Those in attendance for the meeting were as follows:
Mayor: Lois Salter
Council Members: Walter Anderson, Bernie Cohen, and Debbie Guthrie
City Administrator: Leigh Threadgill
Facilities Committee Representatives: Barbara Carroll, Virginia Andreu and Carol Seitz
Eric Bosman, Urban Collage
               

CALL TO ORDER
Salter called the meeting to order at 2:00 P.M. at 4580 Berkeley Walk Point.

Salter noted that Councilmen Sipe and Kitchens were not in attendance. In addition, Dan Huntington, member of the Facilities Committee, was not present.

Salter turned the meeting over to Barbara Carroll, Chair of the Facilities Committee.

CITY HALL PLANNING
Eric Bosman of Urban Collage distributed two packets of presentation materials, one of his own creation and one from the American Institute of Architects, which outlined the differences between the two delivery method options for council to choose from, the traditional design-bid-build method and the design-build method. These are the two methods that are appropriate for the size of our city hall.

In the traditional design-bid-build method, the owner puts together a facilities program, which is what we just did with Urban Collage. The owner then hires two separate entities, the architect and the contractor. The architect is hired first and completely designs the building, which usually takes 6-8 months, and produces 20-50 pages of drawings and a specifications book that includes all the materials and all the rules for the builder to follow during construction. Once that is completed, those plans go out to bid to contractors.  The owner then hires a contractor based either on the lowest bid, if required to do so, or based on which contractor is determined to be best for the needs of the owner.  The contractor selected builds the project based on the plans put together by the architect.

In this process, there are three different entities, owner, architect and contractor. Depending on the size of the building the contractor may hire a sub-contractor(s). We communicate with the architect and the contractor and have two separate contracts, one with the architect and one with the contractor. There is an informal relationship between the architect and the contractor. 

Salter asked Bosman’s opinion about the city hiring a third party to oversee the contractor to ensure that the project is constructed according to specification, similar to what the city is currently doing with the stormwater infrastructure project. Bosman responded that it isn’t a bad idea since the city isn’t that familiar with overseeing a construction project.  It would be nice to have an owner’s representative or consultant to be sure that things are being done appropriately. For larger projects a construction manager would oversee the whole process, but that is usually done on multi-million dollar projects.  Urban Collage can’t assume the responsibility of overseeing construction, but will be acting to oversee the design process.

In design-bid-build, the architect and designers are one team with direct relationship with the owner. When the bid is accepted and a contractor is in place, then the contractor will report directly to the owner.  The architect is going to check the site to be sure that the contractor is interpreting the design documents appropriately. The architect will not be looking for specific building processes or overseeing the construction itself, but will be looking specifically at the design issues.

The owner selects the architect based on design qualifications and experience. The city would put out an RFP and would expect to get back examples of other work similar to what we are looking for in our city hall.  The architect works directly for the owner, us, and we have the relationship with as much or little input as we want.  Once the project is bid out we get a hard contract price for construction, and that is the contract price.  Any adjustments to that price would require the contractor to come back to the city for approval. The facility is constructed with us overseeing the contractor.

Carroll asked who would help us put together the RFP to hire the architect. Bosman responded that Urban Collage would assist us with that and it isn’t that complicated of an RFP.

There are two reasons that the newer trend in design-build came about.  One is because of timing and scheduling.  This process allows you to move through design and construction more quickly.  In this process there is only one entity doing both design and construction; therefore, construction can begin before the design is completed.  If you want opportunity to make changes to the design, it will be costly or impossible with this process once they’ve begun construction. The benefit to this is that we would move in more quickly.  The other reason that this has come about is because some buildings are just not that complicated to design. Contractors have gotten into the design process in order to offer a more efficient design and construction model. At the same time, there are architects who were dissatisfied with the work that contractors were doing so they decided to offer construction in-house to have better design outcome.  However, with this type of delivery method, there is a chance that the firm selected is stronger in construction and weaker in design or vice versa.

Cohen asked about getting a quote for the design-build method. Bosman responded that the quote comes up-front and then the firm selected is in charge for the rest of the project because they’re on the line for that budget.

Anderson asked about the control we would lose with this process. Bosman says you do lose some control but you only have one contact to deal with, which is an advantage.  You lose control because with design-build firms, once they have been hired, they are working against their budget.  It would be very difficult to change things or ask to add something that costs more, unless at the very beginning of the process. 

Guthrie asked about dealing strictly with the architect in the traditional method. What if the architect designs something we love and then contractors won’t build it in our budget? Bosman responded that this can happen.  There is a built-in incentive for the architect to push you in your budget because the more expensive the building is, the more they get paid.

Cohen asked about having an owner’s representative and how we handle that.  Bosman stated that we would want to include that in the contracts in either of the processes.

Salter asked if there is one process that generally costs more.  Bosman responded that there is an opportunity for design-build to be less expensive, but whether it will be cheaper in the end depends on how well we manage the process. 

Our opportunity to change our mind with design-build diminishes quickly as we move through the process. We are able to do this much more easily with the traditional design-bid-build method because we can change our mind while everything is still on paper, although it may end up increasing the amount we have to pay the architect if we continue to change our minds repeatedly.  The design phase is much quicker with the design-build process.  Once they have determined where the outside walls are going to be, they will go ahead and start construction so the ability to change things begins to become more and more difficult.

Guthrie stated that the design-build method seems more doable for simpler or smaller projects.  Bosman responded that if we’re satisfied that we know our requirements, that we aren’t likely to change our minds on core requirements, that we aren’t worried about having consistent input all the way throughout the process, and that we like the efficiency of having one firm and one point of contact with a firm budget then it may work to do design-build for a smaller/simpler project, such as our city hall.

With the traditional design-bid-build approach, the design process takes a couple of months, and we don’t get a price until after that’s done and the contractor comes on board.  Construction costs can change in that time.  That isn’t a danger with the design-build option because you get a price up front.  However, Bosman raised the question about how much the budget quoted by a design-build firm would be padded due to the question of construction costs at the time of construction.  Design could be affected by the design-build firm’s assumptions up front.

In selecting a design-build firm, we need to do our homework before selecting someone for this process. If we weren’t happy and wanted to change courses, we would have to cancel the contract and pay a design-build firm for services to date and then start over with the whole process of selecting someone new.

With design-build, we have one entity, one point of contact. We always know who to point the finger at if something goes wrong. We won’t have to try to determine who has made a mistake and referee between the architect and the contractor.

Guthrie asked about the role of Urban Collage in each of these processes and whether that will help us as we move forward.  Bosman responded that it would be useful to have Urban Collage in either situation. In the traditional method, Urban Collage would rein in the architect so that they stay within budget and scale. In the design-build method, Urban Collage would push the design-build firm to pay attention to design.

Key differences:
1.)    Coordination and level of input – we would direct architect and contractor in the traditional process, we may direct architect to oversee certain aspects of the contractor’s work. In design-build there is one contract and one point of contact.
2.)    Scheduling – with design-bid-build, design is 100% complete once it gets to contractor and construction begins so we could change our mind throughout the design process. With design-build, we would move in more quickly because the contractor and designers are working back and forth with each other. Each is giving input to the other.
3.)    Known cost – you know final cost with design-bid-build when the project is put out to bid after design is completed. With design-build, we know the cost up front.
4.)    Professionalism – traditional process gives you a specialized designer and a contractor who is an expert in building.  With design-build we may get a team that has more design than building experience, or more likely a contractor that doesn’t know as much about design.

Anderson is concerned about what the final product will look like. We won’t have a design plan from design-build firm until after we have signed the contract. We will evaluate them based on their experience and their history. We will see the plans before they start building, but not before we hire them.

Guthrie is comfortable hiring someone based on reputation and other work they have performed as long as we would be able to see the plans before they begin building.

Guthrie stated that we do not have to go with low-bid for design-build firms.

Cohen suggested that we consider how much money other cities have spent on their city halls because the order of magnitude is different, and we would still have to spend the same amount on equipment and men and so forth, leaving less for design, etc.   He suggested that perhaps we might talk to some of our citizen architects living in the city to get some concept of what we want to spend and how it affects what we are trying to do.

Guthrie raised concerns about working with citizen architects.

Salter stated that we need to do some educated calculations about what we expect the final cost would end up being.

Cohen suggested that we need at least 20% more than the original budget for the city hall because of construction costs, etc., but the longer we wait the more expensive it gets. However, under present conditions perhaps waiting won’t be a problem because of the way the housing market is going.  Materials are more readily available. We may be better off in six months time than we are now. With time, we may get a better deal.

Bosman stated that even if the architect says that he can design it at 8%, we won’t be their top client and the architect won’t be likely to bend over backwards to do what we need.

Bosman suggested that the city consider how much input we want into the detailed level of design.  We would know elevations and floor plans with a good design-build firm before they start building.  If we want to get into the moldings, door frames and hardware, then we won’t get that with design-build. How many points of decision do we really want to have? It would probably be good that we didn’t have the opportunity to talk about every single decision that would need to be made regarding the design.

Cohen stated that when we begin this process, we should not do this by committee. We should have a much smaller group that really goes forward with this. We need a smaller number of people that will make the right decisions.   It will never work to do this by committee because it will be hard to arrive at consensus.

We need consensus about the big picture design decisions, but not the small details.

We may have trouble looking at different firms’ histories and getting a good idea of what we would get because of how small we are and what our needs are compared to those in other places. Anderson thinks that it may be hard looking at other buildings a firm has built because we may not get a good idea of what they would do for us because we are so much smaller.

Seitz recommended consideration of making the new city hall a green building.

Cohen stated that Snellville is the only green city hall in the area, and they have had a lot of problems.

Guthrie asked who would bid on projects like these.  Would it be commercial contractors or residential builders? Bosman says that we may have residential builders in addition to commercial contractors bid on this.

Salter stated that we have already been contacted by contractors who want to build our city hall.  Melaver, which is LEED certified, is interested in working on our city hall.  John Willis has approached the Mayor about this.  Clark Patterson has also expressed interest in doing this for us.

Regarding LEED certification, the cost savings can be large and the perception that green buildings cost more up front is not exactly true either. The cost is only about 3% more to construct a green building.  Salter expressed concern about the maintenance cost of this building.

Guthrie asked if it would be less expensive to use a residential construction company such as John Willis versus a commercial building construction firm. They would have to be sure that the building was built to code for a public, institutional building.  

Bosman suggested that we review the disadvantages of these two options. We will be frustrated by something at some point, but we need the least amount of heartache, and should choose accordingly.

In traditional model, if we get frustrated, we can lose time and money.  It is a linear process. Change order and delay claims are more likely. We are the referee. If something goes wrong, it will cost time and, possibly, money.

Design-build is less complex for the owner but more complex for designer and builder.  However, you will get frustrated from too little communication or the compromises in design and quality you’ll see in order to meet budget. We will see the elevation, but we may end up with something that we may have wanted done a little differently.

Guthrie asked time-frame for construction of city hall.

Salter stated that the only thing pressing us to hurry is the existing conditions in city hall.  

Guthrie stated that we need to both decide when we want to start, which may impact which delivery method we choose, and we need to decide how we want to fund this, whether partially with our reserves or not. 

Cohen stated we could start now and have it built a year from now. Bosman responded that he didn’t know if we could occupy it in a year.  If we went with design-build, it wouldn’t take two years.

Guthrie stated that all of council needs to come to a decision about funding and time frame. Bosman agreed that we should think further about our financial situation.

Salter stated that the city administrator needs to work with the county to get an idea of how much money we’ll have at the end of the SPLOST. 

Carroll asked what the next step is. Should we add this to the next council meeting?

Per Bosman, our next steps are to determine the delivery method and shore up schedule and financial situation so that we can determine our target and then set up an RFP.

Bosman stated that from RFP to hire will probably take 60-90 days no matter which method. In traditional set up, you look at about 6 months design period and then a year for construction, for a total of 20 – 21 months. With design-build, they could begin construction in as soon as 3 months from the time the RFP is awarded. It would take about 16 months total for design-build process.

Anderson stated there is an opportunity cost for taking money out of reserves now to pay for it, because we would lose the interest on our money in reserves.

Salter asked if we could charge the SPLOST the lost interest. Cohen stated that we could do that.

Salter asked if everyone is comfortable to put this decision about delivery-method and financial decision on the next council meeting agenda.

Guthrie asked the city administrator to find out about the current and projected SPLOST funds for this project and to confirm that we could pay ourselves back interest from having to borrow from our own reserves.

It was suggested that we generate a list of people that we may want to consider and to look at their work to think about who we would want to send the request for a bid.  Also, we want to advertise the bid and direct mail it to those people who have said they are interested.

Bosman suggested that we check with the City Attorney about whether we have to take a low-bid or not for SPLOST projects. Can we do lowest responsive bid or the low bid? If lowest responsive bid, then we can propose qualifications for contractors to be able to bid for this job.  We may want to include something about a green building (LEED certification) in the RFP.  We have to make the decision about whether we want a LEED-certified building or not. The city administrator needs to send out LEED information to everyone again before council because that is going to be considered at next council meeting. 

Salter has three questions for council to consider at the next council meeting: 1.) LEED certification, 2.) the money we want to allocate to this project and 3.) the choice about the delivery method discussed at this meeting today.

Cohen raised the issue of furnishings. Salter wants to invest into the building itself and live without good furnishings for some time if necessary.  Guthrie thinks there should be, at least, a minimal amount of money designated for furnishings and equipment.

Anderson asked if there would be trouble with getting a LEED building from contractors that hadn’t worked much on that in the past. Bosman and Salter responded that experience counts a lot for LEED buildings.

ADJOURNMENT
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, SALTER ADJOURNED THE MEETING AT 3:40 P.M.

Respectfully Submitted by Leigh Threadgill (Approved by Council May 17, 2007)