Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-04-12-PBC-minLexington Permanent Building Committee PBC Meeting Minutes Meeting Date & Time: Location: Attendees: Carl Oldenburg, PBC Jon Himmel, PBC Peter Johnson, PBC Joe McWeeney, PBC Dick Perry, PBC Philip Coleman, PBC, B &B, Estabrook Charles Favazzo, Estabrook Brigitte Steines Index 1.0 General Business 12 April 2012 201 Bedford Street 12 April 2012 7:00 PM Guests: Joe Riley, RF Walsh Ken DiNisco, DDP Angel Khazadian, DDP Sandy Trach, Estabrook Principal 4.0 Bridge &Bowman Elementary Schools Renovation 7.0 Estabrook Elementary School 1.0 GENERAL BUSINESS 1.1 Minutes 2/9/12 Motion to approve meeting minutes for 1/5/12 and 1/19/12 Motion: Eric Brown 2 Chuck Favazzo Vote: Unanimous 3/8/12 Motion to approve PBC Meeting Minutes for the January 26, 2012, February 9, 2012 and February 22, 2012 PBC Meetings. Motion: Eric Brown 2 nd : Dick Perry Vote: Unanimous 1.2 Monthly Bills 3/22/12 DPF presented invoices totaling $13,270.00 which were approved for payment 4/12/12 DPF presented invoices totaling 154,790.70 which were approved for payment 1.3 Meeting Minute Format (Item Relocated from 2.24 to general business) For the purposes of reducing ongoing printed text previous entries under this heading may have been removed from current meeting minutes. Please refer to previous editions of the minutes for older insertions. Mark Barrett is waiting for proposal from PSS. 5/12/11 DPF reported a quote received for training on prolog, but could only find out of state vendors approved by the software company. PBC member suggested he knew of a local firm we could get training from that would be more cost effective. 10/13/11 DPF reported that it would appear that we would be able to setup training within the next few weeks. 12/1/11 DPF again reported that it was hoping to set up the training within the next couple weeks. 1.4 PBC Make -up and Proiects Page 1of10 Lexington Permanent Building Committee 12 April 2012 For the purposes of reducing ongoing printed text previous entries under this heading may have been removed from current meeting minutes. Please refer to previous editions of the minutes for older insertions. 5/12/11 The process for new project members was discussed. • Chair reports that the school committee or Town Manager appoints members for specific projects. Question asked if PBC should get to meet persons being appointed and vote if they are to be accepted. DPF reports that the appointment is per the bylaw. Discussion on 7 Member organization: • DPF reported that the 7 member organization takes effect some 60 -90 days after ATM or approximately August. • Discussion that a Criteria needs to be developed for determining new members. • Discussion that an HVAC or Civil Engineer would be a good knowledge base for a new member • Discussion on using town lists for seeking members rejected, focus should be on looking for prospect members individually. • Agreed PBC members should bring prospect list of people they feel would be a good fit. 6/9/11 Gary Lerner, an engineer currently involved in manufacturing, visited the PBC meeting to gain insight into the work of the PBC in consideration of the expansion of the PBC membership. 9/8/11 There was general discussion on Bylaws for adding members to PBC. Question rose if PBC should have input into appointments on the committee. Pat Goddard advised that the PBC is a Town Manager appointed committee. The issue of whether or not the PBC should make recommendations on new members to the PBC needs to be investigated with the Town Manager. 10/13/11 PBC agreed that they should make recommendations to the Town Manager on new members after the prospective member attends a few meetings and the PBC has some dialogue with them on participation. 12/1/11 There are two resumes in hand; however it was discussed that a future meeting should include discussion with these people on involvement with the committee, roles and participation. 2/9/12 Discussion about two candidates who have expressed interest in joining PBC. Currently there is one open position. Chuck Favazzo expressed interest in filling the vacancy. Eric Brown agreed to contact the two candidates on their interest in an auxiliary member appointment. 1.5 Change Order Approval Process 2/22/12 Discussions on authorization of change orders and the process of how this could be done to avoid delay and to maintain approval of change order elements with PBC, through the use a a pre- approved encumbrance that DPF staff would apply interim change orders to. PBC would like to see a flow chart showing approval process. 3/8/12 Flow Chart Circulated and process discussed. Further discussion planned, no action. 1.6 Public Facilities Caoital 3/22/12 Motion to support Article 16 Item I Town wide Facility Master Plan. Motion: Phil Coleman 2 Carl Oldenburg Vote: Unanimous 4.0 Bridge &Bowman Renovation Projects 4.26 Roof Top Unit screening 11/2/11 It was reported that the roof top hvac equipment would be larger than originally anticipated and could be 18 inches to 2 feet taller. There was some concern expressed over the aesthetics of the larger units and the overall view of the school to the public, notwithstanding any sound abatement concerns. Various options for screening and placement of support structure for future screening were discussed. Currently six units suspected of a need for screening based on sound abatement were modified to include roof reinforcing for future screen panels. It was discussed to increase this count to 10 to include units where screens maybe desired for aesthetics as well; however this motion was not acted upon, leaving just the original 6 locations 12/8/11 Page 2 of 10 Lexington Permanent Building Committee 12 April 2012 This issue was again discussed and the PBC elected to request a unit price be added to the bid submission for adding the steel support to other RTU locations if the town elected to do so during construction. 1/19/12 Initial feedback from architect was that they did not want to include a unit price for additional RTU locations, but they later agreed to do so. 4.29.1 Environmental Services 2/9/12 DPF presented a proposal for IAQ Monitoring during renovation and construction at Bridge and Bowman. PBC would like to review in more detail the proposal. DPF will purchase equipment to set a baseline. Further review of proposal for Industrial Hygienist services will take place at next meeting. 2/22/12 Motion to approve IAQ Monitoring services with EBI consulting for initial phases of Bridge & Bowman work not to exceed $42,260.00, see 2/8/12 EBI proposal and DPF request dated 2/22/12. Motion: Phil Coleman 2 Dick Perry Vote: 6 -0 4.30 Construction Contract 2/22/12 Motion to accept letter of recommendation from Design Partnership of Cambridge, dated 21 February 2012, and to forward the recommendation to the Town Manager to award the Bridge & Bowman Construction Contract to TLT Construction for the bid amount of $18,214,400.00 which includes Alternate #1. Motion: Phil Coleman 2 Dick Perry Vote: 6 -0 4.31 On -Site Representative 3/8/12 Motion to award construction on site representation/ clerk of the works contract to Daedalus Projects Inc. in the amount of $380,000 for Bridge & Bowman. Motion: Eric Brown 2 Phil Coleman Vote: 7 -0 7.0 Estabrook Elementary 7.8 Estimates 9/8/11 PBC requested info on estimates in Schematic Design. RF Walsh stated that there was one completed by the architect and one completed by Walsh. RF Walsh advised that the MSBA limits reimbursement on site work to +/- 8% of building costs, so town may have reduced reimbursement if site costs are in excess of the limit. 10/27/11 It was reported that very early cost modeling was showing the Estabrook project cost in the ballpark of 36 to 37.5 million 12/15/11 Cost Summary tables were presented by RF Walsh, dated 15 December 2011, for various design options, with a cost range of $38,894,133 to 42,783,546 for the preferred option 3C. General discussion on overall costs took place along with discussion on reimbursement percentages from the state. There was some discussion from the PBC that Walsh and DiNisco should be cognizant of % of reimbursement and not position the project such that expected reimbursements reduce. It was discussed that the furniture and technology allowances by MSBA may not serve full needs of school and may require increases. 1/5/12 Two cost estimates will be developed for schematic design phase and will be reviewed with PBC on 1126112 meeting, but the two estimates will not be reconciled by that night. 1/19/12 Estimate will be Uni format level 3 with ability to pull out identified items for further evaluation. Identified items listed under 7.14 below. (i.e. 2 story space at library, roof garden, exterior canopies, etc.) Page 3of 10 Lexington Permanent Building Committee 12 April 2012 PBC concerned with temp conditions, logistics and enabling work and would like to be sure that Walsh is coordinating these events with the Architects and the Estimators to be sure that the Estimates accurately reflect the costs. PBC requested a copy of the narrative to be given to the estimator describing these site /project needs. 1/26/12 Questions or clarifications from estimate discussion. • Fee for Commissioning Agent paid by MSBA • RFW states enabling site work is in estimate 0 Question raised that may need more exploration — where is soil to be stockpiled on site? • Moving expense line may need funds to pay for packing • Funds may be needed for school if staff to work with new technology to prepare it for school use. • Escalation was reduced from prior estimate, is that appropriate? 3/8/12 Motion to approve the Project Scope and Budget Agreement Exhibit A Project Budget Lexington Public School District budget and reimbursement for the Estabrook School Project as reflected in approved form 3011 dated 2/12/12 and Reimbursement Rate Certification, with a total Project Budget cost of $40,792,248, with a 37.27% reimbursement rate reflecting a Estimated Maximum Total Facilities Grant of $12,250,739 as seen on line 113. Motion: Phil Coleman 2" d : Charles Favazzo Vote: 7 -0 7.9 Schedule Received schedule 9115111, designer agreement should be resolved by early next week. PBC would like to see a copy. 10/27/11 March 2012 — MSBA Approval January 2013 — Start of Construction September 2014 - Occupy Building 1/5/12 ECC meeting in February and PBC would like to hear what feedback was from ECC. 1/19/12 Next meeting will require votes of approval as submission due to MSBA on 212112. Additional meetings and milestones identified on separate schedule. BOS meeting on 1123112 will require PBC attendance, Jon H., Chuck F. and Pat G probable attendees. 1/26/12 RFW considers project on schedule. Schematic Design Submission to MSBA on 2/2/12 IG has approved 149A process CM application process underway, Qualifications due 2/16.. RFP 2/23. Permitting needs to be addressed in the schedule. 7.11 CM at Risk Selection 1/5/12 Need Sub - Committee for CM@Risk selection which needs 2 members of PBC. PBC would like to know scheduling commitment needed for this sub - committee and to have this at next meeting. 1/19/12 Two or three meetings required along with submittal review. PBC discussed that Phil and Peter might be best candidates however each needs to confirm if they could be considered eligible to serve in this capacity. 1/26/12 Peter can not participate on Sub Committee, Phil will know next week. Chuck Favazzo and Joe McWeeney are able to participate. 3/22/12 Joe Riley outlined results of CM @Risk interviews. Three firms prequalified and 1 later withdrew due to scheduling and commitment charges. Rationale was discussed for CM at Risk Subcommittee recommendation for Shawmut over CTA. Motion to accept the recommendation of the CM @Risk subcommittee to rank the CM @Risk firms, Shawmut 1 and CTA 2 and enter into negotiations with Shawmut. Motion: Phil Coleman 2 Chuck Favazzo Vote: 5 -0 Unanimous PBC agreed that Joe Reilly of Walsh and Pat Goddard would initiate discussions with Shawmut and report back at next PBC meeting. 3/29/12 Page 4 of 10 Lexington Permanent Building Committee 12 April 2012 Collaborative Partners (CP) reported back on fee negotiations with Shawmut and reviewed same with PBC. Included in conversation is level of staffing of Shawmut with personnel on site and management of the project. Proposal from Shawmut is currently proposed in excess of budgeted amount on MSBA 3011 form. Much discussion on cost for CM at Risk services and pro's and cons of Shawmut approach and staffing plan. Motion: Motion to negotiate Shawmut proposal down $200,000 further than current proposal without removing additional key staff, to support award of contract to Shawmut. Motion: Eric Second: Dick Vote: 7 -0 4/12/12 CP reported that continued negotiations took place and Shawmut had agreed to the further fee reductions and that contract language of a few items was being reviewed and would be made available for PBC consideration and award. 7.14 Schematic Design 11/17/11 PBC requested that some discussion take place with DDP and PBC over design styles and aesthetics as the architects should be aware of what general direction the PBC feels the design should be so as not to waste valuable and limited time in design phase. DDP stated that SD deliverables would include: Cost Estimates, Narrative on Systems, Narrative on Site, Narrative on finishes, Plans, Elevations, sections, Rendering and permitting issues 12/1/11 DDP expressed that the design phase would be beginning and there was general discussion on the design, historical elements and their impact on design in Lexington and other design features. PBC suggested that the architects not cast the design features too quickly until they make some suggestions to the PBC to confirm an appropriate direction. 12/15/12 PBC wants to be sure that DDP meets with PBC at least three times in January to have an opportunity to review and comment on design decisions. PBC would like to see 3d modeling of school with topography and perhaps a view from Grove Street. 1/5/12 DDP made presentation on design issues and process forthcoming. Overall massing discussed along with a few design issues such as: The roof equipment screening location and height Possible roof garden area Roof access hatch or door (penthouse) Two story space over library Approx 4000 sf of basement, required, is slab on grade more cost effective? Size of gymnasium, as compared to other elementary schools Canopy in front of school Canopies in other locations around schools PBC would like to see these items as breakouts on the estimate so that they can understand cost impact on the project. DDP stressed that schematic design will not stop after SD submission to MSBA, rather there will be opportunity to further work with PBC on Design issues thru design development. DDP discussed need to be able to deduct from approved design not try to add too it. 1/5/12 Items planned for review at 1/19/12 meeting Detailed site plan with contours — "balanced site" Finalized plans with SF Space summary with net to gross ratio (limit 1.5) Estimates with breakouts 1/26 Building System narratives Preliminary Energy Analysis LEED scorecard 1/19/12 DDP reviewed 3d model and power point slides on schematic design progress. DDP explained that final schematic plans were not quite ready, as they were still working on reducing the SF from 95,000 to 90,000 Discussion points from presentation • Circulation in building for night or weekend use of gymnasium • Basement space versus additional slab on grade for cost effectiveness. Page 5 of 10 Lexington Permanent Building Committee 12 April 2012 • Scheduling impact /concerns with completion of new building, demolition of old and remaining site work to allow access to new building from permanent driveway in time for start of school. • Gymnasium not to increase in size; shall remain as designed. • Height of building not yet calculated 1/19/12 presentation /update Detailed site plan with contours — "balanced site" presented in 3d model Finalized plans with SF Not complete yet, still working on SF reduction Space summary with net to gross ratio (limit 1.5) Not complete yet, still working on SF reduction Estimates with breakouts To be presented at 1/26 meeting Building System narratives copy circulated, was previously reviewed with DPF Preliminary Energy Analysis To be presented at 1/26 meeting LEED scorecard Copy circulated and discussed. 1/26/12 • Reviewed updated floor plans sf down to 91,840. Building height discussed and estimates 43' at high point; average height will be less but not calculated. Screen top +/- 51 -53'. Through course of DD we can cut but we cannot reduce greatly without effecting program, we should include what we need now. • Materials discussion next meeting. • Gymnasium floor to be designed as a floating floor with a layer of insulation in the middle to prevent noise transmission through the floor. • The Gymnasium floor was discussed as being wood or a type of linoleum. The Linoleum type product has better maintenance and longevity characteristics. The school department prefers the linoleum type product, PBC agreed. • Brief discussion regarding site plan and new and existing utilities. PBC would like to know if any of the utilities can come from Robinson road and reduce long runs from Grove Street. • Two Motions were made in support of the Special Education Submission and the Schematic Design Submission to the MSBA Motion: To recognize and approve the Lexington School Departments January 18, 2012 submittal to the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education for Special Education Programming and MSBA space summary template for the new Estabrook Elementary School Project. Motion: Joe McWeeney 2" d : Dick Perry Vote: 6 -0 Affirmative: 6 Jon Himmel, Carl Oldenburg, Chuck Favazzo, Joe McWeeney, Dick Perry, Eric Brown Negative: 0 Abstained: 0 Not Present: 2 Peter Johnson, Philip Coleman Motion: To accept and support DiNisco Design Partnership letter of 26 January 2012 recommending approval of schematic design submittal package inclusive of space summary template and Schematic Design floor plans for the Estabrook School project with an estimated construction cost not to exceed $31,200,000 and estimated project cost not to exceed $40.8 million, with school occupancy in September 2014; subject to compliance with Lexington Zoning Code and applicable laws. Motion: Dick Perry 2nd: Jon Himmel Vote: 6 -0 Affirmative: 6 Jon Himmel, Carl Oldenburg, Chuck Favazzo, Joe McWeeney, Dick Perry, Eric Brown Negative: 0 Abstained: 0 Not Present: 2 Peter Johnson, Philip Coleman 7.15 LEED 12/1/11 Brief discussion on LEED design. DDP expressed that MSBA reimburses 2% for LEED Silver certification the first pass thru the LEED scorecard should occur in the schematic design phase. 1/5/12 Draft of LEED scorecard will be at next meeting 1/19/12 Draft of LEED scorecard, tentatively showing 34 points presumed yes, 33, presumed maybe and 39 presumed no. Although this will continue to be developed thru design it is presumed that LEED Silver is achievable. LEED Scorecard will be reviewed with Facilities after 2/2/12. Page 6 of 10 Lexington Permanent Building Committee 12 April 2012 7.16 Mosaic 12/1/11 There has been discussion about saving the Estabrook logo mosaic, so the construction of the mosaic is being tested for contaminants during December break. 3/8/12 No asbestos was found in the wall. Options are to replicate on a mural or move existing to new school. 7.17 Traffic Clarification 12/8/11 PBC discussed the need for clarification as to the extent of involvement of the ETF committee with traffic concerns on the Estabrook site. Peter Johnson will communicate a reminder to the ETF that the PBC has responsibility for oversight of traffic concerns within the Estabrook site and that while they will seek a recommendation from the ETF on the amount of queuing that may be required based upon their work leading to the property line, it is the PBC who should coordinate the actual design and layout of this work on site with the architect and traffic consultant. 1/5/12 ETF has not met since the 12/8/11 PBC discussion above. 2/9/12 Michelle Ciccolo, Chair of Estabrook Task Force, updated PBC on recent meetings and public concern. A discussion of school deliveries involving 18 wheel vehicles and queuing of traffic for pick up. ETF is drafting their recommendations. The PBC and School Committee voted in favor of the schematic design prior to its submission to the MSBA. The PBC sees the value of the vehicle management that brings the students, parents and staff in the front of the building without the need to walk across vehicle paths and that the deliveries are in the back beneficially located away from the pedestrians. Motion: The PBC suggests that Robinson Road be upgraded to accommodate fix body delivery vehicles similar to those used today and that larger 18 wheeled vehicles be precluded from using Robinson Road once the building is occupied. Motion: Jon Himmel 2 Eric Brown Vote: Unanimous 7.19 Contract bride 12/8/11 DPF advised that a strategy will need to be developed to use remaining available funds from current authorization to bridge gap of professional services at the conclusion of the study phase of the project to allow continued development of the project or subsequent phases until town meeting authorizes additional funding. 1/5/12 Proposals needed in advance of next meeting 1/19/12 Staff will work with Walsh to develop scope and fee documents for both Walsh and DiNisco and should have information by February 9 meeting 1/26/12 DPF working with RF Walsh to have information available for 2/9/12 meeting. 2/9/12 Motion for DD fee, $434,000 for the designer and $45,000 for OPM full DD phase, divided into DD1— schematics to 4/2/12 town vote not to exceed available funds. After affirmative town vote balance of fees will be authorized. Motion: Jon Himmel 2 Phil Coleman Vote: Unanimous 7.20 RF Walsh Collaborative Partners Contract Extension 3/22/12 RF Walsh presentation on fee proposal for balance of project. Discussion of cost differences in OPM fee for 149 job vs 149A job and responsibilities of each OPM staff member. PBC Suggest cost savings in combining Site Manager and Project Manager, RFW to evaluate and report back at next PBC Meeting. 3/29/12 RF Walsh presented an updated contract for services which combined PM and Site manager roles, bringing proposal from 4.5% to 3.73 %. Motion: To approve RF Walsh contract in the amount of $1,162,000. Motion: Peter Second: Dick Vote: 7 -0 Page 7 of 10 Lexington Permanent Building Committee 12 April 2012 7.21 Reading Room 2/9/12 Reading Room: Sandy explained this area houses level literature which is different from literature in Library. It will also be used as a Professional Development training room for teachers. If needed this room could become a classroom in the future. Gym: Gym is used for voting segregating public from children is a concern as to how that can be done. Sandy discussed the thought of possibly using room or rooms on the lower level for voting, this has been done in the past. 7.22 Fuel source for Generator 1/5/12 Discussion on allowable fuel source, MB to follow up with fire department, for use of natural gas instead of diesel. 1/19/12 Have verbal from fire department that natural gas is okay, waiting for verification in writing. 7.23.1 Historical Commission 1/5/12 RFW and DDP will work with Historical Commission on any approvals necessary for demolition of existing Estabrook School 1/26/12 RFW meeting on 2/9 with Historical Commission. 7.24 Permitting 1/26/12 PBC expressed concern that permitting needs have not yet been identified and feel strongly that these issues should be understood and included in the project schedule. 7.25 Resident Email - Elevator 2/9/12 Resident email was discussed. Elevator: Statement was discussed in length PBC agreed that there is no need for further investigation on the elevator as what is designed meets code. 7.26 Designer Update 3/8/12 Building Design Discussion Building pushed back 7 feet on site and steps at front of building removed. DDP will bring grading plan to future meeting. DDP discussed some design expectations. Group talked about fenestration, overall image should perhaps be "simple ". DDP circulated photographs of other buildings and looked at 3d views of Estabrook to generate discussion. 7.27 Estabrook School Driveway Access and Queuing 3/8/12 DDP provided an overview presentation of updates and developments in driveway access and queuing of vehicles. Several design options had been developed, each responding to continued discussion of the needs and most appropriate or flexible solution. Motion to recommend updated driveway access and queuing design for Estabrook School Project as reflected in Design Option 5 modified, which contains 3 lanes of traffic from Grove Street with 1450 feet of proposed onsite queuing; with drop off/ pick up to be curbside only. This meets BETA criteria. Motion: Eric Brown 2 Dick Perry Vote: Unanimous 7.28 Designer Update for 3/29/12 3/29/12 DDP advises that MSBA formally accepted Schematic Design Submission Final Grading plan due in from subs tomorrow Food Service meeting recently conducted to inform designers of project needs Page 8of 10 Lexington Permanent Building Committee 12 April 2012 DDP presented a power point on overall updates, copy to file Discussion on Building Materials — more involved conversation will happen at working group meeting Discussed photos and materials use on other buildings Materials being considered; Limestone, split face block, ground face block, cast stone, zinc panels, all natural colors. DDP needs to do some sketch studies of elevations with some of the materials Some opinions discussed for overall theory...... simple, not busy Reviewed slight adjustments to floor plan to improve function, no change in GSF Approx 500 seating capacity for performance space set up in cafeteria Roof Membrane not yet determined Cafeteria +/ -11 feet to underside of truss, 16 feet to deck Gymnasium 24 feet to underside of deck Glass and lighting require further discussion 7.29 Town Meeting Power Point 3/29/12 Power point reviewed and discussed, as to be presented at town meeting. 7.30 Commissioning Agent award 3/29/12 MSBA assigned Commissioning agent, contact needs to be made and a scope of services received. 4/12/12 Discussion regarding scheduling a meeting with CX agent and schedule meeting. 7.31 Schedule through summer 2012 and Start of Building Construction 3/29/12 It was discussed that a detailed schedule / timeline is needed leading into summer activities and enabling work. Summer Recess for school is coming soon and is relatively short in duration as compared to amount of work that needs to take place. 4/12/12 Summer approvals, milestones and work goals need to be identified in schedule. Site infill area, retaining wall, pavement expansion for temp parking, temp drainage structures. DDP expects early site package to be drawn by end of the month. 7.32 Designer Update DDP has continued to move forward on project, process is going well. DDP has had 2 meetings with Shawmut and reports that they are bringing good ideas to the table. Shawmut is preparing independent estimate that should be available in 2 weeks (4/26/12). Shawmut is estimating MSBA submission with new items & materials noted to compare delta to original estimate. DPF has met with DPW and Rec Dept. to discuss field use and maintenance and has forwarded recommendations to design team. Discussion on possible added costs for grading of field as well as options for sod versus seed. DiNisco states final decisions are needed within 2 weeks on grading and seed /sod. DDP updated PBC on discussions from working group meetings on possible use of limestone, split face block. Rendered elevations were also available showing zinc panels, limestone and overall fenestration. Loading dock discussions, included adding a small roof over entry door, locations for dumpsters, screen wall at back of loading dock. 7.33 Design Development 4/12/12 Design Development scheduled to be complete the end of April. PBC Recommends School Department and School Committee have a process of formal sign off of the Design Development Package. Page 9 of 10 Lexington Permanent Building Committee Next working group meeting 4/23/12 12 April 2012 Next PBC meeting 4/26/12, Energy Committee to be invited to recap / agree on mechanical system issues. Meeting Adjourned Motion to Adjourn 4/12/12 8:30 PM Motion: Dick Perry 2 Phil Coleman Unanimous Page 10 of 10