1994 JAN-JUN-HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE

Home Browse Search

guidelines and then came up with 7 criteria of his own , rating them 0-2 and weighed some of the criteria. He came up with a scoring for each firm. Keyes fell 6th on his list. They have good related high school experience. Limited in house high tech support. Boring designs but cost efficient. Peter stated the Groton school and Coombs school had the same contractor. He expects our architectural firm to be strong on construction management so a Committee member does not have to be on the construction site every day. The architect should be on top of these items. Keyes is a solid but boring firm. Paul said the Committee could, through the negotiations, make it work. They have a good reputation and have been around a long time. KAESTLE BOOS/GROUP ONE Bill Jones said the designs were interesting and innovative but the basic problem is they are a Conn firm, a different State with demographics very different from Mashpee. Their Mass. connection is a firm expert in food service. It is difficult for them to be competitive with the other firms on this list. Merry Sue agreed they were interesting and innovative but not a Mashpee friendly group. They were very up on educational technology. Janice is nervous about them because they had not worked together as a group before. We should not be a test case. Paul said Group One would do the engineering work and they have never done a school before. Bill Martiros said he spoke with the Building Chairman of their Colchester school who was very, very happy with the school , had no problems. He has not seen any of their work . Joan said she reviewed their tape and did not get a good feeling from their attitudes during the presentation . Joe thinks they have produced large , congested complexes, very retail looking. He did not get a good feeling. Based on the other firms, we could do better. Steve said their expertise is to build projects in Conn . The partnership was weak . He spoke with the construction manager of one of their jobs who said they are competent but not cheap. Michael said they have good high school and high tech experience. They did not do a site review, they are not Mashpee friendly . Peter explained when he asked who their leader was, no one knew. There was no person taking charge, they had not thought it out. EARL FLANSBURGH Bill Jones said they were rated #1 for their competence but investigation turned up many interesting facts. They were once a great firm but he did not get the impression they are still today. They were powerful in their presentation but afterward his view changed considerably. Merry Sue said she doesn ' t see the need to discuss them any further. They were not up front with the Committee with their information. They never admitted the problem with Belmont. Janice agreed the Committee did not need to spend more time on them. Paul said during a site visit, the staff said Flansburgh did not listen and the Chairman of the building committee echoed that. We need a firm that will list to us, our political and citizen base. 2