegie site, but he is concerned about not sending this out for a re-bid. He feels a delay in construction will not raise costs. He is concerned with parking and requests a redesign for parking. He urged council to hire an oversight construction manager, but the money is not in the budget for this. Based on all these issues, he does not feel that a contract should be signed. He suggested not spending all the money and turning the excess over to Jackson County for over-runs from other sites. If the Ashland project runs over, the money will not come from the county, but from Ashland taxpayers. Morrison stated he wants a library that will provide a service through growth. He does not want to see the project rushed ahead without a compelling reason. He agrees with DeBoer's concerns regarding parking and construction. The county representative stated he contacted the bond lawyers. There is room for small alterations in square footage, as long as it is ten percent or less of the overall building. The only definitive answer regarding "substantial changes" would have to come from a court. A decision could be made within three to four weeks. He explained that there could be an arbitrage problem, but it would be insignificant. Arbitrage means the City cannot sell bonds, collect funds, and then make money off the interest by sitting on the principle. Ronnie Budge urged the council not to reduce the size of the proposed library. She explained that there is no on-site parking at the Medford Library, only street parking. The site is located on a level site, making walking much easier. The Medford Urban Renewal Agency is working with the library system to provide parking. Three or four large general public parking lots will be located very near the library. The SERA Architect representative answered the councils' questions regarding re-bidding. The possibility of a new bid coming in higher is there, but it is difficult to tell at this point. The project needs to go out to all the bidders. Value engineering is very important in getting a better bid. Nolte explained that the majority of the bond money must be spent in two years. The longer the delay, the larger the arbitrage problem. The current bid is valid until December 24. Shaw noted that a better time for construction is during the off-peak tourism season. In order to meet the tight timetable, the project would have to go out to bid immediately in order for construction to begin in June. The meeting was adjourned at 3:50 p.m. Submitted by Barbara Christensen City Recorder/Treasurer Council Study Session 12/19/00 Page 2 of 4