Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-10-11-SC-min SC 10/11/12 Page #1 LEXINGTON SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING WITH THE PERMANENT BUILDING COMMITTEE October 11, 2012 S. Hadley Public Services Building, Lexington, MA Present: Dr. Paul Ash, Superintendent, Margaret Coppe, School Committee Chair; Alessandro Alessandrini, Vice Chair; Members: Mary Ann Stewart and Bonnie Brodner Absent: Jessie Steigerwald The Minutes were taken by Jean Curran, Recording Secretary The Meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. I. Call to Order and Welcome The Chair called the meeting to order and introduced the School Committee members present this evening. She reminded everyone to use the microphone because the meeting is being videotaped by LexMedia. Joe Reilly from Collaborative Partners representing the Owner’s Project Management firm for the Joseph Estabrook Elementary School project shared that tonight’s presentation will be a collaborative presentation between the project team members including, Jean McQuestion, Project/Site Manager of Collaborative Partners (Owner’s Project Manager), Ken DiNisco, Principal-In-Charge/Lead Designer, DiNisco Design (DiNisco), Shawmut Design and Construction (Shawmut), Joubin Hassanein, Project Executive, Members of the Permanent Building Committee (PBC) and David Kantor, member of the Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) and Sandra Trach, Principal, Joseph Estabrook Elementary School regarding the budget, design and value engineering that have occurred over the last several weeks. Jon Himmel, member of the PBC stated that there have been numerous meetings on these items and that the design team has been promised a decision at tonight’s meeting. Jean McQuestion shared that tonight’s agenda included a review of the 60% CD Estimate that was recently reconciled, a review and accept the recommended Value Engineering (VE) Items and then a review of the discretionary VE Items and based upon tonight’s results it will determine the next steps in the process. Ms. McQuestion stated that in March an established construction budget of $31,150,670 was set, then in July after the budget was reconciled the budge was still at $31,150,670 and that was after $1.3 million in VE items were accepted and Shawmut compressed their construction schedule for the project. Now, in September, at the 60% documents the budget has risen to $33,825,201 which leaves a variance of $2,674,531 and there is a need to discuss ways to address this gap in the construction budget. SC 10/11/12 Page #2 Key dates to keep in mind are (i) end of November to have 100% documents completed, (ii) bid due date is December 20th and (iii) present the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) by December 31st. The design team, members of the PBC and the School Committee reviewed the spreadsheet of VE Line Items dated 10/11/12 to find ways to reduce the gap. This was a very long and lengthy procedure as each line item was discussed in detail. The following are the results of the meeting: Items Nos. 1-7 were accepted by both the School Committee and the PBC. Item No. 8: 2 pipe chilled beam heating and cooling system versus the 4 pipe chilled beam heating and cooling system. The PBC voted in favor of accepting the 2 pipe chilled beam system. The School Committee would like to have further discussion at the public meeting on Saturday, October 13th to discuss this item further as the 4 pipe chilled beam system was in the original design package. The savings of going from a 2 pipe system to a 4 pipe system is $240,000. There was extensive discussion on this particular line including the possibility of the School Committee asking Town Meeting for an appropriation. Also discussed for this item is to consider whether or not to have a bid alternate. Joubin Hassanein, pointed out that there are currently 12 MSBA projects going out between January and March. In order to get the best bid package we are in a race against a bunch of other towns, so we need to get the bids out as quickly as possible and if a bid alternate is added, some contractors may not want to have to put together two sets of bids so we may lose out on a contractor. David Kantor suggests that the School Committee ask for as much money as they believe they will need from Town Meeting to sign the contracts by the end of December. It should be noted that if the extra money is appropriated and not needed it will not be spent but given back to the town. Items Nos. 9 – 19 were accepted by the School Committee and the PBC. DiNisco Design shared that Item Nos. 18 and 19 could be a deferred item if there is money left at the end of the project. Item Nos. 20 and 21 reference the sound amplification system. Item No. 20 would delete the entire sound amplification system. Item No. 21 proposes to install the sound amplification system in two classrooms per grade. The full value of this item is $162,000 and by only installing half, there would be a reduction of $81,000. There was extensive discussion on this line item. The School Committee proposes that it be installed in all classrooms, but would like to wait until the public hearing scheduled for Saturday, October 13, 2012. The PBC took no action on these two items as they were educational in nature. SC 10/11/12 Page #3 Item No. 22 would install a chair rail and paint below that rail, Item No. 23 removes the chair rail entirely and just paint the area and Item No. 24 would eliminate the wood wainscot and put up tack board. Ken DiNisco does not recommend any of these items because architecturally he believes the wainscoting should stay in and the issue is durability and aesthetics. Item Nos. 22-24, the credits were taken by the PBC and the School Committee.. Item No. 28 - reduce the length of the canopy at the receiving so when people come in for receiving it still has some shelter. Item No. 19 would eliminate the canopy in its entirety. Item No. 33 – Greenhouse. It has been determined that it is cheaper to build a new greenhouse that is the same size than to move the existing one. The new greenhouse will include utilities (natural gas heat, electricity and water.) All parties agreed that it should be dedicated to Mr. Horton, former principal in whose honor the original greenhouse was donated. Item No. 35, DiNisco Design has reduced their design contingency by $200,000. Item Nos. 25 – 35, except Item No. 28 the credits were taken by the PBC. Item Nos. 25-27, the credits were taken by the School Committee. Item Nos. 28 and 29, the School Committee would wait to take action until after the public hearing on Saturday, October 13, 2012. Item No. 36 – working with NSTAR on the entire design of the lights and we are on track to receive a check for $138,000 when the project has been completed. This money will be returned to Town but then given back to Shawmut as part of the project. The School Committee and the PBC have agreed to remove this line item from the spreadsheet. Item 37 – Stone veneer in front of building. Stone wall made up of 2 inch veneer made of real stone and this gets attached that goes from the outside into the lobby. The School Committee and the PBC agreed to this item. Item Nos. 37-40 credits were not taken by the PBC and the School Committee. Item 41 would delete the Amphitheater and the PBC and School Committee did not take the credit on this item. Item 42 – replacing elevator at receiving area with a dumbwaiter. After much discussion, the PBC would like to see more drawings on the access route to the stairs to the basement. Item 42 – the School Committee would like to see the elevator placed into the receiving area. SC 10/11/12 Page #4 Sandy Trach pointed out that this original design was set up for the larger amount of storage and this was a substantial recommendation by all the schools they visited, so she supports having the elevator with freight and passengers and not the dumbwaiter. Item No. 44 concerns daylight harvesting. Photo sensors would be installed in all rooms and they would automatically control whether to turn lights off or on and is an operational benefit. It is not LEED required. Switching is required but not the automatic sensors. This system would pay for itself over 10 years. PBC made a motion and the School Committee agreed to not take the $45,000 credit due to the 10 year payback period. Item 45 recommends going forward with a smaller diesel general that has a day tank. The PBC and School Committee are in favor of going with a natural gas generator. The credit for this item was not taken. Item 46 proposes to have the town procure the landscaper in order to go with nonunion workers to save money but they would work under Shawmut. The PBC voted to take credit. The School Committee will wait until the public hearing on Saturday, October 13, 2012. Item 47 concerns deferring costs for landscaping shrubs, but everyone should be mindful that this site needs to be recreated once the school has been demolished. The decision by the PBC and School Committee was to defer this item until the end of the project. Item Nos. 48 – 52, the credits were not taken. After further discussion it was decided that the PBC and the School Committee would send the bids out without a bid alternate. Motion to Adjourn. (Stewart, Brodner). The Motion was Accepted (3-0) (Alessandrini left at 10 PM; Steigerwald absent) The Meeting adjourned at 11:05 p.m. Documents: Meeting Agenda; Spreadsheet of Value Engineering Items dated 10/11/12 Voted by the School Committee January 30, 2013