MINUTES

&nb= sp;

WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

TOWN HALL ANNEX CONFERENCE ROOM

THURSDAY= , FEBRUARY 3, 2005, 5:00 P.M.

PRESENT: &= nbsp; &nbs= p; John Chipko

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Anthony Fusco

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Kevin Killeen

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Karl Kuegler, Secretary

John Orsini (arrived at 5:04 p.m.)

Robert Porter, Chairman

ABSENT: = &nb= sp; Remo Ceniccola, Vice Chairman

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Doug Leach

OTHERS PRESENT: Fred Khericha, Kaestle Boos Associates

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Richard Fusco, Town of Watertown Building Inspector<= /p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Todd LoFrese, Board of Education, Director of Operations

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Rusty Malik, Kaestle Boos Associates

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Meredith Robson, Town Manager (arrived = at 5:02 p.m.)

1.&nb= sp; Convene Regular Meeting - 5:00 P.M.

&n= bsp;

Mr. Porter, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 5:04 p.m.

&n= bsp;

2.&nb= sp; Roll Call

Mr. Porter, Chairman, executed the Roll Call.

3. = Public Participation

&nbs= p; N= one

4.&nb= sp; Discussion and Vote on Construction Management Aspects

&= nbsp; A. Suggested R.F.P.'s (attached)

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: In your packet th= ere was a suggested R.F.P. for construction management and independent commissi= oning services for review. It's not= the exact one that's going to go out, but it's the meat and potatoes with some clarifications. With that I'l= l turn it over to Rusty and Fred.

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 2

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: We've been evaluat= ing the complexity of the phasing at Swift Middle and the more we look at it the more concerned we are in terms of the bidding methodology. I think I mentioned to the Committ= ee previously, that typically what the State recommends is any time you get ov= er the $12,000,000 number that you should consider a C.M. as the method for constructing the project. I know that the Town has had a relatively difficult experience with the previous construction manager, so = we had some discussion as to what do we do, because one of our concerns is that there are not too many G.C.'s that can handle a project of this size. I had spoken to Turner and O &= G and they would all prefer to do this as a C.M., not as a G.C., so that doesn't leave us with too many options. So we thought we should get some dialogue going with the Committee. It would be our recommendation that= you go C.M. because of the advantages, we don't have to deal with low bid situations, especially when it comes to subcontractors, we can deal with phasing in a much more constructive fashion, have a lot more control over t= he people who are managing the job, it would be a team approach, and also just the quality of the subcontractors that we're going to get will be a lot better = than the G.C. that we get who will have low bid subcontractors, and from my experience once you have the low bid contractors and they further shop them= to get an even better price, and as a result you're fighting them all the way = through and you're getting poor workmanship and you're having a lot of change orders because they're trying to make up the money that they lost in the first place. So what we thought wou= ld be good is to get some, a sample R.F.P. put together for a C.M., just so you c= ould understand the type of agreement that would be put in place, and a particul= ar one that would address the issues that you had with the previous C.M., so there's not this business of you know, we're done with the job, we're out of here, we're not responsible to do anything in terms of responding to improp= er workmanship or whatever else that one may discover after the fact.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; In addition we're looking at the concept of a commissioning engineer that woul= d be there for the M.E.P, which is usually the part that you have the greatest difficulty with, mechanical/electrical/plumbing, in terms of making sure th= at the commission, all the equipment and also have the Commission in here, com= e on site during construction, so it's not that you come on at the end of it, but during construction at set periods of time and we can certainly debate and = come up with ways of structuring that, but that will give us another level of oversight on the project itself.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; As far as the architectural and structural and special inspections on the proj= ect, so there will be a special inspector, and also a testing company on site, a= nd certainly we're on site and feel very comfortable in terms of the architect= ural and (inaudible) through the building.

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 3

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; We also recommend that if you choose to go this way that we are very selective about who the people are that are on the construction, the C.M.'s team that= we not only selective (inaudible) that you go through and have them identify w= ho these individuals are. We cer= tainly work with most of the major C.M.'s and we know most of their good people; we also know some of their not so good people, so that way we can identify them and say okay, if we don’t like this certain individual or feel that person will not work well for our project, and we can tell them that we're = not going to accept that and we'll have the option to select a different indivi= dual for that purpose. Make sure t= hat they have a site superintendent, who is not in the trailer, but out on the site. Make sure who the proje= ct manager is in terms of on site representation in the trailer, and of course= the project engineer. We may look= at having them provide a site and a building superintendent too, so it doesn't have to be al the time but the majority of the time you'll have a building superintendent, but the rest of the time one would make sure that you also = have a site superintendent. You do= n't have a very large site, but there is a fair amount of site work to be done,= and so when that's happening you don't want to distract the building superintendent, we want the individual focused on the building, making sure things are being done and coordinated.&nbs= p; The site superintendent takes care of things on the site.=

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: Do we need to sta= te in the R.F.P. that we have to a have a minimum of so many people on the site, 2 site supers, and 1 person in the trailer kind of deal, cause on John Trumbu= ll, that was a huge building, it was spread out, and Fusco should have had 1 pe= rson in the trailer and at least 2 people on the site once it really got crankin= g. Swift, yea, in the beginning you m= ay not need 2 guys out in the field at the same time, but how is the C.M. going to know, cause his price obviously is going to be affected by whether he's got= to have 2 people out in the field all the time or 1 person?<= /p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: I think we should = put it in, let them know up front what we're intending.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: I think we should= cover as many bases as we can, up front, in the R.F.P.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Absolutely.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: I think it will m= ake it easier to compare apples to apples cause if Turner thinks they can get it d= one with 2 guys, and O & G says we'll staff it with 3, you're not going to = get the same price and you're also not going to get the same coverage possibly either.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Killeen: And the other th= ing we want to make sure as well is that they have the appropriate level of administrative assistance on site to record the information so that it's disseminated to us and all others on a timely basis. We know there's work going on in t= he trailer and on site, and it's all being recorded appropriately.<= /span>

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 4

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: I think those sort= of things can certainly be written into the R.F.P. To me the bigger issues, or the is= sue really that we're looking for you to make a determination on is the concept= of the C.M., and certainly any input in terms of what goes into the R.F.P, and obviously there will be a short list and an interview process so you have an opportunity to meet with all these people, and we'd like to see them all su= bmit proposals with the names of the individuals so we know up front who these people are so we can also do some (inaudible) they may have an individual we don't know anything about, but I want to know what jobs they worked on and = call up some of the people that they worked with to find out how they performed.=

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: And the other iss= ue is, which is addressed is here is the C.M. holding the contracts, instead of the Town of Watertown<= /st1:City>, so the construction manager is responsible.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: And because I've b= een through similar selection processes, the only comment they made at that time, and t= his was in an interview process I was sitting in on, they said that if they held the contracts then there was an added layer of bonding, but I'm sure we can work something out, cause each of the subs are fully bonded, and that's the only thing that they felt; beyond that most of them . . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: It definitely was= a shortcoming with J.T., was the Town holding all those contracts, not the construction manager.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Killeen: Right, cause then there was a liability issue about who maintains the responsibility thereaft= er.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: And we're trying = to get corrections and the C.M. is just, not my problem, you own the contracts.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: It makes them more responsible for making sure, they're not just saying let's pay these guys a= nd get them out of here, they'll be a little more hesitant about the final payments.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: And the reason I = asked Rich Fusco to come tonight was the fact that building inspections, we need = to address that also, we need another set of eyes up there. And seeing there is probably money= in the package for this, what would be envisioned would be a part time person,= not a full time Town employee, but one for the Swift Project. Maybe not so much in the beginning= , a lot of work in the middle of it, and then as it phases down, less and less,= but a set of eyes up there watching what is going on. Richie's department can't handle i= t.

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 5

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. R. Fusco: We'll be doing = the code section of it. They'll a= lso be checking all the special inspections. When you apply for the permit you w= ill get a list of all the approved companies that will be doing the special inspections, we'll get a list, we'll make sure you get copies of the special inspections, if the concrete passes the specs, if the nuts and bolts are ti= ght, and so forth, we'll make sure you get a copy of that also.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Actually we do tha= t as a matter of course, we always make sure that the Committee gets copies, and that's great that we have both of us keeping an eye on that. I think what we're suggesting is a construction manager with their team and then the concept of a commissioning agent for the M.E.P. part of it and then a special person assigned from the Building Department, and you've got quite a bit of coverage this way, so th= at between all of us, and then of course the design team, and keep in mind tha= t we require the engineer to come to the job site every week, it's not only we'll come when necessary, we've written it into their contract with us, because = we want to be there, and the reality is, on most projects, one area that gets,= has the most difficulties is the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing, historic= ally that's what we found. So we w= ant the engineers on site, we want them to be able to respond quickly and we ma= de sure that that is the case.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: Any questions?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Orsini: Just to bring thi= s out regarding Trumbull School, we found th= at sidewalks and the approaches to the entrances weren't tied in right. Now who will be watching all this here? Will this be . . . . .<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: The special inspe= ctor is normally required to do all the inspections of all rebar placement and he should be the one catching that the bars are in or they're not in and notify them.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Orsini: That would be the= commissioner?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: No, special inspe= ctor usually is through the architect's office.= There are 2 things, you have a testing lab which tests the materials, you have a special inspector who inspects the placement of materials. He checks the rebar placement for = the concrete, he'll look over the steel to make sure you got your nuts and bolt= s, that would be through our . . . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Orsini: So in other words before a pour is made, you will sign off?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Absolutely.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: So the architect's engineer will go out there and do the inspection . . . .<= /p>

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 6

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Orsini: So if there is something wrong, we can always go back to you?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Right. Well we want to do it before.=

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: Normally what hap= pens is the engineer would inspect it, if he sees something wrong he would repor= t to the C.M., and then it's up to the C.M. to get the contractor on board to ma= ke the corrections. We would . .= . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kuegler: Then 3 weeks go by. 3 weeks later it comes up= ?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: No.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kuegler: Immediately?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: Because the inspe= ction is not completed until the problems have been taken care of.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: We've had much con= crete pulled out if they went ahead even after we told them not to, usually the g= ood thing is that mostly happens when you've got a G.C., cause when you've got a G.C., they don't care, in the sense where they'll say we'll take the risk.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> When you've got a C.M., they're not going to allow the contractor to pour, cause they don’t want to take = the risk, they're going to tell the contractor, you know, you should have done = it properly.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Orsini: Well we had a C.M. there too and then we're caught that way.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: But this C.M., we= 're making him hold the contracts, so it's a little bit different, he has a lit= tle more responsibility this way.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Orsini: I agree with that= . I think that's the right thing to = do.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: And in this case, = we would then be approving the C.M.'s requisition so that the buck would stop = in terms of payment with us, so when they're not holding the contract, it's ea= sy for them to just say hey, we're just shuffling the paper, and we don't have= , we can say, you know we're not going to pay you, and their payment will be tie= d to the rest of the sub's payments so if we say we don't believe that that guy = did the work, we just won't pay for it. But more than that, it has to work as a team, and in our past experi= ence the C.M. has worked with us, and we've done projects with every major construction managing firm around here in the Northeast so I don't cite many instances where we had a problem trying to resolve anything.

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 7

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; In fact, even after the fact, for instance a situation such as the sidewalks, = we had situations with boiler rooms, with sidewalks, where it wasn't right. When we discovered it, you know, w= e were working with O & G, we got them to the job site, we all met, and this w= as happening 2 or 3 years after it was completed, we got all the contractors, = the engineer, myself, we got together, met several times, no cost to the owner,= we met there, we found out what the problems were, it took awhile, and sometim= es it didn't happen as fast as I would have liked, and ended up fixing the problem. We found that the co= ntractor had not installed one control piece. The moment we uncovered it he was at the site the next week; got it installed. The good thing was= these guys do work with O & G all the time, so there is some leverage. They say if you guys mess up on th= is job you're not working with us again, so that's what you have to deal with.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Khericha: And I think it'= s a matter of (inaudible) personnel, they are the right people in the field.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Orsini: If they're the ri= ght people, I'm sure they'll do a good job, no question about it, but we have to get the right people.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: I think it ought = to be mandatory that when we do the interviews that they bring the persons that a= re going to staff the job, cause if there are any personality conflicts up fro= nt with the Building Committee . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Khericha: I think as Rusty mentioned, the first thing is a list of personnel and who is going to manage it.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: And then have the= m come to the interview process, the short list, because your first impression is usually the right impression, so that would be a good point.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. A. Fusco: I have somethin= g I would like to clear up. If an= d when this project gets going and you're into it maybe a month or two, can any on= e of the Building Committee people come by to check and see? Cause we had that problem with John Trumbull, nobody could go up there.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Absolutely.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: That was squared = away. Job site meetings, visits, there ag= ain not to harp on J.T., but that was one of the problems, we weren't allowed on the site.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: I've never encount= ered something like that. In fact = at our job meetings the building officials, the fire marshal, all the local offici= als are invited to the job meetings, we welcome their comments.

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 8

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: It's the only job= we ever did where we didn't have job site meetings. We were told not to bother going.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Even Charlie Beliveau wasn't allow= ed.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Khericha: The jobs we han= dle, Chairman of the Building Committee, they just walk through any time they fe= el like it, just walk through the trailer and . . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: Well we understan= d the safety issue and the signing and so forth.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Khericha: The superintend= ent will take them around and walk the site.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: There is a wealth= of knowledge on this Committee and they might spot something.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: That's exactly it.= It's just like when we're doing a = set of documents. The people that are working on the drawings are working and they're looking at these drawings d= ay in an day out, and then somebody who hasn't looked at the drawings is able = to walk by and say hey, what's wrong with that? How come you didn't pick that up, = it's so obvious. Everybody was loo= king at it and they thought they picked it up and that's why when we review documents we try to review them by somebody who hasn't been involved as muc= h.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kuegler: Something that h= asn't been done in years is do we still require samples of products?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Yes.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kuegler: And not just cli= ps, but the physical thing?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: The mockups on sit= e.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kuegler: Well you have mo= ckups on site, but when you talk about the mechanical valve, or an electrical component, like say a single pull light switch, that you have the speced out one, the approved one by the architect, because when you look at the drawin= g, your person on site really can't decipher between this one and the pictures, but if he physically has the one that's been approved by the engineer, he h= as the piece in hand, and now he can . . . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Yea, that's someth= ing that's not as common. I mean = we can request it, it's just a matter of making sure it's in the specifications, a= nd certainly I don't have a problem with that. They may ask at the end of the job= can they use that piece, but . . . . .

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 9

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kuegler: Definitely.=

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: The only problem is sometimes depending on how much stuff you ask to, you're going to end up (inaudible).

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kuegler: No, with the bas= ic stuff.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Yea, I agree.=

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. R. Fusco: This is not goi= ng to be a flat roof?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: This is going to be designed based on the new and/or air quality, which is a half (inaudible).<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. R. Fusco: Okay, the State Statutes, so you will have a pitch on the roof?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Yes.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. R. Fusco: It's not quite = flat, but there will be a pitch on it?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Right.<= /span>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. R. Fusco: And the drainag= e has all been designed in it so we don't have to worry about that?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Yes.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: I have comments f= rom, I had sent a draft R.F.P. out to Chuck Frigon and our Attorney's office to ta= ke a look at, and I did get some comments back from both of them. I might just suggest if you're goi= ng to go this route, and I don't want to presume that, but if you are going to, a= nd you have comments on the R.F.P. itself, I'm happy to be the central point t= here if you want to get me any comments or changes that you have on it, and then I'll send it out again one more time as a draft within the next day or so s= o you can move this along pretty quickly and then we can get out and get on the streets.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: Fred has been tak= ing notes so I assume this is the conversation we've been having for the R.F.P. We can incorporate . .= . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Any of the comment= s that . . . . .

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 10

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: So then maybe wha= t I'll do is I'll incorporate the Attorney's comments and Chuck's comments and sen= d it out to you to add that stuff, and then we can get one more draft to everybo= dy to take a look at in a day or something and turn it around that quickly. I also have the commissioning agen= t one too if you want me to send that around too?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: Yes.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Killeen: There will be, I= assume, adequate language to ensure who answers to who, and who can stop what, that sort of thing, pretty much I understand that might go without saying, but I want to say it anyway. While = I'm thinking about it, because it is a school, we want to make sure that the job site is run very clean, including the roadways up to and out of the areas, = so again I felt that you guys will make sure that that is in the appropriate p= lace for documentation.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: When you do the interviews, I think that's a good question to ask the C.M., how they do that because you want to know, and so we hear from them what their procedures are for safety on site, making sure the existing and the egress are. . . . . . = . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: That the site is = clean and so forth, within reason.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kuegler: What about contr= actor/employee parking?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: I think that's som= ething we'll have to address in a phasing plan.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Khericha: (Inaudible) dra= wing I think we identify a place for storage and stuff like that. It's all fenced in.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: But what will happ= en if you go the C.M. route, we'll pick the C.M., we'll want them to be on board = as soon as possible to then review all that, because they'll ultimately be the ones setting the final version of that up, so we want them, we're going to = have all the stuff for them as suggestions.&nbs= p; We're also going to ask them to put a short listed group to take a l= ook at the documents and give us their point of view on the budget. We don't want someone coming in and saying you can't build or you're $10,000,000 over budget. If they say that, we have to figur= e out why.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kuegler: Does the constru= ction manager take care of cleaning or does he back charge all of the contractors= ?

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 11

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Khericha: I think they sometimes assign some man hours to different trades and use it at their discretion. Sometimes they pu= t in the specs itself and say you have to do it. It depends on the C.M. The jobs I'm familiar with, O &= ; G, he has like in the documents, like every Thursday afternoon clean it up, an= d if you don't I'll bring my own people in on Friday, and whoever didn’t d= o it can (inaudible). So they set = their own schedule and maintain it.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: And then they back charge for not doing their job for what they're responsible for.=

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: Which is real eas= y when they're holding the contracts.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Kuegler: At my former employment I used to hear a lot of complaints by subcontractors that we hav= en't been on the job for 3 weeks and we got back charged for someone else's mess= .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Khericha: It's too bad, b= ut that's how, I mean I'm on the projects with O & G and they hold the line. And they just say you g= ot every Thursday afternoon, and we walk though, and whoever is the guilty par= ty, on Friday afternoon we bring our own people in, so they don't wait for them= .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Orsini: Yea, sometimes yo= u have 10 subcontractors there and who does it, and then the ones that don't do it= , so it's hard to find the one who doesn't do it. It's better to . . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Khericha: They deal with = it and . . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. R. Fusco: The time schedu= le on the school, are arrangements being made so if the students are in class this will be done or . . . . . is it going to be all taken care of?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: We're going to do = the addition first.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. R. Fusco: We're talking a= bout where the students will be while they're working.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. LoFrese: Yea, the school department is aware of that. = We've been working with Kaestle Boos on some phasing plans to allow the building = to be built and the building to be occupied simultaneously.<= /p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. R. Fusco: It's going to b= e a problem.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Killeen: What about site security and off hour site security and let's say during the hours of stude= nt presence, arrival, and departure, because of the influx of construction vehicles, we might want to have to consider . . . . . ?

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 12

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: That's a good que= stion for the C.M.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: Typically they te= nd to go and limit the hours of deliveries around the bus drop offs and pick ups = and also they'll have a construction fence around to . . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Khericha: They'll put it = down in the specs and say this time no deliveries . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Killeen: It also may be a= Town question, for our Police service, I don’t know.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: That's a good, tha= t's a question when you're interviewing the short list of firms, you can send them questions to answer in their presentation, and that could be one of the questions they have to answer in their presentation on how they will handle delivery schedules, construction, because they'll have a set of drawings to work off so they should be able to take and mark up a set of drawings and indicate to us how committed they are to the project too as how much time t= hey put into it. If they don't bo= ther to spend any time thinking about it, then if that's what they're going to d= o at the inception of the project, at the time they want to actually get the project, then you're not going to get as (inaudible) so that's . . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: I mean that's kin= d of tied to the safety program. I= t all goes together, however they're going to lay that out.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Khericha: I was surprised= that the job that I'm handling with O & G that they didn't want any delivery guys to come there and enter the project if they don't have safety glasses = or a hard hat. The guy says I'm ju= st delivering, but they have to ask for a hard hat and safety glasses before t= hey enter the site.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: Nobody wants a fi= ne from O.S.H.A.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. R. Fusco: The building is= going to be completely sprinklered?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Yes.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. R. Fusco: During the time= of occupancy when the new students come in, the area that they're going to occ= upy, will that sprinkler be in in advance, or are you going to do it in stages?<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> I'm thinking that if there are no sprinklers, the Fire Department will get excited that kids are in the schoo= l.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Well we will not be going into the existing building until the addition is done. I mean there will be some encroach= ment but (Tape #1, Side A ended - may have missed some) complete and occupied, t= hat system will be functioning.

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 13

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: Okay, they're goi= ng to be looking at that very closely.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: And the advantage = here is that they'll move into the addition, and then we're not going to move the 6th graders up until the end of the whole project so there will always be t= his area that we can use as swing space.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: On the commission= ing services, I don't see anything in the beginning of this that says what the = commissioning is for. It's not specific to = say that it's M.E.P. or whatever.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: It's M.E.P. and we= 're going to get a list from the engineer as to all the . . . . this was my fir= st shot at putting a commissioning piece together, I've never done it, so ther= e is a lot of information and some of it may apply and some of it may not. The engineers have this and I'm lo= oking for their feedback.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: Your engineers.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Yes, and anybody e= lse who's got some comments on it because there may be more in there than we ne= ed.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: Yea, cause there'= s a preconstruction phase and is that necessary or . . . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Well the thought t= here is during the peak construction they want to, it's good to have them unders= tand the job and make sure what needs to be done for the commissioning. It's a fairly typical, when you ha= ve an on-going commissioning agent, that's fairly typical.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: Now would the com= missioning agent be the firm that's doing the M.E.P. design or it's a separate . . . .= . ?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: No, it's separate.=

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: Any further quest= ions?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: The commissioning = part, we can take more time reviewing. I think the idea is that we will have that commissioning agent, we don't have= to send that R.F.P. out right away. On the C.M., what we're proposing, I think you have the option of inviting peo= ple to submit proposals rather than advertising it as a bid, because it's reall= y a request for professional services. <= /span>You can throw a list of people together, major firms and just call them. If you advertise, it will take more time, and then you'll get just about everybody and their uncle who thinks t= hey are a C.M. operation responding. So that's something that . . . . . I think you can do that, right, just invite= ?

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 14

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: Yes. Do you guys have a list of like th= e top 10 that they can select from?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: I mean it's all th= e big, you've got Gilbane, Turner, O & G, Downes, there are a few others, and = just ask them to submit some qualifications, and then from those qualifications = we do a short list, so to make it rather simple we'll set some criteria up, ei= ther fax the criteria or just give them a call and say we need a qualification statement from you and go from there. I think Konover was mentioned as one possibility, so let's get their qualifications in and not give them too much time; they should have this fa= irly standard information, in, and then have a discussion and decide 3 or 4 or 5= or whoever you want to interview.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: Are you suggestin= g that as the first step, versus sending this out to them?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: No, we'd send this= out to them, but ask for their qualifications cause the short listed group is w= ho we would be interested in giving a full set of documents to.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Chipko: So if we did that= up front, we could possibly do a review at our Regular Building Committee in t= wo weeks. So that will help expe= dite that.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: Any other questio= ns? If not, what is your pleasure, a Mo= tion to go with a C.M. and a Commissioning Agent. I'll open it up for the membership= .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. = Chipko, sec. Mr. Killeen) that we go with a C.M. and a Commissioning Agent based up= on our comments that were made today and information that is in the Request for Proposals.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: So we need to, Me= redith will get you the information that needs to be incorporated. Did the attorney look at the (inaudible)?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: Yea, the attorney looked at the C.M., but not the commissioning one yet. (Inaudible) outstanding comments ba= ck.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. LoFrese: I'd like to, I'm interested in looking at what has been proposed. I talked to the engineering consul= tant on the project from C.E.S. about some things that the school is interested = in, technology, and how John Trumbull was (inaudible) so that's kind of what I’m curious about, to see what's going into that.

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 15

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: Yea, Remo was interested in the same concern with building Swift, looking at the review documents. He did review them= , I sent you a copy (inaudible) and the documents, the plans, the drawings, oh,= how did you make out with the State (inaudible)?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: We were there. I left at bout 12:30 or so, but we= got comments back from them. It's= a fairly typical item to get comments back from them. They had comments on a couple of n= ew letters. Every time we go the= y have another type of letter; for instance the indoor air quality letter has now = been amended to include wireless technology.&nb= sp; Of course we didn't get a copy of that so our indoor air quality let= ter has to be redone and that's what I'm giving you, and then they have another form for indoor air quality that addresses the 1/4 inch (inaudible) but they need the Superintendent's signature on it.= We have that. They also brought up something that they never asked for before, which are the insura= nce limits, so I'll need that. I saw your= email about . . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: Did Bill call you= yet?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: No, he hasn't so w= e want to have that. Then they had o= ther comments about, with Mr. Waltag, supposed to be a 5D, we made it a 5C, whic= h is part of that review process and other items such as that, so I was meeting = with Diane. In fact this morning w= e've got a plan, we'll probably have all of these items that they pointed out ta= ken care of within the next couple of days, and the process is we call them up,= and I hope to call them up tomorrow to set up a meeting for next week. Nobody has to show up. We just go back and say okay, thes= e are the items you brought up, and here's how we addressed them, and then we'll = turn those in and we should be . . . . they told us that they would be under 60 days, whereas we were concerned about that I'm told we'll probably be close= r to 45 days in their review process.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. LoFrese: At the end of the review they indicated that it went very well.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: Great. The plans that you submitted to the State, can we have a copy of them cause Karl and Rey want to take a look at them?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: But what I want to= do is the final changes we make to the State, that set will be made so that you c= an get copies.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: And if it could b= e here it's probably easier . . . th= ere's no room at the Munson House.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: That's fine.<= /o:p>

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 16

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: Rusty, I emailed = you about the drainage, the wetlands, and the traffic. Where are you with that?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: The drainage we re= solved; the Town Engineer.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: Recently?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: No, it was done th= e day that we had the Building Committee meeting.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: I would just doub= le-check because I'm not sure that that is what staff is saying.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: When I saw your em= ail I went back and that was the first thing I did, I talked to Whitney and he said no, we've addressed all the comments. The wetlands and the traffic, until we get the report, I mean the we= tlands is going to be, I think, going through that meeting I think later this mont= h, the 9th or something, so one of the comments is that they're waiting for th= eir approval, well we can't do anything about that. The question is could it be done concurrently. We're hoping to= have their approval in place before the Planning and Zoning meeting on the 23rd. The traffic study is th= e more difficult issue. I mean we've= got the traffic study and right now we're going for a determination that says we don't need to file for an S.T.C. permit and that's the determination that w= e're dealing with with the State Traffic Commission, but we can certainly give t= hem the traffic study itself. The drainage I know is done.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: Let me just stop = you there. Why don't you just do = that with a letter that says that you're waiting for that determination?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Okay.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: That will hopeful= ly take care of that, and I'll double-check with them too.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Okay, and when I g= et back to the office tomorrow morning I'll . . . . .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: And I will call B= ill again on the insurance.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Yea, now because t= hey've asked for it as part of the, well we have to have that information before we can go back to them, even if he just gives me general, it doesn't have to be worked out perfectly.

= WATERTOWN PUBLIC BUILDINGS COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING

FEBRUARY 3, 2005

PAGE 17

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Robson: Yea, well he took= a copy of a bunch of information about the project so he could figure out, like the contract with you that lays out the construction costs, and the soft costs,= and that kind of thing.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Porter: You're looking to= make sure there is insurance on the building during construction, is that what I= 'm getting?

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Malik: Yea, the limits of= the insurance. They don't really care what the li= mits are, they just want to see there is some language in there, and usually we = work that out with the insurance agent when it gets close to the bid time, but n= ow they're saying they want to see it before we come into the State. So that's fine.<= /p>

5.&nb= sp; Adjournment=

MOTION: (Mr. Killeen, sec. Mr. Fusco) to Adjourn the Special Meeting at 5:43 p.m.

Discussion: None

MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

Special Meeting Adjourned at 5:43 p.m.=

Respectfully submitted,

Robert Porter, Chairman

Watertown Public Buildings Committee

Approved: _____________________________= __

Lynn M. LaForme, Clerk