EAST
MARKHAM
COMMUNITY CENTRE AND LIBRARY
SUB-COMMITTEE
TOWN OF MAKRHAM
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
11:30 a.m., York Room
|
Attendance: Regrets: Regional Councillor Landon |
Staff: Henry Tse, Project Manager Gary Adamkowski, Asset Management Laura Gold, Committee Clerk Distribution: Joel Lustig, Treasurer Meg West, Manager, Strategic Initiatives Glen Taylor, Director of Recreation Dave Merriman, Recreation Coordinator Biju Karumanchery, Development Manager David Pearce, Real Property Manager Lori Wells, Manager, Programs Veronica Siu, Senior Business Analyst Shore Tibe Irwin & Partners (STIP): Others to Receive Minutes: John Livey |
The meeting of the East Markham Community Centre convened at 11:47 a.m. with Councillor Carolina Moretti, presiding as Chair.
1.
VALUE ENGINEERING EXERCISE
The Committee was advised that the purpose of the meeting was to report possible cost savings for the East Markham Community Centre Project based on the output of the value engineering exercise that was conducted with Town Staff and the Contracting Team. It was explained that the value engineering exercise was an attempt to save money through applying a more simplified design to the East Markham Community Centre Project without affecting the final outcome of the Project. Some of the criteria used to evaluate the savings were: whether the product replacement was technically inferior; if the savings would affect the aesthetics of the East Markham Community Centre; and if the saving would lead to greater risk for the Town.
A list of all the potential savings provided by PCL Construction Leaders was circulated to Members. The Committee reviewed all of the items on the list. Staff explained why a potential savings was rejected or accepted. The Committee was advised that the potential savings accepted by Staff as part of value engineering exercise was $677,625. It was noted that if the Committee was not comfortable with the savings currently accepted, Staff would go back and conduct a further review of the plans.
The Committee agreed that the original plans were well thought through, as there was little savings to be found through the value engineering exercise. It was noted that building a smaller community centre would reduce cost, but that a larger size community centre was required to meet functional requirements agreed upon for the community centre.
The Committee agreed with most of the suggested savings being recommended by Staff, but discussed in detail the deleting of the decorative glazing fins at the precast parking garage. The proposed change was to have decorative glazing fins on the east wall of the parking garage rather than having the glazing fins wrap around all the walls of the parking structure. Staff explained that they had accepted this savings as they thought the community centre design still benefited from the aesthetics of the decorative glazing fins on the east wall.
The Committee recognized that reducing the number of structural glazing fins would lead to great cost savings, but on the other hand, felt that the parking garage should be thought of as an extension to the building. It also thought that accepting these savings could mean greater expense later to beautify the parking structure. After some discussion, the Committee agreed that the south wall of the parking garage probably did not need the glazing fins, as in time the wall may be hidden by landscaping. It also agreed that there was value in having the glazing wrap at the entrance and exit of the parking garage and in ensuring that north side was equipped such that the wall could be beautified at a future date.
The Committee agreed to following modifications to the proposed savings from the value engineering exercise:
- Continue structural glazing fins to wrap around the entrance and exit to the parking garage;
- Equip the north side of the parking garage such that structural glazing fins or some other beautification to be decided at a future date can be added to the wall.
A Member asked that the possibility of spacing the glazing fins 5 meters apart instead of 4 meters be investigated as a potential cost savings, however, it was noted that the fins were located at structural joints. It was estimated that allowing the structural gazing to wrap around the entrance and exit of the parking garage could reduce the savings by as much as $50,000. The cost of equipping the north side of the parking garage for future glazing fins was not reported.
The East Markham Community Centre meeting adjourned at 12:50 p.m.