Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 10D_06/14/2001 . ` •_./ f Memorandum To: Village Council From: Finanee Director JoAnne Forsythc; Chair of Architectural and Engineering Negatiating Committee for equesta Village Center Date: June 8, 2001 Subject: PHASE I NEGOTIATED CONTRACT FOR TEQUESTA VILLAGE CENTER Attached you will find the Professional Ser�ices Fee Proposal for Phase I Tequesta Village Center between Song + Associa.tes and the Village of Tequesta, as well as minutes from the June 5, 2001 Meeting of the Architectural and Engineering Negotiating Committee for the Tequesta Village Center, "the Committee." The Committee agreed to provisions found in the June 7, 2001 proposal; with the exception of the following issues that were discussed in the meeting, but not addressed in the proposal: 1) three ninety minutes public presentations, with possible dates of Tuesday, June 19, 2001; Saturday, July 14, 2001; and Tuesday, Ju1y 24, 2001, 2) that Song + Associates would produce a mailer to be sent to every resident of the community that would include a synopsis of the process and the three presentation dates, as well as publishing notices in the Palm Beach Post and the Jupiter Courier The Committee recommends accepting the proposal by Song + Associates with the above added items. ' � r�* � � 3une �, ?oo� . Mr. Michael Couzzo V"itiage 1Utanager Villa�e of Tequesta 250 Tequesta Drive Tequesta, Florida 33469 RE: VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA CENTER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FEE PROPOSAL, PHASE I S+A PROJECT NO. 01120 Dear Mike: Song + Associates is pleased for the opportunity to provide professional services for Phase I Space Programming / Building Needs Assessment and Site Selection Analysis / Ranking for your new Village of Tequesta Center. Song + Associates proposes to provide you with Architzctural and En�ineering services for the initial Scope of Work. The project Scope of Services to be provided by Song + Associates for the new Village of Tequesta Center is to be segregated into two separate efforts of work. The services will be identified as Phase I and Phase II. Phase I will consist of two components to track simultaneously and will be identified as IA Space Programming / Building Needs Assessment and as IB Site Selection Analysis. Later, Phase II will consist of the specialized Architectural and Engineering services of Schematic Design, Bidding and Negotiation and Construction Adnninistration. For this Professional Services Fee Proposal, only Phase IA and IB are to be described and presented for review and approval by the Village of Tequesta. Phase I A. Space ProErammin� / Buildin� Needs Assessment 1. The Space Programming i Assessment effort will explore the current and future needs of space allocation for the Village Departments to be housed at the new Center through personal interviews and would include the following multiple tasks: • Identify departments • Obtain department or�anization charts • Have face-to-face interviews with designated staff to determine staffing space needs now and in the near future. • Have individual meetings with Commissioners to include input on Public Community spaces as well as any desired private spaces. Song + Associates, Inc. Architecture • Planning • Interior Design AA0003165/IB0001095 400 Australian Avenue South, Sixth Floor West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 telephone:561.6552423 fax:561.655.1482 American Institute of Architects / NCARB Mr. Michael Couzzo Vilrage of Tequesta Center Page 2t 1 • Agree upon function of each staffer • Ab ee upon ranking of each staffer • Determine optimal department adjacencies and functional working relationships. • Provide public forum for community information for potential community space and its relationship to the administrative spaces. Upon conclusion of interviews, Song + Associates will produce a database and diagramic illustrations to conclude departments, staffing, sizes and types of work spaces, types of common spaces to equate to a desired amount of building area. This database and illustrations will be documented for distribution, review and approval by the Village, and this document will, then, be the basis of design criteria for the Phase II work. B. Site Selection Anal,� 1. The Site Selection effort will include investigations into the advantages and disadvantages of the two identified Center sites and would include the following multiple tasks: • Review the historical aspects of land use, previous building uses, public use, etc. • Review traffic patterns with the Village Engineer (Traffic Study in not included as Basic Service). • Review current, planned and future developments surrounding the site. • Review site specific aspects, natural and man-made (Geotechnical Service is not included as Basic Service). • Investigate potential hardships • tnvestigate obvious assets • Investigate cost and time implications due to ownership, zoning, political equations. • Confer with local agencies having jurisdiction for official input. This effort will also include design aspects such as site access, relationship to adjacent neighborhoods, highest and best use of each property, image evaluation for the new Village Center, appropriateness of the proposed land use, etc. To allow proper evaluation this effort will also include community involvement through public workshops. To that end, Song + Associates will conduct three community workshops to establish public comment regarding which of the two sites should receive the new Center. Song + Associates will design, produce and distribute throu�h the mail service a flyer announcement to notify all Tequesta residents of the community workshops. Song + Associates will also secure a"Public Notice" in each of the Palm Beach Post and Jupiter Courier Newspapers to announce the community workshops. The connments received by Song + Associates from the community and from its conclusion to findings of evaluation will conclude with the technical ranking of each site, and one site will be recommended to the Village for review and approval. The Programming / Assessment effort will be conducted by Song + Associates. The Site Selection Analysis will involve Song + Associates (Architect), LBRH (Civil Engineer) and Gentile and Associates (Landscape). Mr. Michael Couzzo Village of Tequesta Center Page 3 C. Fees The Phase I Scope of Services will be provided for a lump sum amount of Forty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Eight Dollars ($45,858.00) and the following is a breakdown of each task: Phase IA — Programming / Building Need Assessment $ 17,670.00 Phase IB — Site Selection (Architect, Civil, Landscape) $ 28,188.00 TOTAL: $ 45,858.00 Additional Services In addition to the stipulated work outlined above it may be necessary as requested by the Owner or the Client to perform additional services. When requested by the Owner or Client, these services will be performed on an hourly basis at the following rates: Principal $150.00/per Hour Professional Level I $115.00/per Hour Professional Level Il $ 95.00/per Hour Professional Level IlI $ 75.00/per Hour CADD Level 1 $ 95.00/per Hour CADD Leve] II $ 75.00/per Hour CADD Level IIT $ 60.00/per Hour Administrative Level I $115.00/per Hour Administrative Level II $ 55.00/per Hour Administrative Level III $ 35.00/per Hour Reimbursable Expenses Song + Associates shall be paid for all reimbursable expenses such as blueprinting, reproductions, posta�e, newspaper advertising, long distance telephone charges, professional renderings and model, which may be required for project approval, and material boards in addition to the basic compensation at a rate of 1.2 times the actual amount. We look forward to working closely with you and your staff. We are enthusiastic regarding the prospect of this engagement and our ability to meet your complete needs in this matter. If the Owner would like to proceed as described above, please return an executed copy of this letter. Sincerely, Young ong, AIA, ASID, PE President YS/pb Accepted By: Title: Date: PROJECT NUMBER: 1 M034 PROJECT WORK-HOUR SUMMARY June 4, 2001 PROJECT NAME: VILLAGE CENTER - VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA PAGE 1 OF 1 . PERSONNEL TIME & COST TASKS ARCHITECT CIVIL LANDSCAPE TOTAL BASIC SERVICES A. PROGRAMMING PHASE 17,670.00 - - 17,670.00 B. SITE SELECTION Song + Associates 13,360.00 13,360.00 LBFH 12,978.00 12,978.00 Gentile Holloway O'Mahoney & Associates Inc. 1,850.00 1,850.00 TOTAL FEE $ 45,858.00 TOTAL BASIC FEE $ 45,858.00 B. ADDITIONAL SERVICES: Additional services shall be provided only per clienYs written request. FEE PROPOSAL FROM June 4, 2001 PROJECTNUMBER:1M034 PAGE1 ` VILLAGE CENTER - VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA SONG + ASSOCIATES TEQUESTA, FLORIDA PERSONNEL TIME & COST 70TAL TASKS PROFESSIONAL PROFESSIONAL PROFESSIONAL CADD CADD CADD PRINCIPAL LEVEL I LEVEL II LEVEL III LEVEL I LEVEL II LEVEL III ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAMMING PHASE 1 INTERVIEWS 8.00 16.00 8 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 00 36.00 2 EXISTING DATA COLLECTION 0.00 0.00 16.00 16.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 36.00 3 PROGRAMMING DATA INPUT 0.00 0.00 8.00 8.00 D 00 0.00 0.00 4.00 20.00 4 PROGRAM FINALIZATION / APPROVAL 2.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 5 BUBBLE DIAGRAMS (BY DEPT) 2.00 0.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 14.00 6 BUBBLE LAYOUT (PER DIVISION) 2.00 0.00 12.00 0.00 0.00 4 00 0.00 0.00 18.00 7 PRESENTATION 4.00 2.00 16.00 8.00 0.00 16.00 0.00 0.00 46.00 8 FINAL APPROVALS 2.00 4.00 8.00 O.QO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.00 FIRM TOTAL PHASE HOURS 20 00 6.00 88.00 40_00 0.00 24.00 0.00 12.00 190.00 PERSONNEL HOURLY RATES 150.00 115.00 95.00 85.00 95.00 75.00 60 00 35.00 TOTAL $ 3,000.00 $ 690.00 $ 8,360 00 $ 3,400 00 $ - $ 1,800.00 $ - $ 420.00 $ 17,670 00 PROJECT NUMBER: 1 M034 FEE PROPOSAL FROM June 4, 2001 VILLAGE CENTER - VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA SONG + ASSOCIATES Page 2 TEQUESTA,FLORIDA PERSONNEL TIME & COST TOTAL TASKS PROFESSIONAL PROFESSIONAL CADD CAOD PRINCIPAL LEVEL I LEVEL II LEVEL I LEVEL il ADMtNISTRATIVE SITE SELECTION 1 PROJECTADMINISTRATION 2.00 800 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 2 AGENCY CONSULTATION 8.00 2 00 8.00 O.DO 0.00 0.00 18.00 3 COMMISSION LOBBY 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 4 HISTORICAL RESEARCH 2.00 2.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 16.00 5 DISCIPLINES COORDINATION 4.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 6 PROJECT REVIEW MEETINGS 6.00 6.00 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 12.00 7 PHOTO DOCUMENTATION 0.00 0.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.00 S DESIGN / DOCUMENTATION 8.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 16.00 0.00 28.00 9 PRESENTATION 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4 00 0.00 10.00 FIRM TOTAL PHASE HOURS 42.00 24.00 28.00 0.00 20.00 4.00 118.00 PERSONNEL HOURLY RATES 150 00 115.00 95.00 95.00 75.00 35.00 TOTAL $ 6,300 00 $ 2,760.00 $ 2,660.00 $ - $ 1,500.00 $ 140.00 $ 13,360.00 LBFH, Ic�c. Proposal Date:ft�5/07 Prepared By: K.S.S. for Page i ot � Vlllage ot Tequesta Phase One c Corp Sr. Pro�. 7rol� P�oJ. Pro�. Sr. 8urvsy 9r. Prof. Prof. Eng.BUrv. En9�urv. Fleid Flald Hurvey Atlmin. _ 9oope Deacrl uon Ofiloer C9D CSM Pro . En . Fn . 4 En . 3 En . 2 En . 7 Desl ner DeH ner CSM 9ur. 6 Ms x Surv. & Ma r Tech. 2 Teoh. 1 Re . 2 Re . t Gew 9u rt Labor Ex en�e� To41e Item LBFH INC FEES O7 Dete Collxllon Perliminer Permlttin & Conae tual De�l n 1. Mee1 w/ ENCON Re ardin Sanila Sewer arxf Review "Record Orawin s' 3 B 1 B00 0 d0 2 Meet w/ T uesta UIiIA Da 1. q ardi Waier Servbe and Fire Praeclion Pressure Tesl 3 8 � � � � 3. Mael w/ T uasla Weluield En ineer qeese Macon 4 1 15 1 36 4. Meet w/ Itlent' 8 Mal te Re uiremenis ol Qovemmental roval encies a. SFWMD 1 4 1 50 3 73 b. DERM 1 4 1 50 3 73 c. DEP 1 4 1 50 23 73 d. PBCHea71FDe ahmenl 1 4 1 3 73 5 Vish Siies 3 3 25 8 $551 e, Atlantl Week Pro ress Meatin s assumes b leam meelin s al 2 hours each 8 2 30 2 �2 7 ConsU� w/ Vile e ol Te uesta a 4 � �3' � ��2 8 fleseeroh Records al SFWMD antl Review ol Inlormalion a SFWMD Waler Use Pe�mils 2 d �� 6 � b. SFWMD Surlace Waler Mena emenl Permils 2 4 10 6 9b c, Pre are Prelimina CakWalions lor Sudace Water Mana emenl 2 9 5830 2 �2 9. Pre are Conce lual Oesi Orawi s Ior Waler Disiribulion Waslawater Cdlec�fon Slortn 8 8 38 740 187 827 Draina e and Q�atlin for On-sile Im rovemenis 10. Devalo Prelfmina O Inbn of Probabl Pro'ecl Cosls 2 8 � 6 ' � 11. Coortlinetbn wllh Surve ors dnd Oeolechnlca� Consullenls and Review/Process pata 2 4 10 8 36 12. OA/OC 4 80 3 5483 13. Pre aralion lor and Altentlance a1 Presanlatlons to Slalf and Council 8 Z 30 Z �2 $12 �80 5818 512 978 , ' Gentile Holloway O'Mahoney � Assoclates, inc. Tequesta Viitage Hal! Sfte Selvction Phase SCOPE MAN HOUR ESTIMATE i• �.� %����°v wPi j� j�iait a�(5f�i�t� 3 code issues of both sites 2. Analyze vegetation coyer on previous 4 Vi!lage Hap site. 3. Provide historical 8, tech input Qn site g concepts for both sites inciuding landscape concaepts. 4. Meetings/public presentations 5 Tatal Hours 2a Estimated Fee $1,85Q.40 F Tf y ' � ' A VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA �� Post OEfice Box 3273 • 250 Tequesta Drive • Suite 300 9 '� o Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 • (561) 575-6200 �a ; Fax: (5G1) 575-G203 = �� F ��H Co { NIINUTES OF MEETING OF THE ARGffiTECTUR.AL AND ENGINEERING NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE FOR TEQUESTA VII,LAGE CENTER JUNE 5, 2001 L Call to Order and Roll Call The Architectural and Engin�ering Negotiating Committee for Tequesta. Villag� Center held their first meeting in the Village Manager's O�ce at 250 Tequesta Drive on June 5, 2001. The meeting w�s called to order at 4:00 p.m. Recording Secretary Beriy Laur called the roll, and thefollowingmembers of the Committee were in attendance: Micha.el R. Couzzo, Jr., Village Manager, JoAnn Forsythe, Finance Director, and Tom Jensen, Reese Macon & Associ�tes, Acting Utility Director. Also in Attendance was Mary Wolcott, Village Clerk, Young Song, Song+Associates, Inc., andPetierGilsta.d, Song+Ass�ciates, Inc. II. Approval of Agenda V'illage Manager Couzzo made a mo�ion �o approve f.he agenda as submitted. Mr. Jensen seconded f.he motion, which carried by nnanimons 3-0 vote. III. Communication From Citizens There were no communications from citizens N. Selection of Chairperson for the Committee Recycled Paper MINUTES OF THE ARCHITECTIJRAL AND ENGINEERING NEGQTIATING COMMITTEE FOR TEQUESTA VIIILAGE CENTER MEETING HELD JC1NE 5, 2001 PAGE 2 Tom Jensen naminated JaAnn Forsythe as Chair. The nomination was seconded by Michael Couzw, and carried. by unanimons 3-0 vote. V. Discussion Regarding Negotiation of $ Contract with Song + Associstes Mr. Couzzo indicated that the intent was for the work of Song + A,ssociates to be completed in two phases. The first phase would consist of analyzing the two sites, 357 Tequesta. Drive and the site located on the old Tequesta. Plaza property, for viability and suita.bility for a Village Center or Village Hall complex and to do a needs assessment and programming for Villag� staffand the community at large. I?uring Phase One the site would be determined as well as the building si�e. Phase Two would consist of the plans, specifications, and actual construcrion. Mr. Couzzo indicated that unlike the Architectural and Engin�ering Selection Committee for Tequesta �7illage Center, this Committee would stay open and viable until the 6na� phase was finished, and reminded the members of the Committee they could not have communication outside the public meetings. Mr. Jensen commented that it would be logical to conduct the needs asses�ment first. Young Song indicated that the needs assessment could be done simuttan.eously with the programming. Mr. Couzzo clarified that the needs assessment wauld address needs by departments, needs of staff, and needs ofthe Village Council and would indica.te the size of staffneeded.. Ms. Song explained that every organization had different levels of fiannction--what staffneeded to do their work--and her company would prepare a space program chart based on the proper function level. Song + Associates would analyze tlie filing system, storag� system, common support facility system ar�d decide such items as whether one centralized copy machine would meet staff needs or if individual departments needed their own copy machines. Chair Forsythe inquired whether this type of wor� was typical of architectural fu which Ms. Song indicated. it was, but was a specialized. service, explained that they would meet initially with department heac�s to determ.ine what they thtiught they w�1d need and if MINUTES OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING 1VEGQTIATING COMMITTEE FtJR TEQUESTA VILLAGE CENTER MEETING HELD JUNE 5, 2001 PAGE 3 they had any future plans for the next 5-10 years, and based on the department head's plan they would transfer that person's ideas to the space requirement. The work process would be reviewed, including how long records were kept, and the architectural firm could decide from that what size rooms were needed_ Ms. Sang indicated that their main goal was to come up with the mast effii.cient p1an and not to lock in the Village, but to look atiead 5-10-20 yea,rs. Ms. SQng commented that after all departments were reviewed, they would look at how the departments worked together. Discussion would take place regarding a possible community center, Council chamber, who would use the building, and how it would be accessed, etc. They would go through a dream �tage called programming then put tha.t together with the budget to arrive at what could realistically be accomplished. Mr. Couzw cammented. that the Village had discussed a Village Hall at anywhere from 8,000 #017,000 square fe�t , so Song + Associates would na�row that, then go back to the Village Council. The Village Council. might change the Charnber si�e, but for example probabty would not provide a lot of input to the Finance Department space, but they woulcl be interested. in the Village Chamber space DiSCUSSlOil eriStl�. MS. S011g explained that the needs assessment would be �nished. first ��.use it would show the siz� of building that needed to be built and the site, which would be Phase I. Phase II would begin with work on the preliminaries. Mr. �uzzo clarified that Song + Associates was only being engaged gresently for Phase I. Ms. Song explained that the eost estimate would nvt su�port doing a tra�c study unless it had to be done , and sne hoped to use existing data.. To fairly compare the two di.fferent sites, the same building size would'be used ancl the �rm would come back with a range for the cost, plus a ti.me is money factor depending on the Village's schedule to complete the project. Mr. Couzzo commented the Village Hall wo�.ld probably be t�vo stories. Ms. Song commented that Iocations east or west of the railroad track wouid be considered, Five sites had been analyzed for the City of �Vest Palm Beach, and Ms. Song described how her fum had compared those sites and the process used in order to get to the dolla�s, and to compare apples to apples. They ass�med if the land wa.s sold how much money the City would keep. Other considera.tions were dollars, �ime, and psychological and sociological issues and their importance to the Village. MINUTES OF THE ARCHTTECTURAL AND EI�TGINEERING NEGOTI�TING CONiMITTEE F4R TEQUESTA VILLAGE CENTER MEETING HELD JLJNE 5, 2041 PAGE 4 Mr. Couzzo commented. that the Committee was to give tasks to the architect today and negotiate a fee for those tasks. Mr. Couzzo commented he wanted to i.ncorpora.te three not to exceed 90-minute presenta.tions to the community, one da.yti.me, one evening, and one on Saturday. The second workshop would include material Iearned at the first workshop, and th� final one would includ.e all of the input. Ji.m Humpage indicated that past presentations had allowed 15 minutes for questions from the public and more time was neecied for the citizens to present their input. Ms. Song suggested 30-40 minutes for a presentaxion and then that much time would be left to hear the citizens. Mr. Couzzo noted. that the last presentation would be longer because it vvould incorporate all �he input, Mr. Humpage suggested holciing six workshops for three presentations --two just alike for each of the three p�esentations. Mr. Jensen explained that ra�her than presenting the same information, at the first one there would be a lot of questions, at the end of the s�cond one the questions residents a�ked at the �rst one could be presented, building on the first workshop. Mr. Couzzo stressed the concept was for communi�y input and interaction. Mr. von Frank comm�nted that Ms, Song needed to be aware things were changing and that there would be 134 condos across the street soon. Mr. Couzzo indicated she would be mad� aware of that. The scape of services was discussed. Ms. Song reviewed engineering issues to be eo�ered, suggesting that Reese Macon & Associates could provide history of field engineering items such as including water service, sewer, ide�t�ifying government approvals, SFWMD requirements, Palm Beach County H�alth Degartment issues, and traffic for both sites. Ms. Song indicated her engineer would analyze the site issues. Population, designing for the future, and how other amenities could be designed would be considered. Mr. Couzw clarified that Reese Macon and Associates could not be a part of Song + Assaciates' presenta�ion since they were acting as the Village's representa.tives. Mr. Couzzo comm�nted that in order to present a negotiated agreement to the Village Council on June 14 it must be done at this meeting, and requested Ms. Song's proposal. Mr. Couzzo clarified there was no budget. Ms. Song proposed during Pha.se I to use civil engineers Lindahl Browning Ferrari & Helstrom, and Landscape Architect George Gentile's firm to address comprehensive plan and NIINUTES OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING NEG4TIATING COMIVBTTEE FOR TEQUESTA VIIILAGE CENTER MEETING HELD JUNE 5, 2001 PAGE 5 code issues. Ms. Song indicated 5 hours had been allowed for public presentation. Ms. Song commented she did not have a structural engine�r. Ms. Song explained she did not have a traffic study and ciid not think one would be needed because the road was designed to handle traffic on both sides and there should be existing traffic data. Traffic consultants had not been included. Actual soils tests were not included because the downtown site shoutd be ready to go and the other site should have been tested for the public safety facility. Mr. Couzzo questioned what difficulties would be encountered if the well was movad on the old site. Ms. Song indicated no serious difficulties should result if no indian arrows or gopher tortoises were found . Mr. Couzzo asked if all analyses done now would i.mpact Phase II costs, which Ms. Song verified. Ms. Song pro�ided a breal�down of projected costs for programming and for site selec�ion. Mr. Couz�o explained that the int�.t was to bring this to the Village Council for their July meeting. Ms. Song indicated Phase I could be done in 30 days. The proposed amount was $45,858 for Phase I as discussed. Ms. Song stated. that am.ount includ.ed civil engineering and landscape architecture, Ms. Couzzo asked if that $45,858 included the needs analysis, site analysis, and presentation to the community, which was veri�ed by Ms. SQng. The breakdown was as follows: Programming phase -$17,670; site selection work by f.he architect $13.364; engineering by LBFH $12,978; work by the Iandsea.pe archi.tect $1, 850. A breakdown for personnel man hours and tasks was included in the proposal. 190 hours were allotted. for Song + Associates. Ms. Song explained how the hours compared to the job they had done for the Town of Jupiter. Mr. Couzzo questioned what percenta.ge of the total work Ms. Song would consider this to be, to which Ms. Song responded the programming and site selection work was an additiorial service and not a standard architectural confiract. Ms. Song explained that during this phase she would envision layouts because she could not give answers without knowing where she was gc�ing. Mr, Couzzo asked if Phase II would be a pereentage or a flat number. Ms. Song explained that depended on things that were unknown now and things could happen to cause changes, such as being asked to consider a third site, or maybe the very first design would be chosen, and they would just try to do things in steps. Mr. Humpage asked if after the need.s assessment the only thiiig that might change would be the architeetural value, which Ms. Song indicated was NIlNUTES OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING NEGQTIATING CONiMITTEE FOR TEQUESTA VII,LAGE CENTER MEETIrTG HELD J[JNE 5, 2001 PAGE 6 correct and stressed how important the programming was hecause it would set up a future plan, and this was the right way to analyze what wa.s needed. and where the Village was going so there would be a minimum impact later. Ms. Song described other jobs done by Song + Associates which were si.milar in size: the master plan for Palm Springs, a similar size building for B►oynton Beach, the Jupiter project, and a customer service buitding for Pa1m Beach County water utilities. Mr. Humpage complimented Song + Associates for their work in designing �the Republic Bank. Ms. Song described. how that project had been done. Ms. Song suggested tha.t anyone interested. in viewing a project similar to the one proposed for the Village go to see the Arnerican Qrchid Society International Headquaxters building in Dekay Beach in the Murakami Museum Park, where her firm had done this same process. Ms. Song described the programming book tha.t would be developed which would include urformation on existing and proposed buildings, site analysis, and a rough footprint based on the needs assessment. Presentations would utilize power point, boards, and handouts-whichever types of inedia the Village believed would make the public most comfortabla-and the report would probably be divided irrto two sections, one for needs assessmerrt and the other fQr site analysis. Ms. Song verified that the sites would actually be ranked and one recommended over the other, Mr. Humpage suggested using power point presentations. Ms. Song conf'umed. they could do that type of presentation but might also blow up one slide and print it on a board. Ms. Song clarified there would be no rendering of a building, just a footprint of a building. Ms. Song was requested to provide the booklet used for their presentation dt�ring the architectural selection process to the members of the committee. Mr. Jensen asked if the proposed amount was cost plus or a lump sum, to vvhich Ms. Sc�ng responded. it was a lump sum. Mr. Couzzo commented it would be more expensive to do the work this wa.y because multiple sites were being analyzed. Mr. Jensen commented he had e�ected a number in the range of the one presented; that the number was not that large for the programming phase, that he ha.d no problem with other items and two sites were being done, so the numbers proposed were reasonable when one looked at what the Village was getting. It wa.s noted that a needs assessment was really needed and that one had probably never been done. Mr. Couzzo stated his analysis indic,a.ted the M11�IUTES OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING NEGOTIATING CONIlVIITTEE FOR TEQUESTA VIIjLAGE CENTER MEETING HELD JLJNE 5, 2001 PAGE 7 numbers were within reason, and that the Village would expect a superior product. Ms. Song stated they would do their best. Mr. Couzzo explained that the Village Council would make tne decision to go to Phase II, and Phase I needed to meet their expectations. Chair Forsythe questioned at what point the presentations would be made. Mr. Couzzo indicated the initial presenta.tion should be very soon because public input would need to be known; xhe seeond pres�ntation could be in the middle of th.e period and the last one at the end. Ms. Song suggested the first presenta.tion might be just to hear residents comments and take notes, and then to analyze those comments for the second presenta.tion, which would be more polished. Mr. Couzzo requested in addition ta the proposal that Song + Associates produce a mailer to every resident in the community to include a synopsis of the process and the three presentation dates, that Song + Associates put a notice in the newspapers, and the Village would also provide notice in the newspapers, to do everything possible to notify as many r�sidents as possible. Ms. Song commented that the final presentation wouid be more like an actual presentation. Mr. Couzzo notetl xhat mi.nutes would be done for the presenta.tion meetings. It was suggested that a 5-10 minute recap of the previous presentation be done at the second meeting and at . the third and final meet Mr. Jensen described the workshops as a series of workshops built on others whieh would be a building process. Ms. Song indicated this would allow true community input. Mr. Humpage and Mrs. Nagy favored workshops after working hours, at 7 p.m. Mr. Couzzo commented the Village Council could determine the times. Mr. Humpage commented this was the largest capital project the Village had eve�r undertaken and a quality product was expected, and the Village should not be afraid to spend money on the right product. Mr. Jensen commented it was great to see Song + Assaci�.tes chosen since they would provide a quality product. Clarification was requested by Mr. Couzzo that Ms. Song agreed to include in her proposal a newsletter or mailing and mail it out plus to do an advertisement in the Palm Beach Post and Jupiter Courier. Ms. Song commented this might need to be handled as a rei.mbursable beca.use she did not know how many would need to be mailed. Mr. Couzzo responded that the Village would provide a mailing list on a disk. Ms, Forsythe indicated a notice could be placed. on water bills. Mr. Gilstad commented one person would be needed to receive phone calls af�er the advertisements were NIINUTES OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING 1VEGQTIATING COMMI'rTEE FOR TEQUESTA VII,LAGE CENTER MEETING HELD JUNE 5, 2(l0I PAGE 8 published. The length of time that would be needed for Phase Qne was discussed. Ms. Song indicated. she believed it was important for Mr. Couzzo to be a.t tlie presentations, and he was going to be on vaca.tion_ It was determined that 30 days might not be suff'icient ti.me. Ms. Couzzo indicated that a Special Village Council meeting could be held at the end of July. The proposed schedule was to bring the negotiated contract to the Village Council on June 14,and to ho�d the initial workshop on Tuesday, June 19, at 7 p.m., probably as a Special Village Council meeting or Village Council workshop so that the Councilmembers could all interact. Mr. Couzzo indicated he would consult the Village Attorney regarding the meeting format. For the mailing, Mr. �ouzzc� indica.ted the Village could provide a disk of narnes and addresses, Ms. Song indicated they could go ahead. and design a one-page f(yer which would contain the three meeting dates and if the da.tes were changed they would be able to go into the computer and change them. It was indieated there were approximately 2200 residents. The second meeting was proposed for Saturd,ay, Ju1y 14, andh Tuesday night, July 24 for the final presentation. It was estimated another week would then be needed to forma�ize the report, although Ms. Song hoped the report would be final at the last presenta.tion. August 14 was proposed for a Special Village Council meet�ng to be held in order for the Village Council to hopefully approve the recommendation and direct the AdministratiQn t4 enter into the second pha.se of negotiations, after which this Committce would recanvene to discuss the design for the site selected.. Mr. Couz�o indica.ted that a site would be determined from the ranking. Mr. Humpage asked what would happen if it was deter�nined both sites were viable. Mr. Couzzo responded that the process could stop until a referendum could be held and the architects would get a break. It was a,nnounced that the referendum process had already been started. Mr. Humpage asked if a contract could be done for Phase II in November. Iliscussion ensued. Mr. Couzzo explained that policy issues were a function of the Village CouMCil, not a function of this Committee, that the Committee would make their report, the architects would make the�r report, �the Village Council as policymakers would then determine the acti.on to be taken, not the Committee. The Village Council would tell Administration and this Comm.ittee how to proceed.. Mrs. Nagy asked that t11e Village make sure Ms. Song was willing to wait until after a referendum. MINUTES 4F THE ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING NEGOTIATING CONIlVIITTE� F4R TEQUESTA VII,LAGE CENTER �VIEETING H�`LD JLJNE 5, 2�01 PAGE 9 Mr. Jensen made a motion to approve the programming phase and site selec�on services offered by Song + Associates, Inc, in the amoun� of $45,$58.00. Mr. Conzzo am�nded the motion tn inclnde the adver�isements and notices as discussed and that Song + Associates, Inc. wonid draft an agreement to go ont on Friday, June $, 2001 to the V'illage �ouncil for the June 14 uteeting. Mr. Conao seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vute. VI. Adjonrnment Mr. Jensen made a motion to adjonrn the meeting at 5:20 p.m. Mr. Conao seconded the mo�on, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote. Respectfully submitted, . �a'"�c� Beriy Laur Recording Secretary ATTEST: Mary Wolcott Village C1erk Date Approved: