The Habersham County Commission approved moving forward with the redesign of the new animal shelter during its called meeting Wednesday at a cost of $98,200. The redesign includes the value engineering reductions in an effort to reduce the guaranteed maximum price. The original maximum price for the project was $10 million.
For the last several months, Public Works Director Jerry Baggett has been working with the architect firm and the construction manager at risk to value engineer the project in an effort to reduce costs. During a commission work session last month, Baggett presented to the commission the value engineering reductions that reduced the guaranteed maximum price to just over $7.5 million. However, those reductions reduced the ability of the shelter to be expanded.
Baggett was instructed to add back the ability for the shelter to be expandable to allow for future growth in the county. During Wednesday’s meeting, Baggett presented those design changes. The project guaranteed maximum price increased to $7,859,968 to allow for future expansion.
A sticking point for Commissioner Bruce Harkness during last month’s commission meeting was the architectural costs associated with the redesign to include the value engineering. That cost, as presented during that meeting, was over $125,000. Baggett was requested to see if he could renegotiate that price with the architect.
During Wednesday’s meeting, Baggett presented a new cost for the redesign. The architect reduced the cost to $98,200.
Public comment
The commission allowed public comment during the Nov. 7 meeting. Several people addressed the commission, pressing them to move forward with the shelter project.
Cost of a cup of coffee
Janette Byrom addressed the commission about the need for the animal shelter. She explained that she was a shelter supporter who fosters animals and donates to the shelter. Byrom told the commission that she had spoken with the finance manager about the cost of the construction of the shelter. According to the information she received, that would equate to $20 a year for 10 years for each taxpayer.
“That’s a cup of coffee each year somebody’s going to have to give up,” she told the commission. She added, “I don’t know why we’re redesigning everything.” Byrom shared her commitment to the shelter project. “The animals have to be taken care of in a humane and loving way. For $20 a year, I’m on board for 10 years to get the facility the county needs.”
Harkness asked Finance Manager Tim Sims where the $20 figure came from. Sims told him that he took the cost should the commission finance the project and divided it by the population, approximately 47,000 citizens.
Design
Bob Guthrie addressed the commission and presented architectural drawings that he had received from an architect. Guthrie explained that when he heard about the cost of the project, he began looking at numerous animal shelters that had been built and researched their plans.
He came across a set of plans for a shelter that had been built that was easily expandable. He contacted the architect to get a copy of those plans to present to the commission.
Guthrie explained that the architect was willing to work with the county and could get all drawings for the project to them by the end of the month. He told the commission that the design that he presented could be modified for a cost of around $15,000. Guthrie told the commission that the construction time with this design is less than a year.
Harkness asked him what the estimated cost to build the facility from the plans he presented. Guthrie responded that when this facility was built three years ago the cost was $193 a square foot. The current county plans have the construction costs over $500 a square foot.
SEE RELATED: Habersham County Animal Shelter construction costs: A detailed breakdown
Commissioner Bruce Palmer asked Guthrie a few questions about the design of the building. Palmer was not at the meeting in person and was unable to see the plans. He attended the meeting by livestream.
Great ideas
Palmer asked Guthrie, “If you and Mr. Latty have these great ideas, why didn’t you submit a proposal for the animal shelter when the RFQ was sent out?” Guthrie responded, “Primarily because my job isn’t to build animal shelters. I wouldn’t have been accepted under the criteria you had established.” He added, “Second, I trusted the people I had elected to do the job, to do the job properly and me not be involved.”
Guthrie reminded Palmer that they had met with him and staff in August. At that meeting, Guthrie and Latty requested a 90-day pause to look at alternatives for the project. That pause was not granted. He said during that meeting, there was “zero” interest in the alternatives discussed.
Delays
Harkness addressed the fact that the delays were not due to the commission as had been circulated around social media. The delays have been caused by cost-saving measures through value engineering. Another fact that was pointed out in the meeting is that redesigning the current plans to include value engineering will result in additional delays. The architect said that redrawing the plans would take about three to four months to complete.
However, the commission could break ground and begin some construction on the project by the end of December.
Financing
The county commission did not commit to either of the two financing options that were presented at the work session in September. However, the commission did instruct Finance Manager Tim Sims to get information on callable bonds that could be paid off early with terms of 10, 15, and 20 years.
A majority of the commission came to a consensus not to reactivate the constitutional industrial development authority at this time.
