Video recording

and we're going to go over the results of those bids tonight as they relate to previously uh discussed estimates [clears throat] for cost. Uh and then uh the other items related to the need of doing this project at this time. Uh so start off with just uh kind of a baseline of facts uh relating to why this project is here now, why it's being discussed. Uh we've had a structural engineering review of the existing salt barn uh which indicates that doing additional repairs to the existing salt barn uh would be cost prohibitive. um and that the functional operation of the building beyond this season, this winter is questionable at best.

Um the current salt barn only holds approximately half uh of our annual salt usage. Um this is mostly because uh the facility was built 41 years ago uh when our town was much smaller. Uh Webster has grown a great deal since 1984 when the existing building uh was um built originally. Uh so our salt usage is higher. Um so we want to try to be closer to that annual usage amount so that we don't have to rely on deliveries during the winter uh like we do currently. Um that relates to the next item, the salt shortages. Uh they are expected again this year. I actually just saw uh I was on an email chain with other Monroe County Highway superintendents this afternoon where they were discussing if anybody had seen any issues yet and this week was the first time uh when there was two towns that indicated they had not [clears throat] se not received their deliveries within a week of ordering which is the requirement New York State OS.

So this was kind of the first week where a couple of folks had indicated slower deliveries than normal. Um so unfortunately um it seems like at least in the near future here uh these shortages are become more of a reality. Um and when we have those shortages and not enough uh room for storage on site [clears throat] creates a significant uh threat to driver safety if we can't treat the roads. [snorts] Um pushing this project down the road uh revising the scope will take will have additional expense, additional effort needed uh on the engineering side. Um and having a smaller scope of work uh also decreases some of the efficiency that we get uh with a slightly larger project like we have it currently.

Um completing this project [clears throat] after uh there is a more significant structural failure than we have now um not only threatens the safety of the residents and the staff that would be working around the facility, but it also um would have to be done under emergency procedures. And anytime you do construction under emergency situation situations or conditions, uh your costs are higher. You're pulling in contractors that are already at work. Therefore, uh the premiums that they charge to come on an emergency basis are much more um in the short term. So, those are just some some of the key factors uh related to why we're discussing this now.

Um, so related to the salt shortages, uh, this photo was from last winter. Uh, this is the current salt barn and there is not enough salt in that pile to do another salt run that covers the entire town. Um, so this was as low as we got. This is the smallest amount that we had. We usually want to have 10 times this amount uh, minimum to be comfortable. Uh, but last year we did get down. We had a week where we were down to not enough. Luckily, the next day after this, uh, loads did come and we were able to replenish the stock and never run out and never have a lapse in service. Uh, but it did get pretty low.

Um, if you've seen the barn, uh, this is a very small pile, uh, within that. Usually, it's stacked, you know, way all the way to the top of the picture and and at least double that distance out the building. So um so getting right into cost savings uh that we have tried to attain on the project um they was these were presented earlier uh once we got bids were able to look at some value engineering uh items. So the list of items that's provided by the general contractor is the eight items you see there. Um the and then some of those items we're currently recommending to take as cost savings. uh rock allowance.

That's uh would be rock in the ground that needs to be dug out. We carry a certain amount for that because you can't see it. It's beneath the ground, but all of our geotechnic um information that we've received doesn't indicate that there is any. So, we're hoping not that won't be expended. Um they did offer um these are all decreased values that they offer as value engineering. Uh they also offered that if they didn't have to do the performance bond, there'd be a reduction. Uh if there wasn't some additional insuranceances, there'd be a reduction. We're not recommending to take those. We want them to keep the bonding and the insuranceances that are required.

Uh removal of winter conditions. So this is just a scheduling item. If they have to construct uh portions of the building during the winter months, there's cost associate associated with constructing during the winter, mostly protecting the concrete and things of that nature. uh if we were able to manage the project in a way that they didn't have to do some of the critical parts in the coldest winter months, wait till the weather is a little bit better, uh there's a credit for that. Uh we think we can take advantage of that based on the current timing of the project from possibly today to when they would start.

Um, changing to a shingle roof from a metal roof uh was a cost savings, which is a little surprising uh given the situation, but the metal roof really offers the best durability, so we weren't going to take that credit. Uh, changing the building uh fascia. Uh, I believe there's a certain uh PVC board recommended right now. If we go with a standard aluminum uh fascia on a portion of it, there's a $14,000 savings. Um, and then exclude railing paint. There's one of the railings in there that apparently has a special kind of paint on it. Um, it's not in a place where it would receive some kind of special condition that it needs the paint.

So, we would recommend taking the $5,000 uh savings and not painting the railing. Uh, and then uh this is the bigger factor. This was the alternate that we had was to utilize um wood [clears throat] push walls kind of like you see in the picture on the right on the existing barn instead of concrete walls. Um, at this point they're offering $170,000 savings for that. Um, but we're I'm not recommending it at this time because I do think the concrete is a superior, more durable product. Um, and I think on the scale of the project, it will yield a better facility for a longer period of time. Um, I alluded to the picture on the right.

Uh, this is one of the current wooden push wall supports, one of the tiebacks that's already had to be repaired because of its aid and condition. You can see it's kind of piece meal together there with a new post and then uh a vertical post that's completely wrapped in new boards uh to keep it to keep it in place. So that's one of the conditions that's out there. Uh back to the savings. Um there's a portion of the site work that's primarily paving and earth work, which is a lot of what we do that we think we can self-perform. Um there would be a significant savings there by not awarding that site contract, performing it ourselves.

We would still have to pay for the materials. So those are factored into the cost, but we think we could save u about $530,000 by performing that work ourselves. Um given what the scope is, we feel we can do that. Uh there's chips funding from the state uh that has language in there that allows it to be used for a facility like this for a storage facility. We get that annually from the state. >> [snorts] >> uh we currently have enough of a surplus in that coming into 26 where we can utilize those funds uh toward to offset some of this um per the the guidelines of the usage of that money. Um the next one is one of the more exciting ones.

Uh we've now uh received word from uh the DEEC that we have received a grant for $600,000 uh toward our project here um under the basis of the water and quality improvements that having covered salt storage and the truck wash out that we're proposing will be. Uh so you take the totality of all the highlighted items on this page. uh you come up with a total of 1.5 uh a little over $1.5 million in cost savings that we've been able to uh put together in relation to this project. Um so given we did just receive the grant, I wanted to talk a little bit about that. It is a water quality improvement grant.

Um the grant the next step that will happen with it uh would be that a grant award contract will be will be sent. Uh that contract will outline everything that was described in the application and it will need to be complete. So it'll need to match the application which includes everything that's in our current uh contracted scope for these bids. Uh the truck wash out is a key component uh to meeting EPA standards. Uh and I know our application referenced uh bringing the facility overall into into compliance with the EPA standards uh that we have. Um it's a pretty special award also because it's only the second one uh I believe in the state for a salt storage replacement facility.

Uh historically they are only for uh townships or municipalities that don't have cover over their salt. So they basically have a pile of salt sitting outside. So every time it rains that salt melts away and goes into the waterways. Uh but more recently they've given a couple awards. we would be the second uh we are now the second to be awarded for a replacement of one of those facilities versus a new facility. Um this war uh this award also emphasizes the importance of the town's continued dedication to our MS4 uh program and uh shows that we are dedicated to leading by example when it comes to capital improvement projects and development.

uh getting our facilities into compliance with the MS4 and the EPA standards um is definitely been a goal uh for everything. Uh so then just one little note at the bottom that um in discussing this grant recently and and what are the parameters with it that uh there's definitely a factor that uh failure to utilize awarded grant funds that negatively affects future applications uh for townships and different things. So, wanted to mention that. It's a key component that's come up in our discussions about the grant recently. Um, so now we jump into a budget, which is going to align with our last uh presentation where we had a pre-bid estimate uh outlining uh the items here, the salt barn, the truck wash out, and incidental budget for uh construction management, things of that nature.

Uh the demo was broken out. Paving and utilities is where we want to self-perform uh the work. and then the construction contingency that we're carrying. Um, so here we see that uh the bids came in about $350,000 under the last estimate that we brought to the board. So they're slightly less. Uh there's some of the items that have gone up and down, but the net is about $350,000 less. And then we were able to tighten that contingency uh resulting in uh closer to $600,000 less than the estimate that was provided before. Um so then we factor in the possible cost savings. Uh we had a larger possible cost savings during the estimate.

Those items are related to um a slightly more aggressive approach to the self-performance. I think that the number we're utilizing for this is a very conservative number. We may even be able to have addition more savings than we're projecting here by self-performing, but we want to be conservative with that. Worked with Paul Adams to make sure that um those numbers were conservative. So that went down slightly. Uh and then some of the value engineering that we had put earlier, we expected the alternate to go to a wood push wall instead of concrete to be a much larger dollar value than it turned out to be at bid time.

So those are the factors that caused the current projected cost savings to be less than what we projected before. Um there's a note there about which BE items were taken uh in this consideration, which ones weren't. Um, so the net total uh comes in in just about uh $35,000 less than the estimate we discussed here previously um for what we're proposing. So if we look at uh the both phase and phase one and phase two of the overall project which would be the new highway facility upgrades uh we have the total to date for the existing building that's already in place along with Cliff Jones improvements.

um funds that have already been allocated out of either the general fund or ARPA funds uh to date on that portion of the project. The uh costs that we have per the bids um for the salt barn, the truck wash, the demo and the paving utilities along with the construction consistency and an incidental budget to handle any further uh construction management cost. And then the um identified cost savings that we outlined in previous slides make the net uh just under 26 million total for the facility upgrades. Uh the approved bond amount for the highway facility upgrades was 28,250,000. So um our current estimate would bring us in uh 2.3 million under that bond uh approval.

So, um, the photo you see here is roughly half of our, uh, fleet of, uh, 26 trucks currently, all full of salt sitting in the garage. So, this is how they sit, um, waiting for it to snow like it just started to when I came in here, and it sounds like they went out. My phone was buzzing, so they're out on the roads right now, uh, with these trucks. But, we, uh, we load them, and they're in this facility, and they're able to stay warm and ready to go so that they go out at a moment's notice. So, that's what the photo is. Uh next steps would be to uh award the bids and complete the upgrades uh under budget.

Um so questions, comments, uh this photo here on the last page is also last year. Uh you see some untreated salt. Uh we put an additive to our salt that allows it to work better um during colder conditions and it has better uh adhersion to the road so it stays on the road longer. It looks like the the darker brown in the back after we treat it. So untreated salt way in the back, our treated salt. And on the right hand side is some salt that came out of Albany last year on emergency contract. That must be out of a different part of the world because it comes in untreated looking that color instead of what we get uh from from local sources here.

So that is what I have. Happy to uh discuss or answer any questions that I can. So pay you said there's not going to be construction management or >> Yeah. So the the incidental budget will cover for some construction management. So I I plan to take since it's the size and scale of the project and what it is as far as complexity, I'll have a larger role than during the large facility upgrade. Okay. >> So we'll essentially use them for documentation recording. Um, so that I do anticipate um a construction manager, but more in an administrative uh role than day-to-day. I'll handle all the day-to-day.

>> Will that be campus? >> Uh, possibly. We're we're going to use our process to determine what the consultant is with it. They have the most experience. So, my guess is >> familiar with the whole project also. >> Yeah. And they've they've helped with the bids and everything. So, uh I I'm assuming that will will make sense. But we're going to put some scopes together and uh get some estimates and discuss that. But do >> you have a plan start date and the duration of the project by chance? >> Uh that's adjusted a little bit just because of the timing post bid. So I I'd say we've slid about a month.

The goal would be to get it done before next snow season. >> Okay. >> That and I think that's still an attainable goal at this point. So before next November. >> What's your what was the percentage of your contingency? I know I saw the amount but didn't do the math yet. >> Percent bas is getting is pretty low. Uh and again it's tied to the complexity of the of the project not being very high. There's less unknowns >> than you would have on a standard project. It's it's on the footprint of an existing building. >> So we felt comfortable bringing that down very low percentage um at this point just based on the conditions that we're we're seeing out there and and what we think there is for risk.

Uh the the other aspect as I've been going through this managerally and looking at it is by taking the portion of self-performance that we have, we could very easily phase portions of that if we had financial issues. And what I mean by that is there's components of the pavement. We could do a very basic level and hold off until another time to do further point. it could be hundreds of thousands of dollars in material costs that we could change the timing on without having a contract obligation uh implication. So I I think that is going to function as an additional level of coverage to um possibly be a relief valve if something did come up which is another factor in the low contingency.

So, I guess the only other um area not really concerned, but I'm curious as to [cough] [clears throat] I understand that you want to do the cement walls versus the wood. Okay. What's the life expectancy of the wood versus the concrete? Because there's a $170,000 savings by >> Yeah, it's been a it's been a big question this week and it is one of the bigger savings items. uh no uh design professionals have been willing to give me a number, right? It's nice to have a finite number to say this lasts 10 years longer, this lasts 20 years longer. Uh they have indicated that because of the factors, uh what type of wood, how thick is the wood, you know, all of these things because we don't have it designed because it's only an alternate, it would have to come from a manufacturer as the proposed design.

Without some of those specific particulars, they aren't able to assign a number. uh the the biggest factor I think if it designed in a certain way the longevity so the life expectancy could be very similar uh but the durability is not going to be the same. Uh so if you have any bumps knocking into it, pushing against it, things like that, the concrete is much more durable during its life uh in in how it reacts to any sort of punishment or wear and tear uh that comes up against it, which is I think where it's definitely superior um at this point. So it's kind of a tough question to answer. That's why I haven't gotten an answer on it.

I have asked three different entities for a more direct answer. Some don't respond, other folks say it's they they can't answer it without a full design of the wood. Um, so it's not very cleancut as to exactly what that answer is, but if you just think about the surface of those things and say a loader bumps into it or runs into it, how a piece of wood would react versus a piece of concrete. And that's what I mean by the the durability of the the walls overall. So those walls have been up since what? 1984. >> These have. Yeah. >> And and no loaders have run into it since you've been there, have they?

>> Uh no. They you can see some of the repairs in this picture where sometimes you do uh hit the upper portions more so than the bottom. Uh but I can tell you that I don't know exactly how thick these boards were, but some of them are very thin and some of them are broken and there's salt coming out the sides in different spots. So I think you're right. you know, this is 40 over 40 years old and it's been okay. Um, but it's definitely ve in a more fragile state than I think a concrete wall would be at the same situation. >> With the concrete walls, did they give you an estimate to like reseal and maintain those concrete walls over time?

>> Um, I think they don't recommend any special treatment. I'm not sure exactly what they use for the bar, the steel inside the wall. That can be a factor. Uh but other than that, when they put the concrete up, they put a sea a sealer that penetrates at least an inch or two into it that prevents uh stuff. So I think the maintenance would be the same here, which is >> durability every so often. >> Yeah. Yep. I think it's only every 5 years, but I'm not sure if they would recommend it more often on this. I'm just thinking about floors in the building. >> Yeah. Or just how much it is to do it. >> Oh, the sealer.

>> Yeah. >> Uh I would say less than 5,000. I've I've done large sections of floors. It's all per square foot. Okay. >> So, the square footage of the wall. >> So, not a terrible difference then in the maintenance >> versus I don't think so because the wood you wouldn't really do much to it. But like I said, it it this stuff here is definitely in a quite a fragile state. If you go up and look at it and touch it, it's >> okay. >> For the wood for the new one, do we not know what kind of wood they plan on using? Is it going to be different than the current that we have? Are they going to use a cheaper one?

Was that disclosed in the bids? >> Uh, no. there wasn't uh particulars like that provided about. >> So that $170,000 is it contingent on a very specific type of wood we're using or could we get something sturdier >> that I we haven't discussed that I I would have to see what they propose. So it would start by saying okay can you give me the particulars about what you've >> Yeah. My my fear would be a contractor coming in looking to get wood and then save their bottom line by using a cheaper one which then, you know, bites us in the butt later on down the line. >> Yeah. It would have to be um cycled and reviewed by the the design team.

You know, it would have to be deemed adequate. They wouldn't be able to just do that automatically and still only give us 170,000. So, um if we headed in that direction, the next step would be to get the particulars on it. Um given that it's an alternate um I don't know exactly what the sequence would be to get to get to that point, but we couldn't get to a we wouldn't let that happen essentially is what you're describing. >> If we went with the wood instead for the amendment would that and then making sure that we're using proper materials. How far out would that push the beginning construction of the project?

>> That's hard to tell. Uh, it shouldn't be significant, but I can't really speak to it without talking to the general contractor um about what they would >> So, they didn't spell out any specific type of wood? >> No. No. There's a I mean, the specs talk about what the structural wood needs to be, but whether the push wall itself is actually thicker or bigger because it's not a design item, it's an alternate, I don't know those particulars. >> Gotcha. right now. >> Do you know by chance, just in a ballpark, how much we've paid on repairs and maintenance for the current barn in the last 5 to 10 years?

Because that might answer some of our questions in terms of maintenance on the wood barn. >> In the last 5 to 10 years, so 10 years ago that there there was a roof replacement on it that was a significant cost. Sure. Um >> uh over well over 50,000. I I don't have those exact records just because um I don't haven't compiled them that way. >> Sure. >> Uh and then I would say year-over-year for the last five years um probably average 2500 >> a year I would say in just uh minor boards and fasteners being replaced and different plates that have sort of sistered together with things like uh the repair that I showed in that picture.

>> I I would roughly say 2500 a year at least for the last 5 years. So more for consideration, our our biggest concerns are going to be around the roof as being the bigger maintenance cost for this building in the next however many years. So that that metal roof versus shingles is is probably a big deal when it comes to the longevity of that. Um >> yeah, >> you know, aside from just the wood and the concrete, but it doesn't seem like from a maintenance standpoint there's that much of a difference year-over-year, but the risk is higher. Yeah, year over year the maintenance of wood versus concrete and that thing wouldn't be significantly different.

Correct. Yeah. >> Based on what I my experience >> when we sorry when we [clears throat] have to make repairs do we use our own people for that or do we have to contract out? >> Uh for the repairs we've needed on this uh we utilized our own staff for it. We have guys that have carpentry skills for the roof that was hired out. >> Okay. Pat, you talked about the savings from doing the selfwork. You may have partially answered this by talking about phasing of the project. When you factored in the cost savings, did you factor in any missed revenue opportunity from the folks who would be working excuse me on on this not being able to do county or other revenue work?

Uh yeah, we we would not be entertaining that. Um so the the scope of the site work, not many of the items in it hit critical path for the structure of the building, right? Because the building's going on the other one. The critical path for installing the new salt facility is the demo of the existing building and the construction of the new one in its spot. So there isn't really any site work prep. Therefore, those items can go and we can do it at our leisure. So there's a flexible schedule and and we might have talked about this at a certain point. >> Yep. >> Uh but because the items that we're going to self-perform don't hit the critical path of the project, we have flexibility and with that flexibility, we're able to make sure we accomplish all of our revenue goals and our maintenance work and then perform these duties um as they're able to fit in the schedule without having impact to those types of things.

>> Got it. I was very surprised with the concrete walls being only 170,000 lefts. And I was also very surprised with the life expectancy [clears throat] of the wood versus the concrete because I would have I I mean what they at least projected based on the bid responses. I I I don't remember the number but it seemed like it might have been only like five or seven years. It was a very low >> number. Um, so I can see why moving forward with the concrete would be important because on one hand it's a lot of money, but on the other hand it'll still last another at least another five to seven years over the the wood which seems to uh make sense to do that for that reason plus the durability reason.

Um, one of the things I read in the insurance letter, it was like a mixed message in the insurance letter because somewhere it said there could be an estimate of like 5 to 10 years of life on this building, albeit it's 40 years old, but then 10 years would be an awful lot and have a lot of risk and potential maintenance. But you know um um the other piece of the insurance that I want to make sure is brought forward because at the at the same time in that letter it also said given the state of this structure if anything happened to it wouldn't be covered because it's already deteriorated beyond its life.

>> Yeah. Um with this there was a lot of Right. we we want to make sure that this is needed, right? Not just wanted. >> So, we had a structural assessment done by some folks and that's what you're referring to. Uh and that had different guidance, different generalities in it about the condition that they were able to observe without taking things apart and actually looking things >> and um >> the results of that letter we now understand from talking to our uh agencies that insure us um makes it become a known factor that there's major deficiencies for this. Therefore, a claim of insurance for its failure apparently would not be possible now that we have that knowledge.

>> And I think that's a very important aspect of how we move forward with that project because if it's basically not insurable based on that structural assessment, I guess that's there's two big reasons. One, you don't want to take a $600,000 grant. That's the second one ever awarded for a salt barn. probably had a lot to do with the um truck wash out as well from an environmental perspective, but that would be a a double whammy to give back the grant and then have insurance issues. >> Well, but to clarify the insurance when they looked into it, even without the letter, if it fell apart because of old age, it wasn't going to be covered.

And then our max insurance coverage on the building, I think, was $257,000. So even in the miracle that insurance covered it, >> it's not going to cover anything. >> 257 and this is 6 million is >> So we can kind of say that insurance is the >> Yeah, I don't think there's any question that >> this is not a want. This is a need. >> Yeah, it's getting old. >> Absolutely. The only question is the cement versus the wood walls for cost savings of 17. One other question for you, Pat. You know, there were some emails about the fireproofing standards from New York. >> Is can we look into is there any way to have this building be considered fireproof to improve our bonding years from 15 to 30?

>> Yeah, we were looking into that. We were talking with Paul about that. Um I don't know. I I didn't get to the point of asking what would need to be incorporated in order to get that. We didn't quite get to that point and Paul's been out of town a little bit. So yeah, we can definitely continue that conversation to see if there's any, you know, minimal items that wouldn't have additional costs that we could utilize. Uh but it was my understanding that the the biggest portion in order to be fireproof, a high high percentage of the components of the building need to be completely fireproof, which would be metal or concrete.

And even if we go with the concrete push walls, there's going to be a large portion of this that's wood framed on the top. So, I'm not sure what that would look like, but it's definitely >> there's something to look into. You know, the difference between a 15 year and a 30-year bond is significant to our finances. So, if we can >> if we got to spend just a little to get the 30-year, it can help pay for itself with that because I agree with John, like it's needed, right? This has been a known thing for a while. >> You also bring up an interesting insurance point and that concrete walls are going to make an insurance pol policy cheaper for this building as opposed to the wood.

So, there's going to be some long-term savings there year-over-year. >> Sure. Yeah. >> Yeah. I'd like to know what those numbers are. >> Uh yeah, that's something I think it's pretty easily attainable. Our uh our insurance providers pretty quick to respond, so we should be able to Okay. >> get that. Yeah. >> All right. Do we have any other questions from the board? >> I don't. >> No. >> All right. That >> Thanks, Pat. Thank you so much. Thanks, guys. But uh that concludes our uh town board workshop and uh stick around. We'll be doing our town board meeting.