HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-06-05-PBC-min
Lexington Permanent Building Committee Meeting
Maria Hastings Elementary School Building Project
SBC MEETING MINUTES
DATE OF MEETING: June 5, 2017 at 7:00P.M. at 201 Bedford Street, Lexington MA
PROJECT: Maria Hastings Elementary School Building Project
Dore & Whittier Project #MP16-0112
SUBJECT: School Building Committee Meeting (D&W#11)
ATTENDING: Jon Himmel Lexington PBC Chair
Curt Barrentine Lexington PBC
Charles Favazzo Lexington PBC
Carl Oldenburg Lexington PBC
Richard Perry Lexington PBC
Howard Hobbs Lexington PBC
Mark Barrett Lexington DPF
Louise Lipsitz School Principal
Trip Elmore DWMP
Rachel Milaschewski DWMP
Donna DiNisco DiNisco Design
Ken DiNisco DiNisco Design
Vivian Low DiNisco Design
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Call to order at 7:05
M. Barrett handed out the Meeting Minutes from the 5/5 and 5/11 PBC Meetings, which the
Committee agreed to table until the next scheduled PBC Meeting on 6/14 for further review.
2. Review of Project Estimate
D. DiNisco began by explaining that a good portion of last week was spent reviewing the estimates
from both A. M. Fogarty (third party estimator), and Walsh Brothers, adding that they will be carrying
building itself has not shifted from a cost perspective, but there are many characteristics to the site
which create a challenge, and in turn increases cost; some of these characteristics being the
topography, storm water management parameters, need for large retaining walls, etc.
D. DiNisco went on to say that the estimates were close to a 7% difference at the end of the day
Friday, adding that the project team has spent a lot of time reconciling. Furthermore, she stated that
Walsh wanted a couple more days to fine-tune some of their numbers, and added that she is
confident they will get to a number that is agreed upon.
Additionally, D. DiNisco explained that the project team had begun to put together a VE Log to bring
the number down; they had gone through a series of adjustments to simplify some areas of design to
be more cost effective. One major adjustment that is currently being explored is a ~15% rotation of
the building away from the abutter property lines, which could allow them to avoid any easements,
perform a smaller amount of blasting, and less of a retaining wall on the north side of the property.
The Committee then began to review the VE items, and D. DiNisco reassured that none of these
items would affect the educational program, maintenance, operations, or function of the building; she
added that most of them
After being asked why the cost of geothermal went up so much since the PSR, the project team
explained that after further exploration of the site and geothermal well systems, it became apparent
tha
expensive than the deep wells upfront. D. DiNisco pointed out that they would have a life cycle cost
analysis soon. The original $600,000 Geothermal Design was based on a deep well (1,500+
foot) Open Loop System similar to those in other Lexington schools, after engineering review
it was determined that system was not appropriate for the Hastings Project but that a
shallower (500 foot) Closed Loop System was the best fit for the Hastings Project, which led
to a 100+/- well design configuration and a $2.3 million dollar system cost. A test well was
authorized and dug to confirm the engineers findings and it was determined that the closed
system would work for the project.
The Committee then discussed the option of the Haul Road, giving access to construction vehicles
during construction. D. DiNisco pointed out that Walsh believes the Haul Road could come as a
savings to the project, as it would allow for larger construction vehicles to access the site for
deliveries, resulting in less deliveries, which cost money. There was a discussion regarding the
requirement of a police detail if the Haul Road were to be put in place, and D. DiNisco reported that
the project team is currently exploring this option in further detail. The Committee and project team all
agreed that the Haul Road would be worth if from a cost standpoint, and the project team will report
back with their findings.
The Committee then reviewed the remaining items in the VE log, agreeing to take several of the items
now and leaving the rest of the items for discussion down the road, the total value of the Value
Engineering taken was $1,445,370.
G.1, G.3, G.4, G.6, G.7, G.14, B.1, B.2, B.6, C.1, C.2, C.4, C.6, C.7
D. DiNisco and T. Elmore then explained that this list will continue to grow and will be much larger by
the time they go out to the voters, though this was a successful first pass in finding savings. D.
DiNisco added that the VE Log will also be included with the cost estimates in the submission to the
MSBA.
The Design team has taken design benefits and lessons learned from the Estabrook Project
and incorporated them into the Hastings design.
Motion to Adjourn by D. Perry
2