Loading...
Planning & Design Meetings Facilities Steering Committee Meeting 1/6/2010 - Agenda 25 Churchill Avenue, Building ‘D’ ● Palo Alto, CA 94306 ● Phone 650.329.3935 ● Fax 650.327.3588 ● www.pausd.org MEASURE A – STRONG SCHOOLS BOND Gunn High School Facilities Steering Committee Agenda January 6, 2010 Staff Lounge, 12:30 pm to 1:30 pm     1. Welcome 2. Schematic Design Group 1 Projects Approval a. Presentation b. Budget Action 3. Gunn Gym Discussion 4. Landscape Master Plan a. Conceptual Plan Progress Update Information 5. Summer Site Logistics Plan a. Overview of Modulars Relocation Information 6. Air Conditioning Project a. Scope Update Information 7. CEQA Update Information 8. Next Steps a. Schematic Design to BOE Information i. Presentation on January 12, 2010 ii. Approval on January 26, 2010 b. Landscape Master Plan Meeting i. February 4, 2010 at 3:30PM ii. Gunn HS Staff Lounge c. Handout of Upcoming Meetings 9. Public Comments Discussion Gunn HS FACILITIES STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING Palo Alto Unified School District 06 January 2010 P. 1 GUNN HIGH SCHOOL Palo Alto Unified School District FACILITIES STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: 06 January 2010, 12:30pm-2:00pm SUBJECT: Gunn HS Facilities Steering Committee ATTENDEES: Sign-in sheet (attached) The following are the highlights of the meeting: 1. Noreen Likins (NL) welcomed the committee, and opened the meeting. 2. EL gave a power point presentation of the schematic design, Group 1 projects, with design updates and new cost estimates. The following highlights were covered: At Classroom Building ‘A’ large computer labs were added on each floor. AC was added to Classroom Buildings ‘A’ & ‘B’. At Classroom Building ‘A’ the administrative core grew in size to accommodate the added Labs and offices. 3D views of the new buildings illustrated how the new structures relate to the existing buildings and contribute to the overall campus design. Slides were shown of the new covered walkways, expressed roof profiles and windows that pick up on the vertical rhythm of the colonnades. Project milestones compared the budget and current cost estimate based on the latest schematic design documents. Tom Hodges (TH) gave a brief summary of where the current estimates are for the Group 1 projects. Two estimates were prepared which served to test and validate the other numbers. One estimate was prepared by DLM and the other by the program manager OCMI. The Classroom Building projects are within the budget while the Gym project is slightly over budget. TH emphasized the good news that overall the projects are in good shape for the current level of development. 3. The following discussion followed:  Tree impact diagrams for each site illustrate the trees that are slated to be saved and removed to accommodate the new structures. TH noted that the memorial tree (in the way of Classroom Building B) will be removed and boxed safely until an appropriate place is found for re-planting.  The “Next Steps” will involve completion of the CEQA process and completion of the Landscape Master Plan which will involve the landscape subcommittee. Tom Jacoubowsky (TJ) asked if the new Gym and existing Gym modernization would commence at the same time. TH answered that mostly likely they would Gunn HS FACILITIES STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING Palo Alto Unified School District 06 January 2010 P. 2 though the modernization work would finish earlier. Participant asked if the new Gym had a pitched roof and EL answered that no, it had a flat roof and overhang. Participant asked if the roof over the Gym would be well insulated and a “cool” light colored roof. EL answered that yes it would have both as the building is not air conditioned which is typical for large group spaces like Gymnasiums. Participant asked if there would be solar power on the Gym roof. EL answered that the roof would be designed to accept solar panels but the project did not include the panels themselves.  Building projects will use the recognition program called, CHPS Verified. Arthur Keller (AK) asked if there was funding available with the CHPS program. TH answered that yes, but it wasn’t substantial, maybe enough to help offset costs for the CHPS commissioning process.  Participant asked if there would be mechanical units on the roofs of new buildings as there are with several existing buildings. EL answered that the sloping roofs of the new building would be clean with no units and that most of the mechanical units would be located in closets within the building structure.  Participant asked whether the new wrestling room in the existing Gym could be a multi-purpose space. Tom Jacoubowsky (TJ) answered that yes that was the intention.  Participant asked whether the elevator would be used for the disabled. Chris Ades (CA) answered, yes, and large enough to accommodate a gurney. 4. NL opened up discussion on Agenda item 3, Gunn Gym. Additional space is required for the Dance Program in the new Gym. Dance area needs to be comparable in size to the space they have which involves making the new building 10-feet wider adding 800 square feet in area. Participant asked whether the dance program could use the large Wrestling space being provided in the existing Gym. Chris Horpel (CH) answered that it was not suitable as the walls and floor have padded mats and these are difficult to remove and replace on a regular basis.  TJ added that the new wrestling room will be used for various PE programs but that dance would not be one of them.  TH noted that he sees two options: make the change now, adding the additional 10-feet to the Weight/Fitness area of the new Gym, or second, create an add- alternate in the documents so that both the small and large options would be bid. TH asked the FSC group vote on which option to adopt. It would cost an additional $250,000 (based on per square foot building cost of new Gym) plus an additional $100,000 of soft costs, totaling about $350,000.  Participant asked if the extra space might be funded from the overall $400,000 surplus of the three projects. TH answered that the Board saw the Gym project as a separate project from Classroom Buildings A & B. Therefore these projects should stand alone.  TH recommended that if the FSC agreed to increase the area of the new Gym, to transfer the $350,000 from the Gunn Reserves funds to the Gym project.  NL said that looking forward was important and if the burgeoning dance program needed the space it made sense to add the additional 10-feet to the new Gym. Gunn HS FACILITIES STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING Palo Alto Unified School District 06 January 2010 P. 3 She asked if anyone had any objections to this recommendation. A staff member indicated that her concern was about the effect on other projects such as Special Ed. The FSC voted unanimously in favor of changing the design of the new Gym to include the additional 10-feet in width or 800 SF in area.  CH added that there needs to be a permanent wall between the Weight Room and Dance Room in lieu of a curtain. The Dance Room would need mirrors and ballet bars to serve the program. 6. Aimee Lopez (AL) summarized the events of the last Landscape Subcommittee meeting. The next meeting will be on February 4th in preparation for a February 24th meeting with the BOE. EL noted that the intention throughout the process was to get the students involved. 7. AL introduced Alex Morrison (AM), construction manager from Gilbane, Inc. He recapped the Summer Site Logistics Plan and showed several slides to illustrate the fencing layout around construction zones and how the construction traffic would be channeled. Goal is to keep students safe and to steer them away from the construction zones. He also described how the relocatables will be moved this summer and how their new sites will be prepared. Participant asked if the contents of the relocatables would need to be removed. AM answered that yes, everything needs to come out and that there would be a moving plan to help the teachers move and relocate once the portables were at their new locations.  Participant asked whether the Fire Marshall would require access to the newly placed relocatables. AM answered that he had just met with the Fire Marshall and that he needed access through the new fencing so that special locks would be provided at the gates.  Participant asked if the bike lanes would be maintained during construction and AM answered that yes access for bikes and cars would be maintained.  AM described that the site of the Viking Village would be fenced off once the relocatables were gone to avoid potential dangerous conditions for the students. The temporary fence would be chain link. 7. EL provided a scope update on the Air Conditioning Project. He noted that early design work for providing AC to buildings was underway and proposals were being developed. TH said to be sure to include cool roof coatings to the scope of work. 8. TH gave an update on the CEQA process. The BOE should adopt the CEQA findings in two meetings in March. Responses are currently being prepared to comments and he is planning a meeting with the stakeholders in February to review the responses. 8. NL opened up the meeting to the public and discussion followed. Duncan MacMillan (DM) noted that traffic and landscaping mitigation issues and measures may have cost impacts and asked whether these have been included in the cost estimates. TH answered that these issues plus the added AC work is being assessed and will be presented to the Board all at once. Gunn HS FACILITIES STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING Palo Alto Unified School District 06 January 2010 P. 4 7. Schedule: Next Monthly FSC meeting will be scheduled for Feb. 10th at 12:30 PM. END Prepared by Christopher Ades of Deems Lewis McKinley. Please advise if you feel that any of the above items are inaccurate or need further clarification or detail. cc: Attendees, File O'Connor Construction Management Inc. Palo Alto Unified School District ‐ High School Project Estimate comparisons Date: 01‐05‐10 No. Element for Comparison Cumming O'Connor Est. Variance Budget Variance Henry Gunn High School 1 New Math‐English Classrooms a Building (Direct Cost) $9,550,849 $9,790,839   GC, OH&P, Ins, Design Contg, Esc $2,943,331 $2,923,411 $0 b Sitework $797,095 $678,311   GC, OH&P, Ins, Design Contg, Esc $245,645 $207,429 $0 d Total Construction Cost: $13,536,920 $13,599,990 $63,070 $14,040,000 $503,080 2 New World Languages a Building (Direct Cost) $1,915,894 $1,906,755 ‐$9,139   GC, OH&P, Ins, Design Contg, Esc $578,827 $583,091 $4,264 b Sitework $279,659 $144,852 ‐$134,807   GC, OH&P, Ins, Design Contg, Esc $84,490 $44,296 ‐$40,194 d Total Construction Cost: $2,858,870 $2,678,994 ‐$179,876 $2,760,000 ($98,870) 3 New Gym & (E) Gym Remodel a New Gymnasium (Direct Cost) $5,496,861 $5,811,291 $314,430   GC, OH&P, Ins, Design Contg, Esc $1,627,411 $1,777,108 $149,697 b Remodel (E) Gymnasium (Direct Cost) $729,301 $625,101 ‐$104,200   GC, OH&P, Ins, Design Contg, Esc $215,918 $191,157 ‐$24,761 c Sitework $1,433,002 $1,283,250 ‐$149,752   GC, OH&P, Ins, Design Contg, Esc $390,320 $392,421 $2,101 d Re‐configure parking lot; Allowances   f Total Construction Cost: $9,892,813 $10,080,328 $187,515 $9,950,000 $57,187 Gunn High School ‐ TCC: $26,288,603 $26,359,312 $70,709 $26,750,000