1/9/2023 - Meeting Minutes MEETING MINUTES
SALT LAKE CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING CONSERVANCY AND USE COMMITTEE
ELECTRONIC MEETING HELD, MONDAY,JANUARY 9, 2023
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESE%Canorrbautp
EX OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT
w
Steve Cornell,Committee Cha ;•t Jim Cleland,SLC Facilities
Anne Oliver �``'� `i '�� Joan Swain,SLC Facilities
Kathy Davis t Tal:r C�itn&fountr$3nilDwg arilyn Anderson,SLC Engineering
Rob Pett &Ese Connnitter J ysen Oldroyd,SLC Attorney's Office
Catherine Tucker i _ _ A den Lillie,SLC Planning
Jennifer Hale _
r LiewikkiAM — _
John Kemp,Vice chair Q#HER GUESTS OR INVITEES
Kathy Davis i ate: February 13, 2023 Don Harward, Don L. Harward Assoc.
Travis Sheppard,Architects
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT
Barbara Murphy
Steve welcomed everyone to the Salt Lake City and County Building Conservancy and Use Committee Meeting this Monday,January
9,2023,and asked that a rollcall be done including everyone attending in person here in the City and County Building as well as
those participating virtually via WEBEX. Steve Cornell,Committee Chair; Rob Pett, Committee Member;Jim Cleland,SLC Facilities;
Don Harward,Guest;Joan Swain,SLC Facilities;Travis Sheppard,GSBS Architects;Aiden Lillie,SLC Planning;Jaysen Oldroyd,SLC
Attorney's Office;Catherine Tucker,Committee Member;Anne Oliver,Committee Member; Karilyn Anderson,SLC Engineering;John
Kemp,Committee Member;Jenny Hale, Committee Member; Kathy Davis,Committee Member
AGENDA ITEM 1: REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 12M 2022 MEETING MINUTES.
Steve asked the Committee if they have had a chance to review the minutes from last month and suggested if anyone needs to take
a minute to look them over to do so. There were no questions or comments and Steve asked if someone would like to make a
motion to approve the minutes.
Rob Pett moved that the minutes for December 12, 2022, be adopted.
Steve asked if there is a second.
John Kemp seconded the motion.
Steve asked for a vote by the Committee. The motion was unanimously approved.
AGENDA ITEM 2: FURNITURE (CHAIR) PRESENTATION—Don Harward
Don Harward explained that the Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency(RDA) has asked for a particular type of furniture that would
facilitate a plan to change an existing conference room (once an old safe) into multi-use room. The room is located on the first floor,
northwest quadrant. The furniture that has been chosen is a piece of furniture that becomes a club chair on casters with a tablet
arm and the tablet arm that can be adjusted to the side if needed. With this chair they can have conference meetings, discussions
and the chairs can be moved around. There are no chairs like this in the building, but because this room is not available to the
public,they will only be used by and seen by RDA employees for the multi-changing functions they have in this department. (A
picture of this furniture was sent out with the agenda.) It is a well-made piece of furniture with an oak finish and locking casters
and will hold 300 pounds. There would be some right and some left tablet arms based on how a person writes. RDA would like to
have something like this in this multi-use room. It had a conference table at one time, but they have more people than can fit
around the conference table and with these chairs can moved around to huddle up or spread out as needed. The initial drawing
included 12 chairs to fit into this room, but there could be more purchased at some point. The fabric has not been chosen yet, but it
will be fire-rated,and RDA has agreed to stay within the palette of the building.
Steve thanked Don for the presentation and asked if a motion was required or if this presentation was more of a courtesy.
Jim Cleland suggested that this was more of a courtesy, but it would be more that there is no opposition for this in the place where it
is designated to be used.
1
There were no further questions or discussions.
Rob Pett motioned to accept the proposed chairs for the RDA as presented today.
Steve acknowledged the motion and asked if anyone would second the motion.
Anne Oliver seconded the motion.
Steve asked for a vote to approve the motion. The Committee voted unanimously to approve the motion.
Steve thanked Don for coming.
AGENDA ITEM 3: Building Interior Signage.
Jim Cleland explained that he is all for having a design discussion and possibly a survey done with ADA compatibility and other parts
of a survey and a study, however, he would like to postpone the fund-raising and the financial of the project until this buildings
cracks and earthquake work is all done.
Rob: This will mean 3 more years if you look at the schedule.
Jim: Hopefully it will only be 2 years. Once they get this started,the Contractor is going to want to get this done as soon as possible.
Steve: Are you saying you want to postpone the fund-raising and any work on the project, but in terms of doing an analysis you
would do that now?
Jim: No, part of it has to do with the funds and there are no funds right now and the other part is that internal resources are
stretched to the limit with the number of projects and the total volume of projects they are doing right now with the current bond
they just received. There are 2 bonds, and they also have CIP,and a lot of our resources are in the process of taking care of those
right now and we don't have internal resources to do them right.
Jim: Karilyn do you have anything to add to this information.
Karilyn: No.
Rob: Are we just going table this for 3 years and see nothing happen. It seems that in a 3-year period a certain amount of work
could be done,and it could be initial work that is not the major project.
Jim: This could not for the immediate year. Funding changes each year and there may be an opportunity to slip this in, but there
isn't right now. The CIP for 2023 has already been submitted and they are now going through the CIP process for 2024. We can't
submit anything for 1 year and perhaps it could be addressed at that time and then we will have a good idea how far along the
project is coming and maybe there will be some bandwidth within Engineering and Facilities to be able to make this happen.
Steve: Are you saying that either Engineering or Facilities would do the study or the analysis.
Jim: One of these departments must initiate the study,find the money,and get the details of the study. The study will come before
this committee,so this committee will not go unaware.
Rob: This was discussed last month, and Sean brought up that there was the possibility that the current architects could be asked to
look at.
Jim:The City is not going to do that right now;the city cannot engage anyone to do anything until there is funding in place.
Rob would like to keep this as an ongoing agenda item to discuss every time the committees meets,to see where things are.
Steve: Maybe it can be put it on the agenda quarterly or six months down the road,since there is not going to be funding this year.
Jim: There will not have an opportunity for funding until October of 2023,which is when submittals are done for 2025 Capital
Improvement money.
2
Steve: If the Committee looks at this quarterly and can help conceptualize what this study would entail, it could be looked over and
possibly be ready to present in 3 months and then sort of finalize the scope 6 months down the road and that way it would be in-
place for the next CIP budget cycle. The suggestion by this Committee of what the scope might look like would obviously have to be
finalized by Engineering and Facilities.
Jim: The scope as suggested by this Committee can be submitted with the CIP request and will hold a lot of weight.
Steve: The outline this Committee submits will have a standards guideline,dictating what the signs need to be,what they need to
look like,this will all come out of the"Design and Use Guidelines".
Travis: Would it be possible to go into funding with both the design guideline funding and the study? Most firms would be able to
understand what signs are going to be going into the building and provide a cost estimate.
Jim: That is a big part of the study and you've got to have some design when you do the case study.
Travis: What I am saying is,so as not to push it out further,the city could have funded both the study and the design so that the
bulk could happen with that year and not have to wait until the following year.
Jim: That would be a piece of the scope of work that you would include the study and the design as one project. The city would not
want to fund$100,000 worth of work and just have a study at the end, but they could go$20,000 or$30,000 as a study with the
design in between and say yes to continue with the design,with funding secured.
Steve: Does anyone have any other questions or discussion on this. There were no more questions.
AGENDA ITEM 4: OTHER BUILDING PROJECTS UPFDATES.
Karilyn Anderson: Engineering just received the estimate this afternoon,therefore they have not had a change to study it, but
Travis is going to walk through what has changed since the last estimate and see what questions the Committee may have. Kari lyn
shared the report on the screen.
Travis explained the following:
• GSBS received a revised cost estimate for the seismic damage work. The first page is a summary and jumping down to the
bottom line the estimate is 10.155 million,which in rough terms is about 20%more than the previous estimate. The
reasons for this are several,one is inflation,which is approximately 17%. The other thing is that we've gone through and
just verified all the cracks and all the damage. Some costs did increase from our original design documents, but we just
wanted to be thorough and make sure we caught everything.
• One clarification in our construction documents, is that we qualified each of the damages by a level. This estimate says
level, but the levels mentioned on the cost estimate are the floor levels, not the damage levels.
• This estimate is very similar to the previous cost estimate and formal information. The only thing that has changed are unit
costs and the quantity.
• The other item that was also included in this cost estimate was we had a selective demolition study done and we included
that information from the study that was included in the report in this cost estimate so the materials and the process that
we concluded on due to the repairs is included in this process.
• Some other things,just to clarify the other damage, light fixtures,sprinklers and opening to light fixtures and sprinklers is
damage that occurred in the angular openings to all of those,so we've got money there to make those repairs. Openings
shown are 11. The most significant is the opening that is behind the trophy case,which we're going to strengthen that wall
so the opening acts as though it's not there structurally. There are some items here for any other openings that we may
find during the construction that need to be repaired.
• In the selected demolition we found that the roof was not damaged by the earthquake,that whatever damage the was
seen by the drone appeared to be wind or other damage. Stone repair was also something that was looked at in the
selective demolition and we found that there was no significant damage that was apparent by the earthquake.
• The Base isolators were also tested, and they were found to be adequate/functional, not requiring any repair or update
because of the earthquake.
Travis:Are any questions on the summary?
3
Rob: Of these 10 million dollars, 2 million of it is contingency(roughly 20 percent).
Travis: That is correct,for overall design,contingency for each level.
Steve: If the contingency is not used, how does that work?
Travis: This is the cost estimate, but gives GSBS and the Committee an idea of what it looks like. GSBS won't know the actual cost
until it is bid out. This is quite a bit of detail if you go through line per line but is based on GSBS's current construction documents,
which are going to be submitted to the City's website this evening. This does say draft and the only why it says that is that is hadn't
been reviewed by the owner or by this Committee, but we don't anticipate any changes to this until it comes out of these meetings.
Karilyn asked if there were any questions.
Catherine: Would it be appropriate for Committee members to request a copy of this to review.
Rob: If it gets distributed to the Committee for review it ought to come through Engineering.
Jim: Engineering needs to have time to do their evaluation before sending it out to the Committee. It's going to be a public
document going out on a bid sheet.
Karilyn: Engineering will receive a 100%set that is going to start being reviewed by the billing department for permits: Those will be
posted those on "ProCore",and these will be shared with everyone with interest in the City to give their feedback and can make
comments on the drawings before we release the final 100%.
Travis: Will Engineering really be releasing the detailed cost estimate?
Jim: The city usually releases the bid packages along with the engineers estimate after Engineering has completed their own review
of the drawings.
Travis: That is surprising that the city would send the total amount out before, because the contractor would say this is a 10-
million-dollar budget and I'll give him a 10-million-dollar budget even though I know I can do it for 8 million.
Karilyn: Engineering discussed that they are only going to have a budget of about 8 million dollars of insurance and this is about 10
Million Dollars,so we will probably have to do some sort of breakdown of the project or phasing and will have to summarize the
project so we don't send out a bid for something we don't have the funds for. We have to phase certain parts of the project saying
this part is an alternative and if it becomes part of the budget,we can do it and if it is outside the budget it is left out.
Jim: They have a budget now,we show them this and if it's within 1 or 2%of the difference of the price of the project,then they can
send it. If it isn't within the 1 or 2%then they must sharpen their pencils and bring it to the budget that they have.
Travis:The hard thing here is that the insurance company is willing to pay whatever it costs,so if its 10 million dollars and if the bids
come back at 10 million dollars that's what it costs.
Karilyn: The discussion that was had with the insurance company is that they will pay for the value of the repairs at the time of the
earthquake, and it has been 2 years, and now were dealing with inspection and because of that they are not going to issue the full
amount.
Jim:The insurance company has been good enough to front us some of the claim, but not the entire claim. The amount received is
mainly to cover our expenses up to this point.
Rob: What is the date that this information will hit the streets for the contractor to bid?
Karilyn: Engineering is getting ready to issue the RFQ and after that the vision is that it will going out to bid mid to end of February
and start construction the beginning of March, but once we select a contractor,we still have to go through the phasing again and
make sure the contractor understand what are the limitations of the phasing with the users of the building and make modifications
as they go and see if we can find a way that is reasonable and save us money too. There are lot of people in the building that are
4
concerned about the phasing,especially because it is going to affect their work and schedules and they are going to come up with a
lot of questions.
Steve: Do you have to displace departments as you go through and do the project or do people just go and work from home for a
month? What is the plan for that?
Karilyn:There are a lot of departments that have said they are willing to work from home, but the one that is most concerning is
probably the attorney's office because they like to work in their space because they have a lot of conference calls so if it is going to
be an effort for everyone to come to a conclusion agree upon the phases that are going to be the result of the study.
Steve: But that's not part of the cost of the project to relocate departments and get them set-up, is it?
Jim: In many of the areas the ceilings are affected and so they can't put scaffolding on top of the systems furniture without injuring
somebody. So,the systems furnishings will have to moved and that is why Facilities maintains redline drawings on every room,
every drawing because everything will have to be dismantled,taken out in the hall or worked around.
Steve: Is this cost in this bid as well?
Jim: No.
Karilyn: We still have the cost of moving the furniture and the artwork which is going to be significant. The a rtwork will be about
$40,000, but they are still trying to figure out insurance issues. We are trying to get insurance in place once we get the artwork into
storage. We are trying to store the artwork in the building so it's not too far from the source and we can save money, but the
movers are concern that if they don't have the artwork insured and they don't have it in a controlled space,then anyone can
damage the artwork while they are not there and they would be responsible. This is what we are trying to figure out.
Steve asked if there are any other questions. Steve thanked Travis,Jim,and Karilyn for their information.
Rob asked if there is any news of the vault/transformer.
Jim: The City and County Building transformer replacement project ran into a problem that we discussed a couple of months ago in
this Committee meeting, but the project has pieces of it on 2 parcels,therefore the city is going to require 2 building permits. 1 for
the central plant are they will be installing a new enclosure for the generators and 1 for the vault here that is going to hold all the
transformer equipment next to the City and County Building. We are just waiting for permitting and getting all that to do before we
can put that out to bid.
Rob: I suspect that if that goes out to bid during this project there's no overlap in construction efforts since everything is outside.
Jim: Except for the tie-ins and that will be done separately. The new equipment will all be installed and ready to turn on and then
the transfer will take place(the big switch).
Travis: Because this is not going to be released until Engineering reviews it, I need to collect the handouts back from each of the
Committee. Once it gets posted we will send it out.
Steve asked if anyone has anything else on the last agenda item to discuss. There were no comments.
Steve suggested he will entertain a motion to adjourn.
Anne Oliver moved to adjourn.
Catherine Tucker seconded the motion.
Steve asked for a vote. The Committee voted unanimously to adjourn.
5