2024-03-19-PBC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

1250kW generator was pushing a threshold. Lorraine Finnegan stated that she would ask Andrew why it was so large. It was suggested to put brackets after the heading to be in line with the uniform at code. It was discussed that historical information related to public projects would be useful to see. It was discussed that the MSBA required a code-only upgrade cost estimate as well to help the community understand the baseline. It was asked what direction was given to the estimators on the different options for the schoolhouse and fieldhouse, especially regarding the MEP systems. Lorraine Finnegan reported that the fieldhouse options, it was a standalone project with all separate utilities. On the central office, MSBA agreed it could be part of the school project. The pool would fall into the same category as the fieldhouse. She stated she would add more clarification. It was discussed that it would be useful to see the section on inclusions, exclusions, and assumptions that would go along with the estimates. It was discussed that the fieldhouse and pool would be treated as added alternatives, for estimating purposes. It was suggested to use a different term, such as "added projects," instead of added alternatives when referring to the fieldhouse and the pool. Lorraine Finnegan confirmed that cost estimates would be done for the furniture, soft costs, FFE, technology, and more. It was discussed that some of the projects would be longer durations. Lorraine Finnegan stated that schedule information would be added to the forms. It was asked if there was enough lay-down space. Lorraine Finnegan stated that they would likely need satellite parking lots, which were often used in projects. It was discussed that at the current level, high-level assumptions needed to be made. It was asked if the design team had recommendations on how the town could think about the value of the options. It was suggested to add information on parking for the different options in the future. Mike Burton reported that evaluation criteria were being discussed to help decide on the one project that was desired. The evaluation criteria assigned a numerical rating to different items. The tool would be used at a high level at the current phase and would be helpful for the SBC in deciding what option was wanted. It was stated that the parking count was identified as a challenge and an analysis suggested that if parking were going to be reduced, bus access and more pavement for shared transportation would be needed. It was discussed that there were many conversations about parking and there was an assumption from the public that structured parking could be added. Lorraine Finnegan reported that the decision had not been made, and she added a note about structured parking. The attenuation for the construction equipment for noise control was discussed. It was suggested that an executive summary be created for public consumption that includes the numbers, diagrams, and the narrative. Urgent Business There was no further business. Motion to adjourn, 8pm, all approved.