Memo Interviews W/Facilitators/Architects
. C I T Y o F HOP KIN S
M E MaR AND U M
DATE: April 26, 1995
TO: HRA
~ FROM: Paul T. steinman, Community Development Specialist
SUBJECT: Interviews with Facilitators/Architects
Regarding Arts Facility Project
Staff has recently solicited seven proposals from facilitators
and architects for undertaking a programmatic consensus-building
process with the HRA for the Arts Facility Project over the next
approximately two months. The purpose of this phase is to
develop a product upon which the HRA/Council can base its
decision whether or not to proceed with the project. Staff has
pared the seven proposals to five and invited the following to
. attend an interview process with the HRA.
5:00-5:15 - Meyer, Scherer & Rockcastle--Tom Meyer
5:15-5:30 - Ankeny, Kell, Richter, Walsh--Duane Kell
5:30-5:45 - Art space--Kelly Lindquist
5:45-6:00 - Cluts, O'Brien, Strother--Dan O'Brien
6:00-6:15 - Hammel, Green and Abrahamson--Dan Archer
Each of the firms being interviewed has been informed they will
have approximately five minutes to make a brief presentation. It
is anticipated that the remaining ten minutes will be utilized to
answer questions which will be raised by the HRA and Staff. It is
important that the HRA maintain the above schedule to ensure
sufficient time for all the firms.
To facilitate the discussion, Staff has prepared a list of
potential questions which could be asked by the HRA. An
evaluation sheet has also been prepared which will provide a
basis for ranking of the firms.
It is anticipated the interviews will be completed by 6:15 p.m.
e Following this, the HRA and Staff will have an opportunity to
discuss the interviews and attempt to form a consensus as relates
to which consultant will be selected for this phase of the
PS042GSA
.
. Memo to the HRA, April 26, 1995 - Page Two
project. At 6:45 p.m. the HRA will adjourn their work session
and begin the regularly scheduled HRA meeting, and if possible,
select a firm to contract with for this phase of the project.
An alternative for the HRA if there is not a general consensus is
to identify the two top consultants. These two would then be
asked to provide additional information. Another interview
session could then possibly be held with these two candidates.
Additionally, if it is determined through the interview process
that none of the consultants would be appropriate, the HRA would
have the ability to direct staff to solicit proposals from
various other consultants.
In discussing this matter with certain members of the Arts
Facility steering Committee, they feel the HRA should pursue a
process which would include hiring someone other than an
architect to play the lead role through this phase of the
process. They feel that the steering Committee experience in
undertaking this process with an architectural firm, although
beneficial to them as potential tenants of the facility, may not
provide the same benefit to the HRAjCouncil, as the owners of the
. facility. Therefore, the steering Committee has discussed
recommending that the HRA utilize a method involving a
facilitator, rather than placing an architect in a lead role
throughout this phase. This would effectively shift the focus
more toward identification and education of the broader issues,
rather than more of a technical approach.
Attachments
e
!2S0'126'JA
-- - -
.
QUESTIONS - ARTS FACILITY PROCESS
Please note that primary questions should be asked first, with
secondary questions asked if time permits.
Primary Questions
1. How would you propose to invite public input and information
throughout this phase of the project?
2 . What would you propose your final product would be, which
would be presented to the HRA at the end of this phase?
Secondary Questions
1- Explain how you have participated in the past in
. pUblic/private partnerships such as this with regard to
construction of an arts facility.
e
pSD~Z65A
--
. . .
.
QUESTIONS FOR ARTS FACILITY CONSULTANT
CONSULTANT NAME:
PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM:
FULL 50% 0
EVALUATING FACTORS POINTS POINTS POINTS
Prior experience with projects of a
similar nature - 20 points
Ability to carry project through to
completion - 20 points
Cost of services - 10 points
. General comfort level - 20 points
TOTAL POINTS:
e
~SD1265A
- - -