West Campus Utilities Distribution Systems and Infrastructure Improvements / Expansion

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "West Campus Utilities Distribution Systems and Infrastructure Improvements / Expansion"

Theodora Robbins
5 years ago
Views:

1 Request for Qualifications Engineering Services Programming, Planning & Design Phase Architectural & Engineering Services West Campus Utilities Distribution Systems and Infrastructure Improvements / Expansion Date: November 1, 2017 Time: 10:00 am (Pacific Time) UI Project #: CP MEETING MINUTES A. INTRODUCTION OF THOSE PRESENT (Guy Esser) 1. Attendance: Refer to attached attendance sheet. 2. UI Facilities Project Team: a. Ray Pankopf: Director of Architectural & Engineering Services b. Guy Esser: AES Project Manager c. Gene Gussenhoven: Director of Utilities & Engineering Services (not present) d. Kristyn Hardy: Facilities Engineer (not present) 3. Guy explained that meeting minutes and a copy of the slide show presentation would be distributed to everyone on the attendance sheet as well as posted to the UI Facilities website. (RFQ / Ad-for-Bid section.) B. PROJECT OVERVIEW & PLANNING (Ray Pankopf) 1. Ray Pankopf provided a brief summary of the UI Long Range Campus Development Plan (LRCDP) and some of the outcomes of the plan that provide background for this project: a. The LRCDP was created in the early 1990 s and has been steadily tended to and updated since. It is a living document that is used as one of the main tools to provide direction for campus planning and development. b. Prior to the 1990 s, a lot of new building expansion happened to the west side of campus in open area owned by the University. This development pushed several buildings outside of the central campus core leading to inefficiencies in both pedestrian access and access to the central campus steam tunnel system. These buildings ended up on standalone boiler and chiller systems. i. The Law Building (Was later connected to campus steam via utilidor, and connected to the central campus chilled water systems via direct buried lines.) ii. The Hartung Theater (On a standalone boiler / chiller system.) iii. The ASUI Kibbie Athletic Center and adjoining Vandal Athletic Center (VAC) Page 1 of 6

2 (On standalone boiler / chiller systems. There is no air conditioning in the Kibbie Dome, and only about 15% of the VAC has air conditioning.) c. The LRCDP looked to reinforce and emphasize the central campus core, consolidating the main academic services to the central core and driving development to take advantage of these proximities and efficiencies. At the same time, the LRCDP recognized that the campus would need to eventually expand to the west, and outlined the need to develop a more densely organized West Campus Core with associated expansion of the central campus utilities. d. The LRCDP outlines future building sites within the west campus core, but does not identify specific programs for those buildings. It can be assumed that the future buildings will be some mix of laboratory research, general research, and classroom / office support facilities. 2. Brief overview of the central campus utilities: a. The campus features an existing central steam plant that is fueled by wood chips / biomass. The central core of campus has a robust system of full-height, walkable tunnels to distribute steam and other utilities. b. Chilled water is generated at both the steam plant and a newer chilled water facility located adjacent to the golf course. The newer chilled water facility and storage tank were construction in Chilled water is distributed throughout the campus core via chilled water supply and return lines that are located in the tunnels as well as utilidors. Many sections of chilled water line are direct buried. c. The university would like to expand utilities to the west campus core via full-height tunnel, but expectations are that this may be prohibitively expensive for the given budget. The selected design team will be expected to help the university sort through alternate means if needed. d. The university has its own 13.2 KAV electrical loop. The loop is fed by Avista Utilities from the west edge of campus and the east edge of campus. The UI owns the electrical distribution system between those two connection points. e. Phase I of the 13.2 KAV loop was installed around Phase II was never completed. This system will need to be looked at for how it supports the arena project, west campus area and future development. f. This project will need to look at the existing campus utility system and ask What s next? What if future infrastructure or campus steam plants move to the west edge of campus? What does that mean to the utility scoping specific to the west core campus neighborhood? 3. Idaho Arena Project: a. The University of Idaho is currently engaged in an effort to design and construct a new basketball and multipurpose facility just north of the existing Kibbie Athletic Center. This facility has been a desire of the university in various forms since the 1950 s. Almost all of the various planning efforts over the decades have indicated placing the arena on the patch of ground directly north of the previous outdoor football stadium and the current covered Kibbie Athletic Center. b. The planning and design of this facility is driving the need and desire to expand central campus utilities to the west campus neighborhood. c. The primary goal of the project will be to make sure central campus utilities are available at the new arena project. However, utility expansions should be planned and designed to support future distribution to existing and future buildings located Page 2 of 6

3 within the west campus core. d. It would be desirable to accomplish utility distribution to the existing buildings in the west campus core, to include the Kibbie Dome / VAC, Law Building, and Hartung Theater. However, it is likely that the project budget will not support that scope of work, and therefore future expansion to these buildings will need to be planned for via the use of tees, valves, stub-outs, line sizing, etc e. The first project priority is to set up utility distribution and relocation in support of the Idaho Arena. The second project priority is to distribute utilities to other buildings in the west campus core. Both of the above priorities should be planned and designed under the premise of routing, sizing and scoping utility systems for support of existing and future buildings within the west core campus neighborhood. f. It is the desire of the University to possibly route the chilled water extension to the Arena down the east side of the Kibbie Dome / Vandal Athletic Center. This would effectively complete the chilled water loop to the Law Building, and set up the chilled water loop for future connection to the VAC. g. It is the intent of this project, under the first project priority mentioned above, to also support the relocation of existing utilities that are directly in the anticipated footprint of the new Arena. These are likely to include: i. Domestic Water: There are two domestic water lines that run along the west edge of the proposed arena site. One of these lines is asbestos containing concrete. One or both of these lines may be required to be rerouted around the building site. ii. Reclaimed Water: There is a main supply line for reclaimed irrigation water running through the center of the proposed arena site. This will likely have to be re-routed. iii. Electrical Systems: The electrical system near the Kibbie Dome will need to be evaluated for capacity to support the new arena facility. iv. Telecom / Fiber: One of the main campus fiber-optic connections is running through the project site in concrete ductbank. The ductbank also contains fiber feeding from the library to the west campus Facilities complex, as well as a couple traditional copper communication lines. The ductbank and associated fiber / copper will need to be re-routed around the project site. v. Sanitary Sewer: Early analysis indicates that the new arena will be unable to achieve connection to existing sewer lines that extend from the Kibbie Athletic Center to Perimeter Drive to the west, or to Rayburn Street to the east. These lines are too high in elevation, and are of insufficient size to support a new facility of that size. This may require a new sanitary sewer line that extends from the Arena site to Sixth Street to the north. This line should potentially be routed and sized to support future building expansion in the west campus core neighborhood. D. PROJECT SCHEDULE / BUDGET (Guy Esser) 1. Project Schedule: a. Engineering Selection by December 11, 2017 b. Start Planning and Design by late January of 2018 c. Potential Phase 1 Construction to relocate Arena utilities during the Summer/Fall of Page 3 of 6

4 2018. d. Potential Phase 2 Construction to complete steam, sanitary sewer and chilled water extensions over the Spring/Summer/Fall of e. The current arena schedule is anticipating project completion by late Summer of That may push to the Summer of 2021 pending fundraising progress and other factors. If the arena project pushes to 2021, that will likely make the coordination of some of the utility work easier. If the schedule stays on track for 2020, then tighter coordination with the arena design and construction will be required. f. Development of the utility project schedule has not been planned in detail and will be established with input from, and coordination with, the selected engineering team. 2. Project Budget: a. $3.5 million to include design, fees, permits, contingencies, construction, etc b. The University currently has Board of Regents authorization to expend $300,000 on planning & design. The University will have to seek additional authorization from the Regents before proceeding with bidding and construction. c. The selected engineer will be integral in helping to establish cost estimates and building strategies that will help shape the final project scope. E. QUESTIONS / DISCUSSION 1. Funding for the total $3.5-million project is from central campus reserves. There is no fundraising or bonding involved. The funding has already been identified and is being set aside for the project. 2. It was noted that chilled water lines have been extended to the Law Building. The question was asked as to whether these were sized for future expansion to future buildings in the west campus core neighborhood. That was unknown by Ray or Guy at the time of the meeting, but should be easy information to identify during the planning phase. 3. A question was asked as to whether the UI has considered installing a central distribution system for emergency / standby power. Ray / Guy were unable to answer that question and indicated that this would be a good question to ask the Utilities group during the early planning phases of this project. 4. The UI campus has completely switched over to VOIP systems for phones. There are still some standard copper connections on campus to serve various legacy platforms. The best example are the individual building fire alarm panels that still connect to emergency notification agencies via copper phone line. 5. A question was asked as to whether a total analysis has been completed recently on the campus steam system. Ray / Guy were unable to confirm. The central campus chilled water system was completely analyzed by McKinstry in 2009 as part of the central campus chilled water / storage tank project. The Utilities group will have that information for the selected engineering team. 6. A question was asked as to whether there is a certain dollar limit that would force the university to use a CM/GC project delivery method for this project. Ray explained that there is no such dollar limit in place for the State of Idaho or the UI. The university has implemented the CM/GC methodology on numerous past and present projects. There has been no decision as to what project delivery method will be used on this project, and it is Page 4 of 6

5 anticipated that this will be a decision that is worked out in coordination with the selected engineering design team. 7. The current chilled water plant was designed for future expansion in mind. Ray s recollection is that there were two empty bays implemented into the design of the chiller plant for future expansion, and that one of those bays might be getting upgraded right now. He believes there is extra expansion capacity at the central steam plant. 8. A question was asked as to whether the UI is considering future solar installations, or other alternative means of power generation. Ray explained that the Utilities Group and the Sustainability Office are very interested in solar generation, but that any current efforts are small demonstration projects and haven t reached the point of being implemented. This would be something the UI is interested in looking at for the future. 9. A question was asked as to whether the McKinstry chilled water analysis and modeling could be made available for review for the prospective engineering teams submitting for this RFQ. Ray indicated that he would check into it. (Follow-up Note: Ray checked into this with the Utilities group. There is a lot of data available for review, but pulling that data from the near decade old studies and packaging it up in a cohesive and comprehensive manner ahead of the RFQ submittal will not be possible. All of this data will be available for the selected engineering team during the planning phase of the project.) 10. The UI has no preference for whether an architect or engineer is the prime consultant for the submitting A/E team. 11. There is no federal funding involved in this project, so there are no requirements for Davis- Bacon wage rates or minority / women owned business enterprises. There is no State of Idaho requirements for MWBE. 12. A question was asked as to whether the UI will be able to provide estimated energy loads for future buildings in the west campus core area. Ray explained that there is no program defined for what these future buildings might be, but given the UI s strategic goal to move up a classification level in research, the UI should be able to make some assumptions about the type of buildings to likely be located in this core. A move up in research classification could lead the UI to require roughly double the amount of research lab space on campus. 13. A question was asked as to whether the project would require deliverables to be compatible with GIS or other mapping / data requirements. The expectation is that standard AutoCad / Revit documentation will be sufficient. 14. A question was asked as to whether there are separate campus departments that will have a major influence on utility design and routing. A specific example might be special campus landscape, rare trees, or other arborist concerns that would drive design and construction considerations. Ray and Guy explained that there is not a lot of sacred landscape in the proposed areas for utility extension. Furthermore, the campus arborist is part of Facilities and maintains good working relationships with the design and construction departments. The biggest influence in the west campus neighborhood will likely be working around the Athletics facilities and making sure that construction activities don t disrupt varsity practices and camps. One of the potential steam extension routes could go right through the artificial turf practice fields on the east side of the Vandal Athletic Center. This would obviously require a large planning, coordination and rehabilitation effort to likely include additional scope of replacing the current artificial turf system, which is at the end of its life cycle. 15. The specific selection committee for this RFQ process has not been formed yet. This will likely be comprised of four to five individuals from Facilities Architecture and Engineering Services, Utilities and Engineering Services, and perhaps other departments not identified Page 5 of 6

6 yet. The selection committee will be formed over the next week to ten days. 16. There is likely to be much coordination required with the A/E team and CM/GC team for the Idaho Arena. However, it is not anticipated that anyone from Opsis Architecture or Hoffman Construction will be part of the selection committee. End of Meeting Minutes Reported By: Guy R. Esser AES Project Manager Attachments: Copy to: Attendance Sheet PDF Copy of Meeting Presentation Project File All Meeting Attendees (see attendance sheet) Ray Pankopf RFQ Selection Committee Page 6 of 6

8 Request for Qualifications Engineering Services Programming, Planning & Design Phase Architectural & Engineering Services West Campus Utilities Distribution Systems and Infrastructure Improvements / Expansion Date: November 1, 2017 Time: 10:00 am (Pacific Time) UI Project #: CP AGENDA ITEMS A. INTRODUCTION OF THOSE PRESENT (Guy Esser) 1. Attendance: (Please Sign Attendance Sheet) 2. UI Project Team: B. PROJECT OVERVIEW & PLANNING (Ray Pankopf) 1. Project Overview 2. LRCDP / West Campus Core 3. Idaho Arena Project 4. Overview of Campus Steam & Chilled Water 5. Planning for the Future C. PROJECT IMPACTS (Guy Esser) 1. Project Budget 2. Project Schedule 3. Arena Specific Impacts E. QUESTIONS / DISCUSSION End of Agenda (Note: Minutes of this meeting will be distributed to all attendees.) 1

IDAHO ARENA CM/GC Presubmittal Conference April 11, 2017

IDAHO ARENA CM/GC Presubmittal Conference April 11, 2017 Background / History 1969 Athletic Study Background / History 1970 Concept Construct Open Air Football Stadium Construct North Towers of New Basketball Pavilion Background / History 1972 Pavilion Plans