It is OK with me whatever you say.
Kevin
Begin forwarded message:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Randy Trent <trentr@aaps.k12.mi.us>Date: June 9, 2008 7:30:05 AM GMT-04:00To: Diane Massell <dmassell@umich.edu>Subject: Re: Clarity on costsThe bid documents are ready. But neither the side entrance or the front pavement loop will go to bid unless the King committee chooses it to go to bid.I will work on cutting and pasting some info for you from the meeting minutes and estimates. This will take time. I will shoot for the end of the week, if possible.Thanks,RandyAt 09:20 AM 6/6/2008, Diane Massell wrote:I thought the redesign of the side entrance had gone to bid as well since the architects had presented a plan and the work of redesign had gone to construction drawings.Perhaps my confusion would be clarified by looking at the bid estimates/projected budget. Could you please send those to me? Thanks much, Randy,DianeI will answer in CAPS for easier readingAt 07:21 PM 6/5/2008, Diane Massell wrote:Randy,Thank you for responding. What are the costs of redesigning the side entrance? the parking lot? WE WILL NOT KNOW UNTIL KING DECIDES WHETHER OR NOT THERE EITHER THE SIDE ENTRANCE OR THE PARKING LOT IS A PROJECT AND WHAT THE SCOPE OF EITHER PROJECT IS.When you say that the costs were presented to the King committee, that seems odd to me because many questions were asked about cost and no one seemed to be able to answer that. The only answer given at any time was $60K. THE 60K WAS THE BOND ESTIMATE DEVELOPED IN 2003. EACH PROJECT TEAM MAKES CHOICE AS TO WHAT THEY WANTED AND WHAT THE COST ESTIMATES ARE REFLEST THOSE CHOICES AS THEY MAKE THEIR CHOICES DURING SCHEMATIC AND DESIGN PHASES ESTIMATES.Given that this is bond money for school discretionary use (within certain limits of course) I think its very important to be very clear about the dollars involved. As I said in my original message, its such a rare opportunity for schools to have this kind of resource and we should make the best use of it. I AGREE AND BELIEVE THAT THE CHOICES THE KING COMMITTEE MADE REPRESENTED THEIR BEST CHOICES AND THAT IS WHY I SUPPORTED THIER CHOICES. ON EVERY SCHOOL PROJECT, THE SCHOOL COMMITTEE TEAM IS QUESTIONED BY THE CHOICES THEY HAVE MADE. THEY , AS THE KING TEAM, WORKED VERY HARD TO MAKE THE CHOICES FOR THIER SCHOOL.Have said that, I do want to say that I very much appreciate your coming to King and making information and people available to use to answer our questions. I LOOK FORWARD TO THE KING COMMITTEE'S DECISION. I WANT TO SERVICE THEIR NEEDS AS BEST AS POSSIBLE. I TOO APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND INPUT, AS WELL AS ALL THE OTHER KING COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT ARE WILLING TO COME SHARE THEIR IDEAS.DianeI will answer in CAPS for easier reading.Thanks,RandyAt 03:51 PM 6/5/2008, Kevin Karr wrote:Randy,Can you answer Dr. Massell's questions?Thanks.KevinOn Jun 5, 2008, at 3:41 PM, Diane Massell wrote:Kevin:Can you ask Randy Trent to clarify whether this figure includesa) mandatory $60K for repaving YES FOR THE DRIVE, NOT PARKING LOT.b) redesign of the side entrance NOc) fence separation and sidewalks YES TO THE FENCE SEPARATION AND REPAIR OF THE SIDE WALKE AS NEEDEDd) any other aspects of the proposal not covered above? I AM NOT SURE WHICH PROPOASL ABOVE IS BEING REFERRED TO.It is so rare in the life of a school that we have access to such a large discretionary amount of money. I know that upwards of 80-90% of school budgets are tied up in salaries. Personally, I find it rather appalling that the figure for this work was not made transparent to you at the outset and to the others involved. The district has not been known for its careful use of resources, as you know, and has been highly criticized for such. ALL OF THE COSTS WERE MADE PRESENTED TO THE KING COMMITTEE AND ALL CHOICES WERE DIRECTED BY THE KING COMMITTEE BASED ON THESE ESTIMATES THAT WE EXPALINED AT EACH PHASE OF DESIGN. IF I IN ANYWAY LEFT THE IMPRESSION THAT WE DID NOT MAKE THE COST KNOWN I APOLOGIZE.To clarify my position, as I stated last night:a) no engineered solution can be sufficient in and of itself. Any plan will require an educational component and educational costs. The man presenting last night acknowledged this as well.b) Our educational component has not been successful thus far. There are too many people, like the new parent attending last night, who do not know what the rules for the drive are. I talked to a parent who has been at the school 7 years and did not know all the rules. And there will always be new parents, who will always need to be educated.c) The redesign is significantly flawed in that it does not address safety at the end of the school day--kids crossing in the other direction to get on the busses, or who forget something and dash back to the school building. It would also require someone to monitor at all times so that the cars stop at the crossing at the appropriate times. Who will that someone be? Kids are completely unreliable safeties, and I think you'd have a liability issue there as well. If we have to hire someone, have you or a teacher take duty, it's the same as leaving the drive as is and doing the same.d) and last but not least, environment and aesthetics.Best,DidiAt 9:13 AM -0400 6/5/08, Kevin Karr wrote:This is from Randy Trent. If you can think of others to send it to, please do.KevinBegin forwarded message:The estimated cost of the original design was $249,700.$108,000 was the actual road work and $141,000 was involved with moving the lights.I apologize for the confusion last night about the cost.Thanks,Randy***************************************************************Randall J. TrentExecutive Director of Physical PropertiesAnn Arbor Public Schools(734)994-8118 Voice (734)994-1792 fax***************************************************************--Diane MassellUniversity of Michigan***************************************************************Randall J. TrentExecutive Director of Physical PropertiesAnn Arbor Public Schools(734)994-8118 Voice (734)994-1792 fax***************************************************************--Diane MassellUniversity of Michigan***************************************************************Randall J. TrentExecutive Director of Physical PropertiesAnn Arbor Public Schools(734)994-8118 Voice (734)994-1792 fax***************************************************************
