Oswegatchie Fire Station Building Committee - Minutes - 06/06/2023

Oswegatchie Fire Station Building Committee Meeting
Minutes June 6, 2023
Meeting called to order at 6:35pm by Chairman Robert Tuneski
Pledge of Allegiance
Members Present: Robert Tuneski, Elizabeth Sabilia, Mark Parker, Rocco Bracciale, Wayne Gilpin, Michael
Rocchetti, Ted Olynciw
Guests: Director/Chief Michael Howley, First Selectman Rob Brule, Town Attorney Nick Kepple, Director Gary
Schneider, Twig Holland
Public Comment: None
Opening Remarks: Attorney Kepple introduced building consultant Twig Holland
Approval of May 16, 2023 minutes tabled until next meeting
Review Action Items from 5/2/23:
v
v
Ted Olynciw was unable to locate information on the septic system
Director Bartelli was unable to attend due to personal reasons.
Director Howley presented underground tank information.
Director Schneider shared opinions with building the Municipal Complex Building. Director
Schneider indicated that he is mostly familiar with the Design Bid Build process which he has
customarily used. He explained that you have greater control using this process as everything is
described in detail via specifications and drawings. In contrast to Design Bid Build, Director
Schneider cited some minor shortcomings associated with the Municipal Complex Building resulting
from the Design Build process employed for that building.
Twig Holland explained three different building project delivery methods: Design Bid Build, Design
Build, and Construction Management at.Risk including a summary of pros and cons for each. The
information was presented via Power Point and a hard copy was distributed to each committee
member. This presentation is provided as Attachment 2.
Chairman Robert Tuneski provided a printed summary of lessons learned solicited from and compiled by
Cheryl Larder and Glenn Patterson (Building Committee Members, Municipal Complex Building)
regarding his experience with the Design Build process. These lessons learned were distributed to each
committee member and are attached to these minutes as Attachment 1.
Discussion ensued regarding the three different building methods.
Discussion ensued regarding possibility of moving forward with the existing RFP.
Motion by Robert Tuneski to hire Twig Holland as consultant for 20 hours to start.
Second by Michael Rocchetti
Vote - Unanimous

e Follow-up Actions for next meeting:
1) Robert Tuneski will request legal to look into continuing with previous contract.
2) Decide to use existing drawings if able.
Motion to adjourn - Michael Rocchetti
Second — Wayne Gilpin
Vote - Unanimous
Meeting adjourned at 8:09pm
Respectfully submitted by:
Linda Finnegan, Recording Secretary

Municipal complex building committee
Met as many times as needed and as long as needed to keep any
- particular aspect on track and moving forward, whether it was
preliminary updates from contractor to keep the committee to
make a decision or to keep contractor moving forward.
We reviewed dept needs with key staff / compared to other
studies done to assess whether they were the same or different
and why
Reviewed actual equipment with fleet plan against building
size/needs
We tracked the appropriations needed in accordance with the
BOS, BOF and RTM meetings to keep requests on track
Informed the BOS, BOF and RTM at key moments in process
Corresponded with Planning and Environmental engineer to
ensure they knew project was moving forward (surprised to
learn they were not aware)
Can’t assume depts coordinating with following your progress
IT needs! Should be better now that the Town has it’s own IT
group
During construction
We received weekly updates from staff
Anchor provided monthly updates
Contractor O&G provided timelines of construction
completion with milestones — reviewed each meeting — on track,
behind, ahead, why
Anchor reviewed O&G bill submissions — our eyes and
ears on pay apps, etc.
Ask, ask, ask
Che
| baccdorm
}


C lon (7 er som
On Jun 5, 2023, at 10:00 PM, Glenn Patterson <gpatters512@gmail.com> wrote:
Bob:
Per our telecon
Unfortunately I didn't get the email last week and I can't attend on the 6th. I've put
together some thoughts in this email for you to share with the OFD committee which hopefully
will add value to your discussion.
We had a great committee with complementary skill sets and Dan Matheson from DPW was a
knowledgeable and effective staff contact. We all had a learning curve on various aspects of the
project but the folks put in the collective effort. I’d encourage you to query the following folks
to hear their perspective as long-standing committee members if you haven't already:
Cheryl Larder (You noted she's weighed in)
Beth Sabilia
Tom Dembek
Ken Kirkman
Ray Valentini
Town Attorney Nick Kepple also attended a large number of meetings and may have
observations to share.
What follows are the (3) major take-aways that come to mind about what the MCBC got right
and a couple of hiccups we encountered.
The Municipal Complex Building Committee (MCBC) hired a Representative to Deal with the
Contractor
Ours was a design/build project with O&G Industries and they took the lead on the project. They
were the lead for getting the design, ordering the material, and executing construction and
certification. IMO The smartest thing we did as a group was hire Anchor Engineering ( now
Barton and Logiudice) to repres the committee. From my perspective they did a great job of
both looking out for OUR interests as the customer AND facilitating communication between
the building committee, O&G, the design firm, and the town staff as issues arose.
Having them involved eased the burden on town staff and the MCBC for day-to-day project
oversight and we were able to engage them to run down issues and keep any one issue from
getting out of hand.
Essentially, at MCBC meetings Anchor reported out their opinion of whether O&G was
proceeding per the contract, whether their cost and schedule estimates were reasonable, and any
other concerns they had. I do believe the presence of a third party professional Technical
Services company helped keep O&G on task.
Engage Town IT and Emergency Management Early in the Process
The MCBC had some issues with getting timely info from the Town IT department that caused
some scrambling as the project proceeded. My sense is given the realignment of the IT resources


in town this is unlikely to be an issue for the OFD project. I'd expect that the OFD committee
will also be able to engage the Emergency Management Department to assist on the IT and
communications requirements for the project. They should be in the loop early.
Use of Allowance Items in the Contract
In the contract with O&G there were dollar allowances for certain items e.g furnishings, certain
equipment, etc. The committee asked town staff to determine the items needed from these
categories and provide a dollar estimate for those items. The committee then vetted the staff
requests and set a dollar amount for the allowance.
One equipment item given an allowance line was the large vehicle hydraulic lift in the garage
bays. Long story short, the dollar amount provided by staff and approved by the committee was
off by a factor of 7 for the necessary equipment. It was a $200K miss....
IMO there were (3) lessons learned from our use of allowance items:
a) staff needs to be clear to the committee about what they are asking for to be funded as an
allowance
b) the committee needs to ensure they understand what staff is asking for and what a typical
example of the item(s) cost.
c) this was a major equipment item that, in retrospect, should never have been an allowance
item. It should have been its own line item in the specifications for the building and price-
estimated accordingly by the contractor--it actually affected the foundation and floor of the
building!!!
Finally, I'd observe that there were occasions where we met twice a month to keep the ball
rolling; and it's important to ensure the committee's actions recognize the normal meeting
schedules of the other town Boards whose involvement/approvals the committee may
need. Nothing worse than missing a regular meeting and either having to request a special
meeting of that Board or lose a month until the next meeting.


ee
ee

"Project
Goals
Within
bodeee
fommieted
on
schedule
:
Quality
—
}
Used
and
useful
‘Safety
[7
zero
accidents
:


Schematics
...a
.
Adva ntages
Cost, schedule, ality
Merger = = time.
Specs @ schematics _
Direct communications
$1- $5M
“Concerns |
|:
:
Owner
=
scope
&
complexity.
- - | : . No detailed design at selection. :
*
Nov
checks
and
balances
—
:
oe ° Owner = = risk; oversight
oe ° SSS for pre- -bid schematics
S risk built-in

Subcontractor

Design
-
Bid —
Build
|
Advantages
A&E docs ~
Cost
=
early
GC =
cost,
schedule,
quality
A&E
quality
oversight
SSM-S15M
Concerns
: : ee Estimate accuracy
|a
csp.
|
| Rock-solid contracts |
fee
ecs
Owner
= =
lowest
cost
;
ARE
= =
aesthetics
|
GCs
price
at
time
|


:
Co
nstruction on
|
Advantages
Constructor
One
contract
—
Experience
w/utilities,
town
&
state
agencies
Pre-con
value
added
Current
market
conditions
GMP
after
bidding
|
Coordinate,
schedule,
equipment
procurement
Delivers
cost,
schedule,
quality,
safety
“Concerns
serine
allowances
_
: CM controlled contingency


Program Watters prt
Owner’s
agent
Selene
staff
‘Single
point
|
|
Front-end
haeing
|
Scope:
feasibility
ne
ERO

Advantage Comparison
Cost, schedule, quality
Merger = =time |
Specs @ schematics
Direct communications
S1-S5M
: | oe ARE docs -
oe - Cost = ay ee
°
GC=
cost,
schedule,
ee
A&E
quality
oversight

_
Concern
Owner=
scope
&
©
complexity
No
detailed
design
at
selection
No
checks
and
balance
A
Owner
=
risk;
oversight
/
$$$
for
pre-bid
schematics
©
Sriskbuilt-in
— -
Bid
-
“Build
2
Estate
accu
racy
©
Bids
high
—
ae
aapeee
es
Rock-
solid
contracts
;

“Criteria”
Time: ARE, construction
| Complexity
Owner’s staffing / resou rces |
Qualified contractors / CMs :
Bidding requirements |
Budget and cash flow : |
- Special use / design expectations aesthetics
Owner’s risk tolerance oe |
Experience and success

East
Shore
Fire
Station
ia,
,
S4M
,
2013