Minutes - 19830215 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

OBANC£ COTJhiPY mAm CIF.anwassimEm Action Agenda ACTXON AGENDA ITFM ABS".t'M= item NO-1 mE-r= mg February 15, 1983 . Subject: Northside Multipurpose Center Renovation L t: County . ananer public 13ea es no A t s : Information Contact: Yes County ;tanager's Office phone N mber: 732.8181 ext. 501 pp;PCSB: To consider what course to take on the proposed renovation in light of bid results. rip: A bid openin. January 26, 1983, revealed a cost of $228,665 as necessary to renovate the building (see attached bids). This compares to budgeted funds for construction of 5157,043 or a difference of $71,621. Such difference in amounts necessitated the architect to reassess the cost elements and compare them to earlier nrojections. From this there were five major explanations: 1. Prior to 1981 the budget was $138,568, construction cost. Plans were to only bring the deficiencies up to code require- ments and providin? ney heat and air conditioning. 2. In March of 1981 it was decided by the County to locate more agencies-within the building in lieu of their beinn housed in rented space. This created the need for internal narti- tioning and additional HVAC cost of $15,321 ($6,000 HVAC and $8,600 for partitioning). 3. It was aqreed to permit the Community School for People Under Six Day Care to remain in the building and occupy an equivalent amount of space. Day Care operation, however, created a dif- ferent and more costly use category with which to comply for licensing and building code requirements (Class E and' I institu- tional). This was above what would have been necessary for the rest of -he building. While $20,000 of the project budget was appropriated for the .Day Care addition actual cost added--aver what would have been necessary for another use--is $56,300. ($12,300 in extra plumbing work of which $3,200 was added by Day Care Staff, without Board approval,to house toddlers; $3,000 in added electrical ; $7;000 for a separate HVAC air distribution; $4,000 in additional fire protection and $30,000 for the struc- tural addition with 942 square feet required by State standards versus the 600 square feet that was Board approved). 4. There would have been additional cost attributable to keeping the day care function apart from whether the addition to the" building had been approved. This was because the scope of remodeling exceeded 50 per cent of the appraised value of the building, requiring full compliance with code standards. 5. The architects' estimate for this degree of improvement is 527 per square foot and the bid cost interpret to $22 Der square foot. Options include: 1. Reject all bids; 2. Seek space for day care in an alternate building which meets the building standards for that use and rebid project; or 3. Accept bids and seek additional funding by spreading construc- tion over two budget years as permitted by General katute 153A-13. RE,CQTENDATI9NL1:_.___---...__