Laserfiche WebLink
PBC Meeting Minutes <br />2 -9 -12 <br />This issue was again discussed and the PBC elected to request a unit price be added to the bid submission for adding the steel <br />support to other RTU locations if the town elected to do so during construction. <br />1/19/12 <br />Initial feedback from architect was that they did not want to include a unit price for additional RTU locations, but they later <br />agreed to do so. <br />4.28 MEP Review <br />12/1/11 <br />Brief discussions over C3 review of MEP documents comments have been sent to Architects and Engineers and engineers have <br />responded. C3 satisfied with return comments. <br />12/8/11 <br />PBC Requested that DPF ask C3 to verify if suggested changes have been made. <br />1/19/12 <br />DPF did request C3 to verify changes made, which was done and C3 and DPF are following up on last items. <br />4.29 Environmental Services <br />2/9/12 <br />DPF presented a proposal for Dust Monitoring during renovation and construction at Bridge and Bowman. PBC <br />would like to review in more detail the proposal. DPF will purchase equipment to set a baseline. Further review of <br />proposal for Industrial Hygienist services will take place at next meeting. <br />7.0 Estabrook Elementary <br />7.8 Estimates <br />9/8/11 <br />PBC requested info on estimates in Schematic Design. RF Walsh stated that there was one completed by the architect and one <br />completed by Walsh. <br />RF Walsh advised that the MSBA limits reimbursement on site work to +/- 8% of building costs, so town may have reduced <br />reimbursement if site costs are in excess of the limit. <br />10/27/11 <br />It was reported that very early cost modeling was showing the Estabrook project cost in the ballpark of 36 to 37.5 million <br />12/15/11 <br />Cost Summary tables were presented by RF Walsh, dated 15 December 2011, for various design options, with a cost range of <br />$38,894,133 to 42,783,546 for the preferred option 3C. <br />General discussion on overall costs took place along with discussion on reimbursement percentages from the state. There was some <br />discussion from the PBC that Walsh and DiNisco should be cognizant of % of reimbursement and not position the project such that <br />expected reimbursements reduce. <br />It was discussed that the furniture and technology allowances by MSBA may not serve full needs of school and may require <br />increases. <br />1/5/12 <br />Two cost estimates will be developed for schematic design phase and will be reviewed with PBC on 1/26/12 meeting, but the two <br />estimates will not be reconciled by that night. <br />1/19/12 <br />Estimate will be Uni- format level 3 with ability to pull out identified items for further evaluation. Identified items listed under <br />7.14 below., (Le 2 story space at library, roof garden, exterior canopies, etc.) <br />PBC concerned with temp conditions, logistics and enabling work and would like to be sure that Walsh is coordinating these <br />events with the Architects and the Estimators to be sure that the Estimates accurately reflect the costs. <br />PBC requested a copy of the narrative to be given to the estimator describing these site /project needs. <br />Page 4 of 9 <br />