WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=Y442uWLq8so

NOTE
MEETING SECTIONS:

Part 1 (Video ID: Y442uWLq8so):
- 00:00:11: Meeting Called to Order, Agenda and Public Comment
- 00:01:07: Public Comment: Dave McManis, Littleton Youth Baseball
- 00:02:27: Public Comment: Kathleen Leonard, Abutter Concerns
- 00:03:20: Approval of Minutes from February 18th Meeting
- 00:05:11: Discussion and Update on Project Budget
- 00:09:10: Schedule Discussion and Evaluation of Options
- 00:14:08: Gilbane Presents Project Schedule Options
- 00:20:28: Committee Questions on Schedule Revisions and Options
- 00:25:04: School Committee Input on Move-in Timeline
- 00:30:14: Focusing on Summer Completion Timeline
- 00:31:35: Updates on Landscape Repairs and Field Use
- 00:37:39: Design Team Updates, Permitting and Traffic Study
- 00:41:42: Geothermal Well Discussion and Site Exploration
- 00:47:19: Corey Requirements and Team Updates
- 00:48:24: Executed Funding Agreement and Contract Amendment
- 00:49:18: Consideration and Approval of Studio G Amendment 9
- 00:52:28: Discussion of Studio G Amendment 7 (Credit)
- 00:56:23: Approval of Amendment 7 Credit and Other Business
- 00:59:27: Project Invoices and Approval of Studio G Invoice 30
- 01:00:50: Next Meeting Dates and Schedule Recommendation Discussion
- 01:02:33: Motion to Adjourn


Part: 1

1
00:00:11.280 --> 00:00:27.840
Uh, Peter, do you want to uh take us uh on a tour of the agenda? >> Certainly, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Uh, good evening, committee members and all others who are joining the meeting. >> Thank you. Let me just move my screen

2
00:00:27.840 --> 00:00:44.719
around a little bit. Okay. So, hopefully you can see my screen. There's the agenda. I'll be flipping back and forth from a couple of other attachments just for presentation purposes. Um, you'd like, Mr. Chairman, we can go

3
00:00:44.719 --> 00:01:07.280
into item two if there's any public comment. >> Uh, I have one person, Dave McManis. Dave, you should be able to talk. >> Yes. Hi. Could you hear me? >> Yes.

4
00:01:07.280 --> 00:01:24.479
>> Great. So, I I don't have any specific >> Dave. Name and address for the record, please. >> Oh, yes. Thank you. Uh Dave McManus, Three Harvest Lane, Littleton. So, I'm here tonight on behalf of Littleton Youth Baseball and Softball,

5
00:01:24.479 --> 00:01:38.240
uh who I have the pleasure of being the president of. Um, I don't have any specific comments other than to introduce myself to this committee. Uh, I've been, you know, in communications with others around this

6
00:01:38.240 --> 00:01:56.079
project. Uh, and as you might imagine, our league's interest in this project, most importantly, is around the fields. uh and in kind of in two parts. One being the existing fields which outside of the schools and the students at

7
00:01:56.079 --> 00:02:11.520
Shaker Lane, I would say we're the major users of uh and our spring season is quickly approaching. So, it's my our interest as it relates to the existing fields and their availability

8
00:02:11.520 --> 00:02:27.120
uh as well as the new fields when those come around to design and ultimate build. So again, I'm here to, you know, observe and potentially comment. Um, but I just thought I would introduce myself up front.

9
00:02:27.120 --> 00:02:44.640
>> Appreciate it. Thanks, Dave. >> Thank you, Dave. And, uh, okay, Kathleen Leonard. >> Hi. Um, I'm an abutter at 37 Shaker Lane. Um, and I just wanted to introduce

10
00:02:44.640 --> 00:03:00.000
myself. Um, some of you may already know me. I think several of you do. Um, I'm just going to ask that as you go through the agenda today, um, if you could keep in mind the abutters and, um, address any of the issues and how it will relate

11
00:03:00.000 --> 00:03:17.879
to us. We have not heard anything from anybody since November. So, um, we're very anxious to to know how we're being included in all of this. So, that's all I have to say. Thank you.

12
00:03:20.159 --> 00:03:37.440
Well, let me let me talk to Kathleen's comment. Um, until we get uh the designer fully on board, you won't hear anything from anybody. And that's pretty much what this uh meeting is about to get uh get uh project uh budgets

13
00:03:37.440 --> 00:04:03.439
approved. Go ahead, Peter. >> Okay. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess that's moving on, excuse me, to the agenda item three, which is the previous meet minutes from the February 18th meeting. Um, I do I

14
00:04:03.439 --> 00:04:18.079
will put them on the screen. And I did notice I had a typographical error down here. And I'll zoom in on um item seven. I missed a comma and added an extra digit. So I will make that correction uh

15
00:04:18.079 --> 00:04:37.600
with respect to that number. Uh but beyond that, Mr. Chairman and committee members, uh looking for um a motion or edits or any recommendation on the approval of the minutes from February 18th, 2026.

16
00:04:37.600 --> 00:04:54.240
Are there any questions? >> Go ahead. >> Motion to approve as amended. >> Is there a second? >> Kelly second. >> Okay. All in favor? Kelly. >> Kelly clenchy. I. >> Sean.

17
00:04:54.240 --> 00:05:11.120
>> Connor. I. >> Uh Steve. >> Steve. I. >> Jim. >> Jim Dugen. I >> And Steve Moore. Yes. Motion carries. Thanks. >> Okay. Um Mr. Mr. Chairman, I know committee members, we have number four is schedule, number five is budget. If

18
00:05:11.120 --> 00:05:27.280
you don't mind because number four might be a little lengthy in discussion whereas five may not be. If I could go to the budget first and I'll scroll over to the presentation

19
00:05:27.280 --> 00:05:44.960
with respect to the budget and give me a minute to use my keyboard. So, I did um I did take the budget. Whoops. Excuse me. Zoom in a little bit. Zoom out. Um I did take the budget and I made

20
00:05:44.960 --> 00:05:59.680
the edits as mentioned during the last meeting to reflect the values um that were mentioned by Mr. Benudi regarding the values that were decreased. I will just quickly scroll to

21
00:05:59.680 --> 00:06:14.720
the bottom line then we can go back. So the revis the revised bottom line in accordance with uh Mr. Venudi's values that were provided and discussed at the last meeting in accordance with the town

22
00:06:14.720 --> 00:06:31.440
meeting that was approval. U the overall project budget is the 99 million 164951. I can go through the various uh areas that were edited. I do have um the

23
00:06:31.440 --> 00:06:46.319
screenshot that was provided to me from Mr. Venui if it's helpful. Um beyond that, that's the budget update. I did enter one second and I don't mean to scroll to make people dizzy, but I'll just scroll

24
00:06:46.319 --> 00:07:05.360
up to the top. Um, I did enter in the values that were approved on the notice to proceed values. For example, I will highlight them here. Back in January, there was a f 50,000.

25
00:07:05.360 --> 00:07:20.639
Why my highlighters not working? I don't know. But, um, one second. 50. I'm going to do this. I'll do this. $50,000 was approved as a notice to proceed

26
00:07:20.639 --> 00:07:37.440
for the OPM back on January 21st. I did add that. Scrolling down, I did the same for the designer during design development, $150,000. Again, the January 21st meeting. And

27
00:07:37.440 --> 00:07:53.440
then scrolling down, 200,000 for the notice of proceed for the construction manager also at the January 21st meeting. Those numbers have been added and as the other contracts

28
00:07:53.440 --> 00:08:11.360
uh should they when they get signed, I will execute and enter those values into the budget as well. So beyond that, I did enter also under the um designer um the $150,000 invoice that is under

29
00:08:11.360 --> 00:08:27.360
consideration for tonight, which is an invoice number 30 from the architect studiog for services uh performed during January and February in accordance with the notice to proceed. those entries along with those edits that were

30
00:08:27.360 --> 00:08:45.360
mentioned um incorporate the revisions to the budget um and I'll stop for a minute asking have any questions asked but I will go to the bottom line if that's helpful. So these are the values at this moment in

31
00:08:45.360 --> 00:09:10.560
time and I open any questions if there are any. I'll defer to Steve if you have any questions, Steve. >> No, I'm good. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Steve, for those updates last last month. Appreciate it. >> Thank you, Peter.

32
00:09:10.560 --> 00:09:25.839
>> Okay. Um, we can always come back to the budget committee members if there's questions that come up during the course of the meeting. Um, I'll go on back to the agenda to item four with respect to the schedule. Um, again, I'll go to my

33
00:09:25.839 --> 00:09:43.760
slideshow slide deck here. Um, I'll I'll start off with kind of a a brief narrative to this screen and I'll zoom in a little bit. Over the course of the last um month or so,

34
00:09:43.760 --> 00:10:00.399
the OPM Turner Townson Hury, the designer, Studio G, the construction manager, Gil Bane, we've gotten together no less than on a weekly basis, preparing the schedule, preparing what we can do to deliver the project to get

35
00:10:00.399 --> 00:10:16.079
all of us in the queue of how we can uh prepare a master schedule uh to deliver the project. Uh we've had several discussions about what the Gilbane team had potentially offered during the interview process as

36
00:10:16.079 --> 00:10:34.160
an alternative schedule. We're kicking that idea around. There are still it's still under evaluation at this time about what's the best course. We haven't fully um finalized our thinking, but we

37
00:10:34.160 --> 00:10:51.440
also want some input from the town, the building committee, and of course, we also have a question into the MSBA to make sure some of the options that we are preparing are in are acceptable to the MSBA as well. So, a few things

38
00:10:51.440 --> 00:11:07.120
tonight and if you don't mind, I'm going to call this an open discussion. nothing is um solidified at this moment. We're collecting information and we want to finalize our thoughts and bring forth to

39
00:11:07.120 --> 00:11:24.079
the committee a recommendation at the next building committee meeting which will be on the uh the 15th of April. So just a few items of discussion and I'll turn it over to Trip and John from Gilbane who can provide some additional

40
00:11:24.079 --> 00:11:41.360
information from their perspective as as the construction manager and of course Studio G as well because they have a lot of activities that have to be incorporated into the schedule particularly during the design phase. However, um I'll zoom in a little bit

41
00:11:41.360 --> 00:11:57.600
just to give you some thoughts. These are my quick notes. Again, just quick notes. Some items for discussion as we evaluate the options of which schedule to choose, which alternative schedule to choose.

42
00:11:57.600 --> 00:12:12.639
There will be early bid packages to help, I'll use the word, accelerate the project schedule. In other words, get the contractors some of the trades starting early while the design continues to to be finalized.

43
00:12:12.639 --> 00:12:29.440
As we build this project, uh we want to talk about the school's academic calendar as we near the end of the building project. How does that affect the academics of the of the school and of course the school department with particular attention if we end up going

44
00:12:29.440 --> 00:12:45.040
with a particular option known as option one. We could possibly again under evaluation maybe turn the building over mid year um finish the project in the fall of 2028.

45
00:12:45.040 --> 00:13:00.240
Prepare the building for move in and potentially yet to be determined. Move the school in over the winter break of December 2028. And then of course we want to talk about if there's any

46
00:13:00.240 --> 00:13:18.480
uh influences regarding an early delivery of the schedule if does it affect this the town's bonding or funding capacity with any arrangements they have with the financial matters. I'll stop for a minute. Um I'll let Trip

47
00:13:18.480 --> 00:13:34.560
uh from Gilbane and John from Gilbane offer some thoughts on the schedule. Uh we're we're allowing or Gil Bane is preparing this schedule. Um so I'm going to let them say a few things and I'll

48
00:13:34.560 --> 00:13:51.200
zoom in a little bit but I can zoom out and move down the list if you want. I guess before I turn it over to Gil Bane are there any initial questions from the committee? >> Sean Peter. Yeah, Trip, I think why don't you

49
00:13:51.200 --> 00:14:08.160
introduce uh some of your your thoughts and then we can have Studio G offer anything then we'll open it up to discussions. Um again, open discussion, open thoughts on the on the on the >> considerations here. Thank you,

50
00:14:08.160 --> 00:14:24.880
>> Peter. Can you hear me? All right. I just want to make sure my audio is working. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh you have your hand up. want to field John's question first or >> I'll let you speak first. I didn't realize you're going to present so I'll let you do that first. I don't want to

51
00:14:24.880 --> 00:14:41.199
uh ask questions until you you you kind of get your chance to speak. >> No, no problem. Um thanks Peter and good evening everybody. So as Peter stated we've been kind of analyzing three different options which are here shown

52
00:14:41.199 --> 00:14:56.079
just graphically. Uh hopefully this is kind of user friendly just to uh disseminate the information in a little more easier manner. Um so there's three options working from top down. The first option which is at the top of this

53
00:14:56.079 --> 00:15:13.279
graphic is the baseline RFP schedule which still reflects the phase one building completion in August of 29 with phase 2 demo and landscaping completion in December of 29. So that's still the baseline RFP schedule. The one update we

54
00:15:13.279 --> 00:15:28.560
made as a team to that schedule is just the design deliverable schedule has been updated to reflect the current design schedule. So those blue bars have been updated based on where the project team as team is at currently.

55
00:15:28.560 --> 00:15:43.920
Transitioning down to option one which is one of the alternative schedules that we developed over the last couple weeks. The second schedule is essentially our alternative schedule that we developed and presented in our RFP response and

56
00:15:43.920 --> 00:15:59.920
interview but has been updated to reflect the current design schedule. So the logic that we had developed in that alternative schedule remains unchanged. All we're doing is shifting and updating based on where the design development

57
00:15:59.920 --> 00:16:17.160
schedule currently lies. of that option that you see here is that fade build completing up trip

58
00:16:17.440 --> 00:16:41.360
>> inve 28 so it's a few months I went off video everybody hopefully that may help my connectivity I apologize. >> Yeah. >> Help at all or no? >> It does. Can you go back a few words? >> Yeah. I I apologize everybody. So again,

59
00:16:41.360 --> 00:16:57.040
option one, uh, this alt schedule was essentially the same alternative schedule we presented at our interview. All we did was update the design deliverable schedule again similar to the baseline to see what the result was

60
00:16:57.040 --> 00:17:12.480
with that alternative schedule and logic that also had two early bid packages in it. The result of that is that phase one, new building complete, would be November of 28 with the team making the assumption that occupancy most likely would occur during

61
00:17:12.480 --> 00:17:29.200
winter break that year, followed by turn over the existing building to the CM and the rest of the project team in January of 29, which then would support phase 2 demo and landscaping completion in July 29. So that would be earlier than the

62
00:17:29.200 --> 00:17:46.160
baseline but result in a mid-year move and overall project completion would be about 6 months earlier than the baseline schedule. Now seeing what that did from a logic perspective and what it yielded a November

63
00:17:46.160 --> 00:18:02.799
completion date of phase one is not far off and it's pretty close to an August date. So the team really challenged ourselves on what efficiencies there may be in the logic of the design deliverable schedule. And what we developed and represented in this option

64
00:18:02.799 --> 00:18:18.400
is that the next phase of design starts upon submission of the previous design deliverable submitted to the MSBA. And this is in lie of starting the next phase of design upon MSBA's completion of their review period which is how the

65
00:18:18.400 --> 00:18:35.440
baseline RFP schedule logic was built. it can be seen in option one and the baseline schedule. So you now see that there is some overlap and some potential efficiencies with the design deliverable schedule taking that approach. And what that allows us to do with those two

66
00:18:35.440 --> 00:18:53.360
early bid packages is that it brings back those delivery dates and brings back phase one building completion back to that August 28 target date and then phase two demo and landscaping completion in December of 28. Essentially again that that year ahead

67
00:18:53.360 --> 00:19:08.400
of schedule uh or year ahead of the plan baseline schedule. Those are the three options that we've been tackling. But the the next steps as Peter already kind of alluded to is we're still validating those two options

68
00:19:08.400 --> 00:19:24.960
and we have some work still to be done and validated. Again, one some acknowledgement from the MSBA that that logic approach I explained in option two uh is agreeable paired with the early bid package approach that we have. So we have some correspondence with the MSBA.

69
00:19:24.960 --> 00:19:41.600
We're awaiting some response and feedback from them. SGA and their consultants, they're validating the design sequence and durations to ensure that as a team it's achievable based on that revised logic. The other big thing that the team has dug into and we have

70
00:19:41.600 --> 00:19:57.840
some follow-up meetings this week and next week is discuss about the project permitting timeline and do either one of those alternative options developed allow for s sufficient time for deliverables review presentation and approval with the appropriate town

71
00:19:57.840 --> 00:20:14.080
boards and commissions including but not limited to the conservation zoning board and building department. So, that is one thing that we're still working on and is a focus here over the next few weeks ahead of the next committee meeting. And then finally, uh, looking at an all-encompassing cost analysis with each

72
00:20:14.080 --> 00:20:28.480
one of these options in comparison to the baseline. So, our work, as Peter noted, we we still have some work ahead of us. Those are kind of our primary focus points of vetting out these couple options uh in in advance of next month's building

73
00:20:28.480 --> 00:20:47.600
committee meeting. So open open to questions and comments. I know there was a lot of information there, so feel free. >> Yeah, Trip, this is Steve Moore. At the opening of your statement, you said uh the um design

74
00:20:47.600 --> 00:21:08.240
timeline had been revised to um reflect the uh current schedule. Um does that mean it changed? >> Yeah, some of these design deliverables um shifted based on um the last update

75
00:21:08.240 --> 00:21:25.200
we did with TTH and SGA's schedule which is reflected here. >> And and what was the uh change? >> How how did that affect the original schedule? Yeah, Steve. Um, committee members, Mr.

76
00:21:25.200 --> 00:21:42.480
Chairman, um, if I can jump in Trip a little bit. We were anticipating on the master schedule or the baseline schedule during the RFP process with the selection of the construction manager that we would beginning begin the design

77
00:21:42.480 --> 00:22:00.480
development stage in January, but we're not really starting it until March. Um, so I think we spoke about this about a at the last meeting. The only adjustment is about is about a month or so lag that we um once thought

78
00:22:00.480 --> 00:22:15.840
we would have, but now we're into the late February, March starting period. >> So I think that's the adjustment with respect to the schedule. We can still catch up on the quote baseline schedule to meet the September 2029 completion

79
00:22:15.840 --> 00:22:32.640
date. So, I think what's showing here, and I'll just cloud it real quick. What's showing right here is the design development starting late February, March, as opposed to January, February. That's about the month timeline. >> Well, Peter, didn't we give them an NTP

80
00:22:32.640 --> 00:22:51.360
in January for design development? >> We gave them Yes, exactly. We gave that was uh January 21st, correct? >> So, that's January, February. We have an invoice from them to review tonight for work done in February and

81
00:22:51.360 --> 00:23:08.080
March or what is it January and February? I can't remember. So, I'm >> January, February. >> Confused by the start date in March. >> Well, it's really middle of February if I zoomed in.

82
00:23:08.080 --> 00:23:25.200
>> Yeah. I mean, it's just the visual. Yeah, it's it we did all all the services did begin January 22nd, the day after the notice to proceed was authorized at the building committee meeting. The design team, Studio G, and

83
00:23:25.200 --> 00:23:41.120
ourselves, the construction manager, we went to work the next day. So, really, so we were thinking it would have been earlier in January, but we're just showing here by the time we got up and going, it was couple weeks later. But yes, it's really there's really no big hiccup in the schedule in accordance

84
00:23:41.120 --> 00:24:05.280
with the baseline. We're still okay. >> I'm not sure that I totally understand that, but okay. >> So, Peter, could I jump in? >> Good. >> Is that Yeah. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Um, so

85
00:24:05.280 --> 00:24:22.880
I just wanted to say studio G was very comfortable as soon as she gave us the notice uh to proceed. We started but remember this I know you know this from public contracting there's a lot of work to do to get all of the subconsultants started. So what this reflects is full

86
00:24:22.880 --> 00:24:42.240
team has begun and it really was the end of January that we began. >> It'd be nice to have the uh graphic agree with the uh comment.

87
00:24:42.240 --> 00:25:04.559
>> Yeah, >> I think I think at this point, Mr. Chairman, committee members, um we can open it to discussion unless um there's questions about what we're proposing on project schedule options. >> Mr. Chairman, Sean has his hand up,

88
00:25:04.559 --> 00:25:21.600
please. >> Yep. Uh if I could just uh zoom out for a second. So, I discussed a little bit at our last school committee meeting. Uh just for those that don't know, I'm on school committee. Um, so talked to uh the rest of the board and obviously

89
00:25:21.600 --> 00:25:38.400
Kelly as well and Steve. Uh, the feeling I got was that we'd like to have a move in date that's more reflective of maybe a June or July. So that way teachers have more time to move in. Um, we were worried a little bit about how quickly of a turnaround you'd have for a move in

90
00:25:38.400 --> 00:25:55.200
for Christmas break. Uh, teachers work hard. I don't want to expect them to take their winter break to move in. Um certainly I don't think this is the only reason to do a certain schedule but just want to bring that up. Um, and I'll leave it to Steve Venudi to speak what the uh financial impressions of a change

91
00:25:55.200 --> 00:26:15.880
schedule would. >> Yeah, good point, Sean. >> We we can take care of the financing, whatever the timeline is. So, don't worry about us. We We'll be fine. Great.

92
00:26:17.120 --> 00:26:34.720
>> Okay. I guess I have a question for um both Trip and for Gail. I mean, option two looks very aggressive, but I think it satisfies what Sean was

93
00:26:34.720 --> 00:26:51.679
just talking about moving in in August before the school year starts. Um Gail, have you done a project that aggressive before with MSBA? with Gil Bane. Yes. >> With Gil Bane. Okay.

94
00:26:51.679 --> 00:27:07.120
>> Yeah. Makes me feel a little better. >> I I will admit uh that the first time they proposed the schedule we had for Florence Roach and Groten, I was a little a gasast at what it meant for our team because it does load up a fair

95
00:27:07.120 --> 00:27:23.279
amount. Uh I will acknowledge. Uh, but if this allows the town to save money, which we think it should, I'll leave that part to Trip to talk about. Um, we think we can do this. It is true that I

96
00:27:23.279 --> 00:27:38.159
think we need to make sure that we've got the buyin from every member of our team. It's not just Studio G that has to buy into this, right? Structural engineer, civil engineer, um, mechanical, electrical, right? They've all got a part in these early

97
00:27:38.159 --> 00:27:56.480
bid packages. So I think we need to finalize that and then I think critically we need to hear from the MSBA that whether they will accept this speed because it does mean that we don't wait

98
00:27:56.480 --> 00:28:12.960
until we've gotten all their comments before we move on to the next phase of design. So >> Gale to to your point Gail did they did they have the same type of acceleration in Grten and did MSBA >> we did

99
00:28:12.960 --> 00:28:28.880
>> we did and the MSBA was not thrilled but what I think is the case and we're going to have to see what they say is they're probably seeing a lot of schedules like this being proposed because of the cost of construction.

100
00:28:28.880 --> 00:28:46.080
>> Right. So the the longer duration of a public project, the more you know risk there is of added cost for all those trades. >> But this of course impacts their cash flow, their projected cash flow, >> right? So that would be the other piece.

101
00:28:46.080 --> 00:29:01.360
We didn't hear any issue about that in Florence Roach, but there was a little bit of grumbling um about the fact that we moved on to the construction documents phase before we had gotten all their comments. Now, the thing is they don't really give

102
00:29:01.360 --> 00:29:16.720
that many comments on the design documents, which is why we were comfortable doing that. The comments tend to be more regulatory, >> right? Desi import and so forth. So Gail to your point about uh subconsultants

103
00:29:16.720 --> 00:29:33.760
buying in the duration of the different design activities doesn't change it just starts them earlier right >> we overlap them is what happens effectively. Yeah. Yeah. So you know if

104
00:29:33.760 --> 00:29:49.120
we manage this well if our three teams work well together we can pull this off. This is what we definitely were able to do in Groten, right? >> And I, you know, certainly the district appreciated it a lot.

105
00:29:49.120 --> 00:30:14.240
>> Well, I'm glad that we have both Gilbane and uh Studio G on this project because uh it sounds like uh we're building on success. >> Thank you. >> Yes, sir. It sounds like as we go back to the um

106
00:30:14.240 --> 00:30:28.640
to the workt, Studio G, Toner Townson, Harry, and Gil Bane after this meeting in the days ahead. Is it safe for me to more or less say that

107
00:30:28.640 --> 00:30:45.760
a mid academic year December holiday move period is not preferred and sort of quote off the table and we are down to two of the three options. Make it make it a summer completion so

108
00:30:45.760 --> 00:31:00.240
the school department can move in prior to the September academic year start. Is that not necessarily the full decision, but the direction we should lean towards? >> Kelly here. I I'm certainly fine with

109
00:31:00.240 --> 00:31:18.799
with that uh approach. >> Okay. Just trying to whittle down what what our options are and focus on what we need to do. If there's three of them, that's great, but if there's two, we can focus on two options. I think we have to

110
00:31:18.799 --> 00:31:35.200
go with Kelly's recommendation. Focus on uh option three. >> Option two. >> I'm sorry. Two. Third one on the list. >> Understood. Understood.

111
00:31:35.200 --> 00:32:00.480
Okay. We're we're still available, Mr. Chairman, committee members. Any other thoughts, comments, questions? Any other comments from the committee? >> Think we can move on then, uh, Peter. >> Okay, very good. Thank you. And if something comes up, we can always come

112
00:32:00.480 --> 00:32:16.559
back to this. Um, thank you for that. So, we just we just finished item four. We talked about item five. Um, item six. Um, just some updates. Um, and we'll talk a little bit. I just typed these in

113
00:32:16.559 --> 00:32:32.399
um earlier this evening. Couple of updates I want to talk about. Maybe not right now, but we'll talk about uh uh the landscape repairs to the athletic fields because we're currently have a proposal for

114
00:32:32.399 --> 00:32:47.679
acceptance of the studio G amendment number nine which authorizes the expenditures of monies for site investigations under with their subconultants. We talked about um coming on to the

115
00:32:47.679 --> 00:33:03.519
property during the school vacation period, April 20th through the 24th, which is important for the design team to collect data on the site conditions when it comes to geotechnical borings, test pits, things of that nature, so the

116
00:33:03.519 --> 00:33:19.519
design team can um collect that data. So, we we're looking to do that again during the April vacation period. And being the spring season, um the ground will probably be a little saturated and I'm sure some of the equipment coming

117
00:33:19.519 --> 00:33:35.519
onto the fields will cause some tire ruts or some divots, if you will. Um as um Mr. McManis spoke earlier regarding the athletic fields and we know the fields are in high use within the

118
00:33:35.519 --> 00:33:51.840
community. So, we we will we'll need to make sure that um whatever repairs need to get done after this investigation during the vacation period, we're able to prepare the the the fields with some landscaping

119
00:33:51.840 --> 00:34:06.720
improvements just to fill in any ruts or divots and maybe some, you know, lmen seed, if you will, to make the field safe for athletic use. Um we'll talk about that in a minute, but I wanted to bring that up at least. um as a

120
00:34:06.720 --> 00:34:22.879
consideration. I will say um I spoke with the DPW uh highway director Steve Whitten. He's directed me to the DPW director um to talk this through. Potentially maybe. I don't have

121
00:34:22.879 --> 00:34:39.520
confirmation or full conversation yet with the DPW director to consider um having the DPW staff um after hours. we would pay them off the project budget is my thought here to have that that crew

122
00:34:39.520 --> 00:34:54.720
or that DPW crew who's very simil familiar with the with the area to do those repairs and if not we would seek to get a local contractor landscape contractor to do the repairs um as such.

123
00:34:54.720 --> 00:35:13.200
So, that's still in the works of which direction you're going and and the associated cost, but I want to at least bring that up for for um for your awareness. >> So, Peter, the um task one in that uh

124
00:35:13.200 --> 00:35:31.200
breakdown for uh amendment nine uh indicates one day of uh test pitting. How many how many test pits and um are we confident they'll do that in one day? >> Um

125
00:35:31.200 --> 00:35:47.280
if I may kind of lean on uh the design team, Mary Lee or Gail. Um >> I can I can answer that. >> Okay. Thank you. I'll come back up here. Here you go. Sorry. >> Yep. So the geotechnical engineers are

126
00:35:47.280 --> 00:36:03.839
the ones who are supplying the rigs to do the excavations of the test pits plus the borings. Uh I believe the number of those is uh well over a dozen. I'd have to go back and remind myself, but it's quite a few. Not as many test pits as

127
00:36:03.839 --> 00:36:20.320
there are borings. Uh but the excavator is scheduled to be there Monday and Tuesday and also Wednesday just in case, but they don't expect to have to use that third day. Uh in Samiod scope, they only need one of those days of

128
00:36:20.320 --> 00:36:36.400
excavating. So they're sort of piggybacking onto the geoteex uh equipment while it's there. Um there is uh all of the these consultants are talking amongst each other because this takes quite a bit of collaboration and

129
00:36:36.400 --> 00:36:51.599
planning between them to make sure that they're not duplicating any efforts and they're not leaving anything out. So once they have a final planned set including all of the exact locations of the test cuts and borings, we'll be uh releasing that for everybody's

130
00:36:51.599 --> 00:37:09.040
information. >> So who's going to be do doing the excavation? But geoengineers, that's the geotech consultant. >> Well, they they specifically say excavator fees are the responsibility of the client. So, who's who's doing the

131
00:37:09.040 --> 00:37:24.400
excavation? >> That uh the Samiod's one says that. So, uh that's covered under geotech. There's not any additional excavation that needs to be done. In the past they did some testing where they used the an excavator

132
00:37:24.400 --> 00:37:40.079
from the town and that's how that was covered in the past. But in this case uh geoengineers has confirmed to me that they are providing all the equipment for this uh round of excav investigation. >> So I'd like to see their proposal

133
00:37:40.079 --> 00:37:55.359
revised to uh reflect that. >> I I think it's Mary Lee. Mr. Chairman, if you don't mind for a second, um there are three consultants that that are in this proposal.

134
00:37:55.359 --> 00:38:11.119
One of them is Sami, which is the civil engineer and geotech or geoengineers is doing the geotech. >> Oh, got it. Okay. >> Mary. Yeah. So rather than getting two pieces of equipment in, we're going to have one firm provide the equipment and

135
00:38:11.119 --> 00:38:26.240
both engineering offices work off that one piece of equipment which is being provided by geo engineers here. Yes. >> Is that correct, Mary Lee? >> Yes, that's accurate. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. Thanks for the clarification. >> Sure.

136
00:38:26.240 --> 00:38:41.119
>> Um, okay. If you don't mind, I'll go back to here. So, we can go back and forth a little bit. So, committee members, that was a quick update from my end. Um, with respect to item six on the agenda,

137
00:38:41.119 --> 00:38:56.960
I'll move it on to um the design team, Studio G, Mary Lee, and then Gilane. any updates? Um, Mary, Mary Lee, I just threw in that meeting date you put in here and you can also talk about other things. >> Yeah. Okay. So, I know you have further

138
00:38:56.960 --> 00:39:13.200
down in the agenda project meetings, but I think it'll be more efficient if I just tell you about all of the activities we've been working on since the last SBC meeting. Uh, so we've been kicking off with all of our consultants. Uh we're so we're talking with civil,

139
00:39:13.200 --> 00:39:30.079
structural, mechanical, electrical, landscape, and lead uh sustainability consultants. We had a food service meeting with Littleton Public Schools food service staff. Uh and we have a follow-up meeting in the works. We had a

140
00:39:30.079 --> 00:39:46.240
big security meeting with town departments, which included police and fire plus uh district tech personnel. There are a few follow-up meetings coming out of that as well. Uh for very specifically on design, we are having a

141
00:39:46.240 --> 00:40:01.839
series of meeting days where we are doing teacher and staff focus groups where we are meeting with each department in the school to do some detailed space planning. Uh we actually have one of those days today. It was a it was a great day, a lot of fun, a lot

142
00:40:01.839 --> 00:40:18.400
of uh very productive meetings. We have another one lined up tomorrow and then a third one on Monday. Uh coming up we have Samiotes is scheduling to begin their survey beginning next week. Uh we have our

143
00:40:18.400 --> 00:40:35.359
acoustic engineer who is going to be doing an ambient noise survey to figure out how loud the site is right now which will help our mechanical engineers uh choose the rooftop equipment to make sure it's not too loud. Uh we will be

144
00:40:35.359 --> 00:40:49.599
scheduling for next week and the following week meetings to talk specifically about playgrounds and playfields and we intend to involve uh Dave McManis in those discussions. Uh obviously we have the site

145
00:40:49.599 --> 00:41:06.720
explorations coming up. uh the the uh disciplines that that affects is civil, geotechnical, geoenvironmental and it also helps landscape and structural and mechanical. So there's a lot of crucial information coming out of

146
00:41:06.720 --> 00:41:25.040
that site exploration. And then as well as that, we are uh coordinating the permitting timeline with Samyotes and Gil Bane uh looking ahead and how that's going to work with the DD phase and the CD phase. And uh

147
00:41:25.040 --> 00:41:42.480
there is some potential discussion that we might need to do some sort of traffic study. We'll know uh we'll know more about that after we have that meeting with them and then we'll be uh getting a proposal from our traffic consultants in case we do end up needing that. So, a

148
00:41:42.480 --> 00:42:00.560
lot of stuff. Any anybody have any questions on those activities? >> Mary Lee, you want to touch upon geothermal? >> Yep. Oh, thank you. Geothermal. Yes. So, one of the other site explorations we're doing is geothermal. They are doing one

149
00:42:00.560 --> 00:42:16.079
test well that will ultimately become part of the full geothermal well field. We are putting it uh as far away from the baseball diamonds as possible, trying to disturb the site as little as

150
00:42:16.079 --> 00:42:31.040
possible. But basically what that looks like is they'll come in at the beginning of April break week. They will have they have a big rig that drills the well and then they run the pipe and they do the concrete in the pipe and then the rig

151
00:42:31.040 --> 00:42:47.599
leaves and so all we have then is the well which has a cover to it that's maybe six feet by six feet and then they have a truck there for four to five more days while they uh run the actual testing itself. Then when the testing is

152
00:42:47.599 --> 00:43:03.839
complete, the truck leaves, the well is uh safely closed off so that nobody is coming up to it and messing with it. But it's it's capped. It's just a it's just a small thing on the ground out of the way. Uh and then we will have that information for the geothermal so we can

153
00:43:03.839 --> 00:43:20.000
incorporate it into our mechanical uh equipment drawings. >> Just out of curiosity, how deep is the well? I think they're going down 550 ft, I want to say, if my memory serves me right. >> Okay.

154
00:43:20.000 --> 00:43:38.000
Then what? They fill it with what? Bentonite or something? >> Oh, I don't I'm not sure. >> Okay. >> You if I could add um Mary Lee and just maybe for general information um these activities during the school vacation week will be done during normal business

155
00:43:38.000 --> 00:43:54.880
hours. So with regards to the community or the abutters, u they will probably see this activity uh during the day. Um and then after this after the school vacation week, it it it'll it'll go away. Uh we may be back there a day or two after the

156
00:43:54.880 --> 00:44:09.839
vacation week if there's any landscaping repairs to do. But that'll be the extent of let's just say construction operations to some extent that the abutters may hear or see that is not normal. that the by today's standards,

157
00:44:09.839 --> 00:44:25.200
but then it it'll dissipate and we'll be certainly outreaching to the community and the abutters. As the design continues to develop and we get more activities underway, we will schedule meetings. >> Are there any Corey considerations

158
00:44:25.200 --> 00:44:45.119
required for the uh activities over uh the April spring break? >> I I don't go ahead somebody else. I and and this may not be the right time. I I do have a question uh about field field use uh during that break. I

159
00:44:45.119 --> 00:45:04.240
know baseball has their season is starting. Uh am I to assume that one of those fields uh would not be usable during that week or both of those fields? during during the week it ex itself uh

160
00:45:04.240 --> 00:45:19.599
we expect the fields to not be usable. I know there is an event on Saturday the 25th which is mainly going to be using the lower field. That field should be fully online at that time. Uh the only thing happening down there is we'll have

161
00:45:19.599 --> 00:45:35.760
a truck in the bottom right corner of the lower field monitoring that well during the testing period. Um >> after the field would be safe to use then or no? >> Say that again. >> That field would be safe to use during

162
00:45:35.760 --> 00:45:50.800
that week. >> Yes. Yes. >> Perfect. >> Yep. And so then the upper field after we get the landscape company to come and do the final repairs, then those fields would be playable. And we are trying to get that scheduled to take place in the

163
00:45:50.800 --> 00:46:08.400
week following April break. We're also making sure that while the truck is in place, it's not impeding traffic flow of the way that people come from the parking lot and access the upper field.

164
00:46:08.400 --> 00:46:27.839
>> All right. Thank you. >> So, going back to my question, are there any Corey requirements for these uh activities? Steve, for the week of April vacation, I don't believe there are Corey requirements. Students are not in school. >> Okay. Just wanted to confirm.

165
00:46:27.839 --> 00:46:47.920
>> Yeah. And then we're working on procedures. Once the construction starts, we'll get queries uh involved for anybody that we need to. >> Thanks, Steve. >> Okay. Um, >> again, we can come back to any questions that might surface as we move down the

166
00:46:47.920 --> 00:47:03.200
agenda. >> Drip has a question. >> Thanks, Mark. Sorry, Peter. Um, >> I didn't see you here. Sorry. >> No, it's all right. It's all right. Um, just following up on the Corey that just reminded me. Um, can we start that

167
00:47:03.200 --> 00:47:19.760
process at least for our team in the event that we are on site outside of a school vacation or uh vacation day? Yes, Trip, I'll Trip, I'll contact you and we'll get that procedure going. >> Great. Thanks, Steve. >> Yep. >> Steve, Mark, just a quick heads up. I

168
00:47:19.760 --> 00:47:36.560
had some conversations uh recently with Mr. Alex Richards regarding regarding Corey. So, we can circle together uh and get that procedure identified. >> Yep. Perfect. >> Thank you. Okay. Um again, moving down the list of

169
00:47:36.560 --> 00:47:53.280
the agenda. Um, Gilbane team, anything new to add? Um, updates? I think you've offered quite a bit, but if another opportunity if you wanted to add anything else. >> Nothing additional, Peter, other than uh both what you and Mary Lane Mary Lee

170
00:47:53.280 --> 00:48:08.640
outlined. We're just supporting the team going through that. Um, you know, now that we're all on board, we're getting engaged with the consultants with Studio G. And, um, again, the items that Mary Lee highlighted are going to be our focus here in the coming weeks. uh especially around permitting and

171
00:48:08.640 --> 00:48:24.640
coordinating with the rest of their consultants. >> Very good. Uh next item was just uh 6D an opportunity for anybody from um the town of Littleton or the building committee to offer any updates that we're not aware of forformational

172
00:48:24.640 --> 00:48:45.280
purposes. I guess there there's good. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Moving down, item seven, uh, 7A. Uh, just wanted to let the committee know that the the project funding agreement has been executed. The town sent it through

173
00:48:45.280 --> 00:49:01.520
the town administrator's office, signed it some time ago. The MSBA has reviewed it and sent it back. So, that item is closed. The project funding agreement between the town and the MSBA is fully executed. Just an update for you there. Um,

174
00:49:01.520 --> 00:49:18.640
also, uh, for for consideration tonight, there's, um, there's two, well, in particular, one contract amendment for Studio G, uh, contract amendment number, um, number nine. I'll put it up here on the screen. It's for the the services

175
00:49:18.640 --> 00:49:36.079
that we've just been talking about here. Um, it's down to the amount. Um, I'll zoom in a little bit. $492,556 that is for um the services

176
00:49:36.079 --> 00:49:52.800
reimburseable services um by the studio G sub consultants to do the services we just mentioned for example the geotech boring the test pits the permitting phase uh the um and things of that nature that are listed

177
00:49:52.800 --> 00:50:07.680
here um this was recently sent on to the financial working group for review and consideration. I know it was rather last minute so there wasn't necessarily a a great amount of time for the financial working group to evaluate

178
00:50:07.680 --> 00:50:23.920
it in deep detail. Um we have we as the OPM have reviewed it. We do recommend uh support of this uh amendment based on our evaluation and discussions with the design team. These these services are

179
00:50:23.920 --> 00:50:39.040
are necessary. they are incorporated into the overall project budget as are the reflected cost for those services. Uh at this time um it is somewhat I will say it's it is I guess urgent that we

180
00:50:39.040 --> 00:50:56.079
more or less accept or recommend to some degree these services so the design team can get underway with those services during the school vacation period to collect the necessary data and soil conditions and site conditions to um

181
00:50:56.079 --> 00:51:10.240
incorporate into the design which is essentially lack of a better word step one quite frankly for the design team to get underway and also helps with uh establishing the permitting process and collecting some of that information as

182
00:51:10.240 --> 00:51:28.720
well. So that is um one of the items here go going back to the agenda item 7B uh consideration for approval of studio G contract amendment number nine. Whoops, excuse me. Where'd it go? I just

183
00:51:28.720 --> 00:51:49.359
lost it. in the amount of um I'm sorry, I'm over here this screen. In the amount of $492,556 for the services uh listed here in this um in this amendment. All right, we'll stop if there's anybody has any questions or if the studio G team wants

184
00:51:49.359 --> 00:52:06.520
to offer any additional comment. >> So, uh Peter, I'm just going to make one comment. In order to support option two for the early de delivery of the uh project, it's imperative that we approve this amendment tonight.

185
00:52:09.200 --> 00:52:28.960
>> I would agree with that comment, Mr. Chairman. All right, we'll go to Cland >> and I have reviewed all the items in the proposal and they're all there there's a lot of a lot of work

186
00:52:28.960 --> 00:52:48.240
there and it's all necessary and it's um it's uh well enough said just a lot of work. Steve, I'll make a motion we approve the um amendment nine. Is it? >> Yes.

187
00:52:48.240 --> 00:53:07.520
>> $492,556. >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? Uh >> Kelly. >> Kelly Fletchie. Yes. >> Sean. >> Sean Hearn. Yes. >> Steven. >> Steven. Yes. >> Jim Dugen.

188
00:53:07.520 --> 00:53:22.640
>> Jim Dugen. Hi. >> And Steve Moore. Yes. Thank you. Motion carries. >> Thank you very much committee members. Appreciate the conversation and approval. Um the other one I want to just mention the last meeting we had uh

189
00:53:22.640 --> 00:53:39.040
we moved forward with approving the studio G amendment number eight based on their um their services which I have here on the screen. Also, just for backup information, this was their continuation of the contract design

190
00:53:39.040 --> 00:53:55.839
services as listed here for the balance of the project, which is the design development phase, construction documents, bidden award, construction administration, and closeout. And that number was approved with at 8.3 million with 150,000 set aside as quote

191
00:53:55.839 --> 00:54:11.440
additional services as an allowance. as that was approved during last month's meeting, there was a conversation about, hey, what happened to amendment seven? Um, amendment seven was a cleanup, quote, I'll use the word housekeeping

192
00:54:11.440 --> 00:54:27.119
for lack of a better phrase, of the services that were conducted during the feasibility and schematic design phase of the project prior to town vote. Um I will quickly summarize to say that the

193
00:54:27.119 --> 00:54:43.280
design team had a series of additional services uh as reimburseable which is standard operating procedure during that phase and those services um totaled 145,000

194
00:54:43.280 --> 00:55:00.160
$274 right here. That was the six amendments and that was sort of on a time spent time and materials basis. As it turned out, the design team and their consultants did not necessarily need to spend the entire 145,000.

195
00:55:00.160 --> 00:55:17.800
They spent 130,000 which is shown right here. So what ends up becoming is amendment seven becomes a a credit or return of unused funds in the amount of $15,227.

196
00:55:18.160 --> 00:55:33.839
And um that is shown essentially right here. This is kind of the attachment F MSBA schedule of contract amendments that we fill in. So the amount there was the the -15,227

197
00:55:33.839 --> 00:55:51.440
which ended up resulting down here um right there total amendments to date uh on the contract at the time. So again just kind of a housekeeping thing. I think we all were aware of some adjustments to the designer's fee during

198
00:55:51.440 --> 00:56:07.520
that phase and this this cleans it up now that all the numbers have been um reconciled against one another in a cleanup. So I just wanted to mention that um as well uh because it was discussed a month a meeting.

199
00:56:07.520 --> 00:56:23.680
>> So we need a we need a vote to approve this. >> I guess it wouldn't hurt Mr. Chairman. uh officially it would be um it would be beneficial I would say yes. >> Yeah. Is there a motion to approve the uh credit? >> Just one question, Steve, before we move on.

200
00:56:23.680 --> 00:56:38.480
>> Go ahead, >> Peter. Did we expend the 145 and we're going to get money back or credit against the future bill? How's that working? >> It was never spent that it was approved, but the invoices did not accumulate to

201
00:56:38.480 --> 00:56:54.720
145. They only accumulated to 130. >> Okay. >> So in other words, >> we paid out 130. >> Yes, correct. Thank you. Yeah. >> So they will bill they will bill 145 and then give us a credit for 15. Is that

202
00:56:54.720 --> 00:57:12.400
correct? >> No, just not not quite, Mr. Chairman. The the the paperwork contract amendments had a total sum of 145,274. The invoicing that was submitted and approved

203
00:57:12.400 --> 00:57:30.000
by Studio G only amounted to 130,000. This is a paperwork credit. There's no quote monies being returned. It's just a reduction in their initial fee or their fees or >> housekeeping >> housekeeping contract. Thank you, Jim. >> If if I can jump in, this is to make

204
00:57:30.000 --> 00:57:46.000
sure that your accounting of this project and our accounting of this project are aligned, >> right? >> Okay. Yeah. Unencumbered. >> Okay. >> Motion to accept. >> To approve.

205
00:57:46.000 --> 00:58:02.000
>> Motion to approve as presented. >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? Uh Kelly. >> Kelly Fletcher. Yes. >> Sean. >> Sean Hearn. Yes. >> Steveny. >> Steven. Yes. >> Jim Dugen. >> Jim Dugen. Yes.

206
00:58:02.000 --> 00:58:19.920
>> And Steve Moore. Yes. Motion carries. Thanks. >> Great. Thank you everybody. appreciate the patience and on on that item as we went through it. Wanted to get the math right and the paperwork right. So, appreciate that. Um, okay, moving down the list. Item eight. Um, just a um a

207
00:58:19.920 --> 00:58:36.640
hold a placeholder if there's any previous business. I didn't have anything recorded. If I missed something, it's an opportunity for others to chime in if there's something previous that needs to be discussed. If not, number nine, um, any new

208
00:58:36.640 --> 00:58:56.000
business opportunity for any new business or other general discussion. Number 10 is just aformational. We've been meeting as mentioned here between the OPM designer and construction manager on a weekly basis, sometimes more than a

209
00:58:56.000 --> 00:59:11.760
week, twice a week. And just um as Mary Lee mentioned, there was a meeting on the 13th of March for the building site and security with their consultant. It was it was a good meeting, a lot of attendees and some good questions and there'll be a follow-up to some of that discussion.

210
00:59:11.760 --> 00:59:27.119
>> Uh just a question, Peter. Has the uh building commissioner been invited to these meetings? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thanks, >> Mr. Font Mr. Mr. Fontaine. Yes. >> Yep. >> Um project invoices. There's one as

211
00:59:27.119 --> 00:59:43.599
mentioned um studio G um um invoice number 30 in the amount of the 150,000 that was pre-authorized during the uh notice to proceed. I will I have it right here is for those who haven't seen it.

212
00:59:43.599 --> 00:59:59.440
Oops. I'll zoom out. This is a kind of a cover letter that the OPM puts on just to tell everybody what what it is. And then here's the invoice itself from Studio G. uh right over here and then I'm out.

213
00:59:59.440 --> 01:00:18.799
Back to the agenda. Looking for any discussions, comments, or a motion to consider approval. >> I'll move to approve studio G invoice 30 for 150,000. >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? Kelly.

214
01:00:18.799 --> 01:00:32.880
>> Kelly Clanche. Yes. >> Sean. >> Sean. Yes. >> Steve. >> Steven. Yes. >> Uh Jim >> uh Jim Dugen. Yes. >> And Steve Moore. Yes. Motion carries. >> Great. Thank you very much on that item.

215
01:00:32.880 --> 01:00:50.319
Item 12. Um nothing that I have that business wasn't reasonably anticipated. And then just number 13 is the next three meeting dates 15th, 20th, and 17th as shown April, May, June.

216
01:00:50.319 --> 01:01:05.119
Mr. Chairman, committee members, that's what I have for presentation information this evening. >> So Peter is >> great. Any any comments or >> I'd have one. Steve Peter is the um

217
01:01:05.119 --> 01:01:20.799
decision on which option going to be recommended on April 15th. >> I would say yes. I'm going to be leaning. We're all going to be leaning on each other. we being the designer, OPM and construction manager to make

218
01:01:20.799 --> 01:01:38.079
sure we can deliver um option let me go back there just two purposes option two which is um right here um again we have to come back with all the things we need to do to deliver a

219
01:01:38.079 --> 01:01:56.799
project which will be delivered um you know the move in August of 2028. Um I if and we'll would be looking to have um the committee give a nod of approval

220
01:01:56.799 --> 01:02:11.119
that we are okay to move in that direction um that we can deliver the project a essentially a year earlier than what we initially anticipated. >> I think Kelly Kelly has voiced his op opinion on that. It's really up to the

221
01:02:11.119 --> 01:02:28.160
MSBA at this point, right? In studio G. >> Yeah, it's there's a lot of work to do to get there, but in the early stages, yes. >> That's why we want to make sure we double check ourselves that we can pull it off and don't overpromise and

222
01:02:28.160 --> 01:02:48.240
underdel for sure. We don't want that. >> So, Mr. Yes, that's what will be on the agenda for um further discussion and recommendation at the next meeting that we can truly comfortably confidently deliver option two.

223
01:02:48.240 --> 01:03:05.839
>> Thank you. >> Any other comments? All right, then. Moment we've all been waiting for. Is there a motion to adjourn? >> Almost. >> We adjourn. Okay, I think that's

224
01:03:05.839 --> 01:03:09.880
unanimous. Thank you every