Building Needs Assessment Work Group Minutes
April 8, 2021 1:00 p.m.
Virtual Meeting
Present:
Corey Baumann SCLS Delivery Services Coordinator – late 1:35 pm
Nan Brien SCLS Board Trustee
Kerrie Goeden SCLS HR & Finance Coordinator
Mark Ibach SCLS Consulting Services Coordinator
Jesse Stewart SCLS Fleet Manager
Vicki Teal SCLS Technology Services Coordinator
Kristi Williams SCLS Board Trustee
Martha Van Pelt SCLS Director
Called to Order at 1:00 by K. Goeden
Approval of previous meeting minutes: April 1, 2021
a. Motion by N. Brien to approve the minutes
b. Second by M. Van Pelt
c. Approved
Reports:
· Any updates on Shopko or Graham Place lots? – K. Goeden
o D. Haug sent a draft of a term sheet for the Shopko site for the work group to review at the beginning of the meeting. Group members discussed the term sheet and agreed to let K. Goeden contact D. Haug and D. Flanigan to move forward after removing the phrase “Land Lease with Purchase options”. The term sheet is merely a written representation of the terms we’d like to include in any negotiations on the sites. It does not represent an offer to purchase; that would come later. The group is comfortable with David having the conversations with sellers of both Shopko and Graham Place about sales price and development costs to determine which site is the best fit for SCLS.
o No other updates were provided.
Discussion:
· Review the spatial relationship plan provided by Keller:
Delivery
o Put Jesse’s office closer to Mechanics Shop
o Meeting room location is good so they can act as a noise buffer between administration and garage and sorting floor.
o Make sure to include a sound barrier between the sorting floor and the meeting rooms as well.
o Would not like docks or loading areas at the front of building or too close to the front entrance.
Common Areas
o Want to be able to lock off meeting rooms and bathrooms for after-hours use
o Add direct access to the meeting room from vestibule or from the professional collection/lobby area?
o Should we add a restroom to the vestibule area?
o Would prefer to not have breakroom overlooking fleet vehicle exits
Administration
o Fine as written
ILS
o Move the Huddle Room/lab closer to ILS team member offices.
o Can we remove personal names from offices? Just label them ILS offices.
Technology
o Office Craig does not need direct access to Huddle room
o Can we remove personal names from offices except Will & Emily?
Consultants
o Move Storage closer to consultants
o Can we remove personal names from offices except Deb?
o Move Deb closer to Workroom
Additional Notes
o Include crosswalks/hallways from consultant side of the building to the ILS side of the building in the middle of this wing
· Discussion of one story vs. two stories
§ Workgroup preference is one story
§ 2 stories would require elevator
§ 2 stories would continue the separation of delivery and admin – which we are trying to eliminate.
§ Future growth needs – We are not too concerned about outgrowing the building. By building offices a size that can accommodate 2 people, this allows for accommodation of additional staff. Huddle rooms can be transformed to offices in future if need be. Shopko in Oscar Mayer location will be future boom area and easier to sell in future.
§ If we have room to expand our footprint, the need may be more in the area of expanding the size of the garage to hold more vehicles, but we can utilize the wash bay. And if we expand delivery, it would most likely be the addition of hubs in other locations.
§ One story is preferred by the work group but understand we may have to consider 2 stories depending on site selected
· MUFN Information: Vicki received further information regarding MUFN that was shared at today’s meeting:
In March 2021, V. Teal reached out to Dan Parenteau at MUFN for a preliminary assessment of the Shopko site and the Fen Oak building. These assessments were shared with the BNAW group and are located here: "Z:\Technology Team\Sites\SCA\New building\MUFN Assessments for building sites". V. Teal has consulted with Will Allington (SCLS Network Administrator) and they are both in agreement that, based on the preliminary assessment, the Fen Oak site (and now the Graham Place site) is the superior choice for MUFN. The Shopko site would cost an estimated $30,000 to $80,000 (depending on City of Madison partnership) for the fiber build. Ongoing costs may increase if we cannot partner with the City of Madison on fiber and need to go with one of the MUFN commercial partners (SupraNet or WIN). There does not appear to be any infrastructure improvements with the Shopko site. (Will be put into the term sheet). The Graham Place location would cost an estimated $20,000 to $25,000 (or less) for fiber build costs as we can tap into the splice point at Agriculture Dr. and World Dairy Dr. This location has an added benefit in that we would no longer need the ADVA system which connects the SCLS / Monona ring. It appears that there would be no increase in ongoing costs. An important added benefit is that this location would put SCLS on a purely dark fiber path which would be an improvement over its current situation, as we could do 10G or multiples of 10G, thus allowing for future expansion (and the bonus of being on purely dark fiber). There are some caveats to this solution, but D. Parenteau's email sounded like it could be worked out. V. Teal has asked D. Parenteau to provide a more detailed comparison of each site.
As we move forward what criteria do we prioritize more? Delivery’s operation and access to highways; version of MUFN; combined department list of building needs.
V. Teal’s choice on sites is:
Graham Place #1. Graham Place is the superior option for MUFN in terms of startup cost, ongoing cost and infrastructure improvements.
Shopko #2
Homework:
· K. Goeden will ask Keller what is the final deadline to stop shopping for new sites?
· Is D. Haug still looking for other properties?
· K. Goeden will send today’s comments on spatial relationship plan to Keller.
· D. Haug and D. Flanigan need to firm up information on term sheet for both properties, Shopko and Graham Place
· K. Goeden will forward V. Teal’s info on MUFN to Keller
· D. Parenteau is providing more information on MUFN for both sites.
Topics Tabled for May Meetings:
· Review photos of things we like design-wise to share with Keller
· Schedule Admin and Delivery meetings to discuss shared spaces – Brinnan, Tim, Heidi, Kerrie
· Start discussions with Deb, Rebekah, Devin, Rob, Mark Ibach regarding Deb’s level of involvement in interior design of new building
Next Meeting Date: 05/06/21 at 10:00 a.m.
Adjournment at 2:53 pm