My over my over Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Let me click home. Quick
hey. Thursday, March 12th, 5:00 p.m., the real estate, facilities, and housing committee meeting is convened. Clerk will call the role. >> Councelor Kadim >> here.
>> Councelor Hart. >> Vice President Dion >> here. Pursuant to the open meeting law, any person may make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium. Attendees are therefore advised that
such recordings or transmissions are being made whether perceived or unpersceived by those present and are deemed acknowledged and permissible. First item is citizens input. We have nobody signed up for citizens input.
Item number two, the minutes of January 20th, 2026. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. All in favor? I >> I opposed. Eyes have it. Uh thirdly, is a resolution
uh to convene. Um Oh, I need a motion to lift from the table. >> Motion to lift from the table. >> Second. All in favor? I >> opposed. Motion passes. Um, oh, all right. Well, whatever.
Let's see. This is Okay. So, the resolution is as follows. Whereas the city of Fall River owns significant real estate assets, including the Bank Street, Omry, police facilities, municipal parking garages, and other city-owned properties. And whereas ongoing oversight and transparency are
necessary to ensure responsible management and long-term planning of these assets. Now therefore be it resolved that the city council committee on real estate proceed with the following actions. Committee shall review and discuss the status status condition use and planning
of all city-owned real estate including but not limited to the Bank Street Armory police stations parking garages and related facilities. The chair of the committee is authorized to call meetings at any time as necessary to address matters involving city-owned real estate. The committee shall provide a
written report to the city council on a quarterly basis summarizing its findings and any recommendations. And be it further resolved that this resolution shall remain in effect unless amended or rescended by the city council. Any discussion on the resolution?
>> Well, I'm glad I'm not the chair. got homework to do. So written report on a quarterly basis. Um I guess can we just ask the administration to come down? I I know this is a very generalized >> Yeah. >> resolution. So I I think if we can just
maybe for this meeting just kind of set some ground rules and expectations of what we want to see and then just table the matter and come back. gentlemen. >> Good evening. >> Good evening. >> If you could state your names and
positions for the record, please. >> Al Oliver, director of city operations. >> Glenn Hathaway, building commissioner, city of For. >> Okay. So, basically, I think our objective is
um to try to get some of our projects up and running, some of our real estate that really needs attention, uh to move forward with it, um to try to work collaboratively. If there's ways that the council can help to make it easier
for you to get from point A to point B, um to keep people informed as to what's going on. Um, so hopefully we can get away from things sitting on a back burner for eight years or 10 years. Um, and actually do things that are going to
help the city. And I'll defer to uh, Council Kade. >> Yeah, I I I mean, I'll just piggyback on that. I won't say exactly what you said because I think you did a a very good job of articulating what it what it was, but you know, internally we've had conversations about the real estate committee and and what the committee has
been doing in the past. It's just essentially just meeting to dispose of property or take in bids that of property that we might want to purchase. But I think we would all agree that there's a number of uh facilities that are owned currently owned by the uh city that we need to to address and try to
make sure that we keep on the forefront in terms of what are we doing with them? Are we maintaining them? Do we need any additional appropriation? Um do you folks need any resources from from the council uh just to keep that moving? Um Bank Street Armory is one of them. Um, I know we'll be talking about the parking
garage and and fire stations. Um, but if there are any property, I know we, you know, with the, uh, building blocks program, if there are any properties that you've identified that, uh, we need to take a little bit more aggressive action on. Um, or if you need, I know you've got your evolving account, uh, if
there are any additional resources that you may need. But I think the in the intent is really to make this a, uh, active more active and involved committee. So, I I think it's going to be very very productive moving forward. But I think the key to this whole thing is is what um the chairperson had just
mentioned. It's it's a collaboration. Uh so we definitely need to to work together to to move these items forward. Um we're not looking for anything to be contentious. That's not not the goal. It's it's truly to make sure that you folks have the resources that you need. Um but we're also taking action on the on the parcels that we need to to take
action. Uh from my standpoint, if we could just highlight, I think the goals would be obviously as and and director Olivera and I have had a conversation. From my standpoint, it's um you know, the parking garages, it's going to be the fire stations. Um, and then any
other municipal building uh that we don't typically talk about, but I I know Al has uh been doing a lot of reviews of uh these buildings, but if there are any additional improvements that need to take place, you know, I think it would be important for us to to know what those are. Um, but again, Bank Street
Armies is going to be one that I think we should talk about uh and discuss in terms of >> especially while we don't have a game plan, making sure that that building is is being maintained. Um so that when we make that determination uh with the administration as to whether or not we want to keep it or sell it that it's not
in a such shape that it's going to be prohibitive from us doing anything that we want to do with with it. So from from that standpoint, I I think um I would just ask ask G to prepare for the next meeting uh specifically the bank Sharry and then identify
any parcels uh or buildings that he thinks that we should be uh that should be on the forefront and that we should keep focus on um just in terms of of repairs. >> Do you yield? >> I yield. Um I think at this time because the Bank Street Army is not necessarily
on the agenda, but it is because it's in the resolution that that was one of the items that we would talk about. Um we have somebody from the preservation uh committee here as well that I'd like to invite to the table so we can touch on the Bank Street Omry. Um,
and part of the reason why I want to do that is I know that there are people who think that everybody forgot about the Bank Street Army that the city council just voted on it and basically it's yep, here we go. They vote on it and then it goes away and nobody's doing anything. And um I think I think it's important
for people to understand that there have been things going on that things are moving forward. Um, and I'd like to have uh you state your name, your the committee, and um whatever comments you'd like to make in terms of that. >> Yep. Hello, my name is Alex Silva, 148
Purchase Street. I'm the president of the board of directors of the Preservation Society of Fall River, which is a nonprofit organization. I'm also the city council appointee to the community preservation committee. Um, so I think it was about a year ago when the city council passed the resolution um,
asking the historical commission, which is the city board and the preservation society to kind of work forward to coming up with a plan for the armory. Um and since that time we've applied for a number of grants uh towards the goal of the city going out for an updated
conditions assessment and feasibility study to examine possible reuse scenarios and uh hopefully have a community input and engagement part of that uh component of that which will you know get input from the entire city of what they actually want to see happen
there. Uh but a key first step is updating that old study that was done in 2015 which had a number of things that are either outdated or or or were a little incorrect about it. Um one of the like slightly wrong things well it was it just wasn't mentioned in it was the
deed restriction already on the property which has some limitations uh to it can't be changed to the inside or outside um some historical aspects of that. Uh so that wasn't taken into account and some of the issues that were identified in that report have since uh
been fixed by the city uh through primarily I think community preservation act grants. Um the drill hall roof was repaired some time ago. There was a grant to do a lot of extensive masonry repointing and actually one of the chimneys at the top was completely taken
down and rebuilt. Um, and then I think there was a final grant uh that did some more repointing and removed some of the shrubbery uh which as anyone who drives by there knows is a recurring problem and is back um that that is I was told
caused by the seagulls constantly dropping seedlings up there when they're going up there. So it's has to be a recurring maintenance thing uh to address it. Um which I think is access was primarily the problem in the past. Uh so moving on to what we've been doing, uh the historical commission, Al,
uh Jasmine, the city's grant writer, and the mayor have all been helping us apply for some grants. Um firstly, well, it was kind of a two a two-prong effort, uh at the start of the process a year ago where the city applied for a community
preservation act grant uh and it was successful in receiving that for $55,000. I think the city council already approved that because it was an emergency grant some time ago. Uh and the point of that one was to be uh the matching source so we could apply for a couple other grants that we knew that
were coming down the line. Uh the one that at that time we were applying for was round 31 of the Mass Historic Commission's uh it's called the Massachusetts Preservation Projects Fund. Uh that was last year. We were ultimately unsuccessful in that uh grant
application. Since then, I think it was one or two months ago, we submitted another grant. It was a different program through the Mass Historic Commission. I think it's called the Survey and Planning Grant. This is actually one of the grants that the city was only able to apply for after
obtained certified local government status, uh, which I know the historical commission and the city worked on for some time, uh, which essentially opens up the city to a bucket of funds for these types of planning and study grants. I think it's like only 30% of the state have access to it. Uh
whoever's a CLG. Um it might be less than 30%. Uh so we have that. I believe it's still currently under review. And then we just submitted this week. The deadline is tomorrow round 32 of the mass uh preservation projects fund. The initial one that we didn't get uh this
year. We've made some changes and we're hopeful to to hope we're hopeful for that application to move forward. That was a request for 30,000. So the ultimate aim is for grant funds of 85,000 to conduct the study in which then the city would go out to public
bidding for uh conditions study a conditions assessment and feasibility study and then the city would have the information it needs to go forward and make whatever determination it wants. You know municipal use, private use, uh municipal ownership, private lease, you
know, whatever whatever the city wants to do. at least it will be in the best position to get the best value for the community. Uh yeah, I think that about covers it. Um >> m Mr. Alivera, do we have the ability to because I've noticed driving by I don't
drive by there often because I don't I just don't but that growth is always coming out in the top. Do we have the ability to reach that and take care of that? >> We don't have a bucket that will do that. So, in the past, I'm sorry, >> sorry. In the past, we've subbed that
work out to Aenda and they have the lift. They'll come in and clean all the vegetation. Um, so that's what's happened in the past. We're planning to do that in the spring so we can capture that uh what's left right now. So, it's it's pretty much dead at this point, but we still need to droo that.
>> Yeah, because I would imagine at some point that's going to affect the structure. >> Absolutely. Yeah, it will definitely damage any of the pointing issues that are currently there right now. It'll just uh expose more of the uh the masonry. >> Now, have you um have you I'm going to
assume I'm going to assume you've been up there and if you have or or um Mr. pathway. Is there any way that you think that could be remedied so that if it is a case of birds bringing seeds and chicken bones and all kinds of stuff and that's causing this growth for whatever
reason, is there any way of remediating that or doing something to to to thwart that off? >> I this is the first time I've heard about the seagulls doing that. What a seagull does is they'll they'll drop some type of a clam or an oyster or something. They'll smash and then
they'll they'll they'll utilize they'll capture the food inside that. That's the only time I've heard that. But maybe that's >> seeds that are on their feathers when they fly. >> Oh, okay. >> It's for the former DC. >> You can shift that down to him.
>> Yeah, it was told to us on a tour a couple years ago by one of the former DCM heads, I think. >> Okay. >> Mr. Haway. It's correct what you're hearing or what you've been told. Um, it happens throughout it happens more in that building because there's more of a
architectural >> facade that uh has many uh >> it's granite has granite. got many key ways to it uh architecturally to make it look you know aesthetic uh from the old
days and now with uh it's not the lack of use, it's just it just happens and uh maybe due to the fact that there is some lack of use and nobody around there uh we don't see it until it grows a little bit bigger
>> uh obviously but as long as it you know it's looked at once a year and and re uh removed, the building will be fine. It happens to homeowners all the time when the leaves build up in the gutters and so on and so forth. So, it's a maintenance issue and as long as they keep on top of it, uh the building will
be somewhat okay. >> But we're we're looking at the facade of the the building. That's what we're talking about, right? On top. I I get it. It's on top. >> Well, I believe she's talking about the growth of the >> on the on this facade on the side, right? >> Well, and way up top branches. >> Yeah. the trees growing out of certain
areas. >> So that that that is part of the part of the out of the birds. Um the one thing that um >> the one thing that's a concern to that once we remove that, the best thing for us to do is actually try to find a way to point that so that it doesn't happen
often like that. We do do a preventive maintenance. We go up up on top. There is a drain that always captures some debris, some stones, and we'll always clean that up just to make sure that there is no um no rise of any of the water on the roof.
>> Now, we have received uh CPA funding. Um do you know if all of that funding was exhausted or is there some uh money left over that we if we do remove all of that that we could do some repointing there? Yeah, we'd have to we'd have to see what
what's left under that 55k. Um, but yeah, so that's Have you >> there? So, uh, there was some funds left over last I recall. I think it was over 10,000. Um, but it was passed. It's, uh, the grants are usually good for two
years and it was a completed project and I think that was might have been deemed leftover funds and returned to the committee. Um, so we would have to just check to see if that's still in the account or not. >> Yeah, that was prior to me. Um yeah, >> councelor Kadim. >> Um so just in terms of the $85,000
grant, so is it just looking at the feasibility of the building or are you doing actual assessment of what needs to be >> The goal is the goal is both. So like 55,000 has been awarded right now from the CPA uh and the 30,000 is to
hopefully do a more full complete study for both options. Um I think conditions assessment is primarily the main focus and feasibility assessment would be secondary but both being done at the same time would be cost effective and the ultimate goal I think of the city.
>> Do you know so you have the 55,000 or you have the entire 85,000 in hand? >> 55 is what was appropriate. I just have to double check. I think the city council did vote on it last summer. It was a uh it was recommended by the CP the community preservation committee in
April. Um, so it would maybe be your one of your May meetings if you wanted to check if it was voted on. I believe it was. Um, but I just would have to double check that. >> Uh, and then the 30,000 is kind of the amount we've been applying for from these other sources that we've been unsuccessful for to date. Um, but
hopefully hopefully this new this new round we'll get. >> So the I guess the 30,000 do you have a is there a timeline when we would be hearing back from that? Um usually it's by some I think it's by June. >> June
>> I believe it's June. >> Okay. So has the conditions have have you said the conditions uh assumptions I mean the condition analysis been done or in the process? >> Yes. No, we just have funds to to >> Okay. So you're going to wait for the 30
and then just go out to bid. Okay. >> Ideally I believe the city would put out to bid for both. >> Right. Okay. So Al, from your standpoint, is there any I mean what what do we have for a budget in the armory? Are we just doing minor heating and
>> we're just there is no heating. So the prior to me showing up the boilers were decommissioned. >> Um they there was a flood there and then the boilers are gone. Before I left in 2012, they were they were actively uh operating, right? >> Uh they're no longer working. So that's
been the result the caution of the whole the whole project. Uh we've been repairing any type of leaks in that building. We've been replacing any type of alarm systems, wherever. We just do the preventive maintenance. Just walk in there, do the walks, and see what the condition is.
So, um and there's no temporary heat that we could get into that that building, right, until we make a determination on the >> only would only only temporary heat would be the electric. And that's it wouldn't suffice, >> right? the whole building. So, yeah.
I mean, my recommendation is if we're going to do anything, we have to do we have to get some heat in that building or else we're going to be going into this winter again. >> I mean, I think it was about a it's about a year ago that we we tooured the building. And I mean, it was in halfway
decent shape for a building that has been vac, you know, vacant for a while without any any heat. And then you had the uh the leak that took place. So, I mean, um it's it's still a viable building. Absolutely. I mean, there's a lot of work that needs to be done. There's there's no doubt about it. But I I I think the two of you being in construction, I I know you've seen worse
buildings than that. I mean, >> absolutely. >> Um, so I I just want to make sure that whatever whatever we're doing, we we have because I I know I know when it was vacant before, we had at least minimal uh heat in there just to to keep it going. And I just don't want to see the build building deteriorate more than it
needs to. So, can if you could just I guess give us an assessment um on what you think as a a minimum we would need to to at least get some heat in that building and uh what we need for a budget just to maintain that through the uh the winter months.
>> Absolutely. >> And then I I know when I drive by I see a number of folks standing right outside the front door um trying to get away from uh the elements of the of the weather and stuff like that. Nobody's gained access into that building. >> No one secure. >> I've kicked a few people out myself, but
they just that's >> okay. >> They'll just go in there and just hang out just to get away from the wind a lot of times. >> Okay. And then in terms of the building itself, have has the administration had any conversation that that you're aware of in terms of um having conversations with department heads of space that
could potentially go in there or any municipal use uh that we would be able to use that for? >> No, not not internally from what I've been involved. Okay. All right. With that, I yield. >> I have um I brought my little omie
folder with me. Um so I had received this um in FY17 um CPA funds in the amount of 283,000 um for to repair the center roof and two
chimneys and emergency funding of 57,932 in that same year to repair the center oh again for the center roof and two chimneys >> supplemental appropriation probably >> FY Y21 was 50,000
uh urgent masonry repairs and removal of vegetation from the building exterior roof and parapet >> the total funding did I say that correctly >> parapet parapet >> um total funding to date has been $390,932
but the last that I saw was in FY21 so here we are five years later um still battling some of the came. I thought for some reason I'm looking through this booklet. I should have looked before. Um, this is when
they were considering selling the building. And I thought in here it identified how much they believed they'd need just to secure the building um, in terms of the heat, the windows, and that sort of thing.
I'll keep looking at while we speak. But >> council, that pri when I when I reviewed that document, that price tag included a lot of the segregating of the building for the museum and having different sectioned parts of the building. So that plan was a a museum type plan that they
were planning to do and no pun intended, but they were just trying to segregate what they needed to dehumidify, heat, and and condition each space. So there's that's that's why there's a major difference on that inside that plan >> because they had different planned
sections of that building designated. >> So what >> have we put we've put I'm under the impression we've put windows in the building or we have not >> I don't think >> we we've we've tried to seal off what we could without putting without renovating
the whole building not knowing what we were going to do. So if there were openings in the building, we would just board it up and make it look a little bit presentable at that point. >> Okay. So we have not put any windows in. >> Um what do you think the cost would be
to be able to put in a system that would heat that building? >> It's something we can get back in touch with you at this point because they they did have some some um large boilers at that time. Uh I I don't think they would need that size of boilers at this at
this day in time. The original way that building was heated originally was through coal >> and that's what heated the chimney and that's what allowed the moisture of that chimney to all to evaporate. Once they changed the the system then that's why
some of the pointing on the chimney damaged and that's historically how coal burning uh plants have always worked. So that when you minimize the heat because the coal is is a different heat. That's why the chimney had to be repaired and replaced. So a lot of the building
systems have been changed over um at this point. So we'd have to do a quick mechanical system upgrade to figure out what we're going to be doing. So we could have someone go in there and give us a quick assessment. >> Do we think I'm sorry. did
um in your opinion I mean I I look at it this way and I could be totally wrong obviously you know more than I do in a lot of areas um it's just always been my position that anything we do to that building to improve it to secure it to
safeguard it whether the city keeps it or decides to sell it and especially in the event we decide to sell it it's worth that much more money and the price to uh of purchase would be more significant. >> Yeah. Council, you're probably not going to you're not going to have any feedback
differently than than we are. We we we love buildings. We we don't like to get rid of buildings. We like to make sure we renovate those buildings. But and I I agree with you there. That is a beautiful building. There is no no questioning that. >> If I may, I agree we should have heat in
the building and it's vital to this building. Um, as far as spending a lot of money to heat the building and then remodeling the building, the heating systems may change, maybe change because of the levels. Uh, may so it may be
prudent just to get heat into the building >> to in order to keep it from decaying any further >> uh and drying it out like it should be dried out instead of just deteriorating away. Uh, I agree 100%. And uh that
should be done, you know, ASAP with uh yeah, you got to look at the budget for everything. I I understand that. But heat is a vital to that building or any other building. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> It's just like a leaking roof. If you're going to let it leak, it's it's going to
decay. Uh heat is vital. Um, as far as putting a lot of money into a heating system, I would do the bare minimum to get through because uh, in the new design of whatever happens to the building. Um, each area may have its own
heating system. There's modern technology today is is uh, well advanced to to be more successful in heating a building like that uh, with different heating systems at different levels, different type of heating systems. So, I
would agree. >> Do you think that um once do you think that we would need to wait to probably to complete the study first? Um or that's something we should just go ahead with and if it is something we
should go ahead with is there an avenue for funding. So I guess the first half of that question is yours. >> I absolutely agree with you. he he should be in that building as soon as possible and should remain there until such time the building is sold or or remodeled or whatever um the city
decides to do with the building. The heat is really really vital to the building. It's just like having a watertight roof as far as I'm concerned. Um the longer it has no heat, the more the further it's going to decay. >> Um it's an expense to the city. It's an
expense to anybody that has a vacant building, understandably. Uh but it's a vital building, so let's keep it >> Well, yeah. And in this case, it's a it's a building that ultimately um again, whichever way direction it goes
in, ultimately um is going to increase the value of it. >> Oh, absolutely. Go ahead. >> Absolutely. I mean that what what Glenn is talking about is >> if you picture if you picture that building like like a human body that's the heart without a heart and it's not
pumping any anything around no heat that's the building is just useless. >> Well you see that just driving around with houses if there's a house that's empty and there's no heat you see it they've dilapidated. >> So is is there an avenue for funding do you think uh for a heating system?
>> Yeah. So I think so I I was just going to say it's probably good and worth noting that depending on the amount of funding that the city gets for the study and assessment uh the the ideal reuse uh feasibility reuse study would examine
different options and then what kind of heating those options would require. So it might be uh best to not make any permanent heating solutions and just make them temporary because the study should also include cost estimates for you know different cost estimates for
the different uses. So say it's a performance venue that would be heated differently than you know a combination of offices or housing or something. Uh and I would just be cautious about making any investment upfront. Ideally the heating would never have been shut off in the first place. There's could be
pathways of weatherizing, weather proofing the building over doing uh more permanent or maybe weatherizing and temporary heating just to get uh us by. Thankfully, the winter is almost over. Um the schedule that the grant that we
just applied for uh kind of wants applicants to follow has the study being completed during this year. So, if we the city were successful in getting this study um you know in a perfect world you might have some answers this time next
year um is what I I could I guess offer. >> But I think the opinion is that we can heat the building without putting anything exorbitant in there just >> to get some form of heat in there. >> Anything we put in that building is going to be pricey. Okay. Even
temporarily. Uh nothing is reasonable any longer. Um, it's a huge building. Anything you put in there is going to cost considerable amount of money. Um, but I think the building is worth it. And the longer we wait, if this goes on and doesn't get heat next winter, it's
another winter without heat, right? >> It's more detrimental to the to the facade. It's detrimental to everything. >> So, um, I would say, you know, is the faster we get working on heat >> uh for the heating season, um, the better off the building's going to be in
the long term. That's my opinion. >> I can get a quick a quick budget number that we can look at just a 50 mile uh distance just what couldn't we put down there that will give us some heat. >> Okay, that would be great. Uh Council Kadim.
>> Yes. So my I guess my question was going to be whether or not um for a temporary heating unit can we actually use the infrastructure on the duck work that's currently in there and just so at that point we're looking at like and I know boilers are expensive but um whatever type of system it is but again not
having to go through the entire duck work duck work until we get the uh the assessment that's >> absolutely >> been conducted and then at that point we're looking at something maybe completely different. Um, I don't even I mean I think mini splits would be a little bit too much work for that. But
>> a commercial uh temporary commercial heating system forced hot air uh even if Al has to take a door out and put a temporary system in and with a couple of fans or perhaps connected to some existing ducts that's in there.
>> Um the heat can circulate and and it may take two units. Uh as an example, we use them in new buildings today. There's no heat. They're a brand new building. Diamond is one. Um they're heated to room temperature uh throughout and uh
they do a wonderful job. They're commercial units. Uh you take out a doorway or a window and you put them in and they run uh happily ever after. We'd have to fence it off because of the >> You're talking about the diesel units. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> The diesel or natural gas. We have them in natural gas. We have them in propane.
>> Um but something to that effect uh it's called temporary heat. uh and not touch the existing boilers if they're that far gone. Um at least it's heat and I don't think it's going to be they're very efficient units. So um I think if it
took two heaters to go in there, uh so be it. It is what it is to to keep the building in its uh structure and intact and benefit the building alto together. >> Okay. Well, I think that an avenue then that we need to go down. Um
I'm not sure one. Oh, I'm sorry. No, no, no. It's it's okay. Uh we actually Secon Library actually went their heating system went down. We actually did a temporary unit. So we went to go rent one of the units and it and it did work well. Um but we ended up buying the unit because it was just cheaper to to buy
the unit than rent it. So uh we may just look at you know looking at some buying purchasing maybe two or three of those temporary units and we can always use it if a building goes down. So I mean they're not a whole lot of money. It's it's short money for Yeah. >> Right. So the the only cost would be if
it's you know if it's the natural gas or if it's the uh diesel is just filling it up and making sure it's running and >> obviously making sure the building's secure as well. So >> right >> and I appreciate what the you know historical commission is doing. Um I just again I I agree that I think if we
do one more year without he it just makes it that that much worse. So >> uh I personally like to see that in there and then at least we know it's it's secure. It's uh being maintained. it's not doing any any more damage than uh than what we'd like to see. Uh until we get a game plan and then once we get
the game plan next year, then I I think getting that report before us and getting everybody to the table to discuss, you know, what our options are and then we just we go from there. But I I think internally too if we if we can just talk to the administration um if they're because I I personally like to
see the the building, you know, be kept within the city. Um I I I think there might be a number of options that we can utilize to to make that work. I know space is a little tight with some departments. Um just kind of think outside the box. Maybe we want to relocate some departments uh to that
building and and have uh almost like a mixeduse where there's um you know there's a there's a public component to it and then there's uh some municipal uh departments in there. So I just you know house housing I I've mentioned my stance on that. And I know we we're working on housing all over the place and there's a
need for housing. I just I don't know that that that's what the Bank Street Armory should be. I think that it has just so much more potential than than just housing. That's my stance. So with that, I yield. >> If I may, I'd like to add one more component to this heating uh system. Um,
I'd like to see uh a professional company look at the fire alarm system that's in the building uh just to upgrade it temporarily so that um we're fully covered whether it
be uh just naturally run wires for now um a makeshift system in there. It's not occupied. Uh, but I would like to see an upgraded fire alarm system whereby it rings at the It does ring at fire department headquarters now, but I don't
I think it's a little obsolete. So, uh, I know the chief is sitting over there and grinding his teeth because he doesn't have a fire alarm system in that building. So, >> I'd like to help him out while we're talking about it. >> Would you like to weigh in on that? If >> you'd like to.
>> You're welcome to. And there's a seat right. I mean, we're fortunate, >> fire chief. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> No, that's okay. >> I was just introducing myself. Um, so I think that uh I agree with Glenn. I think um what we do in a lot of the larger buildings in the city is Fire
Wire. It's called they run it through the building and it uh it it provides fire protection uh essentially because it's not occupied. It's it's it's an acceptable alternative to putting in a more expensive system in. So, >> yeah. And I think well we're fortunate
now we're going into spring so we're going to have some nice warm weather for a while and it'll give us time to um logistically figure it out uh find out how much money we're going to need, see what kind of funding we can come up with and uh hopefully be good to go next
winter. Um what do you think is a reason what is you think is a reasonable time for us to come back to meet on on these subjects or on this subject? Well, I I guess I would say we should probably target maybe June July time frame once the grant comes and then at
that point maybe get an update on uh if the grant was awarded or not awarded. Uh and if it's not then maybe we have a conversation about um how we identify the other $30,000 uh to get that over so we can get out >> quickly. Maybe it's just a a resolution from this committee to the full council
to get an appropriation from stabilization uh so that we can go out to bid for that. >> Yeah. Because again, I mean, 35,000 is short money when you're talking. >> Can I just ask is the grant is it a reimburseable grant or >> the one that we're going
>> that you applied for? Yeah, >> we have to have 75% of the matching of the funds up front and then they reimburse the the >> okay the amount >> would they um I guess the reason I'm asking can can we stop the work? So, if we were to get an appropriation for it,
>> um, >> or because some grants will allow you to to start in advance, others say no, you can't have any work. Once you once you do work, then you own it. >> Since this would be utilizing a CPA grant, those grants require that you don't start the work before. >> Yeah.
>> Well, you can keep us surprised of um Yep. when that comes in and >> then we can move forward from that date. If I may, seeing we're looking at the grant and talking about the grants, I would I'm asking is the fire alarm and
the heating system is uh aside from that grant. We're going to continue looking at that without the grant money. Am I correct? >> Yeah. >> In stating that, right? >> We're going to we're going to dowards. I know that. I just wanted to clarify that so that there's no confusion. We're
going to move forward with heat and >> fire protection. >> Correct. Yes. Two separate issues, two separate financial >> wonderful >> tracks, so to speak. Yes. Um I don't want to keep Mr. Silver here longer than I have to. Um
I'm not sure >> when it comes to the parking garages. That's not part of your conversation. I don't really have anything to add to that. >> So, I do have a question. Um, if I if nobody minds because I know we're going to be talking about I know we're at not at the fire station yet, but it's
applicable um because of the historic things that need to be done for the repair of the fire station >> so center fire station. So, I recently learned that the police station has yellow brick that's identical to the
brick on the fire station that we can actually take that brick and use it on the central fire, which would save the city significant money moving forward. >> That's the hope. Um, >> so that was a great great catch, counselor,
and I did ask the architect, we're going to match those bricks to make sure that it is perfect. And if it does, if it is a perfect match, we'll palletize some because we're not going to use a lot of brick. It's only the ones that are cracked. The ones that are cracked, they'll just take the motor out and
replace it with a new with the one of those bricks. So, probably half a pallet we may look at if that matches the other bricks. Absolutely. >> So, would it make s and this is just me because this is how my mind works. Um, would it make sense? Okay, so we need a
half a pallet. Would it make sense to have a full pallet just in case down the road something happens, somebody crashes into the crashes into the building? Uh I don't know what, but some unforeseen thing happens and all of a sudden we need more bricks. >> Absolutely. So we'll have enough ads stock,
>> classify that as adstock as a pallet and then utilize that as necessary. >> We've been doing historically that's what we do. Uh DCM yard is full of bricks that have never been used. So we will palletize that, have that shrink wrapped, but that's an agreement that we have to work with the con the general
contractor that's demolishing that building. So that has to be something that's worked. >> So I've heard that I've been asked that the preservation society or uh some agency wants certain items from the
building. Um, one thing that nobody knows that I know is the entire building is considered hot. It's contaminated. Mhm. >> So, in order to get those bricks or those pieces or whatever anybody wants out of that building above and beyond
the bid to rem to demolish it is going to be an additional cost because that material is all considered hot. It's got to be cleaned. It's got to be cleaned according to D specs uh for um asbestous. Uh that cost money.
>> Um so I haven't had those discussions. We haven't picked the contractor yet. the bids are still out and so on and so forth. Um so just keep in mind that when we ask for these items um there is going to be a considerable upcharge
uh to decontaminate these items. Even though brick is not a porous item whereby the it's still going to be washed according. It can't leave there >> uh in our truck. It has to leave there in a protected truck to go to a protected site. uh all considered
hazardous waste. >> So at that point it would be which avenue is more cost effective. >> There you go. >> And once we know that we move forward in that direction. >> It may be cost effective just to buy a new block if we can get the exact match and and less expensive to do that. Uh
not always less expensive being the best avenue, but uh under these circumstances it may be. We'll have to we'll have to review that. Um the first thing is to determine whether the brick is actually usable over there. Um but there's a couple other items that people have
shown interest in uh from the building. Um getting them down, getting them packaged or getting them cleaned and getting D certification that we can take them uh and then getting the contractor to uh uh give us a quote that we're
going to be pleased with. Good. >> So when you say the bricks are contaminated, is it is it because there's uh asbestous um corking around it or is it like is it so the >> just as inside the building? >> Yes. >> Is it's so exposed?
>> So the building has asbestous in it. Some of it in the first floor or a lot of it in the first floor was removed when they started the building. So there's there's not much there >> uh if any. Um, there may be some spots of glue adhesive from the old tile. There may be some tile there that they
didn't get to. Um, it's in the roofing paper, uh, is one of the items. It's not so much in the glazing that I'm aware of. Uh, I didn't pay attention to the glazing too much, but the windows were replaced in the 80s, I believe. So, I don't know if the glazing in the window
itself is is considered hot, but there is other flooring material. there is um uh plaster and all those various items. So when you try to separate them from one another, it you can't it's it's
costly. So they take it down as a package deal, put it in a sealed container, sealed dump truck and and haul it away. Um the key element is to have the plan that D approves in order to do this, >> which is constantly spray water. We um
as far as the city is concerned, I will make sure that the city and it's already in the works, we have a uh independent third-party person that's going to be doing air quality management over there. Um that's a requirement. Um he's working for the city of For River. Uh he's done
that work for me before for the city and he does a a standup job. So, he's going to be doing it for the for the police station as well to ensure that um everything goes smoothly according to D regulations and that uh we don't have
any concerns when this is done. >> Okay. So, I understand now cuz I I was just getting confused. So, we're not doing any um cleanup prior to we're just going to basically So, so no mitigation. It's the whole building's coming down. >> It's an unsafe building. So, you can't
Yeah. You can't just go in and take asbestous like how you would normally do it. >> They just have to be creative on how they take that. And >> so everything's got demolished. >> Everything's going to get demolished. Yep. >> All right. >> This is um unfortunately it has to be this way because
>> uh we let the roof leak. >> All right. So, uh, just to a couple points, the preservation society requested, I think it was exclusively exterior components just for the city to save in general, including the brick. Um, regarding the
brick, the central police station, central fire station, district courts house, and the now gone post office. They were all constructed around the same time to specifically match each other. So, I'm hopeful that the bricks will actually uh match. It might be
maybe it's the sizing that might be different but it should be cut uh color texture and component should be similar. Um and since the center fire station is on the national register and it's received CPA funding all exterior work has to be done to secretary of interior
standards for historic preservation. So all the brick will have to match. So, it will ultimately come down to a cost determination of which is cheaper, cleaning the ones we have versus trying to find some that >> I agree with you and we're going to the goal is to make that happen. But there's
two things that's going to decide that. Um the first thing is will DP allow us to take those bricks and clean them and remove them from the site >> um as a separate um and then will the city be able to afford to do that through the contract.
This being an upcharge is going to be uh um quite extensive charge I'm assuming because it's time consuming and the contractor is going to get uh prevailent wage for this. So it could be costly and it may not be wise to do it. I I'm just
saying at this point in time I haven't got any figures yet. So we'll we'll make those determinations as we >> uh start my meetings closer together with the contractor and D. Okay. Um, do you feel comfortable with tableabling number three at this point?
>> I do. Motion to table. >> Second. All in favor? >> I >> I >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um, so number four was a resolution to convene with the administration and the director of city operations to present a definitive
action plan for the repair of the Pearl Street and Third Street parking garages referred on January 27th, 26. Um, so that's on the agenda, but um I would like to tonight, if nobody minds, just
address the Third Street parking garage for tonight um because I think we have more information on that and um it could be a more productive conversation. >> Absolutely, counselor. Um at this point,
Third Street is being designed at the end of this month. Um as we spoke several minute meetings ago. Um, it's in process right now. We're looking at um the end of this March. All the plans will be ready. We'll go out to bid and
then we because the building is going to be occupied, it's going to take a little longer than normal. Um, but we're looking at nine months of uh work going on to that. Once that building is up and running, we will be able to move the
folks that are in that open lot into that building. And then the next plan is trying to plan a secondary level at that stage. That's the talk that we've had internally. Some of the some that the plan for the third street that's going
to continue on. It's what we're going to do with the parking lot. >> We're going to have to have that designed. try to figure out what the next plan there is. So, in March, we'll be out to bid. Nine months later, Third Street will be up and running. We're going to work on uh the high and the
medium items that we talked about at the meetings. So, we're looking at close to $6,700 to that. >> Okay. So, I believe at if I'm not mistaken at the last meeting, I think it was in regard to the the parking garage. I think sometimes I get confused. It could be the fire station. You were
waiting for two reports that were supposed to be come back in two weeks. >> That's Pearl. That was Pearl. >> That was Pearl. Okay. So, >> um, so structurally, Third Street is good. >> Structurally, it's it's it's just
repairs that we need >> to repair the concrete. Um, a lot of the work has already been done in the past and now we're just ready to get the um items repaired and make that um building ready to go. >> Okay. Um, I'm going to I'm going to uh
defer to uh Council Kadine, but I would like to say as one counselor um that I think the sooner the administration sends down the request to bond to repair the Third Street garage, the better. Um,
I for one would p will push for that to happen. Um, because the sooner we have the ability to pay for it, the sooner it can get done. Um, it is a revenue source and something I just I think, you know,
is going to benefit the city and something we should move forward with sooner than later because it's already really later at this point in time. Council Kadim. >> Yeah. So, so my I guess my question and maybe my recollection is is wrong um
because I apparently took terrible notes because it doesn't clarify here. But so the January 27th meeting when we were discussing this, I I thought the appraisals were going to be back in two weeks for Pearl Street, which we're not talking about, and then I I thought the
third street garage, we were ready. We just pulled back on the construction documents not to go out to bid. Was that not the case? >> We did. What we did is we moved we moved ahead with the the pearl. >> We got that designed, ready to go. >> Those specifications have been put aside
until until we can determine with the um the appraisal. >> We're move at that point in time. We said we're going to move with the third street >> now. Third street is is ahead and we moved we're ready to go in March. >> Um so that's that's still in the works. So nothing's really changed since the
last time we met except it's just progressed a lot at this point. So the bid documents weren't ready at in January of 27. >> They were not. They were not. Those were the only reports that we had of the the feasibility condition. So we moved on one. We held Third Street back.
>> Once we met and we talked, the administration spoke and said, "We're going to move ahead with Third Street." And that's what uh Tai and Von the designer is looking at right now. >> Okay. So, and then in terms of when you said I forgot what how you just said it, but the uh two high priorities maybe. Is that
>> correct? So that would be um >> the third street garage and the parking lot. >> Yeah, I I got the phases here. I'm just trying to figure out um if it applied to Pearl or third. Again, I didn't take great notes, but there was uh number
one, I guess, make it safe for parking, right? Is that >> that's high the high that was the high um criteria. >> And then did that also require the rebar repairs on >> that's third. So that would be this that would be the medium one. Okay. >> So, that we had the high to move people.
We could literally move people in and under the high uh the high category. The medium was all that all that visible rebar, the the blown out concrete. And so, that's all going to be taken care of under this this um plan. >> So, the estimates we got with for third
street was 6.7 million, right? And 4.2 for for Pearl. Is that And then so obviously once we go out to bid, we'll figure out if those cost estimates are close in nature, right? So, I guess the question I would have is is why would we not or is is the administration opposed
to doing the 6.7 million for Third Street and just get that >> That's the one we're looking at. That's the one we're moving on. >> But the 6.7 was like for three three different phases, right? Well, >> I thought you said you wanted to do them in in phases, I guess. So, so what I'm trying to figure out is are we going to
do phases or are we just going to take care of it and just repair the entire thing which is would be my I guess preference >> it would. So, one of the things that we've done is we I talked to the to the engineers and they said listen pull what is you think is necessary out of the
first phase out of the phase one. So, you have the high the medium and then the low. We're going to be pulling some of that item into the medium and high so that we're capturing anything that we feel is necessary. Everything else is preventative maintenance that we're going to be able to maintain
continuously. >> So, we are getting everything that we're asking for and that's um that's all part of that. >> And so, the only thing is preventative maintenance. So, when we say preventative maintenance, that's just moving forward um painting and um
>> shoring up some of the walls maybe with cement or whatever it is. I'm I'm just making stuff up. >> Any basic any basic items that the facilities group will be able to touch base on and correct. But I guess the question is the what we're putting out for a bid and getting a a GC for it's
going to take care of all the repairs so that the preventative maintenance the assumption would be that we're only doing things maybe next year, right? To >> correct >> to make sure that the thing doesn't kind of come back into a situation where it's dilapitated again, right? So there's no major repairs that are going to be taking place.
>> There's no major repairs. We'll have the the uh garage inspected again to make sure that everything well I mean everything's warrantied pretty much for that one year. The following year we'd probably want to just start doing the preventive maintenance and making sure that we are >> getting everything that we're we're
asking for. Okay. >> If we don't do something like that counselors we're going to be back at this point at some point we we can't we can't go back anymore. This is these are priorities. So when you uh so when's the expectation for the bid?
>> So at the end of this at the end of March, >> we'll get specs uh we'll put that out to bid. Let's just say four weeks, five weeks to get that ball rolling. And then >> so out to bid in out to bid in April >> in April.
>> And then um probably looking at like a mid May, June time time frame. >> Mid and then nine months later >> and then Okay. So, it's a ninemonth >> nine month >> project. And then how many spaces do we reopen
there? >> See, so I have 294 spaces to include. Well, so 264 274 spaces that we have available once we
once we get everything up and running. >> So it opens but it doesn't open up 274, right? That's a total of 274. >> It'll be total of spaces that we have. >> Yeah. So how many does that open up for the garage? What do we currently have open now? >> We have open
>> We closed off 120 to segregate from our top level. >> Yep. Uh we have right now 174 spaces available. That'll that'll give us 174 spaces. >> Okay.
And then the the goal for the the at grade parking would be what what what's the going out to bid for a feasibility or to construction construct the parking garage? >> Well, that would be the the plan at this point. We're looking at just getting a
feasibility of what it would be to repair or to add another level or to or what's the next plan going on. So >> So I was actually talking about the the lot across the street. Correct. Oh, >> correct. That's what I'm talking about. So we >> When you said add add a level, I thought
you meant add a level to the uh >> No, no, no. We that that that was never designed for something like that. It would be probably another level up um for another level potentially like we have >> we have a primary care >> primary care that would be something that's been talked about or if we were
want to get more creative and more financial um as we studied his historically in 2020 a $17 million garage was added in Brockton. So >> do we want to go that route? That's what we're trying to figure out what the next
steps are. But primarily the first step that we're looking at is getting this ready. By getting this ready, we can move people over to start doing something at that point. >> So, I know when we met, I forget, I don't know, was it two months ago with the mayor? >> I would say two months ago, three
months. >> Uh I know it was mentioned in that meeting um doing a a parking analysis or there was a parking analysis that was done. Um, so I guess what is the the need for parking and I get how are we
tying that that report in to see to justify whether or not because I I think the need is going to is going to have to really drive what we want to see in terms of it's just one level or multiple multiple levels, right? And just do that costbenefit analysis. So I'm just curious, have have we looked at that and
can we I don't have a copy of that that report. Would you be able to >> we will >> get it to us? uh part of part of the quarterly report. I'll we'll be able to update all this that we're talking about and give you something in that fashion broken down and then we can add whatever
documents you're looking for. >> Okay. >> All right. So, I I guess right now I'm good for Third Street. So, I just want to make sure that, you know, obviously we're still we're still working on construction documents going to be out to bid for April
um with probably a mid May to June start on construction for that. >> And that's going to be nine months. >> And so with that with that work being done, was the garage still going to be able to be open or is it going to have to be closed completely? >> So, the contractor definitely would love
to have the garage to itself, right? But financially and trying to find parking for everyone, that's not going to happen. >> But they'll do what they'll do is they'll segregate certain areas and work from there. Obviously, they'll try to work on the top levels, try to open those up, and once they're open those
up, then they'll just stop moving folks and start segregating that. They they they're going to do everything safe as much as they can. So that's and there will be no safety issues. >> Okay, I yield. >> Mr. pathway.
>> I'm good. >> You're good. >> Okay. Um I think my request would be you go back you go to the administration and ask them to please our next meeting is March 24th, send down a request for the bond so we can get this going
because it doesn't matter when you bond. Yeah. It matters when you start the work and need to pay. I I'll make a motion that we send a letter from this committee to the administration to send down uh a bond authorization uh for the cost of the the project
>> once once the construction bids come in. >> I'll second that motion. >> All in favor? >> I >> I motion to table this item. Uh yeah, I just want No, I just want to on record just so requesting the uh
parking uh report or analysis that was completed for the city with with that. I'll make a motion to adjurnn. I mean adjurnn. I'm sorry. Table. >> I knew what you meant. I'll >> I'd like I'd like to adjurnn. Sorry. >> I'll second that. All in favor. >> It's been a long week.
>> Uh I will all in favor. >> Oh my god, >> she gave me the look. I know >> she's not done. >> I I asked her to postpone this. She said no. So, we'll adjourn. >> Okay. Number five, uh communication
director of city operations regarding inspection of central fire station. Um at this point, we're going to ask the chief to come back to the table. Um I know you do have uh Well, I'll let you go first. Can you update us on what has
transpired where we are >> the facts? >> So center fire station uh the designers RTA uh the OPM is ACG drawn will be complete by the end of
March. The actual drawings the bid documents will be completed by the end of April and ready to bid. Uh, and that's really due to somewhat the additional scope that we added. They tried all they could to make sure that
we met the March time frame. And I mean, Chief and I were we were trying to push them as fast as we can. But at this point, we if we push anybody too fast, we're not going to get a decent uh report coming coming out. So, April will
be the uh the end of April, the report, the actual drawings and report will be ready for uh bidding. One of the things that we plan on doing, and councelor uh Khadim, you you you brought up a great point, is we're going to be doing the facade work. Um and I'll
just skip to that facade work really quick. Today, we actually re received the plans for the for bidding for the facade work from Civitech. Um, in saying that, one of the concerns that you had is we're going to have two separate um categories of windows and
styles. And what what we're going to do with RTA is we're going to make the windows under that spec a proprietary window. Which means that whatever is specified by the Civitech for the facade windows, the front side will have to be
the same as the front side so that we have one system around the whole building. and that that uh we normally do not like to use proprietary and in government pro uh projects, but in this case we're going to be requesting from the city council that to that for that
to be proprietary. And for that we have to ask in a letter form that that's one of the things that we'll do under the bidding. >> So I I guess from I'm sorry. Um so staying with the April uh construction documents so what
what additional um items were added what scope of service >> so we added the windows and the pointing >> okay and the and I guess I wasn't looking necessarily for proprietary windows. I was just looking to get the windows uh
put in. So the proprietary window, so the windows going in front were were more historic. Is that is that what they were looking for? >> It's already passed the historic folks and it's already been deemed approved. >> So just it's just a technicality just to show that whoever bids on that can't
>> put something that they want. It has to be typical to what the fraud. So >> right, >> it's just a little technical technicality that we have under Mass General Law. Do we know how much more expensive that is or? >> No, it really it really is not going to be anything crazy because we've already
speced out the front. So, we'll have an idea of what the what it will be. >> And what >> So, you're just not going to accept any um any changes from from that deviation. So, if the if the GC comes back and says, "Hey, listen. We could potentially do a a window that's very similar in terms of what has been speced out,
>> right? >> Would you give us the the ability to do this window?" You're you're saying no, we're going solely with the window. That's >> Well, I mean, that's that's something that I think is is safe for us by >> we whatever we have in the front is going to be approved for the for the rest of the building. >> Mhm.
>> So, um again, so a lot of that if we if we deem that we want some we want to get a less expensive window, I I don't recommend it, but I think it's something that we we need to make sure that uh historically moving forward that though all that entire building is the same.
>> Yep. Okay. Um so the so the work that's being done the going out to bid in April is for the actual inside right not the >> everything specified going one GC for the entire
>> one GC >> yeah we we um >> Al and I met after the last city council meeting you expressed your concerns I think there was a general consensus from the council that that was >> their uh that was for uh preference, right?
>> And so we discussed it and Al's concern was it's going to delay the project. But we we got together, I spoke with the house captains, with the firefighters and and said, "Listen, we've waited. Let's wait a little longer to make sure we do this right and do it the best way for the city." And and so
>> so that was kind of uh Alan, I decided that, you know, we heard we heard what you said. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, no. I I appreciate that cuz I I think it's going to be just a easier project to manage that way with one GC and then hopefully if you get a good GC then it's you you get a good relationship because it's going they're going to be in there for a while. So,
>> correct. >> Um so that's a good thing. Okay. So, the entire thing will be out to bid uh by April. >> Correct. >> Okay. Well, the end of April, so May. >> It'll be the end of April, 1st of May. Uh the other thing com the other
component to that is under Mass General or any project that's over 1.5 you have to have an OPM >> OPM. >> Um and what we've talked about I talked to the OPM is that they're also going to be uh observing the facade project as well.
>> So that'll give us both eyes and making sure that all the materials are typical and meeting all the criteria. >> Yep. So you're just doing a change of scope. >> Change of scope. >> Okay. Um
and and getting back to updating the asbestous, uh we had the asbestous um tank mini tank removed from the basement. Um a report went out. Uh pipe any pipe insulation that was exposed
with the wrap that was repaired. Uh we did some background uh pre and post air sampling. Everything came up clean uh and we're ready for the project. So when the project kicks in, the any asbesus that is part of the project will be removed out of out of
that phase. Uh and then they'll continue with the with the actual project and a lot of materials didn't come back as as best. So that was great. Um but it's all we have we have all the uh engineers and and um and reports all set up.
>> So the boiler that was removed, was that the one that was already taken out but left down there? that >> it was a little small expansion tank like that. That's all it was. Someone took it out. There wasn't any fryable asbestous because they just removed the union >> and that was it was just left there and
any type of residual they just cleaned up. >> Okay. And so that was removed from the building. >> That was removed. >> Okay. >> We're also working um with the company that's doing the auction, the city auction for the surplus property. We have all the items in the basement
listed on that. Um, and then >> noises, >> right? Uh, exactly. >> Too soon. >> And then, nope. Uh, all good. And then, uh, we'll work with facilities to make sure that gets cleared out. Um, assuming there'll be nobody interested in that
stuff, but once we know that >> computer stuff is that there's old SCBAs, there's old like Okay. >> Yeah. So, I believe past chiefs were under the impression that anything purchased with a grant at any time just could never be gotten rid of. you had to
hold on to it forever and we know that that's not the case. So, we're going through the proper avenues to make sure that uh that that stuff got disposed of. So, >> all right, >> um so the original dollar amount um I believe we were we were up to what 3.2
or 3.7 million for for the does is that still holding? I'm going to refer to um the CFO on that. But right now we have 3.4 in the in the in the plan uh capital plan for that. >> Yeah. Which come which um is coming
which um yeah EMS is is paying that bond. >> But that was my question. Are we still in that price range? >> Yeah. >> Have you gotten a cost estimate yet >> or we I know that they're redoing the documents. I'm just curious is is it
close to the three? >> I will get you I will get you that answer. Um but it it they did say that they would be able to m uh to work that in. We're not doing all the building as a pointing. There will be a percentage wise that we're doing. >> Um and just when we talked about bricks
and I I don't really think it's a lot of bricks that are cracked, right? There will be some because there's some expansion here and there, but there's really not a lot. >> But uh we'll get you we'll get you a dollar amount on that. >> Yeah. I I I guess I don't really need it because I we'll we'll find out once we go out to bid what the actual number is.
I was just curious if they've done a cost estimate. I know you you changed the scope of service in there, but I was just curious if >> if it's still within or you did you have to do value engineering or anything like that? >> Not yet. >> Okay. >> Not yet. >> So I guess I always go back to So the
building is structurally sound. >> Yes. So, we had we had um a structural engineer take a quick peek at that and they're going to write a report from the basement. There's a slight a little bit spalding of some concrete. They didn't think it was that big of an issue, but
they're going to write a report on that. >> Okay. >> Oh, is that is that with the apparatus? >> Yes. Is that >> correct? Okay. >> Yep. >> Because I guess that's always a concern, the condition of the building. Is it worth the investment? Because if it isn't, then we need to take a different avenue. So, >> so somehow in the past, they've already
shored a lot of that. There's some a lot of there's a lot of columns there and they anyway they've concreted a lot of the the pillars. So there is some a lot of protection already. They just wanted we just wanted to make sure that any of that concrete spalding is okay.
>> Yeah. Because there was actually he has it right there. I have the 2018 uh study that was done that the CPA paid $35,000 for. And in here it identified, they have great pictures. Um, I mean,
you can really see underneath the floor and the ceiling in the basement, the the stuff that was exposed, the deteriorated deteriorated concrete, etc. >> So, that's what you're speaking of, correct? >> Okay. >> We brought someone in to take a quick peek at that
>> and they're going to write a report. >> Yep. Yeah. There was nowhere in here. I mean, they identified a lot of things. Um, but there was nowhere in here that they implied that they didn't feel um things couldn't be repaired.
>> Correct. >> So, how soon Yeah, maybe you said it and maybe my mind wandered because it happens. Um, how soon do you think again if moving forward with this is the uh financially the proper thing to do? And
um how soon do you think we can finally get moving on this? >> Should be June as well, right? About 30 days. >> It'll be about June. >> Okay. >> It'll be about June. >> So when we meet in June, we'll just we'll have this on the agenda as well then. And I'll have and I'll have
something that we can all refer to as what what we talked about. I'll update I'll update what I have here so that we have hard copy of of observing that. >> Okay. Excellent. >> And I'm assuming you're going to have filed sub bits on the project. >> Yes. >> Right.
So that may just drag out the bid a little bit. Right. Probably a month and a half maybe. >> It'll probably be a couple weeks. Not Yeah. Not that crazy, but couple weeks. >> Okay. How I don't even know what made this pop in my head, but how many
working showers do you have in that fire station at the present time? >> Uh there are one, two, three, four, five, I believe. >> And they're all operational. >> Well, so so the shower room that has one shower
in it. Yep. >> Right. There's actually three stalls. Only one works. Okay. Okay. >> But there are four other showers functioning in officer's rooms in the building. So, um, so as far as I'm concerned that that's four four or five
working showers, I'm not sure exactly. I think there's five. >> Okay. Because I I just think about if everybody's standing in the line waiting by one by one, that's not a good that's not a good thing.
>> No. No, I agree. And the reality is like our Stanley Street station has seven firefighters and it has one stall. >> That station has uh four, five, eight, eight total and it has four or five stalls. So, I think
that my concern would be more with getting Stanley Street more shower stalls, but that wasn't the route that uh that that meeting went. So, >> Mr. Hathaway, >> you're good. Um >> just council >> I guess in terms of the uh showers is
are those going to be repaired during the process? So okay >> that whole shower room's getting replaced >> right. >> Oh yeah totally. >> So >> I think there's going to be six shower stalls added because there's a female shower and a male shower. >> Correct. >> So and the reason I asked that question is because at that point we're only
talking about a couple of more months. >> Correct. >> With I guess one of the shower facilities only having one, right? but still having access to four other showers or three, whatever the number. >> Four or five actually. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> All right.
That I yield. >> Okay. Um if there's nothing else, I would entertain a motion to table. >> Motion to table. >> Second. All in favor? >> I. >> And now you >> motion your favorite pot. >> All right. >> I second. All in favor?
>> I meeting is adjourned. My over hey, pain. Hey, hey, hey, hey.