Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-10-09-PBC-minTOWN 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 Associate Members: Wendy Krum, Henrietta Mei PBC Minutes for the meeting held on: 10-09-2025 Meeting was held hybrid via Zoom PBC Members Present: Jon Himmel, Chuck Favazzo, Celis Brisbin, Peter Johnson, Fred Merrill, Ian Adamson, Wendy Krum, Henrietta Mei Others Present: SMMA: Brian Black, Lorraine Finnegan, Martine D., Matt Rice, Tom Faust D&W: Mike Burton Christina Dell Angelo, Jacob Greco, Turner: Kate Other:, Mark Barrett, Mark Sandeen, Mike Cronin, Dan Voss, Cindy Arens, Deepika Shawney, Brelle Kissel Meade, Taylor Singh The PBC meeting was called to order at 6:03 p.m. Approve Meeting Minutes The approval of the meeting minutes for January 9, March 13, March 27, and March 31 was tabled to provide additions time for review. High School Project Update Mike Burton reported that they were coming to the end of the feasibility study. The first two years consisted of the initial design, which included MSBA modules, forming the team, inclusion of Dore and Whittier, and inclusion of SMMA. Module 3 included the feasibility study and examined 19 different options. The preferred schematic report (PSR) had seven options. The schematic design (SD) phase consisted of one option. The SD was submitted at the end of August, and the project team was working on the design development (DD) phase. Three more estimates were remaining before the final drawings, which would be done in June 2027. One estimate would be done at the end of DD, one at the 60% construction documents (CD) estimate, and the last at 90% of CD. The goal was for phase one construction to be complete by the fall of 2029 and for site completion by the end of 2030. Design Status: Brian Black (SMMA) discussed that they were ramping up the DD phase, which included adding new team members and reviewing project goals and expectations. The Building Information Model in Revit was shared across disciplines to identify potential challenges and improve efficiency. The detailed programming process with all departments was ongoing. Throughout the DD phase, plan optimizations would be one focus. Discuss Target Value Design School Comps: It was reported that target value design (TVD) involved dividing the project into component teams that worked together to identify efficiencies and cost savings. The meetings began three weeks ago and covered sitework, foundations, and structure. Jon Himmel asked if the TVD logs were sufficient for value engineering (VE). It was discussed that there may be pending items that would be added to the VE log. Mike Burton added that the VE box was checked for the SD package. There were three remaining estimates, and for each one, a VE list was required to be shown. Chuck Favazzo added that TVD was a process, but not just a list. Brian Black commented that TVD was not meant to change the project's scope, but VE items could. Brian Black commented that the early release package one (ERP 1) was the current focus, would go out to bid in April 2026, and would focus on structural components. The TVD component team presented the cost comparison. It was asked if the Revit model was set up by TVD components. Brian Black reported that it was generally set up by discipline within the broad categories, but sets of information could be created within those. Re -Cap MSBA Budget Caps: Mike Burton discussed the MSBA reimbursement caps/limits. He noted that everything eligible was what the town would capitalize on, given the MSBA's 36.95% participation. Building cost funding limits were S586 per square foot, and site work costs were S59 per square foot of the eligible building gross square footage. It was asked what was planned to be spent on site work. Kate reported that it was geothermal. 71.6 million with PV and Mike Burton continued reviewing the MSBA reimbursement limits and discussed ineligible costs. He emphasized that the Central office, the field house, the kitchen area, and the administration were ineligible costs. Mark Barrett added that the MSBA supported one assistant principal, leaving the remaining areas unsupported. It was asked if there was anything in the existing school that could still be used. It was reported that they would conduct an assessment in the summer of 2029 and hold a sale for the town and surrounding municipalities. Jon Himmel asked about the cost breakdown. The MSBA policies, broken down by construction costs, soft costs, adjustments for ineligible items, and contingencies, were presented. Mike Burton discussed that they were actively advocating for areas to be deemed eligible with the MSBA. He confirmed that LABBB was covered, which had previously been deemed ineligible. Report Back on SBC Field House Discussion: The field house decision timeline was presented. Brian Black discussed the robust process of meeting with many stakeholders, including health and wellness, athletics, the track coaches, and the recreation department. The takeaway from the meetings with athletic staff was that safety was the highest priority, followed by equity for programs that did not have a place to go, and then space flexibility. Everyone except for the track coaches preferred the 146 - meter track. A programming meeting was scheduled to look further into the design of the 146 -meter track. Discussions on the DD estimate would start at the beginning of 2026, and components of VE would also be discussed. Chuck Favazzo asked for clarity on Option A. Mike Cronin clarified that Option A-1 was to spend million. Option A had been previously voted for by two individuals. 6 million to 8 Jon Himmel noted that the chart comparing the four options was from 2024 and predated other estimates prepared by Turner Construction. The project cost numbers were outdated, but Jon Himmel stated that it would be helpful to return to the options to verify that they made the right decision. Mike Burton reviewed the pricing for the chosen option. The contingency included S93.2 million for design, escalation, tariffs, and construction. VE was intended to be an exercise prior to the final bid in June of 2027. There were three more rounds of opportunities for discussing VE. If there were to be a large, impactful change, it should occur before March 2026, when construction documents were available. It was asked if the documents allowed for alternates. Mike Burton discussed that there could be alternates, but they had to be taken in a specific order, and having too many was not helpful. The topics for the rest of the year were discussed. Mike Burton noted that TVD took time, and the design scenarios needed to be worked through. Kate discussed that some of the structural items would not impact the program or the look and were simpler discussions. It was asked how the PBC could help Dore and Whittier, Turner Construction, and SM MA during the next steps. Over the next three months, the team would be working through ideas. Throughout the next steps, there would be periodic check -ins, and the PBC and SBC could discuss any issues with the team. After the end of the year, there would be additional engagement. Brian Black noted that site design and some interior work would begin in November, followed by exterior work. He discussed that there were multiple layers to the TVD and that the goal was to coordinate between the teams. Kate discussed the need for optimization as all of the teams worked together. During SD, there was a detailed timeline of when decisions were needed, but it sometimes didn't work out. The goal for the next phase is to have periodic look -ahead updates. The meetings would still have some themes to them. Dan Voss recommended meeting with Eversource to look at the single -line diagrams and walk through questions from the last meeting. The prior indication from Eversource was that they did not want to have a meeting until there was a single -line diagram. Jon Himmel asked if there was an update on Article 97. It was reported that the select board decided to continue the Article 97 process, which added another approval cycle. The discussion had focused on the risks of not moving forward being higher than going through the process. Public Comment There was no public comment. Urgent Business There was no further business. Motion to adjourn PBC, all approved.