HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-02-09-PBC-minTOWN OF LEXINGTON
Permanent Building Committee
Permanent Members
Jon Himmel, Co-Chairman, Charles Favazzo, Co-Chairman,
Peter Johnson, Philip Coleman, Celis Brisbin, Elizabeth Giersbach, Frederick Merrill
Police Station Members: Semoon Oh, Wendy Krum
Associate Members: Curt Barrentine, Henrietta Mei
PBC Minutes for the meeting held on: 2-9-23
Meeting was held remotely via Zoom
Members Present:
Jon Himmel, Charles Favazzo, Phil Coleman, Peter Johnson, Celis Brisbin, Elizabeth Giersbach, Semoon Oh,
Curt Barrentine, Henrietta Mei
Sustainable Lexington
Todd Rhodes, Dan Voss
Others in Attendance:
Julie Hackett, School Superintendent
Kathleen Lenihan, School Committee and School Building Committee Chair
Deepika Sawhney, School Committee vice-chair
David Kanter, Capital Expenditure Committee
Mike Cronin, Director DPF
Mark Barrett, DPF
The PBC Meeting was called to order at 5:00pm
Meeting Minutes
The minutes for 10-25-22 Meeting were held awaiting further comments. The Meeting minutes for the 1-12-23 were
approved as noted. The vote was unanimous
Westview Update
DPF staff reported that Plumbing and HVAC rough nearing complete. The exterior windows delivered 2/8/23 and
install was scheduled to begin on 2/10/23.
Electrical rough is scheduled to begin 2/13/23
The Roof top DOAS unit reported as delayed by Manufacturer, no new date was available yet.
The exterior metal cladding delivery of 2/7/23 was reported as delayed with no new date yet.
Over the next few weeks we anticipate Inspections, installation of pipe insulation, electrical rough, electrical secondary,
and overhead door framing
Police Update
DPF reported that the crane for steel erection arrived on site on 2/8/23, as well as the first three loads of steel
Future deliveries of steel will continue periodically, 2/10, 2/13, 2/15 etc.
By mid-day on 2/10/23 the first sequence of steel was approx. 40% in place.
The buildings steel frame and deck has 6 sequences and is scheduled to run to the end of March.
Last Pour for concrete pour for foundation walls and footings will take place 2/10/23
Tecton Architects on solar canopy update
The Feb 2. HDC meeting was cancelled
Jeff from Tecton presented a power point that will be also presented to the Select Board on Monday 2/13/23
The Power point slides for the solar canopy included slides showing the use of fletcher field as the Farmers Market as
well as the winter skating rink. The views had the main solar canopy in the background. There were also views of
both uses of the field with the Mass ave leg solar canopy in the background. These were shown simply to show how the
canopies might be used by the fletcher field uses.
Jeff related that the panel being considered is a Bifacial 585 watt panel. With the current canopy deign, without the
mass ave leg, the current calculations show the project about 800 (canopy) sf shy of making net zero, although they
are still working to close the gap.
Questions and discussions included:
The estimate was discussed at 3.3 million dollars. It is no surprise that the cost of this canopy structure exceeds the
cost per square foot of typical solar canopies given it location and the need to be highly sensitive to the very
prominent location at the entry to the Town center within the Historic District. It was strongly suggested that the
price be parsed something like the following to show the cost of a “vanilla” solar canopy and the added cost/benefit
of the refined design to clear the thoughtful recommendations of the Historic Districts Commission, synergistic uses
with Fletcher Field functions such as the the Farmers market or music venue and as a large, covered outdoor use
when vehicles are not there. , It was suggested that this cost parsing could help sell the project to Boards and Town
Meeting.
Can the canopy extend more east toward fletcher or perhaps to the west? There is a Natural Gas regulator valve on the
property side of the sidewalk at the fletcher entry and we are trying to keep a safe distance from the underground
equipment. Westward expansion is being explored.
It was stated that when having the discussions about costs we should include the benefit received by free or reduced
cost energy.
Integrated Design policy
That status of the High School Project was requested.
M Cronin replied that the project was still in the Eligibility Period although all Lexington work was complete. We are
awaiting an invitation from the MSBA into the Feasibility phase, which would begin with hiring an OPM and Architect.
It is projected that if invited we would have our consultants on board by the end of the summer.
The RFS for these services could go out within 60 days.
It was asked if the body of the actual Integrated Design Policy (IDP) was being edited or just the attachment. The co-
Chair felt that there would have to be at least some update to the main policy document.
Prior to reviewing the highlights of proposed IDP attachment changes the co-chair had prepared a proposed organization
chart, which showed where different participants in the process might have their input. There was general discussion
about the chart and where some of the various parties might best be placed. It was noted that students and the
commercial district did not show up on the chart and should.
The School Superintendent shared that this was a good visual and thoughts on placement of different groups. It was
thought that this could be shared at School Building Committee once fine-tuned.
Through discussion of the Bridge Document, It was suggested that the Town might want to consider hiring its own
estimator for the High School project in addition to the estimator that will be part of the Architectural team.
The attachment A draft discussion was led by Dan Voss and Todd Rhodes; there discussion on each item and
suggested updates. Discussion included the Life Cycle Costing tool used in Cost benefit analysis calculations, resilience
levels and what they truly meant to operational Capability; EV charging; the phrase “evaluate & report”;
Body Carbon, Carbon Footprint, and Landscape or Arborist Commissioning.
One of the Attachment A descriptions indicated the need for a submission consistent with Zoning Site Plan Review
requirements. It was strongly suggested that the prescriptive language associated with the Site Plan Review be
referenced in a way that precluded any misunderstanding that Planning Board involvement was thus triggered.
The agreed upon edits to the Attachment A were captured by Todd Rhodes of the Sustainable Lexington Committee and
will be attached to these minutes.
Motion made to adjourn 7:20 PM
motion approved
Next meeting 3/9/23