Evening everyone. I'm going to call the city council urban affairs committee meeting to order. It is Tuesday, September 23rd. We have two items on our agenda. The first one being order number 251009497
referencing 2023 8062H, an application for a modification of a special permit for Raphael Arinoff on behalf of Green Gold Group Incorporated to amend the hours of operation at the marijuana retail
establishment located at 910 Boston Post Road East in the Wayside zoning district. I believe we have attorney McMahon and the um president of retail Amanda Woodward are here. If you two want to come and sit in the well, make
sure that there's a light on in front of the microphone. I don't know if you have opening remarks or if we just get into this. There are Oh, there we go. Okay. Of
course, thank you so much for having us here and continuing this discussion. Um, as stated, we represent Green Gold Group at uh 910 Boston Post Road. Um, with the move of Garden Remedies down towards the
Apex Center. We will be the only dispensary on this side of town. And that really is the facilitating basis for our request. Um the hours that we originally had were inherited from uh our purchase of local roots and they
were in line with the hours of other facilities at that time. Um both Green Meadows and Garden Remedies have extended their hours later in the evening. So we are seeking to do the same. Um, but then another thing we are seeking to do is we've already started
to see increased demand in the morning hours is to ask to open an hour earlier in the morning as well at 8:00 a.m. Um, so what we would be seeking is 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Um, which exactly mirrors the maximum permitted hours of liquor
stores under both the Marorrow code and the state code that it follows. Um and we really view this as a way to match the c customer demand that we are already seeing. Um so we are trying to support the patients, support the
customers. Um and we would love the support of the committee uh to be able to move ahead and do that. Hours are set by special permit under the zoning code for marijuana establishments. So that is why we are coming here with a request to modify our special permit and modify
that line item of our hours um with no other changes. Um so I had asked Amanda just to um grab some photos from our security cameras. Um she was able to grab them today um just as a display essentially of showing um customers waiting outside of the facility in those
morning hours. So we are not by this request hoping to open earlier and induce demand. What we're hoping to do is serve the demand um that already exists within our facility um and instead of having customers waiting out front for us to open um be able to open
and serve those customers. I know one of the concerns that was brought up when we were at the council is if you open at 8:00 a.m. uh won't people be waiting outside at 7:00 or would you come back next year and ask to open at 7:00? Just want to make sure we get ahead of that. Um 8:00 a.m. is what we're looking for.
8 a.m. matches the liquor stores in town, which is what we see as our most analogous business. Um, and between our own staffing and between our own protocols, um, that's the earliest we would want to open. We open at 8:00 a.m. in our store in Charlton. We open at 8:00 a.m. in our store in Palmer. We
would want 8:00 a.m. here as well, so that all of our retail shops follow the same uh, code. So, we, you know, are happy to backs stop it at that 8:00 a.m. Um, we also just see from the traffic patterns, um, because we do have those cameras. Um, no one's sitting in our
parking lot at, you know, 7:00 a.m., but they do start coming in at about 8:15, 8:30. And Amanda has some photos of, uh, of that just in case, um, anyone on the committee would want to reference. So, um, that's really what we're looking to do. We're looking with our evening hours
to match the other facilities in town. We're looking with our morning hour to uh serve that demand that we're seeing outside um and be able to better serve our customers and our patients and uh be in line with our other facilities. Um we appreciate the committee's consideration
of this and happy to answer any questions you may have on the request. Okay, I'm going to just open up with the remarks that we got. We do send around the draft special permit to department heads. ask them to give input before the
committee meets so that we know if there are any issues from them. So from the police chief, I do not have any issues with the applicants. Green gold group request to amend hours of operation. The police department has had very few calls for service to this business and I don't
foresee an increase in calls for service with the suggested change of hours. from William Payton, now the building commissioner. The building department has no issues with the amendment of hours of operation for Greenold. From Jeffrey Emanuel, the assistant fire
chief, no fire department issues. From Tom Deersio, the city engineer, engineering does not have any issues with this decision. And from Priscilla Ryder, conservation and sustainability officer, I have no issues with this modification.
So unless anybody has questions to start, I'm just going to go quickly through the draft decision. Council Madam Chair, I just want to point out I live close enough that I actually was checking your place on the mornings and it's not a regular basis that there are people waiting in line. I've gone by a
couple of times. I hadn't seen people waiting in line. Maybe one that's not a line, okay, for 9:00. Okay. Overall, I don't necessarily agree that an 8:00 opening for a dispensary, it's not it's more that the other dispensaries are
going to ask to open up that early. Okay? And it's a it's you know, we're in a racing condition trying to get more and more hours because a opens up at this level while we want to have it here. I'd rather prefer to keep it more consistent across the across the city.
So, I I'm not necessarily agreeing to opening at 8. I think the opening should still stay at 9:00. the at the other end I can listen to other debates. All right. Any other comments? So you all should have the draft decision.
It is um the decision on the amendment to the special permit with the order number. The procedural findings of facts list the applicant as the duly organized existing corporation having a business
at 60 Prospects Street in North Brookfield. They are a tenant of a commercial retail unit based at 910 Boston Post Road East. Number three is the details of November 16th, 2020. The city council of the city of Marorrow voted to grant a special
permit authorizing local roots any incorporated of which the and I think that should be of which the applicant is the successor in interest to build and operate an adult use marijuana retail establishment at the site giving the
details of that and then there number four is a repeat of number three so I have suggest I am suggesting that it just be removed moved, but we'll let the solicitor make sure. I didn't see any difference in the two. Attorney McMahon,
or do you have a copy? The four are exactly the same. I I don't see any difference. I think that just got copy pasted in twice. Okay. So number five, on August 21st, 2023, city council voted to grant a special permit authorizing Green Gold
Group certain amendments to the original special permit as further described in a document recorded at the Middle Sex South Registry of Deeds. And on this one, I will ask the solicitor if he thinks that that we need to clarify that
the amendment was to add medical marijuana and amend the hours or if it if that's not important enough, but I think it should be added in there to just to clarify what the amendment was. Number six. On June 17th, 2025, the
applicant filed with the city clerk of the city of Marble to modify condition number eight of the amended special permit in order to change the maximum hours of operation. Number seven, in connection with the application, the applicant submitted a certified list of
AB butters filing fees and site plans. Number eight, uh the application was certified by the building commissioner. Number nine, uh, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the city council, the city council established a date for a public hearing. And number 10 talks
about the public hearing was on Monday, July 21st, 2025 with the hearing closed. Number 11, the applicant through its representatives presented testimony at the public hearing detailing the change in hours describing its impact
upon municipal services, the neighborhood, and traffic. Number 12, at the public hearing, no members of the public spoke about the use or submitted written comments about the use. Number 13, procedural findings of facts specified above supplement those made in
the original special permit and amended special permit. Based on the above, the city council makes the following findings and takes the following action. A the applicant has complied with the rules and regulations promulgated by the
city council. The city council finds that the modified operating hours is an appropriate use and in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance of the city of Marorrow when subject to the appropriate terms and conditions as provided in this decision
and in the original special permit and amended special permit. The city council makes these findings subjects to completion and inherence by the applicant, its successors, andor assigns to the conditions more fully set forth
in this decision and the original special permit and amended special permit. Number C, the city council incorporates by reference finding C and the original special permit and amended special permit. And D, the city council incorporates by reference finding D in
the original special permit and amended special permit. E, the city council, pursuant to its authority, grants the application an amendment to modify condition 8 of the original special permit as follows. number one by
deleting condition number eight in its entirety and inserting in its place the following 8 hours. The maximum hours of operation of the use shall be Monday through Saturday, 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. and Sunday from 10:00 a.m. to 900
p.m. Madam Chair, I would propose to change the opening from 9:00 a.m. to 11 p.m. All right, let me finish this and then we'll go back and talk about amendments. Okay. All other conditions of the original
special permit shall continue in full force and effect and are incorporated by reference as part of this decision. Um, going back to the deleting the current the current hours are 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and the current Sunday hours are
10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. And in your application, you stated you were not changing Sunday hours. Correct. We are not looking to change the Sunday hours, but it says from 10:00 a.m. to 900 p.m. That is a change. Is that a typo?
What are we What do we operate on Sundays now? I thought that's what we had on Sundays. 8:00 p.m. Oh, then we are. I'm sorry. That is a typo. I I was under the impression we were open until 9:00. Okay. All right. So, um, Councelor Ducet, yes,
you are. I think um I do not think that opening up uh a dispensary at 8 a.m. and I don't think liquor stores open until 9:00, but I haven't had a chance to double check that in Ma in Malboro. So, I'd rather
not have it opening at 8 a.m., but make it open at 9:00 a.m. in the open. Sounds awfully late, but I know we did check on how late they can be open, and that's 11:00, but I don't know about I'd have to go back and look at the email that we got from
the license board secretary. Um, so you are making a motion to change the 8 am to 9:00 a.m. So that it would be Monday through Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Keeping the additional and then are you okay
with 10:00 a.m. to 900 p.m. on Sunday? That's fine. Okay. So, it's been moved and seconded that we change the 8:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday and keep it the current 900 a.m. Is there discussion?
I saw Councelor Naven's hand up before, so I'm going to call on Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I am in agreement with Councelor Ducet. Um, I do think 9:00 a.m. um should be held as the time that they open. I do not have any concerns with opening an hour later. Um, we've had this discussion before. Um,
please just match them. So, I'm glad to hear you're okay, but with the Sunday time being a 9:00 p.m. close. Um, which is great. Um, like please, let's just leave all these the same so we can stop having this conversation all the time. Um, but I agree. I have some concerns about um opening at 8:00 a.m. Um, and I
think making them parallel. I believe one of the earlier discussions was that it be open for patients. Um, drawing the parallel to the liquor stores, I think kind of muddies that argument a little bit, but I I believe that these should be opening at night. So, thank you, Madam Chair. All right, Councelor Fchillo. Thank you, Madam Chair, and uh thank you
folks for being here. Um I do support opening at 8 a.m. um during the weekday through Saturday. Um you know, right now we have this as a a case- by case basis, and so you folks have come to us and let us know that you have people staging. I I know you guys have photographs. I know, you know, there's some dispute
there. But even if it is one person, two people, I want you guys to be successful in your business. I'm not here to hinder your business. So, um, you know, personally, I I have no issues with opening an hour earlier, right? I think, um, um, you know, a 1 hour difference here. That's that's what we're debating.
I I personally see no issue. I know the police chief said he has no issues with what's been presented, right? There have been no concerns to the police department. Um, I wouldn't think that opening an hour earlier in the morning would even cause concern. Um, it's not going to cause traffic issues. Um, you know, if anything, folks will have an
opportunity to stop in on their way to work, you know, during the week or something like that. And um you know for those reasons I I'm uh would not be in support of the amendment. Thank you. Thank you councelor Austin. Thank you Madam Chair. Uh I would not be in support of the amendment either. I think the hours that they've presented
are reasonable. Um I want to keep them functional. I want them to work if they can bring more business to Marro between 8 and 9. You're going to hear you're going to need a school here shortly. We need revenue folks just to remind you. I would highly recommend that the
amendment not be passed be withdrawn and we approve as submitted the hours listed by the applicant. Thank you. Right. Is there further? Councelor Presiato. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um I am also in support of the hour change from 9 to 8.
Um it is only an hour. Um, and I think when you um compare your business to a liquor store, it kind of g um uh kind of disservices your your your uh business a little bit. Um you're not there essentially to provide recreational um
products. You're there also to provide medical products. Um so just for that reason, I would support that. But I would also support um standardizing these hours for the rest of the shops as well um at some point. Thank you. Good luck with that. Council, do I see you have a hand up?
Thank you. Yes, I've been listening to you on WMCTTV and uh thank you for being here and I will agree with the last two counselors that well last two council that spoke of trying to get these hours standardized so that's the same for everyone. So I
would have no problem if everyone's following the same hours and hopefully we can match that with your request. Thank you, Madam Chair. Well, currently everybody's not the same hours. Currently, Garden Remedies is 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday,
10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Sunday. Uh, Green Meadow Farm is 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. and 10 to 9 on Sunday. Green Gold is 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and 10:00 a.m. to 8:00
p.m. on Sunday. and VD natural is 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Sunday. Thank you, Madam Chair. So, we tried having a standard and it did not succeed. So, now we've let people come in as they see fit, pay
their filing fee to change and change again uh as it suits them. So, it's really up to this body or a future body to either make a standard or to um let applicants come and put forth
their spiel and we decide. Madam Chair, if I may just one other comment. Thank you first of all for that information. It appears 11:00 might be becoming a standard at in the evening. Uh and at the same time I would like to
see that we uh treat those hours as no different as mentioned by councelor Naven as we do the uh liquor stores. Thank you. I think councelor Naven mentioned that. If not it was this group here. Thank you councelor vital. A good Thank you madam chair and thank you guys
for coming in today. They are uh business constituents in my ward so I support what they have. But what I do on a personal note from a counselor I support it. From a personal note, I'm becoming an expert on the dos and don'ts of hours for cannabis retailers here in
Marbor. I believe I've only been here not even two years, and I think this is the third or maybe even the fourth time that an hours have to get adjusted. I fear by agreeing with my constituents here that we're going to have the other two coming down and saying, "Well, we want 8:00. We want 8:00." And then it's
it's it's getting kind of silly just um going back and forth. And that so I share that with you as well. Thank you. All right. Uh, it has Oh, councelor Ducet. Thank you. Um, I'm the one that started this, so I think I need to at least clean up some of the mess. Um, I think
the the opening at 9:00 a.m. seems to be the standard is what you were saying, uh, Madam Chair. Um, but I do think that if the more we tweak it, as what council vital said, they're going to come back and say, "Well, I want eight and I want eight, and then you're going to come back and I want seven and then it's
going to run around again." So I I think we need to lock in, you know, the times that are pretty consistent across all the different dispensaries, which seems to be, you know, 9 to 11 during the week and Sundays 10 to 9. That seems to be pretty close where everyone's going. You
be corrected into that and I'm fine with that. Um, but I think that uh if we deviate from that, we're going to continue coming back to this because I think right now we're pretty much locking into a normal time for dispensaries. and I'd rather stay with
that. The the amount of revenue that the city would get over that extra hour is probably not going to amount to even pay for gas for a bus stop for a bus but you know school bus uh in a year because it's you know in the first thing in the morning you don't get a mad rush you
know they come in later in the morning when they you know the only ones that are there are the ones that can't make it later in the day. So dispensary you know either medical or recreational but I'm staking with my chain. All right. And and I I hear what everybody's saying. I know I was the one
that tried to standardize. Um Green Meadow Farms came in in May of this year to modify their original hours that were set when they were calvery in 2021. Garden Remedies came
back in January of this year to change their hours. Um I don't believe the other two have come back for change. Well, Green Gold did um already change their hours. So,
we've set ourselves up for people coming back and wanting different hours. And as long as we don't have a standard, I don't know how you can stop somebody from filling out the application to amend their special permit. We have to either say no when they come back or
let them move. So, um any other comments? Councelor Fill. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just one last remark. I, you know, it seems like I'm I'm one of the few counselors who does like this case byase basis, and that's fine. I think every business is different. You folks are the only dispensary on that side of town, and so I take that into
account. Um, you're definitely going to have different folks driving from that side of town on that portion of Route 20. Um, and so for that reason, you know, there are going to be subtle differences. Um, I just want to confirm your stores in Charleston and Palmer in in your original um just kind of overview do open at 8:00 a.m. Have there
any been any issues in that 8 to 9:00 window at any of your other stores? We've seen a positive change. Mhm. Right. And so go ahead. I I was just going to echo what um Amanda had said is we do see um as we've seen, you know, our business tracks the
traffic trends of the roads that we're on. So you have a morning rush hour, you have an evening rush hour. Those are our busier periods. And then the 11:00 catches people who are working uh second shift that you know 3 to 11 shift essentially. So we have a morning spike as people are out doing their morning
errands after they drop their kids off at school or you know if they're working at night on their way back. Uh our midday period is a little bit slower and then we see an evening uh pickup. um that's as people are driving home from work and then that sort of rush right at the end of the day um right before we
close. So um just as you said, we're we're trying to match the traffic patterns that we're seeing versus um hoping that our hours will induce demand. Thank you. I appreciate that. And I you know the way I see it, the bottom line is you folks have come to us saying that there's a way to better your business
and that this body can help you guys achieve that. So, you know, I am in full support of what you folks are looking for and I encourage counselors to to try to see it that same way because again, the bottom line is you folks are coming to us. You've done it at two of your other stores. You're asking to do it here. It works in those communities. I
don't see why there is any issue with opening at 8 a.m. Thank you, Madam Chair. All right. There is a uh motion on the floor to move to amend the hours to keep the current Monday through Saturday 9:00 increase it to
11:00 from 10:00 and then to have Sunday from 10:00 a.m. to 900 p.m. Um I think this is both of your first times in front of this body. So there's a lot of us here. There are officially five voting members of urban affairs. The
rest of the council are considered members but not voting. So there will be five people. I am the chair. Councelor Naban is the vice chair. Councelor Ducet, councelor Presiato, and councelor Fchillo are the five members, the voting members of this. Uh what we vote tonight
will then get presented at a future city council meeting with a recommendation. I can ask for a suspension if you're in a hurry or it could lay on the table. um actually I think would have to be referred to the solicitor and then at
the following meeting the final document would be uh up for a vote of the of the full council. So if madam chair counceloring so the 90-day period is up at our October 20th meeting unless they file an
extension. Okay. Oh, I I was going to look that up today and I totally So, we have October 6th and then October 20th. So, if I can report it out on the 6th to refer it, it could be on the 20th's agenda for
a decision of some sort. Um, it's a special permit. All right. Um, all those in favor of amending to make the hours 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Sunday 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.
One, two, and all those opposed. One, two, three. So, it does not carry. Is there someone willing to make a motion to approve as Madam Chair submitted? Fill.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh move to approve um the modified special permit as presented. Actually, some corrections as well. Madam core got duplicated with with the clerical with the clerical as corrected as corrected by by yourself, Madam
Chair. The few clerical errors that you'd noticed. Yes. All right. It's been moved and seconded to amend as a to approve as correct presented with a couple of questions for
the solicitor on um what should be in there and to double check on and to remove number four as a repeat. Um all those in favor one two three four five. All right. Thank you all for your indulgence in
that. So, this will be reported out. As I said, I'll move to suspend so it can go to the solicitor. He can check over my questions, the document, make sure it's in legal form. The hours will be as you submitted them, and it'll be a full council vote then in the future. Excellent. Thank you so much.
Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Give them a couple of minutes to get their things. Thank you. Thank you so much. All right. The second item on our agenda
is the order number 25100 9495, a communication from the mayor regarding Richard Elementary School feasibility study update. I am going to quickly read the mayor's letter. Dear council president Oing and
counselors, over the past year, the city has continued to make progress on the richer elementary school feasibility study. This process has included the formation of a school building committee, the appointment of Vertex as the owner's project manager, and the selection of a designer, Lamaro Pagano
Associates and Architects, to guide the project through its initial phase of the study. The feasibility study follows a structured process outlined by the Massachusetts School Building Authority which includes several key phases. The preliminary design program phase
involves developing the educational program, an initial space summary, evaluating existing building conditions, outlining site development requirements, and the preliminary evaluation of alternatives. The next phase, the preferred schematic
report, refineses the evaluation of the site and existing conditions, confirms enrollment projections, conducts a final review of design alternatives, and identifies a preferred solution. Finally, the schematic design phase includes development of a design,
traffic and environmental assessments, geotechnical and code analysis, ADA, MAB compliance review, sustainability goals, detailed room data sheets, and construction cost estimates. This culminates in the determination of
a total project budget and submission of the maximum reimburseable grant to the MSBA. This update is being provided to the city council as part of our commitment to transparency throughout the richer elementary school feasibility study process.
An attached boundformational packet includes additional details for your review. Vertex, our OPM, is available and would be happy to attend a future council meeting or public forum to answer any questions you may have. That letter was written in June of 2025
and we all received the bound packet. Now tonight we have Vertex and we have Lamaro Pagano Associates with us. Uh there are multiple people here. So I know Chris and Christine and Chris want to come up um and do the
presentation. I'll let you introduce yourselves. We do have the superintendent of schools here with us and of some other people from both Vert.Ex and LPA. I am a member of the school building
committee um and have been involved in the working group that has also been leading. We also have Ted Scott who is also a member of the school building committee. Thank you Ted for attending. So, I'll let you
start with the presentation of some new material and everybody should have received another packet of the slides. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, as part of the packet, we provided some background information about the overall process that has to do with the MSBA. For those
of you who were able to attend our uh well attended public forum last Thursday, we had a lot of members of the community come and ask questions. I apologize for those who attended because we have a little bit of redundancy, but we've tried to make this presentation focused on the parts of the project that
we think are most relevant to you. We'll be open to answer any questions that you may have on anything related to the project at the conclusion of the presentation. Uh what we want to talk today is just to talk about some of the key decisions that have to be made in terms of the
schedule related to the MSBA prod um process. We want to madam. Can we have an introduction of the folks who are up here? Sure. Chris, you want to introduce? Certainly. Um, so I'm Christopher Eberly. I am the project executive from the Vert.ex companies where the OPM on
the project. In the audience joining me are my team of Steve Theren who is the senior project manager and Matt Stirs who is our project manager on the project. Also with me this evening is Christina Basilman. Um she is the project architect for Lamaro Pagano
Associates and uh Chris Lee also from Lamaro Pagano. Um he serves as the project manager for the architect. With them is uh Peter Caruso who is the principal in charge for Lamaro Pagano. And also with us in case there are questions is the principal of uh Richard
Elementary School, Lisa Richards. Um Dr. Jason Defalco, the superintendent of schools. and um if needed uh Ted Scott um the DPW commissioner who also serves as the chair of the school building committee. Thank you.
Um the last item that we want to really focus on is really the cost and schedule decisions that are going to be made over the course of the next couple of weeks. And that's really why we've come to you at this stage because we're at the end of um we're at the end of a process. And
so the MSBA breaks their feasibility study up into multiple phases. And within those phases, it really amounts to three key elements. We start with once you bring the team in, we have the preliminary design program stage. That's where we really talk about what goes in
the building. And then we focus on the uh preferred schematic report, which is really where the community decides what of the multiple schemes that are considered do you choose to move forward. at that point, as the mayor's letter um outlined, into a schematic
design phase. And what that really is is it's focusing on taking the scheme that's selected and looking at the the myriad of decisions that need to be made to ensure that you can turn it into a building that you can develop a budget for. And we'll come back with that uh
construction process, that um budget, as well as an outline of the building that's proposed. And that'll really dictate what you will we will ask of the full committee to select at the end of SD. The end of SD, you will be selecting a budget and choosing to fund that full
budget. For that, the MSBA will review the information and offer you a maximum facilities grant based on the budget that you propose to them. When you propose that budget, you do have to vote to bond the entirety of the budget, but you will receive reimbursements for the
first 95% of that based on the structure of the MSBA's grant program up until the last 5%. often that last 5% you'll receive at the conclusion of construction plus 2 to 3 years and in some cases even longer as the MSBA
audits everything that they reimburse on that will move you into the really the meat of construct of design and construction documents where you'll spend about a year deciding um the building exactly as you want it developing it within that budget that
you've approved and then you'll move into documenting that which we expect to conclude sometime around the end of the summer in 2027. At that point, we'll start construction and we anticipate that construction will lead us to opening the school in the
fall of 2029 on the current schedule that we are on. With that, I'll turn it over to Christina to speak about the process that we've gone through. Thanks once again, Christina Basilman's with Lamro Pagano Associates Architects.
This here on this on this on the screen is a summary slide to kind of show you what we've been up to for the last several months. The first course of action along the top was to work closely with the school and district to um establish the educational program and the educational plan. And so that allows
us to get an idea of the key adjacencies, the sizes of the spaces and the size of the building that are going to be needed that is going to be needed to support a 950 student elementary school. And the second one in the on the second line, we um at the same time completed an evaluation of the existing
buildings in the existing site. We wanted to try to get an understanding of the existing challenges and constraints of those existing buildings and sites so that we could inform the scope of work for our base repair and um addition
renovation options. And the last line along the bottom um just kind of outlines our exhaustive site search. We also took a look at um over 130 sites 10 acres plus um west of Route 85 and were able to whittle that down and whittle
that down until we were eventually only left with a handful of parcels as a potential that would act as a potential alternative site for the richer elementary school. And so one of the first questions that always come up is why can't we just repair the existing building?
Um and this is as Chris indicated very much required as part of the feasibility study and we have analyzed it in great depth with scopes of work and cost estimates. Um the base repair would be costly and disruptive but the most important piece of the puzzle here is that the base repair cannot provide that
additional space that is required to support the 950 student enrollment. And as you'll hear from the district, that is one of the most critical goals of the project and really required to address overcrowding throughout the district in all the elementary schools.
So the second frequently asked question is, well, why can't we just add on to the existing building? And so that's also required to review um to be reviewed at part as part of the um analysis. And we did um we did review how we could potentially add on to and renovate the existing building. And
unfortunately that came in to be more expensive than new construction. And then most importantly it was it ended up being a longer construction duration. So it was a longer period of time that we would be disrupting the existing um students and staff in the existing um
Richard Elementary School which was not a a desirable feature. So for that reason that was somewhat eliminated kind of early on. So clicking there we go. Um this on the screen now is just a highle overview of
the options that we've considered and and the working group has kind of dismissed in some ways. So the first one I mentioned was the one that's called BR that's base repair that can't accommodate the additional enrollment. So we we kind of took that one out of consideration. Then we have the AR
options which stands for addition renovation options. And again we mentioned those ones came in as more expensive and more disruptive to the existing school. And then along the bottom, the three along the bottom are new construction. So NC stands for new construction. 1 2 A and 2B is what we're
considering kind of some different configurations of the building on the existing site. And we've whittleled that down to be um just the one option, new construction 2A on the existing site, which is the most compact and efficient option that we were able to come up
with. Now, at the same time, we did not forget about the alternative sites. We've been whittling down the alternative sites as well to the point that we are just down to one option on an alternative site which is called new construction 6 NC6
uh which is a new construction at the forest and as site. So today what Chris is going to walk you through is these two options that are still on the table for the working group. So, the new construction on the existing retro site and the new construction on the forest and aim site
and I'm going to turn it over to you to Thank you, Christina. Again, my name is Christopher Lee. I'm a project manager with Nagago Associates. Um, no formal decision has been made, but these are the trending um trending items that we're looking at in
terms of all the options. to jump right into it. There's only one location within the existing site to to accommodate the size of building we're looking at for 950 students and that's down the hill on the fields. Now, for context, what you see in gray
is the existing existing building and that's 65 ft at the pinch point. Now, Vert.Ex and LPA has um history with projects that are even closer 10, 15, 30 ft apart. So 65 is construction friendly
in many ways. As Christina mentioned, this building configuration is the most compact and efficient of the ones that we've been able to study. We're able to respect the numerous setbacks present on the property as well as distance construction furthest from the existing
school. We're also intentionally building into the hill. So, we're entering on the main floor, the middle floor, and occupants will only have to travel up or down one floor. So, that makes a big building smaller in experience.
Now, the pilling fields would not be available for recess or to the public for about 2 years during construction. So, that's just a footnote there. We also realize traffic's important. So, we're showing two two different traffic
patterns. The buses would use the front driveway from Foley Road and have their own loop road and that's shown in the red arrows to the left of the new school. Parents could um now current codes and
emergency responders require a ring road around the school. So that could also double as a parent drop off if that is um looking to be reestablished for drop off and pickup. It would start on Ripley
Avenue, circle around what is um shown in gray is the existing building or the new location of fields and playgrounds and exit back the way they came. To explain the design concept and to think of spaces as building blocks, um
we're intentionally taking the gym and cafeteria and stacking them over each other just to save on footprint because we're on a tight site and so we're trying to find efficiencies. And so, um, that was intentional and we're doing that on different levels. And so, there's a little nickname for this
scheme. It's just the stacked gym or cafeteria option to locate um, kids where they are the most in their classrooms. We're putting those around the entire perimeter of the school and then putting support and
shared spaces in the middle. And to make those spaces desirable and have daylight and views, we endeavor to have skylights and light wells to make the spaces um equally day lit. Now, the last piece in this design is
that we would endeavor to have a monumental ramp that would embrace universal accessibility. What you see on the screen now are the preliminary prints to prove out that concept. And you can see the number of light blue rooms around the perimeter.
Those are classrooms around some of those shared spaces in the middle. We're located kindergarten and first grade on the main floor and that is to the left. On the lower floor would be uh the fifth graders, the cafeteria, music rooms,
mechanical and cluster of custodial spaces. On the top floor are three grades. [Applause] Um second grade, third grade, and fourth grade with innovation labs and art rooms
just to name a few. And so in overall summary, we find that this is um a strong scheme that can meet the educational goals and have flexibility for the future. Uh there are some architectural qualities that I mentioned that will
make the environment inspiring for students, staff and visitors uh they want to be in. Now this next slide is an orientation slide. We we are showing in yellow on the top right
the existing victor skull at the other end at the bottom is the Ames and Forest site. It's at the intersection. So really this is just to demonstrate that that the school really bookends the same neighborhood. So despite being a new location, it's
nearby and familiar. It's a smaller site, but with less restrictions, so we're able to better utilize the site. There's two access points, one off uh each Ames and Forest Street. And so that helps with traffic patterns
for both buses and cars. On the bottom right, you'd see the right arrows for buses. They would be able to come in, be able to line up in front of the school. Um, possible pattern for for parents. They could come off Aim Street, circle around the perimeter of the site, and
exit the way they came. And this is the one of the few options that would able to onboard the site with all the um projected traffic or cars required in a queue for um really pickup
because drop off rolling typically. Um the parking is also colllocated well with uh the location of fields um for after school um community use.
And to explain this design concept is really a separation of public and private. We endeavor to have all the public spaces, your gym, your cafeteria, your media center type spaces cluster together near the main entrance and then have more conventional classrooms, your private spaces kind of
shooting off of that. And so you'd be able to um be able to lock those off concise points. And this just so happens to take an L-shaped configuration. What you see is the preliminary plan for the main floor. This would also be kind
of that split level configuration. Entering the main floor, be able to go up or down one floor. Kindergarten, first grade again are located here. This also has strong opportunities to meet the educational plan. It's just a lot more flexibility on the site to
reconfigure things. So, um, these are these really are, uh, initial concepts. Um, what you're seeing would likely change just a little bit to as we continue to meet with teachers and the school to refine, um, the program
to look at the upper floors quickly. There are just two grades per floor. Take that over, please. Um, second and and third grade would be on the lower floor. fifth grade and fourth grade would be at the upper floor each with
their own support type spaces. Next slide please. And so the last slide I have to share with you is just the evaluation criteria. We did this twice once for the first phase and um our revising the set
of criteria for this phase. And so location in the district is paramount. we're considering is the area, whether it's on-site or off-site, suitable for a school. All those traffic considerations feed into that first criteria, location within the district.
The second criteria is the ED plan. We're trying to accommodate a large enrollment, the spaces needed to support that program. And so, there are a number of items there that feed into that. Second criteria, site and facility goals as well, both operationally kind of
temporary during construction, but also long-term. What are all those factors that would also feed into um criteria number three? And the last three are really just about construction scheduling cost. And I think Chris is going to elaborate on those in the next
few slides. So, um to give you a quick primer, there's two methods of precuring construction. two primary methods of procuring construction in Massachusetts. One is to design the entire building to receive a bid and to move forward with construction. The other one is to hire a
construction manager earlier in the design process and they provide you with a service that opens up a couple of avenues that really affect schedule. They're allowed to procure certain portions of that construction ahead of time and that allows to accelerate certain parts of the schedule. And
there's really a key difference between the two sites as it comes to consideration of how you would procure it. For the richer site, um it would be the bottom schedule because when you're talking about an occupied construction, you really want a contractor who is
working for you as a service. You really want to have the flexibility to adjust to things as they need to modify their site limits or as they need to change times to react to things that are affecting the education of students. It really provides an opportunity for them
to um work together as a team and we brought members of the school building committee to one of our sites where we have a CM so they could see what that interaction was and hear from the staff at that location about what that interaction is. Now there is a cost
premium that you pay and when we estimated the various sites there was roughly a 10% cost premium for going forward with CM at risk. Now, it is still possible on the top to open the building at the same time if you're pursuing that design
bid build approach. And so, we recommend that approach on the forest and aim site should the city be able to acquire that site. It's really a the ability to open at the same time, but you no longer need the extra 8 months to prepare the site to receive um a building project so
close to children and also the time at the end to demo the existing building and finish the project that's would be going under that existing building. So that was the recommendation that we made and how we reflected the cost pricing. The SBC did a thorough evaluation of the
site. When we do this uh evaluation, we really try and do it from a relative evaluation approach. We don't think what is the best possible site. We talk about the sites that we're considering and how one is more advantageous than the other. We use the criteria that Chris described
in order to understand um how they related. And from that it was clear that where green is the um most advantageous in the dark green and advantageous in the light green, yellow is neutral, orange is less advantageous and red is
least advantageous. We really found through this evaluation that both NC2A, the first scheme that Chris presented, and NC6, the second scheme, um that Chris presented also made a lot of sense. We did a breakdown of the costs and so
we wanted to present this to this group so that you understood not just the how are we educating the students but what are the cost impacts of this process as we move through. I want to remind you that at this point we're at about 15% of the overall design process and when we come back to you to ask you to authorize
a budget for the full project we'll be at about 30% of the design process. So there's always a string of decisions that needs to be made in each one of those that's appropriate to where we are in that process. With the initial decisions that we made in the PDP, as we described in the packet we provided you
in June, we talked about the fact that PDP is really about looking at what are people across the the state looking to spend on their schools and then looking at the minor differences between the various schemes. And I think you saw in the results that we gave you that those
costs were very comparable between the schemes. there was not a huge variation between the different schemes that we looked at, but at the time we did not have information about the um the purchase of a site and where the value of that site was. So that was not
included in those early PDP numbers. As we move forward to PSR, that center column, you can see that um in some cases such as 2A and also NC6 and NC7, the overall cost of the project came down in terms of the bottom line. But as
part of the evolution of that 15% of the work that we need to do, we also identified through the comments that the MSBA came back that we needed to add a little more space because in all these schemes we were adding slightly more space. The cost per square foot between
where we started and where we are now came down in each one of those cases. Now, we're only a short way into the overall estimating um process. So, we're still talking about the building in terms of per square foot numbers, but with the difference between these two
stages is we also begin to talk about um exterior. We begin to think about it as a 3D volume and we estimate it as such. So, we're making certain assumptions about what the envelope, the outside walls of the building will be and how they differ between schemes. And that really led to some of the variation
here. You can see that we came down $39 per square foot in terms of the cost for construction on scheme 2A and we came down $123 per square foot on NC6. Now, a big reason that NC6 and NC7 came down by so
much is the decision to pursue that cost in terms of design bid build. And that's that 10% difference that we talked about a little earlier. Now, we also looked at filling in that blank of what would it cost to potentially acquire a site because I
think this is an important piece of information that you need to consider when you look at the overall results. We cannot necessarily force a sale, but we can find out what the market price is for a sale. We did not have access to either of the properties. We hired a
commercial appraiser to develop an appraisal report and that was provided to the school building committee as part of the information that we produced along with detailed estimates um for pricing the scheme. At this time we found that for NC6 it appraised at 5.85
85 million. When you take into account it passing with its 90 unit development overlay that it presented to this council that as you all know that did not pass at the time. And so we also asked them to look at what was the cost
of that um parcel without the zone the 90 unit zoning overlay and they came back with the $2.3 million number. So there's roughly a um a $3.55 million difference in terms of the value leaving that zoning overlay
from a commercial appraisal standpoint. We also looked at NC7 and it came back at $8 million, but through the discussion with the school building um committee, we determined that that was not an ideal location to put a school. That was one of the biggest reasons.
It's more of an industrial area. It's not really a walkable area for kids and it doesn't really fit in a neighborhood as is so important to a lot of the residents of Richard who came to our public meeting last week. We also wanted to talk about some of the acquisition
risks because obviously you cannot necessarily force someone to sell you land unless you go through an eminent domain approach. And so when you're considering whether or not to proceed with a um with the NC6 option, you need to understand what some of those risks
are. The MSBA will require that by the time we get to that budget point, you have a clear plan for how you're going to achieve that ownership of that site. So they want to in they prefer that you can tell them by that time that you own the
land, but if you cannot, they will delay continuing to reimburse until you can prove you own that land. You don't lose money in that process unless you never own the land. But you could have to wait before you can enter into the continued agreement, similar to the feasibility
study agreement you've already entered into before they're going to continue to reimburse for you. If you continue with the design without owning the land, you're taking a risk. In the event that you don't own it and you have to design another um building on the richer site, that would be a sunk cost and there'd be
additional costs associated with that. But also, if you decide that you want to pause, there's costs with that. We're seeing about 3% construction escalation. And so, you're talking about with the numbers that we got about $5.2 $2 million annually for that delay. Um, in
terms of just the price of construction continuing to increase, there's also no guarantee that the sale will close. Even in eminent domain, the land owner can delay the process through legal means for a period of time. And so there is risk associated with that. We
want to be clear with you about what that risk is. So when we talk about where the numbers actually fell in terms of the budget, we talk about construction costs in two different ways. We have the hard costs. The hard costs are the construction estimate that the estimator gives us.
And that really speaks to what it takes to buy the building that you're looking at at the end of the day. The soft costs are the things that it takes in addition to the construction contract to deliver that building. And we ran the numbers a couple of different ways with each of
these scenarios and ended up around 30% for those soft costs. That includes architecture and OPM fees. It includes some of the site investigation costs. It also includes contingency. You'll often hear from folks in the construction industry that change orders are one of
the banees of their existence. But we've been successful in planning for construction. This is our 18th core grant program as a firm and we have a great success record in delivering projects under budget by having appropriate contingencies for the
project and those contingencies are included in that 30% to make sure that with the budget you approve and obviously those are those can change but with the budget you approve that it's appropriate um risk management to make sure that we have contingencies for
anything that could come up. Now, when you compare these numbers to the um to what was provided in your packet in June, in all cases, they came down. In the case of um NC2A, it came down about
$15.5 million after the MSBA reimbursement um compared to where we were in June. In the case of NC6, we estimated it to be um 86 million plus the site cost at that time. But now that we have the
appraisal, if you include the appraisal, just based on that 86 million, we came down about $19.8 million. Now, there's two reasons for that. One, we know more details about the building, so we're able to get better costs. And in all cases, there's a chart in the packet we
gave you in June that shows how construction costs have escalated. In all cases, those construction costs per square foot came down in all of the schemes that we looked at, as we showed you on the previous slide. And so we're still at the bottom range for projects that are on a similar timetable through
a lot of the choices that LPA made as they put together their construction um outlines that are part of the uh material that that come up with the estimate. The other thing that changed is that the MSBA changed their um the
way in which their program works. So when you get your reimbursement, your reimbursement is not a straight percentage. They will give you a percentage number, but that percentage number is to decide how much of their eligible costs you're allowed to be reimbursed for. You can influence that
with certain decisions that you made. And we made certain decisions about pursuing a um uh mechanical system that provides a green schools 4% increase um by pursuing the specialized energy code. We also um made some assump some
conservative assumptions about the percentage that you get for maintenance. But that percentage which for Marboro works out to be somewhere around after those changes about 76%. Is of the eligible costs. So, the MSBA has a time-tested um outline where they
determine what costs are eligible and they have recently between um when we submitted the PDP information and now held a board meeting and decided to elevate those costs. They've increased the cost as it relates to technology
reimbursement, furniture reimbursement, which are both done per student. So, that's just additional money that you're getting for the 950 students. But they also increased where they cap construction costs and where they cap site costs. And by increasing those
caps, it was a significant amount of the increased reimbursement that you would receive from the MSBA in support of the project. Now, when we talk about reimbursement at this level, you have to understand that we've made 15% of the decisions and we have to make the same amount of decisions in the next 6 months
that we've already made over the last year to get to that budget. So these things remain variable and when we talk about them we always encourage you to think of them as a range. I've presented this slide with the cost per share per the MSBA grant at the bottom in terms of
the number that it calculated to, but I want you to think of that as a range. The MSBA reimbursement could be up or down by $2 million and the conceptual total project budget could be up or down by about $4 million because we still
have a ton of decisions to make to get to a budget that we would ask this committee to support. As you can see, the result of this is that the two cheapest options that are under consideration today that we've presented to you are uh 71.5 million after about
98 million in MSBA reimbursement and 66.2 million when using the appraised value as the value of the property um for NC6. NC6 does have a lower MSBA reimbursement because the cost of acquiring the property is not an
eligible cost that you receive reimbursement on. So, while it's significantly cheaper to be able to do design bid build on a separate site without the interruption to the educational process that's going on in at Richard Elementary School during that time, you do also not get reimbursed for
certain items. I also want to say that the MSBA grant is a maximum total grant. So they will set a value that value will be set when we submit to them at their June board meeting and that will be the amount that they will give you. That fits within the confines of their
program and I am not aware of any community in the state that has received that dollar value because they either choose to pursue things that aren't fully eligible and they don't get reimbursement in the back end. their bids come in really low and they don't get a certain amount of that
reimbursement or their change orders end up really high and you only get so much reimbursement there. And so that is the most that you will get back and the least the project will cost. But what I can tell you is that in all the projects I've been involved in and that my firm has been involved in, when you have that
maximum total project grant, often you're not getting it because you don't spend all the money. If you go see them at risk, it's common place to get a million dollars or more back at the end of the project. That million dollars that you get back, you never spent it, so you don't get reimbursed on it. And
communities will often lower their bonding because they know that that reimbursement is coming 3 to 4 months after the project is um after the money is spent. When we ran the numbers, you work out to an effective reimbursement rate of about 57 to 59%. So, while the
number 71% is out there in the community, once you apply the MSBA program, what that actually amounts to is about 59 to 57% of the costs that you actually pay, you'll get reimbursement on from the MSBA at the end of the day.
That's how you get at the end of the day $170 million project for about $71.5 million from the numbers that we're presenting to you. When we went to the uh city controller, we asked him to use the 71.2
um as his basis for figuring out the tax impact of bonding. So the information that was submitted to you in your packet that spells out that tax impact is based on proceeding with NC2A. If you were to pursue NC6 and be able to acquire the
land for a price less than or at the appraisal or even the appraisal plus $6 million, the difference between the two schemes, you would be able to um lower that tax impact just purely based on that you're spending less money. So with
that, um we just wanted to update you on what remains to be coming. The um school building committee will be meeting next Thursday to choose a um scheme that will move forward. We'll be talking about the evaluation that we had. We'll be talking
about the dynamics of um all the costs that we presented as well as the impact to education. then we'll be coming back to your joint meeting with the school committee because the MSBA requires us to the MSBA system creates a school building committee and so they ask them
to choose the scheme but they also ask that both the school committee and the government body in the city of Marbor the city council votes to endorse the choice that the school committee makes. They do that because they want to show that the community is on board with moving forward with the project and so
they do ask that um the governing body endorse the decisions that are being made related to the project. So Chris, I I have an issue with that. Okay. What you just said was the school committee makes a decision and then we endorse it. No, I expect Go ahead.
The school building committee, not the That's not what he said. I'm sorry, I missed. School committee. uh the school building committee makes the choice and then the school committee and the city council endorse that choice. I I apologize if I misspoke. It's okay. I want to be clear. This is a
city council. We get to I am uncomfortable with the school committee with the city council taking action without the school committee making their recommendation. All right. And I and I my personal opinion it should not be in a joint function. Just my opinion. We'll see how
it goes. I haven't had this disc the mayor knows where I'm at, but we'll there'll be more discussion on this, but I just want that out on the table that we should hear from the school committee, not the building committee, the school committee, what they're looking at and we can factor that into
our decision. Making that at the same time, I don't think is what because we will not be in control of the meeting. The meeting will be facilitated by the mayor. it won't be a city council meeting and that's taking
away the city council authority my opinion. Thank you Chris and to give you and I it's not on the slide but to give you perspective on the schedule. So the MSBA wants us to submit by October 23rd in terms of the report that we put
together. There's a there work we need to do after that report concludes in order to put it together and package everything including the endorsement vote that will come from the community. So there is time in the event that the city of Marbor and I say that at large
decides that they want to change that structure. We do have a little bit of time to make this decision. Um and so I just want you all to be aware of that that it's the the 6th is early in what we originally thought for the process. We were trying to take advantage of the fact that you would both be in the same
place to be able to have a joint conversation about it. But obviously we we don't control your city. We are we work for you and we try to deliver service as best we can. So if there's an opportunity to change that, we have about 2 3 weeks to sort that out.
Thank you, Chris. So with that, we would open it up to any questions that you have about what we've presented today or any other questions that you have about the project. Before I open it up, I I just want to I I certainly hear councelor Austin's concerns, but I
believe the word was endorsed by the school committee and the city council. It's not a vote of a choice of one or the other. There will be a recommendation made by the school building committee between the two choices that you were told about
tonight. And then that choice, one of those buildings either at Richard or at Ames and Forest will be before for an endorsement. A simple, okay, fine, move forward. No debating. No, I want to go the other
way. No any of that. It's simply thank you very much. Yes, we endorse. So, if there is discussion between the president and the mayor to change that decision to be October 6th, I guess
we'll hear about it at a future meeting. Um, with that, I'm going to open it up for questions. And I see councelor Ducet's hand up, so I'm going to kind of go around. Thank Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Uh, couple of things. Excellent
presentation. Covered a lot of ground. really do appreciate uh the work you guys did. Um clarification on a couple of things. Um in the handouts that wasn't part of the presentation, uh you talk about the tax impact for the average home. My question is, is that
tax impact an annual expense or is it the entire duration? Um, my understanding, I don't know if the mayor wants to uh clarify, but what my understanding is that they based it on a 30-year bond, and the average tax impact that we um presented to the citizens at
the public forum last week was the average tax impact of $219 over the course of 30 years, just annualizing it as a as a mean. So, it is an annual amount. It would it's not annually increase. It's in addition to whatever your tax impact is now.
Yeah. You would have an extra 219 on that each year. Yeah. You would not pay until the bond is over. It wouldn't compound. So, well, yeah, bonds don't compound, but Yeah. Okay. But yeah, it's So, that's the annual rate, you know, until it's paid off in 30
years. Yes, that's why. And I appreciate that clarification. Uh, the other thing is, um, in the handouts you provided for the meeting, there was this reference to Kane School. Yes. Okay. Is that part of the conversation
now or is that being put off till later? No. So the as part of the MSBA's process that um the when the city of Marbor entered into the feasibility study agreement, the they provided you with two enrollments. They said you could
have built an 870 um student school and separately on your own you could renovate Kain or you could choose a 950 student school. That's in response to an educational plan that was submitted that
seeks to take students out of the other schools and put them into richer in order to make richer significantly larger, but also lower the enrollments at your o overcrowded schools. the MSBA pushed for an option in that discussion
with Mary Murphy when she was still here to have the um Kain building be considered so that you would continue to disperse your residents in a slightly you wouldn't have as large a school and you would still have a little bit more room in Kane. We did study that option
and the numbers for that were in the packet that we provided you um in June. The school committee, let me make sure I say it right this time. The school committee did vote at their meeting two weeks ago um that they would select the
$950 option because when we looked at the economics of Kain, it just didn't make sense. It was a $70 million project and that $70 million project only touched a couple of things. It touched making the building bigger. It touched code triggers like having to
go through and widen all the doorways because the ADA code today wants bigger doorways and it touched some HVAC repairs. It didn't give you a new roof. It didn't change your envelope or change your energy efficiency. It didn't look at
fixing any of the other problems that are present in the building. All of that compounds on top of that. So for a cost per student that was unusually high, you were looking at an unreimbured cost to pursue the cane school or you were
looking at a much more cost-effective solution to get reimbursement on a 950 school. And ultimately the school committee voted to proceed with the 950 school which takes all of those 870 options off the table and it also takes the cane renovation off the table.
There's nothing that precludes you from submitting a statement of interest in the future because you're one of the comm the few communities that's been successful in entering the core grant program with the MSBA twice and you know it's based on need. So if the need is sufficient at
the cane school because you're building this and you continue to grow that could certainly be in Marorrow's future but at this time there is no plan to do any further work in the cane school. Okay. I will add that as part of the process, we did ask that we do extensive
study in terms of understanding where the building is at and understanding some of the challenges of renovating the building and that information is provided to the community so that if you ever choose to move into that, you have a basis to begin that discussion. Okay. Thank you for the clarification. I
appreciate it. Council Orum. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh first question is what was discussed just a few minutes ago. uh the schedule that you show for the October 2nd and October 6 endorsements and decisions
is that provided by the MSBA or is that something that was created within your review? No, it's um the MSBA decides so they have a structure that requires that you have a school building committee and they provide you an outline of who should be on a school building committee. There's certain requirements.
the city councelor for instance um often the chief executive of off always the superintendent and a number of others we have a community resident Joe Trollola who's part of the school building committee and the school building committee is what the MSBA believes is the vehicle that communities make their
decisions now in addition to that they have certain things that they also ask other boards or committees within communities to weigh in on so enrollment is always decided by the school committee and at milestones such as the
preferred schematic report and schematic design, they want to make sure that there's endorsement from the executive um in this case the city council and they want to make sure there's an endorsement of the school committee on the solution that you eventually move forward. Thank you. And and I should have started
my conversation with thank you for both your presentation last week as well as tonight. Every time you speak, I learn a little bit more. So, thank you. Another question I have to the Q's at presently at Richard's school it's going to
increase in students to 950. Did they calculate how far the the cues will go back like on Ripley and Foley? Have those been determined on the increase in student population that cuz I saw it even at good now the queue was
down the street of the high school and they changed it to the parking lot. Has there been a determination on the queue both cues both at the Forest Ames and the present school system based on the increase of 950 students?
I'll turn that over to Chris to speak to. Thank you. So, we did have a traffic study at both schools, the Kane School and the Richard School. And so from the information gathered at those times, we were able to project a certain number of
cars to be about 70, which is an increase from what you have now cuz it' be a bigger school. And um the current school configuration that we showed you is actually um we we can talk about either um would be able
to accommodate most of the queue. I think we estimated about 64 cars and the neighborhood would have to absorb the balance which it can do. It's not a main artery road. So I mean take that for what it is. The other site would have a
potential queue of about 80 cars. So that was the buffer that I tried to convey. So, be able to onboard the site with all the parents plus a little bit um if it were done in this way. And there's probably a couple ways it could
be done, but this seems to maximize the the space. Maximize in respect to less cars out on the street, correct? Streets, I should say. Thank you. And um I appreciate that because it's helping me to understand the impacts. you did a great job showing many of the impacts.
The disruption if it's the present school. Um the cost is a very concerning part of my review and I'm sure all the city councilors are looking at cost. You know, when we can save a few million and have a better site, it projects a good
situation as we as councilors are always making decisions on money and taxes as was mentioned just the last meeting. Uh but the one thing that concerns me and I may have to refer this to the mayor is we may need legal counsel.
Unfortunately, we're in a situation where we are being presented by the owners of Forest and Ames a second second attempt for a special permit for me to make a decision one way or the other. What is the legal consequences if
we are being presented? And I would not ask of you. you're you're not involved with that, but maybe that we should seek legal counsel to see how that interacts and interplays with our decisions moving forward. Um, that's something for the
mayor. Maybe he can get legal counsel to address how we handle a present request for a special permit in the area that you're suggesting, which is Ames and Forest. Um, a couple other quick notes. Um, I mentioned the pickup. Uh, like I
say, you did a good job in that. The disruption concerns me. My my feeling, my personal, well, not personal, my opinion as a city councelor is I'd like to see as least amount of disruption to the students as possible and that they
get the best product that we can provide. And it seems like the less costly approach appears to be the one. And I don't, you know, I've had kids to lose your playing fields and recess and
being inside for 2 years that I would ask the school committee, what's your opinion on that? For me, I wouldn't want to see my kids without playing fields. That really is a a real concern of mine. And again, I would ask my fellow counselors to move forward with the
school committee, work as a group, work as a team, and make sure we get a decision before October 21st. Thank you. Anybody else with questions, comments? Councelor Irish. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good evening,
Chris, and thank you for even last week's session. Um, refresh my memory. Last week, you mentioned is that the cap for from the MSBA uh 71% reimbursement or 70%. So, the easiest way to think of the reimbursement from the MSBA is basically
think of it like a bar graph. And so you've got a bar this big. Yes. And that's how much your project costs. And so if that works out to say $700 a square foot, they're only going to give you Make sure I'm giving you the right number. They're only going to give you
678 of that as eligible costs. So whatever that percentage is, you're only going to get it on that 678. So everything you spend above there is unreimbured essentially. Now they uh they apply a similar format to um OPM
fees. They cap that at 3.5% of construction. The designer fees are capped at um 10% of construction. The site work, they've recently upped that to 12 from 10 in the past, but they also have a dollar cap associated with that.
When you apply all those caps, it takes a cost that's this big and it squishes it down to what's reimburseable. That's what they apply the percentage to and that's how you go from that 71 down to what's essentially 57 to 59. Thank you for that clarification. Thank
you, Madam Chair. Anybody else? Uh, council vital was council vital. Thank you. Um, I have a number of concerns. First of all, if we go to a a new site, I'd like the mayor to be able to come back to this council and talk to us about what we're going to be planning
with the existing richer site. We don't need another building where we need a new roof and a new boiler half five years from now and not utilizing it properly. That's number one. Number two is that did you numbers you put that you presented did they include demolition
costs of the existing richer school if assuming it goes on site we and then the demolition costs and does it also include the cost of putting new fields in new playgrounds in all the additional cost of just getting that back up to an elementary school area?
That's a great question. So with the um 2A which we presented so this this scheme when you build on an existing site the MSBA will support demolition and abatement up to a certain amount on that
site for existing buildings. So when we propose a scheme such as this, we do include both abatement and demo costs in that overall number. If we were to move offsite, generally when we're proposing an offsite such as NC6, we would not
include in that budget demolition and abatement. That's one of the factors that makes the NC6 number so much lower than the NC2A number because demo and abatement is not included in that. And if it doesn't directly relate to the education on the site, the MSBA won't
support reimbursement for that, which is why it's often a separate number. That being said, we have had communities decide to build it into your total project budget, and there's nothing that prevents you from doing that, but it would not be reimbursed.
The fields demolition is one cost, but how about the the building? Has all that been fitted? every everything that you see within this is included in that. So, um we this was actually an animated slide originally, so you can't see I think if you attended last week, you
would have seen the what's under here. All the work to do that is included in that. Oh, very good. After the building is gone. Thank you. I apologize if that didn't mic. That's all your questions you have. All right. Councelor Asing. Thank you, Madam Chair. Chris, can you
tell me or remind me again what you said the tax impact was? Um, I believe I'm doing this from memory because I didn't write it down. I apologize for that. I believe it averaged out to $219. That That's good. So, listen to what Chris just said. Average.
So, the comproller provided you what the tax impact for $72 million is. It starts at 310 million $310. It doesn't get down to 219 until the year 2045. I may not be here by then, which may
make some of you happy. All right, but to say 219, that's and then again, you're going from memory and it's okay, but we've got data from the comproller. It's $310 increase to the average, some of us live
in a little bigger than average houses tax bill. Okay. So, it's not 219. That that's a key point that you need to factor into when you're deciding this. And they get all juiced up over quote
the lower cost of the other of the Ames and forest. I will remind you as you heard in executive sessions, assessed value and what the appraisals are are not what we're going to be paying for these places.
the time to acquire through eminent domain or other means is not going to fit what Lisa wants is a new school to accommodate the crowding issues we have throughout the city.
So it if you're going to go down that and say get all excited that oh that looks lower. You're not paying for demolition. You have no idea what the cost is to to to acquire that property. So it's really not in my mind a valued
judgment at this point in time. You I mean you can think about it but the cost that you are not being told because they don't know is going to be my opinion more expensive than what you're being told renovating
richer school is. And I'll remind you on renovations. We rebuilt or added on to Jar School while the kids were in school right next to each other. World was okay. We modified Whitam School while school was
in session. Building right next right smack next to it. World did okay. And Chris is telling us and Chris that there's 65 ft between the new building.
So, I'm pretty sure we'll be okay. Chris, are there any in our good now school? As we've went through the process, we ended up picking a model school, saved $10 million, cut a significant amount of time off the schedule. Are any of the
projects that you guys are proposing, well I'm more interested in the richer one. Is there any model concept the standard one that the MSBA likes that you go after or is is this unique? And it's okay. I'm just curious cuz we we it worked out real well for the city.
No, it it did work out really well for the city last time. And one of the things that I found astounding when I first started this is that you were able to have a construction cost that was $33 a square foot when you built Good Now. And the cap at the time, you know, the the graph I talked about, the cap was
$300 at that time, which is really an amazing job to be able to get in that low. Now, uh, model school has changed slightly since that time. At that time, they offered you additional reimbursement, which they have since sunset. So that's no longer available.
You are able to negotiate down uh design and engineering fees by 4%. But the real challenge here um comes down to amount of available land and amount of um program. I reviewed this actually this morning because I anticipated this
question and there is currently in the published list of model schools one school in the bank of schools that they have that fit the model school program a wearham school and that is large enough to fit the enrollment but it's a
two-story school that's spread out wide I think it would be challenging to adapt that school to this and maintain a lot of those model elements and in discussion with LPA and obviously LPA has their own perspective because they'd
be the one that would lose out if we go with someone else's model school as was the case with good now um it's difficult to see the model school working now the city of Marbor and I'll stop you there cuz not taking every time I'm good with I just didn't know if that threestory facility
was something that was replicated somewhere else if it isn't I'm good I don't believe I know you got the constraints you have for that facility. I I get it. I I understand that the hill and the wetlands make it very challenging.
If I could just add, LPA does have a school within the enrollment. Um there's a extension like a 20%. I think you're short by two by Okay, we're short by two sto. But you can go on MSBA's website and look at
all their model schools. I did that last night. Um, none of them had an elementary school of 100 of 950. So, there weren't any elementary schools that fit. There were high schools, but they are configured completely
different. So, and again, I'm good with the answer, Madam Chair. I just want to know if there was one, did you consider it? And I got my answer, so I'm good. You can always say that you're interested in the MSBA looking at it as part of your PSR because in both cases, it appears that we are selecting a new construction scheme. But in that case,
the MSBA would do an exhaustive search over the next basically late October, early November and come back to you with what they think might work. And you could consider it as a community based at that time. At that time, you'd negotiate um you know what would change
as a result of proceeding in that way. But it it's an option that's on the table to get the results back. But we in our view, independent of LPA, don't believe that any of the options fit well with the way that your educational plan
lays out and the way that um the site offers opportunities. And I'm good with that, Chris. That's fine. Thank you. And so, last one just for the counselors. So, again, $310 to the average tax bill year one. And if you go to the fire station at 35
million, it's $142 to the average tax bill. So, I want you to think of these as we're we're moving because they're all going to come into play and then we got to figure out how we're going to pay for them. Is it reduced budget? Is it approved projects? You all got to
decide or is it just taxpayers open your wallet? I'm I'm not big fan of that portion of the program. All right. So, I just I just set the tone so you understand there's a lot of money being out and I'm
looking for a similar effort to want to spend it to how to recover it or reduce budgets. Thank you, Madam Chair. That's a hand. Councelor Ducet. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Um, I agree a lot with council oing as far as
uh the price differences between NC2A and NC6. you know, there's a lot of hidden hidden costs in the new construction. You know, the demolition here. Um, I completely, you know, we don't know as far as negotiation goes, how much this property is going would
cost the city, you know, and also uh as far as time frame goes, how is the schedule going to get delayed because of negotiations or lack thereof with purchasing this new, uh, you know, purchasing the the location. So, if if
we're going to have problems getting the location, I think that NC6 might have to get dismissed because in the long run, it's not necessarily cheaper. That's the way I see it. You know, um the price difference is small enough that it could be overwhelmed very easily with the
increase in cost or figuring out what we're going to do with um the school before, you know, after as part of demolition because the city the state won't cover demolition. if we go with the new school in the same facility, the demo, you know, chunk of the demo cost would be covered, which is
a huge advantage for us. So, I do think that even though on paper this might be a little bit more expensive, I think in the long run it's going to have more savings for the city. Um, the other thing I want to say just because I've been observing construction issues over
the last couple of months is the price of construction is dropping significantly. I have been the phrase is the price of wood is collapsing because there's a whole bunch of construction going on but lack of a better term a lot of people are planning a wait and see
for doing their construction projects so they're not doing any new projects and that is causing an impact in the supply chain because there's not as much demand for it without getting into more details than that so I think um you know there
was a drop of $15.5 million down to 71 1.5. That's a hell of a drop. That's like 20%. Okay. In how much time? Couple of months. If if I could address that specific. So, um, and we spoke to this a little bit in
the document that we gave you in June. So, we measure that against an average of construction costs in the state. So, it's based on assuming that like wherever that average falls times how big the building is and that's how you get your number. big reason that the
construction came down is not that costs came down. What we've actually seen is that costs are not dropping but leveling out. We're seeing a lot of cases where you're seeing big savings because they were predicting escalation that would be significant. And it's not that it's not
deescalation. It's not that the price is dropping. It's just that it's level where they thought it would go up. Mhm. And so we're seeing it that escalation is not meeting the um expectation that folks set for it at the time that the budget was set. So we've within my own
firm, we had uh 18% lower than the budget, but we set because you set it at the end of SD and then you spend a year to a year and a half designing the thing. You're assuming what that cost is going to be a year or two from now. And if you don't hit that prior
and so at the time because of where things were at where CO was at there was still an expectation of 5 or 6% escalation. I think anybody who goes to the grocery store knows that we went through a period of really significant inflation and it's it's not going down
but it is in some cases moderating and construction is no different. So what we based the estimate on this time was not an average, but it was looking at the particulars of the individual schemes. Like I would speak to this versus some
of the schemes that were dismissed because it's such a tighter compact box. It has less surface area around that exterior and every square foot of that exterior adds to the cost. So, a lot of the price variation between 2A and 2B and um NC1 really had to do with you've
got to build an extra courtyard or you've got to build extra exterior walls or this bumps up in this way. And so, this was the most compact scheme purely on a construction basis. What pushes the cost of this higher than NC6 is you pay
for the demo and the abatement of the existing building. And also it um is CM at risk instead of design bid build because it is very challenging to do design bid build of a project this scale
and to site all of the um requirements there. And so we if that's the way that you decide to go, we would advise you to up your contingency because you're more likely to deal with issues in the course of administering that construction contract.
Okay. Uh I I understand the the the points you were making. I think that the issue here is I don't think there's as much difference between in price between the new construction and working through this. And you know the the other point basically is you know if we do the new
construction we still have this building to worry about you know while you know it's so half the half the you know half the story is done. We I we do have the number of what demo and abatement of that building costs.
Mhm. Because that's part of each of these existing on-site schemes. Understood. Um it's about $2.8 $8 million in direct costs and that gets escalated by 30%. And I draw for a living so I'm not going to do math in my head in front of you.
Okay. Thank you for the clarification, Council Vital. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just so I'm following this whole process um clearly, the building committee will come up with a recommendation, a single recommendation. This one of those plans that we were presented tonight, they're
going to come up and say, "This is the one we want." The school committee will then say yay or nay basically and then soon thereafter the council will say yay or nay. Am I follow is that so far so good? That's my understanding. What happens if either the school
committee or the uh council says nay? Um I I'm I'm happy to take that if you'd like. Go right ahead because I don't know. So the the MSBA operates in a board meeting schedule in terms of how they administer
the grant program. So from the moment you get approved entry into the program, you have 913 days to basically go to a board meeting and have them approve a schematic design and offer you a project scope and budget agreement. So that puts you at about I want to say it's August
of 2026. They have a board meeting about every two months. And so when I gave you the October 23rd date, that October 23rd date was the submission date of our PSR report, which is a big fat document that's bound up of all of the things
that we've done to date, all the additional things, all the things that describe the schemes we looked at and all the things that describe the preferred scheme. The team takes 7 to 10 days after you decide to put that together. So when if in the event that
the schedule as we have it doesn't result, there would be ongoing discussions of between everyone involved to make sure that we can try and stay on schedule for that October 23rd. Obviously, one of the steps to get to that was um that we asked to come see you tonight because we think that it's
very important that we hear all of your perspectives on this and that the members of the school building committee who are here tonight also hear your perspectives because that's going to factor into that decision. If we can't reach a decision by then, then we're not going to be able to review the project
at the December board meeting with the MSBA. It's largely a two-month schedule. So that pushes us to a February meeting. So now our whole schedule is shifts by that amount of time. Now, we looked at this because this is a big decision. Obviously, there's discussion that has
to happen if you're going to choose to buy a site to proceed with that particular option or if you're going to decide to do this. That's this is a big decision and that's why we're spending time on it. Um we thought that we had enough schedule to slip one month, but
at that point when you look at the whole of the schedule, it does begin to endanger the ability to open in the fall because there's just not enough time to do the thorough job that's necessary to design the building and there's not enough time without expediting certain
things to build the building. depending on which option you choose. There's probably more flexibility if we go with if we ultimately end up with this because we'll bring a CM on board and they'll help us work out some of those schedule details that make it challenging and so it's easier to slip
if that's where we end up. But if you end up in a design bid build, you're really playing with fire a little bit to try and open in the fall. That's not to say that opening in the fall of 19 has to happen, but I've spent a lot of time and I've seen the challenges that
created the need for this project and I think, you know, that extra 6 months has a lot of impact. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you, Madam Chair. You're welcome. I think I'm more concerned about when it comes to the bond, which doesn't happen until next
year, which is a different body that's sitting here now. So that's that's my personal concern. Uh any further questions from anyone? Councelor Ducet. Actually I have one question because this brought up before about the bond.
You said we actually bond for the full amount. You have a you don't bond for the full amount amount. How you decide to break up your your debt purchasing is entirely up to the community itself in terms of what bond you seek. Um what we do in
support of you is we'll provide you a cash flow of where we see the borrowing to be necessary and that becomes part of the process through which your comproller whatever finance process borrower chooses to use for how you seek the bond that authorizes that amount.
Often communities will take an estimate of what reimbursement is and offset some of the bond as a result of that because the reimbursement generally happens on an expected timetable. There are exceptions that occur for various reasons that I won't go into tonight.
The MSBA does require that you authorize the borrowing, right? Up to the amount of the full Okay. construction amount, but that doesn't necessarily mean the bond, but that doesn't necessarily mean you bond the entire amount. Correct. If I
can go back to 2018 when we did the good now project, the total project budget from MSBA was, let me scroll down. Um, $56,418. I'm sorry, 56,418,338.
On February 22nd, the mayor presented us with a bond authorization request in the amount of 56,418,338, the exact amount. That money, that bond authorization was approved,
but then the comproller figures out how to ban and then eventually bond. So, it's not an immediate hit on the taxpayers because you don't need the money. all the money up front because you're getting reimbursement from
MSBA. So, I'm sure that the comproller will do that same process. Um, but the amount that we will bond will be significantly higher than that 56 million that we did in 2018. Is that
covered for you council? You are correct, madam chair. So we will be authoriz the mayor will send down an authorization to bond 176 or whatever the total value is. The comproll has already provided us if the reimbursements are what as anticipated
it's going to be about a $72 million bond which pays. So just so we're all clear that's it's a $72 million bond with $53 million in interest. All right. So, you know,
that's how the payments are all scheduled because it's not just a $72 million bond. You have to pay the interest. That's I don't buy my house for X. I It costs X plus all that interest. It's a lot of money, but that
comes out to right now we're anticipating $310 to the average tax. And so the average on if you live in a $594,000 house, you would expect to see your and there's a lot more that goes into it,
right? Cuz this is just the bond. We could be reducing other things in the budget. Who who knows what it's going to look like cuz that's 2 3 years down the road, but just bonding that amount of money is $310 to the average single family home.
Does that help? Okay, councelor Ducet. Yeah. Um, no, I got the 310 as being the bottom. I just wanted clarification as far as the total versus the relative amount, but that's fine. Um, you know, I I think at the end of
the day, we're we we need a new school. So, the question is which one? Okay. And trying to be, you know, um trying to make the right decision for the best, you know, providing less value for the community is what we're here for. So, um thank you for clarification.
All right. Anybody else? Um, there really is an action by this body. Uh, there's no recommendation of any kind. This was reallyformational so that we would all understand what was going forward. So, I
think an appropriate motion would be to just file this. Motion to accept and place on file. Money has been moved and seconded to accept and place on file the data that we received back in June and the new information tonight. Is there
discussion? All those in favor? 1 2 3 4 5. Okay. Motion to adjurnn. It's been moved and seconded to adjurnn. All those in favor? 2 3 4 5. So we are adjourned at call 9:00.