ORDER-2022-77 : An Appropriation from Free Cash, account number 01-324001, in the amount of One Million Five Hundred Thousand ($1,500,000.00) Dollars to the Memorial Hall Renovation Project, account number 33864-490000.

Transcript (~49 min @ 34:00)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 34:01 Jen Grigoraitis: All right, our final item for tonight is order 2022 77 and appropriation from free cash account number 0, 1, 3, 2, 4, 0, 0, 1. In the amount of 1,500,000 dollars to the memorial hall renovation project account number. 3, 3, 8, 6, 4 dash 4, 9, 0, 0, 0, 0. And I know we have many people coming on for this.

▶ 34:32 Jen Grigoraitis: Denise, are you going to be kicking things off?

▶ 34:35 Speaker 7: Yes, I am and I think we have everybody. Let me just double check here. Very good. Okay. Yes. Good evening.

▶ 34:45 Denise Gaffey: And thank you for this opportunity. I'm going to just introduce the folks that are here. My name is Denise. Kathy. I'm the director of planning and community development. And joining me tonight is Kathy, who is the executive director of Memorial Hall, Bonnie Reese, our city engineer. Brian Neely, who is our consulting engineer with Gale Associates. And Patrick De La Russa is also joining us, CFO, to answer any questions specific to free cash. And also we have the chairwoman of the Memorial Hall Board of Trustees and several members in attendance, I believe. I just want to mention that in case any questions come up later. And as, you know, we have been developing plans to restore the exterior more and address water infiltration issues that have plagued the building for years. The council previously approved 2.3Million dollars for this work. And as our 1st step, we hired Gail associates, they are experts in building envelope work. To thoroughly evaluate the building, so they performed an extensive leak audit, including test cuts and geo technical evaluations. In addition to a visual inspection inside and outside of the building. This in depth testing methodology identified more extensive damage than originally envisioned and. Along with structural defects that we could not identify initially through visual inspections alone. This was all outlined in a very detailed report that Gale Associates prepared, which was submitted along with this order. So hopefully you've had a chance to take a look at that. So, consequently, as part of this process, Gale advised us that the construction budget would only allow for us to address the most immediate areas of concern to prevent water infiltration now, but that we would need to establish a future phase of work. In order in roughly 5 to 7 years in order to tackle the rest of the work. So, that that funding for that is is estimated to cost approximately 1.5. Billion dollars, and that particular scope of work was itemized in the memo that I also submitted with this order. In which we're going to review in a little more detail in a few moments. So, we presented this information to the board of trustees. To Mayor Broder and to Patrick DellaRusso along with our recommendation that. It would be more, it would be most cost effective and advantageous to try to fund all of this work now. If at all possible in order to take advantage of the design team that is in place. To avoid cost escalations that will occur. In future years, in addition, additional mobilization costs that will occur. Also to minimize disruptions to the building and to allow Kathy and the trustees to proceed to address the interior renovations that are needed. And really should only be accomplished once the building is weather type. And also, just as an aside, I've been involved in other restoration projects at Memorial Hall over the years. Including many smaller projects that were accomplished with grants. and more limited city funds and the results have been a more of a piecemeal approach that makes tracking repairs and identifying identifying future needs more challenging so i think there's great advantages to accomplishing all this work at one time to ensure that everything is weather tight for decades to come so given this information and the availability and the availability of free cash which is ideally suited for one-time capital expenses like this it's recommended that we make this investment now. So with this as a background, I thought it would be good to just turn this over to our consultant from Gale Associates for a very quick presentation of the findings from the evaluation. He has put some slides together just to show you in a little more detail some of the areas of deterioration and disrepair that we hope to address and restore as part of this project um and then we'd be happy to talk talk about it further answer any questions that you have so if we could have uh allow brian to share his screen right now all right there we

▶ 39:49 Speaker 6: go all right one second sorry it's starting to get wrong counselor gary can you not hear

▶ 40:02 Mark Garipay: sorry uh yes if they could just speak up a little bit i'm having a little trouble here

▶ 40:23 Speaker 6: it's a little little thing sorry thank you thank you all right i'm not sure this is not sharing

▶ 40:29 Speaker 6: the right can you see the presentation now perfect thank you yes we can i'm just going to quickly go

▶ 40:34 Speaker 6: through presentation that i believe you have a copy in front of you just to go over the scope of work that um we are performing at the memorial building uh these are some overall shots that we're taking with the drone uh that we used to fly the project during the evaluation phase the evaluation phase as Denise mentioned was included testing of the brick and the roofing materials to understand the existing conditions in a better detail we also performed geotech boring to get a better understanding some of that settlement that was observed in the stairs and this allowed us to put together a detailed set of documents as far as noting what the deficiencies were which what led to the uh budget scope and uh repair items on the left side you can see some of the deterioration of the interior space because of moisture penetration that's occurring through the rising walls at the roof above the roof level causing damage to interior finishes within the gar hall and the auditorium on the right side you can see some photos of the condition of existing window sills that are uh laminating pulling apart glass is falling out um on the upper clear story windows just causing problems um obviously not being air and watertight um we're also going to be treating and addressing a lot of the peeled wood elements making sure they're consolidated repaired and agent solid and repointing all the brick and stone and adjusting concrete um small and prepared images um so the scope of work i won't go through the detail but is going to include concrete major work window work where we're going to remove and restore the existing windows we're also going to include a new low profile aluminum storm windows to improve the energy efficiency of the building uh the roof uh the doors will be replacing the north entrance doors which are the opposite side of the building from the fire station then we'll be repairing some miscellaneous damages to the existing doors that will remain We'll be removing or replacing the roof with a new PVC roof membrane with additional insulation for improved energy performance. We're also going to be addressing some of these issues at the chimney cap by lowering the cap, capping the abandoned flue, removing the deteriorated metal flue liner that is basically hanging on at the top of the roof. There is multiple areas of sheet metal roofing within the project that is either missing or place i'll move over that in a minute i'll also show you some structural steel that we identified during the test cuts that is uh delaminated and in poor condition it needs to be repaired now some additional scope items are listed in the bullet that denise provided to you which will be adding to the project and look over and these pictures so it just gives you an idea of some of the general conditions we're looking at um where joints that have failed previous repairs that are on um that don't use the same water type as the original building and leave a dissimilar kind of spotting look to the facade concrete um smalls that are uh potentially a hazard to people walking the store and also could let more moisture and more damage into the building uh the major repairs are going to be replaced um with the detailing that matches the existing scene at the top right some water joints that are open loose on the right are a sample of a metal t that we're going to be inserting into the sky-facing joints that protects the water joints from further water filtration and provides a longer lasting detail uh the window repairs are going to be removing the windows putting them into a shop removing the glazing and the lead cage um putting in new glass or repairing the existing reset existing glass and then putting new glazings in and then painting every switch we'll also be adding a New color glass to the auditorium clear story windows. Well, a lot of the glass in that space, they repair and replace over time as the. Wood muttons are failing and the existing ways and parties a lot of rolling windows in. Those glasses are repaired with different types of glass, which given on. Regular appearance, the insides will be replacing the incorrect color glass with 1, uniform color as part of this additional money. We'll also be providing shades in all the windows that are currently missing that. That includes some of the changing rooms in the upper level that don't have any shades at all.

▶ 45:05 Speaker 6: And other locations where they're missing or damaged. The interior store windows that we discussed are going to be installed on the inside of the window. They're going to be thin profiles so that they don't impact the aesthetics of the interior of the building. We can provide additional energy efficiency to the single pane windows that are there now. The upper clear story windows currently during some performances need to be darkened there that's darkened by using a black plastic bag. Um, ribboning over the windows that's leading to further deterioration of the existing would trim. And what we're going to replace and said with this electronic exterior shades that can be used. To lower the shades in those areas during the performances that need require it. Um, and then, uh, so successful and maintainable from the exterior is needed. uh that'll be powered with controls so it'll be a safe method to access that into to operate them uh the rear of the stage area includes uh sheet metal and trim that is deteriorated will be replaced um to match the existing uh the front entry door has some damages uh the wood that will be repaired painted uh similar the existing metal doors are going to

▶ 46:20 Speaker 6: remain but we'll prepare any spots and provide equipment uh the north lobby doors are in poor condition they don't meet current um egress code requirements so we'll be replacing them with doors that match the south lobby doors to face the fire station which are two pairs of larger leaf doors but we're going to replace them with fiberglass wood door rather than with the solid wood door because those are used mostly for

▶ 46:44 Speaker 6: maintenance and catering and things like that and get a little bit more abuse the rear door on the top right hand corner is the organ door which is in poor condition as daylight visible through air and water against the building so we'll be repairing or replacing that with a new fiberglass door to match the system roof replacement as i mentioned has several conditions that we'll be addressing to provide a watertight flashing condition we'll be increasing the thermal proficient thermal efficiency of the roof As the chimney cap we talked about earlier, that will be reduced. The top right shows the existing condition. The bottom right shows the lowest condition that the historic has approved. You can see on the left the damages to the existing flue liner.

▶ 47:32 Speaker 6: That is no longer connected. The sheet metal is in generally good condition. We'll be doing some repair work as needed. The copper banding element on the left will be removed and replaced with new. And what we want to do with the project is bring back some of the original ornamentation that was not a part of the original building, but it's no longer there. You can see in the right, the current photograph of the building and on the left postcard image from the early 1920s that indicate there was some banding that goes around the front piers. You can tell that that's missing by some shading of the existing stone. Now, the upper left-hand side, you can see a sample of what was there facing the fire station, and then a wreath on the side that faces away from the fire station on the north side. So we'll be putting those elements back on and replicating the existing. We've worked with manufacturers in the past to provide 100% replication of the existing reputation through molding and sheet metalwork. So these are just some samples of what we'll be doing, but in our case matching the existing banding and wreath structures. During the demolition and test cut work before we found that there was some deteriorated steel elements that hold up the stone piers at both sides of the building. You see in the bottom right the exfoliation of the steel when water enters the building and thus the steel starts to flake, this is significantly deteriorated. So we'll be storing that section of the building and removing or replacing the steel and it's new to match existing. I believe you all have a copy of the expanded scope budget and the line items that we're to add to the project to complete all of the wire renovation items and then as our graduate schedule um assuming that this is accepted and passed we are planning on completing the 100 design scope with these additional items by the end of april uh sorry by the end of march so that uh april will be out to bid and we'll be looking at construction through the fall and spring of

▶ 49:44 Speaker 6: 2023. thank you i'm going to leave any of these on denise or uh stop share hi i think you're okay

▶ 49:48 Denise Gaffey: to stop sharing for now unless any of the counselors want to see any of the images again

▶ 50:00 Speaker 7: at this moment um but at this time we're happy to answer any questions that you have are there

▶ 50:18 Mark Garipay: counselors who wish to ask questions counselor Garipay thank you um i supported this order originally when it came down i'm gonna support it now i think it's important that we do the exterior fix it all at all at once so we can get to the interior and get ms pickett broader a building that uh that um we can rent it hopefully not that we're not renting it but continue to uh rent and get to it maybe self-sustaining uh on the budget but um i guess i i just have a couple questions and and Ms. Gaffney and I have talked and she understands my frustrations with this with this process. I guess the question is why didn't we bring Gale and Associates in closer at the beginning of this process so when we got the first round when it first came down for 2.3 that we allocated two years ago we didn't have more of an accurate number in detail. It seems like once Gale and associates went in and did a detail inspection we found a lot of additional work so how come just curious how come we just don't get on projects of size we don't bring them in earlier or a company like them in earlier so we have more of an accurate number that we're voting on sure

▶ 51:31 Denise Gaffey: i think what happened originally is we had a very small amount of money through an earmark back in i want to say 2018 and at that time we were trying to um identify and fix some some of the immediate concerns that kathy was having with water infiltration and with deterioration inside the building so we didn't have a lot of money we didn't have the kind of funds that we to do the the scope of evaluation that was done once we brought gail on the inspection that the engineering company at that time did which again was designed more to identify some quick area fixes in the building at that time with the small amount of money that we had um that their investigation was more of a visual survey and didn't give us the the extent of the um uh information for that we could get with a more destructive kind of testing protocol that we were able to undertake later i'm just i'm just wondering if

▶ 52:45 Mark Garipay: if we had spent a little bit more up front would we not be looking at an additional 1.5 million and i you know in this project uh for the initial i think you said that the initial um was an engineering group that that gave us an initial estimate um because we didn't have the money to go or we didn't we didn't allocate the money to go out and do a full scope inspection at that time or is this typically how it uh it tends to work with these size projects

▶ 53:16 Denise Gaffey: the goal at that time wasn't to do and in retrospect it maybe wasn't a good decision the goal at that time was to try to take to use some of the funding to just do some repairs in the building and so instead of getting the funding that was needed to do the full scale evaluation So it's just the approach because it was just a small amount of money at the time.

▶ 53:42 Mark Garipay: Yeah, I mean, my concern, like I said, I'm supported, I'm 100% behind it. My concern going forward is trying to get as much of a post-accurate number on these large-sized projects. But also when we're asked to allocate $2.3 million and two years later, if the money hasn't been spent we just went through a cip process we have 96 projects i'm wondering that 2.3 million dollars in in over the two years could have been allocated to a different project that may cost us more money because we've had that money tied up that's that's my my only concern i hope we can take a more a larger view with these um or a more detailed view with these when when these projects as they come down i've already had you know we've already discussing discussing with patrick and my concerns on this so i just um i just have trouble tying up two point two point three million dollars uh for two years when we have so 96 projects on uh that we're looking at on a cip um but i know this has to be done i fully support it um that's

▶ 54:51 Jen Grigoraitis: just uh that's just that's it thanks thank you counselor okay next up i have counselor stewart and then I have Councillor Karim Cheney in queue. Is there anyone else, any other councillors wishing to

▶ 55:04 Robb Stewart: be added to that list? Okay, Councillor Stewart. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you everyone for coming forward to us tonight. This was an unanticipated,

▶ 55:17 Speaker 8: you would consider this as unanticipated, right, based on the results?

▶ 55:23 Denise Gaffey: I think it's safe to say that the extent of the scope was not anticipated. That's correct. I mean, we do have, and I will clarify, we could do a project now with the funding that we have, and it would make the building watertight. It's just that we know we wouldn't be able to address. We know that in five years time, the elements that we can't do now, the portions of the roof or the portions of the masonry that aren't that you know we're not we wouldn't be reappointing right now would need to get done in five years and so then we'd be chasing the problem again

▶ 56:03 Robb Stewart: understood understood um well since it was unanticipated and we're drawing off of this um there's there's a capital investment that i assume would need to be deferred as a result because we're shifting the monies from something else that we may have had planned to this what

▶ 56:27 Denise Gaffey: what is getting deferred um i'm not sure that there's anything being deferred right now i think and maybe patrick is the best person to speak to this because we we we are we do have the benefit of some funding available that i think is a little bit unique um right now because of um because of the free cash situation and because of the arpa funding so i'm not aware of anything that is actually not being done specifically because of this project but if i make to the counselor

▶ 56:56 Speaker 8: a great question good evening um no we don't have anything in the queue right now that's being deferred in the past i think you'll recall we had the library project itself within the queue when we talked about other projects we talked about the bb at a much lower level of funding at that time That was in the queue and the projects that we had for the fire department for the ladder truck that's already been out there. And that project has been completed. So, 1 of the, um. Benefits of just of this project, the way it's we're proposing that it be funded concept is that right now we're just entering a brand new program. We'll have the opportunity to look at these projects 1 on 1 without without having behind us. The concern that perhaps another project wouldn't wouldn't it wouldn't be funded the way we had anticipated or, like, set up a placeholder and the debt program because right now there isn't the only thing I would bring to everyone's attention is that we are cognizant of the fact that the bulk school debt will be coming on in fiscal 23. And so it comes on the 1st, 2 years, probably about 65,000 dollars right now from what we know, then it goes up to a 30 year to almost 200,000 thereafter. It's 351,000. Per year, so another. Benefit of finding it the ways we've been proposing this evening counselor is that, um. We're not, we're not going to be going out for another note at a time when we know that, you know, we had that other obligation out there. So, this would really help relieve that the debt program from having to, uh.

▶ 58:51 Robb Stewart: Be concerned with that, you know, I've gone a little bit back and forth on this quite honestly, because. You know, I know we're waist deep in the planning effort. And it feels like we're jumping the line a little bit because this was a piece of work that we had identified we had funded and we had agreed to and supported.

▶ 59:19 Robb Stewart: And what I'm hearing is. There's something that has to get done within 5 to 7 years, but it doesn't have to get done today. I don't know the status and the details of the, but if there are items that have to get done today that are potentially higher priority. And what's being asked for tonight that gives me cause and pause for for questioning. Are we aligning what we need to do in terms of priority with how we want to allocate the dollars? So, I'm, I'm interested in, um, before I be rash about my decision. I'm interested in how you see that perspective and how we're making these decisions relative to all of the things that we need to do. It's the 96 different projects that we have in line and I know a lot of them are out there, right? But I know there's several of them that are center. So, let me understand how that decision gets made relative to everything else that we need to do if I may typically and that's an excellent question because we're 96 projects on this current list that we're looking at.

▶ 1:00:26 Speaker 8: We have yet to fully rank them as a committee. We go through this dilemma each time that we have a capital program because the number of projects that are on there as rated by the committee members are of different priorities to different members. And then collectively we come together and formulate a program that actually orders them based on the collective wisdom of everyone on the committee. So, what we see here happening is a couple of things. 1 is that we, we cease to always. Provide as as much resources as we can with the knowledge that we know of today. We do know today specifically. That the work that we're looking for now to have done a memorial hall. If not completed, regardless of how it's funded, it's the building itself will not get better. We know specifically today what the problems are. We also know that the additional cost in a, in 4 or 5 years be higher than what we're looking at this evening. That's a known. And regardless of how candidly, how it's determined in the end to be funded, whether this be the proper funding vehicle or not doesn't change that. We do have programs and projects. There's a number of exactly as you indicated that are much smaller in scope. Some projects within the program are water and sewer based, so they'll be funded through water and sewer enterprise or water and sewer capital. So, they're not all derived from general fund. The ones that we can do that we're able to do. We will do through general bond notes or, and or. Unlike other opportunities over the last past couple of years, we now have an ability, which is quite interesting to take advantage of. We have the 8.4Million dollars in funds. Which that the funds could not be used for this big project that we're talking about this evening counselor. We cannot use those funds for this project. It puts an existing project. However. The advantage that we have is that typically the projects that we find on the capital improvement program. That are looking to be funded. There are a number of them that can be funded through. And there are a number that we can fund from free cash. Historically, we didn't have the offer funds available and we always deferred to the free cash now that we know that it's there. And then there's an actual committee designed to. To balance that, um. Those considerations out, um, we don't have to use free cash for items in the past. I'll, I'll say, for example, public safety vehicles. Which are also part of the CIP program, we don't have to use free cash for road improvements or sidewalks. Even we can defer a portion to opera. So, we have an avenue open that we, we typically would not ever have. So, if we're ever looking to take advantage of this, I'll consider it in my own mind, a 1 time opportunity. To, um, get this work done now, if that's what the desire of the council is. not incur an additional cost and not incur the financing cost that at some point would have to be undertaken whether it's now or five years from now to get this exact same work done that we're asking tonight now just the 1.5 million would generate approximately 1.1 million in interest costs if we intend to borrow it if we added it on to the to the debt schedule So, again, it's not without cost. Candidly, the debt schedule absolutely can support it, but given the way these items have lined up in front of us now, in my opinion, clearly this would be the time where the project is actually in motion to use these funds that are here today without going to the market and addressing that issue. If, in fact, that's what the City Council would like to do.

▶ 1:04:46 Robb Stewart: Thank you Mr. De La Rosa. Just a couple of comments based on what you shared and I do appreciate that. I think we want to be careful about how we position ARPA and the funding there. We had a fairly long appropriations meeting just the other night where the Mayor came on and talked and respond to a lot of questions that we had about what the current thinking is. And I don't think the major thrust, um, rightly, so it's going to be on, um. It's really, it's going to be used, I think appropriately for, um, the. The original intention of the monies that were dispersed by the federal government in terms of helping the community. Uh, finding some of the social aspects that, uh, people. I've been burdened with and being able to fund certain initiatives, whether it be workers or some initiatives to be able to support that. So just my feedback on that is, I think we want to, as an administration, be careful about how we're saying ARPA is going to be used. And I would not want to position that as, you know, for us to fund the capital investments. So just as feedback.

▶ 1:06:12 Robb Stewart: Okay, I will defer for now, because I know there's a number of other folks that have questions as well. I may come back with more, but thank thank you. Uh, everyone and thank you manager.

▶ 1:06:24 Jen Grigoraitis: Thank you Stuart just next step. I have concept form shady followed by counselor and then vice chair. Make me a rally. Is there anyone else looking to be added into the queue?

▶ 1:06:36 Speaker 4: All right, Councillor Carr and Cheney.

▶ 1:06:39 Manjula Karamcheti: Well, thank you to this whole team for being here to go over the Memorial Hall proposal with us and why you're requesting these funds. I mean, I just wanted to start by saying, I feel like Memorial Hall is such an important pillar in our community. Personally, my daughter's dance recital is there. My son will be playing in the pops later in the year. um we had our really important vaccination clinic at memorial hall um i've been to chamber of commerce meetings there and even our inauguration was there so it's a very important place and space in our community and i think it's important for us to take care of it if i understand in regards to the funding with this free cash it's just for the outside and will it take care of everything in the gale report in regards to the issues that were

▶ 1:07:43 Denise Gaffey: surfaced so just to clarify and i and i tried to to make this clear in the memo um it it does everything it'll it'll do 100 of all the roof related work including the roof membrane and the flashing and the downspouts and the gutters it'll do all the and that's steel um deterioration that you saw in the earlier slide it'll do 100 of all the um masonry pointing so for the brick and the granite that'll all get repointed and it'll include 100 of all the work associated with the windows all the window restoration in addition to the um the um installing uh the window darkening system some shades that are needed and um the interior storm windows that don't currently exist and then the north the north side doors the um the the scope of work that's not included is this the front stairs that is um that is a sort of a separate it's viewed as kind of a separate scope because it would be done under a different trade and it's not as integral to the um building envelope per se so um that is not being recommended right now that would that that would have obviously additional cost implications.

▶ 1:09:02 Manjula Karamcheti: Okay, so the free cash request doesn't include doing that part of the project. I did notice that piece in the Gale report and it looked like the stairs were in dire shape in many ways, but this doesn't include that.

▶ 1:09:20 Denise Gaffey: Yeah, I mean, we did study it and we know the footings would need to be redone. so the stairs would all need to be taken apart and a new footing system would need to be put in place and then the stairs would be reinstalled um that since they are ornamental they are not used for um any um they're not used they're not used at all they're not accessible so they're not the the main stair staircase um that that wasn't viewed as a higher price as

▶ 1:09:54 Manjula Karamcheti: higher priority at this point um and then just to make sure it's sort of i understand why this request is coming now when it seems that there was some funding allocated before if i'm hearing what everybody has been talking about is it being requested now because the amount of money available prior would sort of start the exterior work but not finish it and so since we're starting we have this opportunity through free cash to complete portions as opposed and be done with them as opposed to start something have to close it up and then open it back up again

▶ 1:10:37 Denise Gaffey: so it is really um it is a consequence of the timing we were we were we've been um you know we've been working on the project for a while now and the consultants have been pulling the plans together and we were getting getting pretty close to like 90 completion we've had various meetings with different um groups the historical commission the historic district commission the energy commission to get feedback and you know the kind of permitting that you need to do for a project like this so we've been going through all that process and as we were getting closer to to um getting this project getting the plans completed and putting it out to bid um it also sort of of it coincided with our conversations around free cash and it just seemed logical to sort of take stock of whether there was any desire to complete, you know, to add the scope now and do it now.

▶ 1:11:32 Manjula Karamcheti: Okay. So, this allows for us to do more while work on the building is already going on as opposed to starting some work, stopping, and then starting work later.

▶ 1:11:42 Denise Gaffey: Oh, that's very true. Yes. So, we have not bid the project yet. We're pausing for a moment to see if the Council chooses to fund, to make this additional allocation, in which case it'll take Gail a couple of weeks just to complete the plans in order to include this additional scope. And then we will put the complete project out to bid. So, we have not done that yet, but But there is, you know, just to piggyback on Patrick's point earlier, there are significant cost advantages to doing it all now. I mean, we will. It does cost a lot to remobilize to, you know, in 5 years time to bring a new engineering firm on and the fees associated with that. And then, and then the mobilization for a contractor. Um, we'll add a lot to the cost, so we'll be able to take advantage if we do it all. If we do it all now.

▶ 1:12:42 Manjula Karamcheti: Right Thank you so much. That really helps me understand the need for the funding now and how it. Can help in terms of moving memorial hall forward. Thank you.

▶ 1:12:57 Maya Jamaleddine: Thank you. Counselor. Thank you. Chairman. Thank you everyone for being with us today at tonight. And thank you. Mrs. for, you know. always being there and patient to answer all our questions um i know we had conversation before about this um uh project um just a follow-up question uh when was this study done so the work

▶ 1:13:21 Speaker 7: the study that um dale associates has done the evaluation i think it has a september date on it

▶ 1:13:31 Maya Jamaleddine: september of 2021 september 2021 so that was uh was it uh during the time when we had the previous proposal proposal so these issues were they discovered during the first um uh project

▶ 1:13:49 Speaker 7: proposal or no no they weren't no to this no no they did a much more on detailed and thorough

▶ 1:13:55 Maya Jamaleddine: investigation i see okay uh what is the total cost for both projects now are we talking

▶ 1:14:03 Denise Gaffey: so our original our original budget um was 2.3 that was the addition 2.3 million was the addition original allocation and then if you add 1.5 to that it will be a total of about 3.8

▶ 1:14:18 Maya Jamaleddine: Okay, do did we do now with those 2 studies and did we do full study for the whole building? Are we expecting to get more surprises or is that the final request? I know it's a hard answer.

▶ 1:14:38 Denise Gaffey: Well, I, I think we feel very confident and I can let Brian jump in. I think we feel very confident in the evaluation that they did on the building envelope, which is essentially all of the exterior portions of the building. Plus, the visual inspections that they did into your interior to the building. I think we feel very confident that we've. Captured all of this scope for this for this project.

▶ 1:15:03 Speaker 7: Brian, do you want to add anything to that?

▶ 1:15:06 Speaker 6: i would agree with that i mean based upon the scope of work could you try again sorry

▶ 1:15:16 Speaker 6: it's all good based on the scope of work that we have identified we feel that the documents the budget that is based upon them are sufficient for what we're looking for today and as denise said the only things that are not included are the few things that were decided were site work and not necessarily building up

▶ 1:15:34 Maya Jamaleddine: Awesome. Well, good luck with the project. I am in support and I am looking forward to having another, uh, community dinner. Um, there, so thank you so much.

▶ 1:15:49 Speaker 4: Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Jamal Dean, Vice Chair Migliorelli.

▶ 1:15:52 Leila Migliorelli: Thank you Madam Chairwoman and thank you for everyone for being here tonight. Um, most of my questions have been answered. Um, but I just wanted to state that, um.

▶ 1:16:04 Leila Migliorelli: That I think that infrastructure is always something we should be investing in and, you know, I, I'm a firm believer in, you know, not putting something off that we can we can tackle today. Um, and while it seems like the timeline may have. Could have gone a little bit better in terms of if we had found this out earlier and would have been able to approve the full amount earlier. Um, that would have been ideal, but obviously things happen and this is how projects. Uh, progress, I would be interested in this is sort of not quite on the topic of memorial hall, but if we're, you know, we're talking about the and the other projects that are on the list. I mean, at some point, I think the whole council might need a presentation on the. I'm assuming that we'll be getting that and then so that we can go through a prioritization of that and looking at what are the different funding opportunities for each of those projects. If that comes sooner, perhaps before we go in and head into other projects and looking for approval for other projects that might help alleviate some of these questions going back and forth. Um, on that also, I just out of curiosity, I know in the, yeah, in the housing production plan, there's a mention of the CPA and would something like that cover renovations if we were, would we be able to you if we were a part of the CPA if we had CPA, would we be able to use those funds to to fund this project?

▶ 1:17:20 Denise Gaffey: So, um, my understanding of the CPA is that is yes. Um, 10%. There's basically 3, 3 legs to that stool CPA funding and it's affordable housing. It's historic preservation and it's open space and recreation. And you have to spend at least 10%. Of your CPA funds annually on each of those 3, then obviously you can choose to spend more on any 1 of them, but. So, you know, so, yes, you, you would, you would, we would be accruing funds to be spent on historic preservation projects. And given that this is a, it is a historic building on the national register of historic places. And with a preservation restriction and inside of a historic district, it meets all of the, you know, checks all of those boxes. So I would say, yes.

▶ 1:18:10 Leila Migliorelli: That's that's great because I think, yes, it is. It's such a landmark in our city and something that if we can tackle outside, it'd be nice to tackle the interior and really, really make the building. Uh, you know, focal points and and getting new, um, people in as it to perform and, um, you know, rent, bring in more rent to the city. So, um, thank you very much. And I, I look forward to supporting this as well.

▶ 1:18:40 Jen Grigoraitis: Thank you vice chairman really counselor Williams.

▶ 1:18:43 Ryan Williams: I'd like to motion for passage.

▶ 1:18:49 Jen Grigoraitis: I have a recommendation for Councilor Williams, but Councilor Karmchady, are you raising your hand for? A second. A second, all right. With a second made by Councilor Karmchady, is there any discussion? I did just want to ask, while we're on discussion, a few quick questions because the issue of accessibility came up and i know um a couple years ago when we held early voting at memorial hall we actually had to pay to have a wheelchair ramp brought in is that issue going to be addressed as we do this exterior work to make sure that the outside of the building is completely ada compliant

▶ 1:19:35 Denise Gaffey: um well i can let brian answer that i know from our code evaluation or the code evaluation that um gail associates has done i think the exterior ramp actually complies with the code um with the exception there's a minor exception with the railing am i right about that brian i

▶ 1:19:57 Speaker 6: know there's some right so the building has the ada renovations performed about 20 years ago and those renovations did provide a handicap entrance ramp along the north side that in the doorways and the ramp down to the ground hall all appear to apply with current code requirements we did note that there were a couple minor items with the railings that may need to be adjusted and a couple things in the bathroom that might need to be adjusted so we'll be going for review or variance requests on a couple of those items there is an understanding of the town doing a separate ada study then we'll also be looking at the building at a later date so the next Next to your renovations don't necessarily touch those items, but there should be 88 access through what's installed currently. Okay. And then does this I know there's also a monetary amount that once we hit that.

▶ 1:20:46 Jen Grigoraitis: I think it's 30% of the assessed value. Of the building that then triggers the requirement to ensure that all work we do going forward is bringing the building. To code both interior and exterior are we hitting that.

▶ 1:21:07 Speaker 6: threshold with this additional funding right so all new work is required to be ada compliant um so if you know the work we're doing in the north entry store the door has to be you know ada compliant when we replace that door so all new elements will comply with it um the project of this scope is going to exceed the 30 value of the full and fair cash value because the building is in our opinion under assessed um so we will be triggering that amount and we will be going um for a variance for the items that currently are not compliant and the goal at the end of the day would be to be doing that through your interior renovation projects as well as through the accessibility study of the performance city so it's done with concurrent projects since those don't really mesh well with the mainstream the roofing contractors will be using on this project

▶ 1:21:52 Denise Gaffey: and the major issue just to be clear is the um is the access to the stage which is kind of a tricky issue with and it is a tricky issue especially in a historic building um so that's that's something i think that will be a bit of a challenge to try to figure out in the future you know for a future interior project if we're going to try to have to make the stage accessible okay thank you all

▶ 1:22:21 Jen Grigoraitis: right is there any i may have been the only one on discussion is there anyone else mr clark can

▶ 1:22:30 Speaker 1: you please call the role vice chairman clearly yes councillor mcmaster yes councillor Garipay yes

▶ 1:22:57 Speaker 1: councillor Jamaleddine yes councillor stewart yes councillor karmshidi yes councillor williams yes Yes. President Sinella? Yes. And Chair Grigoraitis? Yes. We have nine yes. Nine yes.

▶ 1:23:09 Jen Grigoraitis: So this passes, this passes with a motion to recommend for passage. Sorry, it's late. So this will go before the full council at our next meeting. Thank you all for being here with us tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate your support. You're wonderful.