##VIDEO ID:XGncJuYD6Ig## uh it's Wednesday November 13 2024 this is the Shaker Lane Elementary School uh building committee uh we're here to uh vote on an option to be submitted to the msba for the schematic design I'm going to turn it over to Merle thank you so for members of the public who may be watching this who are not necessarily familiar with the project we will go briefly through why we need a new Shaker Lane this presentation will be available for download on the website shortly so people can read this at their Leisure but these are the main reasons this is not an exhaustive list and then we'd like to show a few photos of the conditions inside of the buildings uh mostly issues with there's not enough classrooms the classrooms that they have are too small there's a lot of class rooms and offices that don't have Windows or are otherwise not suitable for an ideal educational situation the kitchen's too small there's food storage in the loading dock area because there's not room in the kitchen um this is you know again a short list of all of the issues with the building all right so getting into it a reminder of if people were not at the town meeting we went over the estimated cost of the project uh we were looking at three different options and the total project cost was going to range between 92.2 million to 104.2 million uh this is a large number so to put it in context this is a comparison with six of the most recent elementary school projects that have been done through the msba the other six projects these are estimates estimates that we're done at the end of schematic design we are not quite at schematic design yet that will be our next set of estimates but it sort of allows you to make a comparison and see that this really is how much schools cost and if you look at the cost per square foot we are right in the middle of the pack and then if you account for escalation the earliest project here is New Bedford back in December of 2023 and in the past year almost a year the escalation has been around $50 a square foot so if you add 50 to those older projects uh we're even more in the middle of the path looking pretty good in terms of the cost per square foot so a little bit of context on that for you and then I'll turn it briefly over to Steve to talk about tax impacts so the information is the same as as what was presented at town meeting right now still looking at the three options as we just mentioned 92 to $104 million looking for a range for an msba reimbursement somewhere around $30 million so the net cost of the town could run anywhere from 60 to 75 million as the town places its debt the highest impact is in the first year and right now we're estimating that first year tax impact to be anywhere from $1400 to $1,800 depending on which project is selected um after we narrow down this option and do a couple more things as far as construction we hope to have a tax impact C lat up on the town's website sometime early January of 2025 um looking to place the final Bond sometime in FY 29 so it's still a long time out okay so getting into the preferred option the site selection and design subcommittee looked at this evaluation criteria to rank each of the three options we were looking at this was a list that was approved by the full SBC it's very similar to the list that was used when we were uh selecting the initial six sites back several months ago so the results of that survey are shown here every single member of the subcommittee voted and assigned a value of one two or three to each one of these options one being worst three being the best they had the ability to assign ties if they felt that two options achiev something equally well and the overall scores were in last place was option 2.1 the ad Reno at 177 in second place at 371 we have option 3.2 which is new construction at the lower field and in the first selection option the top selection is option 3.1 which is new construction at the upper field so this is the recommendation based on the rankings by the subcommittee does anybody from the subcommittee want to say anything about these results if I can just mention briefly I mean there's obviously a very very close between two and three so would you could you guys go through maybe some like really quick points of like what the major differences are between those yes absolutely so let me see if I can zoom in here kind of more of like the functional educational level um obviously the different but yes so when we were evaluating these options the shape of the building is still pretty diagrammatic at this point uh we're not we're intentionally not showing the interior layout because the interior can change it's going to change based on future conversations with the district and what they need and how things sort of pan out so this was really about selecting where on the site the project should go if there's things that we like from this we can incorporate that into the top selection as we move forward so it's more about just site organization than about anything educational uh the big difference is in 3.1 we have a really nice organization where everything from the uh the major spaces surrounding the main entry which would be the cafeteria the gymnasium maybe the media center could be available for public use outside of school hours everything from those spaces to the South would be available for Community use so it makes it really easy for people to drive in and access the fields really clear site circulation and really nice separation between uh public use parking versus school parking and then in option 3.2 on the lower field this option due to the constraints by the wetlands setbacks this sort of has to bleed out on that site and sort of encroach on the upper field a little bit which takes away one of those uh baseball or softball fields so when looking at this option it sort of splits the site in half we have a field up in the top Corner which is separated from whatever Fields go down here in the lower corner and it's just not as nice circulation for people using it outside hours so that's that's really the main difference between these two so for a 3.1 you get a longer runway for the queuing to happen as opposed to 3.2 where it's a little more compact you're getting to the building sooner which for many reasons is it's beneficial to have that longer Runway away from from the road yeah get the congestion out of the neighborhood yeah and all all all of these options are two story correct correct yes 3.1 also isolated the school a little more so that uh you know during the day during operation uh we we wouldn't have people behind the school Etc so it just you know that was one of the points I considered when when deciding on on 31 or 3.2 okay so then the one thing that the subcommittee did not vote on or did not incorporate into their ranking was the cost estimates so this slide sort of has all the information here that you need cost information and the scores of the three different options so I'd like to open it up to discussion for all the members of the SBC I mean the range between 3.1 and 3.2 it's not that far off with the cost Ren addition yeah it's not it's there's not a huge difference between those two options so if we have buildings more functional more isolated you know it can't be worth that extra what is it green on the2 yeah oh je mean yeah the reimbursements are going to be similar between the two as well right because it's a brand new building so we get as much reimbursement and those things as we can so did you have any earlier slid some of the diff the points in terms of where um the slide before that showed that I'm just curious how they you know because they both scor pretty closely so uh is that the table on the the left should we Zo table well there's not much that's I was just curious how um the site was on the upper field was a a clear winner yeah because that's really the primary difference between the two options really is location is the site so that's what you're saying that Prem important and the scoring s of demonstrates that that was the case because everything else General and yeah sustainability would be essentially the same so so it's just again a little further away from the three and essentially say it's the same price but thism 1.2 million but in this case and as we end into schematic design the next phase we'll continue to massage and scrub and make sure that we're allocating properly and not running wild with the site so it's really going to be contained for the purpose of the community for the purposes of the for the school as well so yeah one one thing that happened between the last set of estimates that we got and the set of estimates is that the overall cost came down and I think that's a reflection of as we go through this we find out more information so we're more confident in the numbers and also we're looking for ways to save and ways to make things more efficient so whichever option gets chosen 3.1 or 3.2 through schematic design we're going to continue to look for ways to make it more more value like more value per dollar I don't think I have any more questions anyone else I'm good I I I I have a question it goes to Steve V's slide on taxes um the um estimated first year tax amount is based on a home value of $672,000 is that the assessed value or the um the real the real value that's the assessed value St assessed yep okay thank you any other questions no you know do we want to have public comment before we vote or you know how does that work we could do that Steve I don't know if there are any members to the public are are there anybody online no you can ask no she's is there we have somebody is there anybody online no no the okay okay well I could say that uh if anybody from the public watches this recording later they can go to the website and there's a link that says has click here to make your voice heard and so if you do have comments you can get those to us that way good idea thanks Marilyn all right is there motion to um approve uh option what is it 3.2 31 31 3.1 upper field just a upper field in about it sure I'll make a motion to um uh support the recommendation of the design U subcommittee to move forward with the upper field option second second okay we'll do a roll call vote uh stepen nudy hi Ryan yes Michelle yes Kelly hi and Steve Moore yes the motion carries um I think that's it any other uh any other comments or questions is there a motion to adjourn move second okay roll call Vote stepen nudy Yes Ryan yes Michelle yes Kelly yes Steve Moore yes and uh enjoy your tour Stacy as well thanks everyone yes thanks Ste thank you Ste bye bye by see how I can get out of this thanks Judy