2020-12-17-PBC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

TBA reviewed the overall site plan with site drainage/storm water but explained that these drawings were in the midst of engineering review and we were hopeful that the large storm water detention basin planned for could be removed. The discussion turned to discussing the need to plan for additive alternates in case we become concerned about bid costs and the fixed budget for this project. A few suggestions were made as possible additive alternates including,gravel drive and parking lots in lieu of pavement,the last of the large garage bays could be an alternate, potential cost savings of the large storm water detention basin. DPW Director stated that the building square footage is what the operations group truly needs so he would prefer alternates to be by way of materials choices. It was agreed that a strategy should be developed and that perhaps the Design Team should understand what could be save by some potential add alternates such as 1 garage bay. It was also noted that there is no other curbing used in the cemetery so any planned curbing could be removed. All in all everyone agreed that the overall design elevations and floor plans were well improved since the last meeting and in good shape. The discussion turned to the Leed/ Lex checklist and overall sustainability discussion.The Facilities Department (DPF) explained that the Architect team had prepared the LEED/Lex checklist for the project,which had been circulated. However the DPF had shared that with The Green Engineer and asked for a review from their perspective. The Green Engineers (TGE) review and associated updated LEED/Lex Checklist was received and circulated just hours before the meeting. TBA share the updated checklist on screen and some items were highlighted. In general TGE's review put the project at 46 points on the green (expected), 25 on the yellow (maybe) and 39 in the Unlikely column. There was a reminder that this was a small +/-4,000 sf building with roughly half of that being conditioned space. One of the checklist items involves the use of Energy storage and the current plan was to provide a conduit path to a slab for future Battery inclusion. However it was noted that given that the building had a low peak demand expectation the battery storage would likely be less beneficial and we could likely save on the cost of the pad and conduit. It was asked if given the discussion of having add alternate ideas, could any of the LEED/Lex checklist items be considered an additive alternate. The Design team would need to look at that. It was asked if the investments made in Red list development for the Police project could be translated to the Westview project. It was discussed that the police project was stopped before there was real development in the work. We had bought a process but do not yet have a product from that. The DPF was asked to verify if any workable/useable information came out of that early work. It was recapped that at the Police project it had been agreed to focus on just 4 to 6 specification divisions It was discussed that this was a very small project with a fixed budget established prior to the current sustainability policy and this was agreed to in principal although it was suggested that some level of commitment in some aspects of the project could support the ideals behind the policy. Interior Finish components such as adhesives and paints were mentioned as easy targets for compliance.