Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-02-12-PBC-min.pdfTOWN OF LEXINGTON Permanent Building Committee Permanent Members Jon Himmel, Co-Chairman, Charles Favazzo, Co-Chairman, Peter Johnson, Celis Brisbin, Elizabeth Giersbach, Frederick Merrill, Ian Adamson Police Station Members: Semoon Oh, Wendy Krum Associate Members: Curt Barrentine, Henrietta Mei PBC Minutes for the meeting held on: 2-12-26 Meeting was held hybrid via Zoom PBC Members Present: Jon Himmel, Chuck Favazzo, Celis Brisbin, Peter Johnson, Ian Adamson, Henrietta Mei, Wendy Krum, Fred Merrill Others Present: SMMA: Lorraine Finnegan Sarah Sopelak, Martine Dionne, Brian Black, Maddeline Lei, D&W: Mike Burton, Christina Dell Angello, Jacob Greco, Kyle Leone, Turner: Kate Cassen Mark Sandeen, Mike Cronin, Mark Barrett, Tom Shiple (Bike Committee) Sustainable Lexington Members Present: Todd Rhodes, Dan Voss, Kavita Ravi, Kavitha Venkatesan, Rick Reibstein, Lin Jensen, Nancy Sofen The PBC meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. The Sustainable Lexington meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. High School Project: Approve VE List Lorraine Finnegan noted that they had made some adjustments to the List, based on the last set of comments. It was asked whether the heat damping was calculated with the sun shades removed. It was explained that the thermal transmission was not an issue, but the greater concern was glare. It was asked whether there were any concerns regarding snow accumulation on sun shades and It was assured that the shape limited any accumulation. Jon Himmel asked if any notes indicated that the items being listed did not mean they would be included. Lorraine Finnegan stated that they would add a visible note before it was made public. Todd Rhodes moved that the Sustainable Lexington Committee recommends removing the Solar and energy storage systems be removed from the VE list for financial reasons. The motion passed the Sustainable Lexington Committee unanimously. Mike Burton noted that they were seeking directive from the PBC on the solar and energy items. Ian Adamson discussed deferring the items rather than deleting them, in case they needed to be brought back in later. Jon Himmel noted that the solar canopies for the police station were not part of the actual project, but the project had anticipated their inclusion. If the project were to come in over budget, there could be delays. The PBC decided to keep the all items including solar and energy storage on the VE list for later consideration. PBC MOTION: Ian Adamson moved that the Permanent Building Committee recommend that the solar and energy line items remain on the VE list. Jon Himmel seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Feature Space Design Sarah Sopelak provided renderings of the dining commons design, including the lighting and wall design, Henrietta Mei recommended that the lights go toward the middle. It was discussed that they had considered that idea and would look into it further. Henrietta Mei asked about the use of opaque glass in railings. It was stated that it would be more expensive to start, and there was a risk of breakage. The ceiling material was asked about. Lorraine Finnegan reported that there were very small holes in the ceiling and that sound-absorbing panels were installed behind. A rendering of the auditorium was presented. There were different scales of banding to create visual interest; the wood tone remained the same throughout the project, a blue color was used throughout, and the ceiling had a darker wood with sound reflection. The curves of the ceiling improved acoustics. It was asked if the seats were staggered. It was confirmed that they were. It was asked if there were aisles on the side walls. Lorraine Finnegan reported that there were two ramps: one up to the stage and another down the auditorium. Henrietta Mei asked about using the high school's colors. It was reported that they would add the high school colors to the furniture. Jon Himmel asked whether the seating area in the foreground was sloped. Lorraine Finnegan confirmed that it was, with a low slope in the foreground and a steep slope in the back. Jon Himmel asked what was behind the rear wall and It was reported that it was a storage room for the auditorium. Jon Himmel asked about the mechanical equipment in the dining commons and if it would be serviced from the main floor with a lift. It was clarified that there was no mechanical equipment at a high level, only ducts. A scissor lift would be purchased. A rendering of the gym was presented. A banding effect was created using a white acoustic panel, and many graphics were included to add color. Henrietta Mei asked if the panels were available in a vertical option as well to create a more stripe-like appearance. It was confirmed that they could be placed vertically. It was asked if the floor was wood, and it was confirmed that it was. A rendering of the double-height library media center was presented. It was on level two of the A wing and included a wood-accented metal ceiling, acoustic wall panels, graphics, a blue accent carpet, and a neutral carpet. It was noted that the carpet was more durable than normal carpet. The goal was for all of the wood tones to match throughout the entire school. The school department indicated a desire for a richer wood color, but it was difficult to match the colors in the rendering exactly. More information was requested on environmental graphics. It was explained that there would be some panels to create acoustic interest, but all of the environmental graphics had not yet been entirely designed. There were also opportunities to include historic images. It was noted that there would be meetings to work on themes, followed by meetings with a focus group. The surface that the graphics were applied to also had an effect. The mechanical equipment was asked about. It was noted that there was no equipment, only ductwork. Jon Himmel asked about the cost estimate from Turner for graphics. Lorriane Finnegan reported that SMMA was doing the design, so Turner will charge only for the fabrication and installation. A rendering of the LGI was presented. It included a blue-tone accent wall, a light gray wall to create balance, and a blue carpet tile. Healthy Materials/Red List Update It was noted that the red list update slides were provided in the packet. Sarah Sopelak discussed that they were starting to incorporate the red-list language into the design. The main focus was on the interior materials. Sarah Sopelak discussed the declare labels and red-list product certification. It was noted that all manufacturers were vetted, and the top three were retained. The red list selection options were reviewed, and an overall summary of red list materials was presented. The spec sessions that did not contain three equals were presented. There were opportunities to get some items within thermal and moisture protection and finishes red-list approved and red-list free, but this came at an increased cost. It was noted that there were options with one red-list-free or red-list-approved option, such as linoleum flooring throughout the school. It was clarified that 'declare' indicated transparency about the product's ingredients. The cost impact summary was presented. If the two equals and proprietary products were included, the estimate was $1.74 million. The estimated recommended total was $223,000, including $123,000 in premium costs and $100,000 for the proprietary items. It was noted that the amount could be broken down by item. Jon Himmel asked whether they were trying to be red-list-free or red-list-exposure-free. It was clarified that the integrated design policy required red-list where applicable. SMMA was recommending areas where red-list materials were most applicable and feasible. SMMA provided clarification on the red-list materials, the different categories based on the number of red-list-free manufacturers, and the cost impact. It was suggested that the focus be on areas with greater impact on the public. It was commented that it was challenging to know how vendors would react on bid day. Unless a proprietary vote was taken, there was a risk that the material would not be obtained. Jon Himmel suggested adding a column to the spreadsheet that allows selection of materials based on value and public exposure. Kate stated that she could add that information. Building Exterior Design A rendering of the exterior design view from the west was presented. A high canopy was instituted to maintain PV coverage over the mechanical equipment on the roof which had some impact on the view from the ground. The steel supporting the mechanical screens was extended higher to serve as the canopy frame. Some of the screens were needed to buffer the noise. The gradient of the brick color was discussed. Instead of having the base a different color, the two colors interlocked and blended on one story. There was some cost involved in the change, since the brick manufacturer palletizes the brick in certain proportions. It was noted that it was one item on the EV list. A couple of members commented that the gradient looked like mud splatter. Lorraine Finnegan noted that the other option on the list was the banding of brick accent. It was asked why the building's exterior was being changed at this point. It was decided that a conversation with the design group was needed. A rendering of the exterior design for the large-group instruction (LGI) space was presented. It was a double- high space, and the perforated screen helped protect from the sun glare. Jon Himmel asked if glass film was an option. It was commented that they had shown a type of glass that would not introduce more glare, but the perforated screen had been preferred. Henrietta Mei suggested placing a metal plane in front of the glass to display the graphics, but to avoid the issue of birds. It was noted that they would take the birds into consideration. It was observed that if the edges of the screen material sloped at a certain angle, birds could not perch. A rendering of the exterior design view in the east plaza was presented. There was a heavier masonry wall and a lighter bridge. Solar-sub shade elements were over the windows. The goal was to create a warm palette, and samples will be provided in the future to determine the color blend for the brick wall. Madeline noted that traditional brick architecture could achieve up to an inch of relief at minimal cost and suggested it as a way to add interest to the façade. Exploring ways to add texture was commented on. It was noted that they were aiming to do that with the window patterning, but it felt too busy. It was noted that they could consider adding more texture to the courtyard. It was stated that they needed to be cautious about the courtyard's texture so that people would not scale the wall. Jon Himmel asked who the design approval group was. It was confirmed that the high school principal, superintendent, and others within the high school staff. Jon Himmel commented that the building's exterior was outside their scope. He recommended providing examples of brick projects around the city. It was asked how much the overhang levels three and four were. Brian Black reported that they were the whole classroom, so approximately 25 feet. There was an outdoor classroom beneath the overhang. A rendering of the exterior design view from Park Drive and Clarke Street was presented. It was noted that everything seen was functional. A rendering of the courtyard view from the entrance was presented. Some elements had been discussed for removal, and many had been. Some items needed pricing, such as lights and tiered benches. There was a vining plant that provided some shade. The skylights were a value-engineering item, and solar tubes may be considered. Henreitta Mei asked if solar tubes would provide daylight into the large area. Brian Black confirmed that they would. Henrietta Mei noted that changing the orientation reduced the space's scale and made it more intimate. It was noted that adding the light poles would also add visual interest and allow for greater control of lighting. Jon Himmel suggested including the mechanical equipment and EV canopies in the rendering. Brian Black confirmed that the canopies could not be seen from the B wing, as shown in the rendering presented. Different views from the C wing and other areas can be generated. Jon Himmel suggested installing a grid under the roof to detect leaks. Lorraine Finnegan commented that those had been done in other projects and that they will be included in the estimate. Approve Value Engineering List for Pricing Tom Shiple from the Bike Committee stated that he believed there would be discussion of bike parking at the current meeting. He asked to sit down with somebody to discuss all of his questions. Lorraine Finnegan apologized and noted that bike parking had originally been on the agenda, but they were trying to ensure that they had a better understanding of landscaping. Jon Himmel recommended sharing the list with the contractor if it would have cost implications. Tom noted that he was working from one paragraph in the July SD report, which included the number of racks, their size, and stainless steel. Lorraine Finnegan presented the updated landscape documents, which included bike parking. There were 145 bicycle spaces shown, and an additional 75 racks were being priced. She noted the bike lanes and shared-use paths. The rack style was a power-coated steel round rack that would be anchored in place. Tom commented that they liked the round rack that was presented. He noted that the next items were the layout of the racks, the spacing between them, and the clearance from the walls. He confirmed that he will send the details to Mark Barrett. Lorraine Finnegan stated that there were two bike repair stations. The 10-foot path went up to the property line. There would be a gap between the path and Waltham Street, which the town could address later. Lorraine Finnegan confirmed that she will share the final layout of the bike racks. Public Comment There was no public comment. Jon Himmel asked if the same slides are being shared with the SBC. Lorraine Finnegan reported that it was not exactly the same, as the sculpture and a student presentation will be included. Urgent Business There was no further business. Motion to adjourn PBC, all approved. Motion to adjourn Sustainable Lexington, all approved. 8:03 p.m.