2024-01-11-PBC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Jon Himmel noted that there were weekly SBC meetings. He discussed that a postcard should be received by all Lexington residents a week before the community meeting so everyone was aware of it. There was a scheduling working group meeting on January 18th. It was discussed that any land taken out of recreational land had to have similar land added. There was a meeting during the week of January 15th to discuss the integrative design process. A milestone look ahead document was shared, which included the dates, meetings, and topics. The document would be issued at the next SBC. A checklist was created after going through the IDP to put deliverables on a spreadsheet, and it was stated that feedback on the checklist would be helpful. The checklist would be a matter of record as part of the packet after the SBC meeting. It was suggested to have the documents on their own on the website. It was suggested to watermark the document as tentative so that it could be posted. It was stated that a meeting log was required to be kept, and an agenda column was added to show what was being discussed at each meeting. The meeting log would also be publicly available. It was discussed that some critical dates were important for everyone to attend, so having the meeting log in advance was helpful. It was decided that documents should be simultaneously sent to the Sustainable Lexington Committee and the PBC. Mike Burton presented the integrated design policy checklist and explained it. It had a policy column, a status column, any actions and comments, and their corresponding dates. The second section covered attachment B and showed the same columns. It was asked if there was a way to circulate the information about what was decided at meetings. Mike Burton stated that he could share the information with the appropriate people. It was stated that no decisions had been made on parking/EV charging yet. It was requested having some element of the reports be sent to the members of the PBC. It was suggested to have a presentation go to committees prior to the town meeting. David Kanter stated that the public would appreciate an explanation of the cost and what was happening in the project and asked that periodic updates be made available to the Finance Committee. Jon Himmel stated that there would be crude estimates, but these would be more relative costs and not absolute costs. For instance, upgrade and renovation will involve more general conditions (GCs) for shiftwork, so we need to discuss how to make informed comparisons. It was discussed that a schedule of when items would be available could be provided. It was stated that the cost estimates would be available in April, but it was clarified that these would not be the final numbers as there would be many decisions to be made, but even benchmark costs would be helpful in choosing options. David Kanter stated that enough information was needed to provide before the town meeting, and he stated that the report to the town meeting needed to make a compelling sense of what was being done so that everyone understood it. It was suggested that potential adjustments that would be made to the costs be discussed during the February meeting. Mike Burton stated that once the educational program was finalized, the MSBA would measure all options based on the educational program. Lorraine Finnegan noted that meetings will be held with the estimators to provide the necessary information. She stated that the package of the preliminary costs would be sent at the end of March so that the pre-estimate conversation would be held in March. Lorraine Finnegan stated that she could provide the information from the conversation with the estimators at the March PBC meeting. It was discussed that the school committee meets for five hours per month and may need some assistance. It was stated that the PBC meetings may need to be shifted. It was stated that the schedule dictates what is being produced, and meetings should be scheduled shortly after the material was issued. It was stated that the milestones should be discussed in the scheduling work group. It was discussed to hold joint meetings with the SBC. It was discussed that the intent of the discussion was for the PBC to share the knowledge in advance of meetings. Jon emphasized that the PBC wants to review schedule, costs, massing and materials, in advance of presentations to the SBC. Also, site logistics is a priority, the PBC should discuss and review even at the conceptual stage. It was discussed that finished documentation to be presented at the PBC prior to it going to the School Building Committee was not necessary. It was suggested to have members of the community look at the meeting minutes and send their thoughts to Mark Barrett. Jon Himmel stated that the current draft of the 12/6/23 minutes should be shared with the consulting team, and then there could be discussions on any changes to the schedule.