Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

Select a month below to see the minutes from the Planning Commission.

Planning Commission January 2008

Meeting Minutes – 15 January 2008 APPROVED

Oxford Planning Commission


Attendance: David Eady, Forrest McCanless, Erik Oliver, Jim Patrick, Hoyt Oliver (Council Liaison)


Chairman Eady called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.


  1. Old Business


Hoyt Oliver reported that the city council had passed the resolution to send the comprehensive plan update to the Northeast Georgia Regional Development Center for review.


Chairman Eady reported that he had followed up on the previously submitted development permit application of Betty Griggs of Godfrey Street for an extension of her house and found that it did conform to the ordinances – therefore approved.


  1. New Business


The members welcomed Forrest McCanless as a new member of the planning commission, appointed to fill the unexpired term of Emma Lou Patterson.


The terms of members have been clarified. The terms of David Eady and Erik Oliver will expire on Dec. 31, 2009. The terms of Vivian Harris and Forrest McCanless will expire on Dec. 31, 2008. The terms of Ron Manson and Jim Patrick should have expired on Dec. 31, 2007 but were overlooked. For the purposes of the January meeting, Mr. Patrick continued to serve. Mr. Manson was absent on family business. The commission voted unanimously (Mr. Patrick abstaining) to recommend to the city council at the February meeting that Mr. Patrick and Mr. Manson be reappointed to the commission for new terms.


Mr. Andre Henry of 170 Longstreet Circle submitted a development permit application to extend his house. It was unclear from the submitted drawings whether or not his existing house and the plans for the extension conform to the required setbacks (15 feet) from the lot sides. The commission unanimously authorized Mr. McCanless and Chairman Eady to investigate further and to approve the application if it does indeed meet the required setbacks. If it does not meet the requirements, the commission’s vote included recommending to the city council that the Mr. Henry be granted a variance – the justification being that his proposed extension will stay in line with the existing structure and not further encroach on the lot sides.


The commission voted unanimously to authorize Chairman Eady to remind Mr. and Mrs. Gadilhe of 1018 Emory Street and Mr. and Mrs. Nanette Watson of 1008 Emory Street (Orna Villa) that before they sell the house recently constructed by the Gadilhes and Watsons behind the Gadilhe house on parcel # X003 005A, it will be necessary to effect a permanent easement or right of way to the property, which is currently landlocked. Chairman Eady will report back at the February meeting of the commission.


The commission voted unanimously to recommend to the city council that they issue a citation to the owner of 118 E. Clark Street for non-conformance with zoning regulations. The lot is zoned R-30, which requires primary structures of at least 1,800 square feet (Article 5: 504, Item C). Contrary to his development permit request, the owner (unclear if it is current or immediate past owner – exchange in 2006) completed a home that is less than 1,600 square feet. The home is now listed for sale on the Internet. It was also noted that no abatement was done of the burned home on the same lot before the home, which was known to have asbestos, was razed. The recommendation is to fine the owner and require that he bring the structure into compliance.


The commission also voted unanimously to authorize commission member Erik Oliver to investigate the timbering and earth work recently begun on two previously undeveloped lots on E. Richardson Street, owned by Mr. Todd Christian. From a prior conversation, Mr. Oliver reported that Mr. Christian claims to have a permit from the City of Oxford that is more than a year old. No present member of the commission has any memory of the request or granted permission. Mr. Oliver will contact Mr. Christian again, as well as city hall and the Newton County Planning and Zoning office in an attempt to obtain the approved permit.


In light of these cases and others that have previously come up or are likely to come up in the future, the commission agreed that a future agenda item for discussion should be the creation of a standardized system of fines and penalties for zoning or development offences.


The commission voted unanimously to recommend to the city council that Chairman Eady be included as a member of the city council committee carrying forward the planning, design, and construction process of the proposed new city hall building (or annex).


The commission reviewed the proposed five-year short-term work program of the draft comprehensive plan update with the intent of identifying those projects for which the planning commission might provide implementation assistance to the city council. The commission will establish priorities for itself in February and report those to the city council during the February council work session.


Mr. McCanless suggested that because there are so many projects listed in the five-year work plan, it would be helpful to have them numbered for easy reference. Erik Oliver will contact John Devine at NEGRDC and ask that the draft be so amended.


Chairman Eady adjourned the meeting at 8:51 p.m.







Erik Oliver

Secretary




Planning Commission February 2008

Meeting Minutes – 19 February 2008 APPROVED

Oxford Planning Commission


Attendance: David Eady, Forrest McCanless, Erik Oliver, Ron Manson, Hoyt Oliver (Council Liaison)

Guests: Jerry Roseberry, George Holt, Jim Windham


Chairman Eady called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.


  1. Old Business


Erik Oliver reported that the comprehensive plan draft is with the Department of Community Affairs for review. The city council and planning commission had not submitted any significant changes. Ron Manson expressed that he would prefer the city change its phrasing in the short term work plan about continued opposition to the Covington Municipal Airport to something more positive. The commission agreed that if changes can still be made, they will adjust the language to something that conveys the same message but with a less confrontational edge.


Chairman Eady felt that the defined character areas in the comp plan failed to address the breadth of residential density he and others prefer in proximity to the proposed town center. Erik Oliver mentioned that NEGRDC had compiled the maps from citizen input. Oliver also brought up the county’s current consideration of Transfer of Development Rights as a potential tool for encouraging density where there is infrastructure in exchange for permanently protecting rural or greenspace areas. A limited form of TDRs might be adopted for Oxford.


Forrest McCanless reported that the previous month’s development permit application from Mr. Henry of 170 Longstreet Circle was found, after investigation, to meet the ordinance setbacks and was thus approved.


Chairman Eady reported that he has not yet spoken to the Gadilhes and the Watsons about giving permanent access to their landlocked property before they sell it. He pledged to do it shortly.


Jim Windham asked the Commission to define when a piece of land that is parceled out over time becomes a subdivision and requires a city road. The example used was the Ellis properties, five houses belonging to the same family and accessible by a private drive only. It was discussed that the council or the commission needs to approach the owners about permanent, public access sufficient for city and emergency vehicles. Because it is a private drive, the city garbage truck should not be driving down it. Instead, garbage and recycling should be brought by the homeowners to the Emory Street curb.


Erik Oliver reported that he had met with the county officials in the planning and zoning department, who confirmed that Mr. Todd Christian had cleared his two lots on E. Richardson St./Airport Rd. and padded them for new construction without a valid land disturbance permit (expired). The county issued a stop work order and instructed Mr. Christian that he would have to go back before the planning commission to obtain a new permit. The recommendation of the commission last month to the city council was that Mr. Christian be cited for clearing the land without a valid land disturbance permit.


  1. New Business


Mr. Todd Christian submitted a new development permit application for lots described above on E. Richardson St./Airport Rd. It was noted that the application failed to show the proposed placement of the houses on the respective lots with marked setback lines. Also, one application was submitted for two separate parcels. The commission therefore cannot vote on an incomplete application and will ask the city clerk to contact Mr. Christian for the additional necessary information and consider the applications again next month.


Mr. Spillers of 208 William Street submitted a development permit application to enclose his carport. The application met all relevant ordinances and was approved.

Mr. Oliver of 402 W. Clark Street submitted a development permit application to construct a free standing 8’X10’ tool shed adjacent to his house. The application met all relevant ordinances and was approved, with Mr. Oliver abstaining.


Jonathan and Theresa Eady of 1216 Wesley Street submitted a development permit application to install a pool, pool house, and pergola, to be constructed by McCanless Design. The application met all relevant ordinances and was approved, with Mr. Eady and Mr. McCanless abstaining.


Forrest McCanless distributed his first draft of a new development permit application form for review by the commission. The new form will more adequately gather the information for both the city and the county to make informed decisions and make the process clearer to applicants. The commission made several suggestions about the draft, which Mr. McCanless will now take back and incorporate before sending it to the county planning and zoning staff for review. He will bring a final draft to the next month’s commission meeting.


The city councilmen present discussed their desire to turn coordination of the planning and design process of the new city hall over to the planning commission. Councilman Windham will make a motion a the next city council meeting to that effect. The planning commission agreed that they would develop a Request for Proposals (RFP) to distribute to architectural firms, review proposals, make a recommendation to the city council for selection of a firm, then work with the chosen firm to conduct a space needs assessment, interviews with relevant city staff, site visits of other city halls, public input sessions, and final design and placement. The council members present indicated that up to $75,000 has been set aside in this year’s budget for the design process and that the entire construction budget for the new city hall will be between $750,000 and $1,000,000. The commission indicated they would meet to develop a draft RFP for review by the council at their next work session.


Because the city council has now changed its regular work sessions from the last to the third Monday of the month, the planning commission approved changing the commission meetings to the second Tuesday of the month to ensure issues brought before the commission can be then brought before the council within the same 30 day period.



Chairman Eady adjourned the meeting at 8:48 p.m.







Submitted for review by Erik Oliver

Secretary




Planning Commission March 2008

Meeting Minutes – 11 March 2008 Approved

Oxford Planning Commission


Attendance: David Eady, Forrest McCanless, Erik Oliver, Ron Manson, Hoyt Oliver (Council Liaison)

Guests: Jerry Roseberry


Chairman Eady called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. The minutes were approved unanimously.


  1. Old Business


David Eady has not yet spoken to the Gadhiles about their need to provide permanent access to their landlocked house before selling it. It was decided that Mr. Eady will email Mayor Roseberry with a summary of the issue and action to be taken and that City Clerk Carol Poole will follow up with the Gadhiles directly.


Forrest McCanless shared his draft of the new Development Permit Application. The Commission reviewed the draft and suggested changes and additions. Mr. McCanless will incorporate the changes and provide a final draft at next month’s meeting, having first shared the revised draft with the Newton County Planning and Zoning Department for their input.


Citations have not yet been issued by the city to Mr. Stanley Steele of E. Clark Street as previously recommended by the Commission. The Commission decided to retract its recommendation of a citation to Mr. Todd Christian as previously discussed. Mr. Christian did produce a signed land disturbance permit from the city. The permit had expired according to city ordinances, but there was no place on the permit form indicating to Mr. Christian that there was an expiration date.


There has been no action by the Commission yet on Councilman Jim Windham’s previous request to the Commission to define when a piece of land that is parceled out over time becomes a subdivision and requires a city road. The example used was the Ellis properties, five houses belonging to the same family and accessible by a private drive only. It was discussed that the council or the commission needs to approach the owners about permanent, public access sufficient for city and emergency vehicles. Because it is a private drive, the city garbage truck should not be driving down it. Instead, garbage and recycling should be brought by the homeowners to the Emory Street curb.


  1. New Business


Mr. Todd Christian submitted a completed development permit applications for his lots described previously on E. Richardson St./Airport Rd. The previous omissions had been corrected. While the Commission questioned the wisdom of erecting two houses during the current housing slump and at the end of the Covington Municipal Airport runway, Mr. Christian’s permit applications met the required ordinances and were thus approved unanimously.


Erik Oliver distributed a draft Request for Proposals for Design and Engineering Services to Build a New City Hall. He reported that it was based on samples provided by Emory University Architect Todd Dolson and that Mr. Dolson had reviewed the draft. Mr. Oliver pointed out that there would be no need for Pre-Design Services (and there would be considerable cost savings) if the City Council could make some basic decisions about location and size of the new building and whether or not the current city hall would be kept or demolished. The Commission agreed that the council should be encouraged to make those decisions and that Mr. Oliver be tasked with changing the RFP to reflect those decisions. Mr. Oliver agreed to attend the council work session, explain the Commissions recommendations, and complete the new RFP in time for the Commission to review and the Council to approve at its regular April meeting.


Chairman Eady adjourned the meeting at 8:12 p.m.


Submitted for review by Erik Oliver, Secretary

Planning Commission April 2008 Notes

OXFORD PLANNING COMMISSION

Unofficial Minutes (No Quorum), April 8, 2008, 7:00 p.m.


Present: David Eady, Forrest McCanless, Ron Manson

Hoyt Oliver and Jim Windham, liaison from City Council

Mayor Jerry Roseberry, for latter part of meeting


Absent: Erik Oliver, Jim Patrick, Vivian Harris

(Erik was out of country; others may have been uncertain of date of meeting,

as it was listed also for April 15 on web site calendar.)



There were no requests for development permits to be considered at this meeting.


Those present engaged in detailed and extensive discussion of the Request for Proposals for architectural firms to be considered for design of new City facilities. City Attorney David Strickland had suggested some modifications to draft proposal composed by Secretary Erik Oliver. These modifications were included in the proposal. The Planning Commission also determined the procedures whereby firms would be considered and evaluated, the dates for submission of proposals and selection of top candidates, and proposed date for proposing final candidate to City Council.


David Eady, in consultation with City Attorney, agreed to write up the modified proposal in time for it to be sent to selected architectural firms by April 11, if possible. A cover letter from Mayor Roseberry will accompany the proposal.


A copy of the final proposal to be sent out is attached, following these Minutes.


Respectfully submitted,

Hoyt Oliver, secretary pro tem

















CITY OF OXFORD

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)

ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR A NEW CITY HALL



GENERAL


The City of Oxford is issuing this Request for Proposals (RFQ) for an Architectural Services Firm with a strong record in successfully designing local government administrative buildings and city halls. This RFQ, more specifically, seeks the qualifications of an architectural firm capable of producing a redevelopment plan to include feasibility and use analysis, conceptual and preliminary architectural design, and cost estimating. These services are sought to provide full architectural, interior design, landscape architecture and building and site engineering design and construction documentation, bidding & negotiation services and construction administration required to fully document, bid and construct a new, free standing city hall building.


Responding firms should be technically qualified and licensed to provide architectural design services in constructing projects using local and state funds. Information, more specifically, should include prior project experience in planning and designing historic rehabilitations as well as construction and/or reconstruction of public buildings.


Procedures for selection of an individual or firm will be in accordance with local government requirements and the Common Rule Selection Process. All proposals will be evaluated in terms of project approach, schedule, experience, quality of prior work, and demonstrated capacity to perform. Prior experience in similar projects and qualifications of principal staff should be included. Past performances on local government construction projects also will be reviewed for project timeliness, completing work within budget, quality of work, and other factors such as knowledge of the community.



PROJECT DESCRIPTION


The Mayor and City Council of Oxford, Georgia seek professional design services of an architect or architectural firm to provide full architectural, interior design, landscape architecture and building and site engineering design and construction documentation, bidding & negotiation services and construction administration required to fully document, bid and construct a new, free standing city hall building.



PROJECT ASSUMPTIONS



Budget: $750,000 -- $1,000,000 (including equipment and furnishings)


Size: 3,868 – 4,690 NET square feet (see Table 1).


Location/Orientation: Same parcel(s) currently occupied by city hall. The building will be oriented to face W. Clark Street, approximately in line with and scaled to the adjacent historic “rock store.”


Existing City Hall: To be demolished as part of this project or a later date, depending on budgetary and logistical constraints.


Parking: Estimated 40 spaces (though subject to further recommendations), to be located behind the building/rear of properties.


Architectural Style: Two-story or split level building of a 19th century/early 20th century civic/institutional style, consistent with the city’s history and mindful of existing historic styles and adjacencies. The city hall with be the northernmost “bookend” of the proposed town center area.


Landscape/Grounds: A “pocket park” will be designed for the space immediately west of the new building to offer an outdoor gathering space and to act as a transition zone between the town center and residential areas. While the scope of this project does not include the park design, the building should consider its relationship to the adjacent greenspace.


Green Building: The City is very interested in the possibility of achieving some level of sustainable building certification, such as a Silver or Gold rating under the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System for New Construction and Major Renovations (NC).


Timeline: Design and engineering should be completed in Calendar Year (CY) 2008. Construction should be completed during CY 2009.



EXPECTATIONS


Review of Work to Date: The selected architect/firm should review all studies and planning documents generated to date (see Background) and meet with City Council and Planning Commission to fully understand scope of project.


Preliminary Design: The selected architect/firm should develop preliminary design documents to include plans, elevations, and architectural renderings to detail compliance with the project assumptions.


Trade Study: The selected architect/firm should conduct a trade study (pros and cons) of various types of construction to determine best fit for Oxford’s needs, desires, and budgetary constraints. This will include consideration of sustainable design components and their relative value, accounting for life-cycle cost considerations.


Cost Estimate: The selected architect/firm should develop a detailed cost estimate for the proposed structure.


Client Review: The Planning Commission and City Council will review preliminary designs and cost estimates and identify required changes. The architect/firm will make revisions and go through further review until final approval of preliminary design is received from Planning Commission and City Council.


Final Design: Upon receiving approval of the preliminary design and cost estimate, the architect/firm will proceed with the final design, including:


SPACE NEEDS/ESTIMATES


Table 1 identifies space uses and approximate allocations in the new city hall were generated in discussion by the city clerk, chief of police, city council chair of buildings and grounds, and the secretary of the planning commission. The selected architect/firm will compare these space allocations with municipal government office space standards, or other applicable office space standards, and recommend adjustments as appropriate.


Table 1. Estimated Space Needs and Allocations

Anticipated Space/Room Use

Space Allocation

(square feet)*

Municipal Court, City Council Meetings, Community Activities

2,000 - 2,400

Judge’s Chamber and Major’s Office (dual use)

140 - 200

City Clerk’s Office

120 - 160

City Manager’s Office (future need)

120 - 160

Deputy Clerk’s Office

120 - 160

City Staff Workspace (up to 3 staff)

260 - 310

Chief of Police’s Office

120 - 160

Police Officers’ Workspace (up to 3 officers)

200 - 260

Evidence/Property Room (secured area)

100 - 120

Copy/Supply Room

120 - 140

Kitchen/Break Room

200 - 280

Attorney/Client Interview Room 1

64 - 100

Attorney/Client Interview Room 1

64 - 100

Archive File Storage Room

120 - 150

Archival Storage Space

120 - 150

Net Total Square Feet

3,868 - 4,690

* Does not include area dedicated to walls, structure, chases, unassigned storage, mechanical, telecommunications, data, security, stairs, elevator, restrooms or basic non department circulation – to be added for gross square feet.


BACKGROUND


During the last four years, the City of Oxford has undertaken multiple planning exercises with a wide breadth of scope. Below are brief summaries of those studies and the findings that relate directly to the construction of a new city hall. The full reports will be available to applicants upon request.


May 2004: City of Oxford Facilities Master Plan


Conducted by Armentrout, Roebuck, Matheny Consulting Group, P.C., the Facilities Master Plan specifically addressed options for all city-owned and proposed facilities, including city hall, a fire station, police station, maintenance facility, an expanded post office, and parks/trail systems. The final recommendations were, in part, to co-locate fire, police, and utilities in one complex and make minor additions to city hall to accommodate files. An assumption was that Oxford would not significantly increase its staff or otherwise increase its services and that the city as a whole would not grow significantly, despite Newton County’s rank as one of the fastest growing counties in the nation. The response to the final report and recommendations by the public was general ambivalence.


2004-2005: Work of Mayor’s Advisory Council


The Mayor (then Mr. Don Ballard) appointed a small group of residents to pursue further planning and ultimately implementation of key projects in the Facilities Master Plan. The Mayor’s Advisory Council (MAC) successfully oversaw planning and construction of the new maintenance facility. However, the facility was not built to accommodate the fire and police stations as recommended by the 2004 Facilities Master Plan. The MAC also proposed a city hall annex that would tie into the existing building and include a new community room/courtroom plus additional storage. The plans were not widely supported because of the site plan and the lack of city council and general public engagement in the planning process.


Winter 2006: Oxford Future Planning Workshop


The City of Oxford and Oxford College jointly engaged students of the UGA Metropolitan Design Studio in Covington to conduct a weekend charrette. The scope of the project included the whole town. A focal aspect, however, was planning and conceptual design for a town center area that would create an identifiable heart of the city, add limited commercial activity and services, and act as a point of interaction between citizens and college faculty, staff, and students. The students recommended constructing a new city hall on the city-owned open area immediately south of W. Clark Street, across from “Rock Store.” The city-owned land on which the city hall currently stands would, in turn, be sold for new residential construction and the property sale would help to finance the new city hall project. By this time in the evolution of thinking, the city leaders had begun to think of co-locating the city hall staff with the police. The question of whether or not to continue with a volunteer fire department versus engaging the Newton County or the City of Covington to provide full-time fire services was raised repeatedly. The fire station issue was not resolved, but it was demonstrated that a future fire station could be accommodated in the town center plan or located further north – perhaps adjacent to the maintenance facility. The highly public process generated enthusiasm. However, because the students only had time to create one concept and that concept was based upon a few assumptions that did not have broad support, city leaders asked “Good, but is this the only option?”


2006-2007: Remembering, Revisioning, and Recreating – Conceiving a Village Center in Oxford


To build upon the concept generated during the UGA charrette, local citizens David Eady (community planner and member of the city planning commission) and Erik Oliver (artist, Special Assistant to the Dean for Strategic Initiatives at Oxford College, and former urban growth management consultant) volunteered to generate additional concepts of the town center to give both city leaders and the public more options and to more fully engage people in the process. Mr. Eady and Mr. Oliver generated 16 additional designs and through a feedback process with city leaders narrowed the concepts to three plus the UGA concept. The emergent majority consensus was that the city hall would remain north of W. Clark Street at or immediately adjacent to its current location, that a new building would be built immediately in front of (south of) the existing building or immediately north of “Rock Store”, that the existing building might or might not be kept – depending on the findings of an inspection, and that the site would include an outdoor gathering space (pocket park).


2007: Council Sub-Committee Findings and Planning Commission Recommendations


In an effort to move planning and design of the new city hall forward, the mayor (then Dr. Bill Murdy) assigned three city council members to conduct an inspection of the current city hall and to solicit architectural firms. Initially the thinking reverted back to the original recommendations of the former Mayor’s Advisory Committee to build a simple annex to the existing building. The same previous objections from the public arose again, and the planning commission voted unanimously to recommend to the city council that a new, “proper” city hall be constructed and that it be located along W. Clark St. in front of the current city hall and in line with Rock Store. Opinions among the city council members varied, but it was clear that there was only one consensus – universal support to move some version of the project forward. Funds were budgeted to engage an architectural firm in FY 2008.


2007: City of Oxford Ten-Year Comprehensive Plan Update


During the summer and fall of 2007, the city undertook its state-mandated ten-year comprehensive plan update. The planning commission coordinated the process with the Northeast Georgia Regional Development Center. The update included a citizen survey that yielded quantitative and qualitative responses from more than 70% of households. Among the responses was strong support for development of the proposed town center. As a result, the city formally added the town center development as part of its community agenda and added design and construction of a new city hall to its five-year short term work plan.


2008: At its February meeting, the city council voted unanimously to turn project management for the new city hall design and construction over to the planning commission given the relevant experience of the commission’s members. The commission is to oversee the RFP process, to interview applicant companies/firms, to make a recommendation for hire to the city council, and to assist the engaged company/firm during the process as necessary.


ADMINISTRATION


The project will be administered by the City of Oxford. Project funding is provided by the City of Oxford in combination with funding from Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) revenues allocated to the City of Oxford.


INFORMATION REQUIRED


Proposals shall contain the following:


  1. A general description of the firm, including any firms to be included as sub-contractors. The lead firm must be clearly identified.

  2. Names, qualifications, locations, and availability of principal staff whom would be assigned to the project. (This includes completing the “Statement of Qualifications Questionnaire” attached to this RFP.)

  3. Fee schedules of key personnel and reimbursable expenses, along with an estimate of total cost (with breakdown) to provide the requested services.

  4. Capabilities of the firm or firms to carry out the proposed work.

  5. Recent experience of the firm involving similar projects.

  6. References from prior projects similar in scope and type to this project.

  7. A brief description of the firm’s general approach to the proposed project and a tentative schedule.

  8. Any other information that the vendor wishes to submit for consideration.



PROCEDURES AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS


The City of Oxford initiates the procedure for selection with this request for proposals (RFP) to which architects/firms are expected to reply. In addition to direct requests for proposals from identified architects/firms, the RFP will be posted in the Covington News and on the City of Oxford website (www.oxfordgeorgia.org).


The City of Oxford will review and rate proposals submitted according to this RFP. Review criteria will include, at a minimum: demonstrated qualifications and capabilities; general approach to providing the requested services; time and fee schedule; and cost estimates to provide the requested services. Top rated proposals will be selected for further comparison, which may include interviews with the architects/firms and requests for clarifications and/or additional information to ensure comparable proposals for evaluation prior to final selection. The City of Oxford will select the proposal that represents the best value to the City in relation to its needs, and the City will negotiate and enter to contract with the selected architect/firm to provide the requested services. All respondents to the RFP will be subsequently notified of the final selection results.


SCHEDULE


April 11, 2008 Request for Proposals Published


May 9, 2008 Proposals Submitted (deadline)


May 13, 2008 Review and Rate Proposals


May 14-30, 2008 Further Review of Top Proposals/Candidates


June 2, 2008 Proposal/Candidate Selected


This schedule is approximate. All items except the receipt date for proposals will be subject to change by the City of Oxford.


PROCEDURES FOR SUBMISSION OF STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS


Proposals must be submitted electronically via email to cpoole@oxfordgeorgia.com, or delivered on Compact Disc (CD), and received by the City of Oxford no later than close of business on May 9, 2008. Portable Document Format (PDF) is preferred. Proposals received after the deadline will not be reviewed. Facsimile submittals will not be accepted. Hard copy versions of proposals may accompany electronic submittals; they must be mailed to the following address:


Ms. Carol A. Poole, CMC

Clerk, City of Oxford

Oxford City Hall

110 West Clark Street

Oxford, GA 30054-2274


Proposals must be accompanied by a cover letter stating the name and role of the primary architect/firm and any proposed sub-contractors. The cover letter must be signed by principals with the authority to submit proposals from their respective firms.


General questions regarding the building or the project can be made to the following individuals (email is preferred):


David Eady, Chair, City of Oxford Planning Commission

eadyd@ctc.com, 678-570-9030


Erik Oliver, Secretary, City of Oxford Planning Commission

erik.oliver@emory.edu, 404-226-4165




MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS


The City of Oxford shall not be responsible for any costs incurred in the preparation of the Statement of Qualifications or other related activities.


All questions pertaining to this RFP shall be submitted electronically via email no later than April 30, 2008. Responses to submitted questions will be provided as they are received; however, all questions and responses will be posted on the City of Oxford website (www.oxfordgeorgia.org) no later than May 2, 2008.


All materials submitted in connection with this RFP will be public documents and subject to the Open Records Act and all other laws of the State of Georgia and the United States of America and subject to the open records policies of the City of Oxford. All such material shall remain the property of the City of Oxford and will not be returned to the respondent.


All respondents to this RFP shall hold harmless the City of Oxford and any of their officers and employees from all suits and claims alleged to be a result of this RFP. The issuance of this RFP constitutes only an invitation to submit proposals and qualifications. The City of Oxford reserves the right to determine, as its sole discretion, whether any aspect of a respondent’s submittal meets the criteria in this RFP. The City of Oxford also reserves the right to seek clarifications, to negotiate with any vendor submitting a response, to reject any or all responses with or without cause, and to modify the procurement process and schedule. In the event that this RFP is withdrawn or the project canceled for any reason, the City of Oxford shall have no liability to any respondent for any costs or expenses in connection with this RFP or otherwise.



City of Oxford



By: ________________________________

Jerry Roseberry, Mayor


CITY OF OXFORD

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS QUESTIONNAIRE


Please provide the following information on your company/firm:


Company/Firm Name:

Address:

City/State/Zip:












FIRM DESCRIPTION:


















































Principal-In-Charge


Project Manager


Project Designer


Project Architect


Architectural Staff


Interior Designer


Mechanical Engineering


Electrical Engineering


Plumbing and Fire Protection


Structural Engineering


Civil Engineering


Landscape Architecture



PERTINENT DESIGN EXPERIENCE: List projects that best describe your firm’s experience and expertise in the design of government facilities. Briefly describe the purpose, size, use and operation of each project and the date of completion. Indicate the final project cost and final construction cost for each project listed. Describe your firm’s responsibility or role in the projects. List all consultants and/or the project team providing services to the project, including the contractors, CM’s, etc., and their specific role. Label and attach pictures of the completed buildings.


Project One:


Project Two:


Project Three: ______


REFERENCES: Please provide the name, title, address and phone number of five individuals/clients who may be contacted as references for the projects described above.


























PROOF OF INSURANCE: Provide the provider(s), contact information, policy numbers, and coverage for all relevant insurance policies held by your company/firm:




ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: You may include as an appendix to this questionnaire, any additional information that you would like to have on file with the City of Oxford for reference.

Please respond to the following question in 500 words or less:


What are the reasons for your interest in this particular project, and why are you particularly well-suited to it?



Planning Commission May 2008

Meeting Minutes – 13 May 2008 Approved

Oxford Planning Commission


Attendance: David Eady, Vivian Harris, Ron Manson, Erik Oliver, Jim Patrick, Hoyt Oliver (Council Liaison)

Guests: Mayor Jerry Roseberry, Police Chief Clark Miller, Michelle Kim (Covington News)


Chairman Eady called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. The March minutes were approved unanimously. There were no official minutes for the April meeting as there was no quorum. The Commission did review notes taken by Councilman Hoyt Oliver.


  1. Old Business


There was no old business to discuss. Planning Commission member Forrest McCanless was absent, but he will bring the final draft of the new Development Permit Application to the June meeting.


  1. New Business


Mayor Roseberry spoke to the commission about the letter from Mr. Stu Tabor, recent executive director of The Cousins Center, requesting that Oxford become the regulatory body for property on which The Cousins Center is located. The parcel in question is split between Oxford and Covington, with roughly 2/3 of it in Oxford, but the preponderance of structures in Covington. The planning commission recommended to the mayor that he and the city council send a response, copied to the City of Covington, indicating that Oxford is already the regulatory body for any development within the city limits of Oxford, but that it cannot be the regulatory body for buildings or other developments in Covington, even if the parcel overlaps the two municipalities. However, Oxford would be willing to be the regulatory body if Covington first de-annexes the remainder of the parcel, if the Board of Education de-annexes the mitigation land (woods, swamp) behind The Cousins Center property, and then The Cousins Center and the Board of Education in turn request annexation into Oxford.


Mr. George Holt of W. Soule Street submitted a development permit application to install an 8’X10’ tool shed on the rear corner of his property. The application met all required ordinances and was approved unanimously by the commission.


Erik Oliver, on behalf of Oxford College, brought a landscape plan showing proposed improvements (sidewalks, street crossings, street trees, curbing) to Haygood Street and the intersection of Haygood and Hammil Streets. The College is asking to make the improvements to increase pedestrian safety, namely the 350 students who will be crossing the street daily when the new residence hall is completed this summer, and to improve the overall aesthetic. The College asked the commission to recommend the plan to the City Council and also recommend that, given the short window of opportunity to complete the project before the students arrive in August, the College be allowed to bid out and conduct the construction in the city right of way itself. It was explained that the College would undertake the improvements in phases as funds are available – for now only the sidewalk on the east side of Haygood and the improvements to the Haygood/Hammil intersection. The commission approved the request and plan unanimously, with Mr. Oliver abstaining.


The commission then turned its attention to analyzing and rating the six proposals submitted by architectural firms for the new city hall. Chairman Eady distributed a spreadsheet to aid in the analysis. The commission discussed each of the firms but decided it could not make any determinations until Mr. McCanless and Mr. Patrick (who had not received the proposals prior to the meeting) had a chance to give their input. The commission agreed that they would try to hold face-to-face interviews with the eventual top three firms and then make recommendations to the city council before the June 2 regular council meeting.


Chairman Eady adjourned the meeting at 8:46 p.m.


Submitted for review by Erik Oliver, Secretary