Search begins for architect

The Whitefish School Board is looking for an architect to design a new Muldown Elementary School.

The board voted last week 5-1 to go out for requests for qualifications for a new design team for the project. Trustee Shannon Hanson voted in opposition.

Voters earlier this month approved a $26.5 million bond request for the construction of a new school in Whitefish.

The district has worked with architectural firm L’Heureux, Page and Werner since early planning for a new school began working with the Muldown Project Task Force more than a year ago.

Trustee Katie Clarke thanked LPW for their work thus far, but said it can’t hurt to see what other firms can offer at this stage.

“I’m not really sure what the loss is in opening it up for an RFQ,” she said. “I think the longevity of the project makes it worth it, because the building is going to last for tons of years, so what’s a couple months just to make sure?”

During public comment, LPW got support from several school staff members who have worked alongside them during the process with the task force.

Muldown principal Linda Whitright called working with LPW “an honor,” and said when she reached out to other staff members and schools that have also worked with LPW she only heard positive things.

“It was interesting to me that as they reflected their experiences, it sounded like the same reflections I was hearing back from those people I reached out to,” Whitright said. “My recommendation would be for continuing that relationship with them and continuing to work with them.”

District Maintenance Director Chad Smith agreed. Having written the original RFQ early in the process of addressing Muldown’s issues, like a failing heating system and a roof incapable of handling Whitefish’s snow loads, Smith said he went back to see how LPW fared against their early estimates on planning stages and decision dates.

“I looked back through the timeline that they had in their original document, with all the terms and committees ... tonight, right down to the last thing on there — they’ve met every benchmark. They’ve really given me no indicator that they’re nothing but the best,” he said.

Architects from different firms in the Flathead Valley, however, asked for a chance to show how they can contribute to building a new Muldown.

David Mitchell, owner of CTA Architectural Engineers, said the best firm to work on the project will be obvious after another RFQ process.

“There’s really no harm in going out and spending a couple weeks looking at other firms in the Valley,” he said. “There’s a lot of talent out there. It’s a few week process out of a couple years and it really gives you the ability to clarify and hone in on who is the best firm to do this project.”

The two main concerns voiced by the board with regard to hiring a new architect were slowing down the project and starting fresh with someone who doesn’t know Muldown’s needs like LPW.

Despite claims of a few weeks for another RFQ process, District Business Director Danelle Reisch estimates the process taking closer to a few months.

“I think that even though it looks like it may only take three or four weeks to do an RFQ and make another decision to determine an architect, I do think there’s going to be additional time that’s going to be involved with an additional architect in getting the understanding and the knowledge that our current architects have,” Reisch said.

Board Chair Nick Polumbus said he worries about losing the full year of work that’s been done with LPW.

“There’s 12 months of real work that has to be explained, and that makes me nervous,” he said.

If the project’s timeline were to be pushed back, Smith said he worries about the building not making it through those added months.

The building’s heating system threatens to allow the school to freeze inside-out if it were to fail during the winter, according to the district.

“The sooner the better on a lot of these issues. Shoveling the roof — if we end up doing another winter, that’s a big expense and honestly I can’t guarantee we’ll make it,” he said.

Hanson did not explain his vote against opening up to new architects, but did say he understands a need for being transparent about how the design process is managed.

“I realize that fortunately we’re on our third building and maybe our last for a while, but at some point the district is going to need to request money [for another project], and my fear is that there’s some part that doesn’t look as transparent if we don’t go out for an RFQ,” Hanson said.

The board also voted unanimously to approve an alternative project delivery contract and allow administration to move forward with an RFQ process to select a general contractor/construction management contract for the project.

“It’s become very clear to me that the sooner we have a contractor on board with our design team, the more successful we’re going to be in the design and build process,” Davis Schmidt said.

Davis Schmidt said approval would mean the process of selecting a contractor can begin, but what she was putting forward was not a request to select a contractor at this time.

“All I’m asking for approval for is to develop the timeline to go ahead and go out for the RFQ, and then with the assistance of legal counsel we would go out and develop the appropriate time line for each RFQ process,” she said.

After completing an RFQ for the contractor, Davis Schmidt said a committee would likely be committed to review firms and bring a recommendation forward to the board for the contractor/construction management contract, most likely in January or February of next year