Following a series of site visits to different kinds of construction, the Marion Department of Public Works Building Committee decided to move forward with Will Saltonstall as its lead architect and manager of procurement.
While stating on his presentation outline a preference for wood construction provided the budget could be met, Saltonstall presented to the committee at its September 23 public meeting the recommendation that the town assemble a full engineering team now in order to help make the foundational decisions that will direct design and construction.
“We can talk about the tradeoff between wood and metal building, but in order to understand all our cost variables and back into our building side, we have to do a lot more architectural-engineering work in order to understand what all the other systems’ costs are,” said Saltonstall. “The basic, the soft costs, the hard costs. We can work quickly on metal versus wood, but … I do think we should move on getting the whole engineering team on board.”
The think tank assembled by Town Administrator Jay McGrail and the Select Board in which McGrail and Select Board Chairman Randy Parker participate has brought about lively discussion addressing both the philosophical and logistical aspects of the DPW operations center that town voters supported earlier this year for Benson Brook.
Experts speaking at the September 23 meeting ranged from contractors such as Zoning Board of Appeals member Dana Nilson and Building Commissioner Bob Grillo to Rochester Facilities Manager (and Marion Planning Board member) Andrew Daniel and retired contractor Dale Jones, who has served the town in multiple capacities over the years.
Many matters were addressed, informed and even debated.
The meeting began with a recap of the site move from a priority area adjacent to the Wastewater Treatment Plant operations center to an area farther back near the water tower and where the salt shed has been planned all along.
Buttressing the revised location is the cost-saving decision to go with one building over two, eliminating duplicate foundations and elements of infrastructure and services. Saltonstall figures one building could save anywhere between $50,000 and $100,000 pending design and cost variables, including those related to time.
Project procurement is considering modular, prefabricated structures and associated pros and cons of wood and metal construction. “We want to look to optimize, but we don’t want to put in this ideal building and come in 30% over budget,” said Saltonstall.
Among items discussed per Saltonstall’s outline were the potential of a solar array, the extent of paved and fence-enclosed areas and the relationship between the facility’s operations area and vehicle storage, the salt shed, the water tower and parking. Vehicle washing methods and storage space could all affect the final tally.
Fire suppression will apparently be necessary, as the one-building plan estimated to be approximately 14,450 square feet is almost double the threshold that triggers the inclusion of fire suppression.
There was debate as to project-design method, basically whether to start with basic necessities and build up from there based on cost (Parker) or start with a full list of desired elements and cut back based on budgetary constraints.
Nilson suggested including all the information on the town’s wish list.
“We don’t have to bid it to figure it out, we have cost estimators,” said McGrail.
After much discussion, Saltonstall told the committee that before trying to arrive at cost estimates, he wants to review the design in the agreed-upon space, “making it a little smaller … with DPW input” and presenting a revision that the committee can consider.
McGrail recommended that Saltonstall meet with the DPW, achieve some rough cost estimates and then report back to the committee. Parker suggested getting engineer Ken Motta’s input as well.
The next meeting of the Marion DPW Building Committee was not scheduled upon adjournment.
Marion DPW Building Committee
By Mick Colageo