HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/07/2005 Work Session
.
City of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 7,2005
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Room, 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, November 7,2005 at 6:20 p.m., with Mayor Leiken
presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Ballew, Fitch, Ralston, Lundberg, and Woodrow.
Councilor Pishioneri participated via cell phone. Also present were City Manager Mike Kelly,
Assistant City Manager Cynthia Pappas, City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Recorder Amy Sowa and
members of the staff.
1. Consideration of Exemption from the City of Springfield Contract Review Board Rules to
Allow Use of the Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC) Proiect Delivery
System for Construction of the Springfield Justice Center.
.
Project Manager Carole Knapel presented the staff report On this item. Oregon Revised Statutes
(ORS) allow for alternative methods of contracting when the project presents unique
construction requirements and when there are budget limitations, time constraints and a complex
project scope. The Justice Center project may benefit from use of the CM/GC strategy because
it meets these four characteristics. In order to utilize the CM/GC strategy, council must conduct
a public hearing, consider testimony, and adopt a resolution exempting the project from.
competitive bidding.
Staff initially presented the CM/GC strategy to council at a work session On April 18, and again
on October 17,2005. In order to use the CM/GC strategy, the project must meet certain
requirements, including: 1) using the CM/GC method will likely result in substantial cost savings,
and that 2) it is unlikely that the exemption will encourage favoritism or substantially diminish
competition. The attached findings and conclusions of law detail how the project meets these
requirements.
Because of statutory requirements, the timing of council meetings, and in order to give potential
proposers an opportunity to understand the project, a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the
CM/GC services has been advertised. The RFP was written in conformance with the applicable
state statutes which address requirements for CM/GC contracting. Proposals are due On
November 14, pending council approval of the CM/GC request. The Selection Committee will
include a City Councilor (as a non-voting member), Cynthia Pappas, Len Goodwin, Jerry Smith,
Rich Harrison, Dave Puent, Carole Knapel and Susanna Julber. A representative of Robertson
Sherwood will also participate. in a non-voting role. If the council approves the CM/GC request,
the Selection Committee will recommend the top-ranked firm to the council. If the council does
not approve the CM/GC request, staff will cancel the solicitation.
.
Ms. Knapel discussed the benefits of having a CM/GC during the design process. She noted that
the CM/GC would help determine which plan for the facility would be best, would look at
phasing of the project and would look at the materials to make sure they were most economical.
They would negotiate for the maximum guaranteed cost. Ms. Knapel noted that the CM/GC
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
November 7, 2005
Page 2
.
would be required to bid out all work over $100,000 and the city would see those bids. If the
total cost at the end of the project was less than the guaranteed cost, the cost savings would go to
the city. The city could use those cost savings to add other things. She discussed the justice
center and that it was a specialized construction due to security measures throughout the building
as well as on the outside.
Ms. Knapel said there were some contractors who may speak during tonight's public hearing.
One contractor may feel it was not a cost benefit to the city to use the CM/GC process and felt it
would eliminate local contractors.
Councilor Ballew asked if the Selection Committee should include a member from the fmance
department. She asked about a fee.
Ms. Knapel explained.
Mayor Leiken asked if Ms. Knapel would have anSwers when the contractor spoke during the
public hearing.
Ms. Knapel said she would. She referred to another project. that had issues the contractor might
mention. She discussed the possibility that if negotiations failed with the CM/GC, the council
could choose to go to the low bid contract process.
.
Councilor Ralston asked about the Pre-Proposal Meeting. It had already taken place on
November 1.
Councilor Woodrow asked if prior experience could be a criteria if the council chose not to go
with the CM/GC process.
Ms. Knapel said if going through the other method, they could not require prior experience in
building a justice center.
Mr. Kelly said the other process would be the lowest responsible bid. He explained. They would
be looking for someOne with experience to work with the architect in the CM/GC process.
Mr. .Leahy discussed the project and the funding issues regarding the question of whether or not
a jail would be included. The CM/GC may give more flexibility in that issue with cost savings.
He said there may not be a decision On the operations of the jail until late in the project and if it
were the standard contractor method, any changes related to adding a jail would need to be done
with an amendment to the original contract.
Ms. Knapel said if they were to go to the lowest responsible bidder, there would be a need for
consulting services regarding phasing the facility. Part of the reason for the CM/GC as part of
the team now was that they would be involved in that evaluation.
Mr. Kelly said it was up to council and their comfort level. Ifthey determined to go the
traditional way, they could do that, but it may involve more work.
.
Councilor Fitch said the agency she worked with had a number of dealings with people who had
used the CM/GC process. She said it gave more flexibility for future decisions.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
November 7,2005
Page 3
.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if the CM/GC process still gave council the ability to choose the
contractor and where applicable to use local people.
Ms. Knapel said the CM/GC would bid all the subcontractor work, but would keep the books
open to the city. There would be plenty of opportunity to use local contractors for some ofthat
work. She noted that there was COncern among local contractors that if someone came in as the
CM/GC from out of town, there would be nO opportunity for them.
Ms. Knapel acknowledged architects Jim Robertson and Carl Sherwood from
Robertson/Sherwood were in attendance. She also acknowledged Bill Hirsh, Facilities
Management Director for the 4J School District in Eugene who was also in attendance.
Councilor Lundberg said the issue wouldn't be around using the CM/GC process, but rather the
justice center experience criteria. She asked if the experience could be preferred, but not
required. She said it was conceivable that someone without justice center experience could be
chosen. She discussed changing the balance of the criteria points.
Mr. Leahy said a contractor submitting an application could also note that they would be
associated with someone experienced in building a justice center.
2. Justice Center Functional and Space Program.
.
Project Manager Carole Knapel presented the staff report On this item. On July 5,2005, the City
Council approved a contract with Liebert and Associates for the development of a Functional and
Space Program for the Justice Center Facility. This document has been drafted and reviewed
with city staff and the Community Advisory Committee. The Program was necessary to
document the requirements for the Police Department, Municipal Courts and City Jail. The work
was to be completed by January 2006 for a cost of $93,600.
The Draft Program has been completed approximately 2 months early and with a cost savings of
approximately $10,000. This Draft Program has been reviewed by the User Groups from the
Police Department, the Court and the Prosecutor's Office. These groups have requested some
minor modifications to the Program, however these modifications will not alter the total square
footage of the facility. With these modifications, the User Groups have determined that the
Program addresses their departmental requirements. The Draft Program was reviewed by the
Community Advisory Committee on October 25. Based On their review, it was the COnsenSUS of
the CAC that the City Council approve the Program as the basis for the design of the Justice
Center. The City Manager's Executive Team has also reviewed the Program. The Executive
Team requested that the Program specifically identify secure space for network infrastructure.
With this modification, the Executive Team also agreed to recommend that council approve the
Program as the basis for the design of the Justice Center. Staff will return to City Council on
November 28 to request council action. The Draft Program includes a preliminary construction
cost estimate for the cost of the new facility. This preliminary estimate indicates that the
proposed requirements as outlined in the Draft Program can be provided within the funds
available.
.
Ms. Knapel presented a power point presentation On this item which included:
· Springfield Justice Center: Gross Square Footage
· Police Department Square Footage Summary
· Overall Adjacency Diagram
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
November 7, 2005
Page 4
.
. Outbuilding Diagram
. Courts Square Footage Summary
. Judicial Adjacency Diagram (Courtroom floor)
· Judicial Adjacency Diagram (Judicial Office and Jury sets)
. Court Operations Adjacency Diagram
. City Prosecutor Adjacency Diagram
. Jail Bed Classifications
. Overall Facility Adjacency Diagram
. Jail Program
. Housing
. Construction and Project Cost Summary
. Police Department
. Courts
. 100 Bed Jail
.. Total Project Cost - Jail, Police Department & Courts
. Policy Issues fqr Consideration
Councilor Ballew asked for more information about maintenance and vehicle needs.
Staff would provide that information to council.
Ms. Knapel concluded the po~er point presentation by outlining the Policy Issues for
Consideration.
.
Mr. Kelly said there was a jail maintenance issue which staff may bring back to council in
several weeks. He discussed the possibility that Lane County may include Springfield jail
operations in their public safety proposal that they may be putting On the May 2006 ballot.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if there was a provision for a K9 facility.
Ms. Knapel said there was an outbuilding for canines and the animal shelter.
Councilor Pishioneri said some of the components of the facility might be mandated by state
statute.
Ms. Knapel said staff would bring additional details on jail operations costs to council at a later
date.
Councilor Pishioneri asked about housing female inmates and noted that if female inmates were
housed, they would need to look at staffing female officers twenty four hours a day, seven days a
week.
Mayor Leiken asked staffto also bring council information On why the cost ofthe jail could be
between $220 and $250 per foot. He said people would compare the cost with other commercial
buildings and would question why it was so much more for the jail facility.
ADJOURNMENT
.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:55 pm.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
November 7,2005
Page 5
.
.r
Minutes Recorder - Amy Sowa
Attest:
~~
Amy Sowa
City RecoI< er
.
.