again. I call the um 1250 kilm school building committee to order. We are we have people online so we're going to do a roll call vote. Um Pat >> here. >> Sean >> here. >> John, >> yes, I'm here. >> Chris >> here. >> Park
>> here. >> Ed >> here. >> Greg And I don't see Greg yet. Um and Nancy here. Super. Um quick review of our agenda. We'll have public comment. We have um
liaison reports. We are going to talk about um requests for proposals are three. We're just going to get an update on that. We'll talk about fence design. We'll get Collier's financial review of all the
invoices from Collier's LBA modulars and other. We'll talk about commitments um of the bid documents where the facilities clerk contract the church parking lot and anything else. will go
to call your um schedule review, talk about early packages, um the pre-quall working group discussion, off-site improvements and add alternates, approve um prior meeting minutes and future agenda items and then um adjourn. We
have a lot of votes um listed as well. So um is there any public comment? None in the room. Any public comment online? I don't see any. >> Okay. >> Doesn't look like any.
>> Nope. >> So, we'll move to liaison reports. >> Does anybody have a report they'd like to give? >> Okay. We will do a um Justin, you want to do this?
Do we want to go through the just an update on the RFPs? Sure. Aaron report. Sure. Is this is that on? Does it light up to be on? Just saw it. Okay. Thanks. Uh so we had our RFPs due today. Um we did get a uh a couple of pricing in for
each each RP that we uh issued such as the code review and um the testing. We as far as a tax consultant, I did have quite a bit of conversation with quite a bit of uh different um different tax
firms on how they can go about providing these services because it it's not necessarily something that they they they say that they can help, but uh as far as providing a proposal, they they need to kind of sit down and understand with like our budget and a little bit more information than we have provided in an RFP. So, I'm going to be able to
give them that information. As far as the other ones we had, uh, they're all due today. I think, um, if we're accepting proposals on the RFPs for the tax consultant, I'm not sure how that process will be. I believe we'll have to extend that deadline with the advertisement and just say we're extending that deadline in case any
other firms have a problem with it. I believe it's um, you have to extend the adver uh, advertise publicly if you do not collect any proposals on that date. So, >> so you haven't gotten any? >> So, I for just for the tax consultant, I haven't got any. >> Okay. the other ones proposals and then
we'll uh kind of level those and for our next building committee we'll have those to present and and recommend for approval. >> Any questions on that? >> Okay. >> Yeah, I have two um leazison reports.
one um is related to um a security uh item and question that we have which is about the level of security that's provided at the vestibule. So in like quite an early meeting we received guidance that um it
was desired for the the transaction window that's separating the vestibule the receptionist from the vestibule for that to be a ballistic glass. Um and now so we have a question of what level of ballistic and then should that wall
around the transaction window also be um ballistic protection? The police chief's opinion is yes. We're just looking for feedback from the um KS from from this group um to kind of agree that that's
this is the right approach. >> And do we have costs for those? >> Um we do not yet have costs. We can get costs with the 90% and then I can bring that back as a kind of item for decision
making at that point after the 90% pricing. Okay. Because I know um Is Mike on Mike's on? I know Mike had a um >> Yes, I made it. >> Yeah, I know Mike, you and I had a discussion on it in terms of like what's
what you've seen and other I mean certainly we can do what what we want. It just matters what we want to do within budget and things like that. Um and Mike had talked about before what he saw in um in other schools.
Yeah. So, I can give you a quick update on that, Carla, or maybe kind of give everybody an update on what I had discussed with you if that's what you'd like. >> Sure. >> So, um certainly this is an everchanging uh item in in school construction. You
know, 20 years ago, nobody talked about any of this and now it's part of everyday construction. So, um I have seen um one school in the recent past that for example used um um schoolguard glass or similar type uh glass on the
entire first floor of the building. Um that's the exception to the rule if you will. Most of the schools I work with, they consider it at main entries, things of that nature, which I think is what we're looking at here for uh for example with the vestibules oftent times it's not on the first level of glass but it's
on the second level. So that way they're um you you always encourage people to leave. If somebody comes in and they want to cause problem, if they want to leave, you want to let them leave, you can always follow back with them or the police can always follow back with them later. But you don't ever want to put a situation where you're you're you're
kind of uh detaining somebody, you're not the police. So from that perspective, um what we typically see is around the um main entries, things of that nature, whether it's at the vestibule or the windows, maybe just outside of that, uh you might see something along this lines. Certainly at
a transaction window, um like where we're looking at, we see that um in the past, I haven't seen the ballistic uh walls. I'm not saying that that's something you shouldn't do, but I just haven't done that in the past myself. um on on many of the schools that I've done.
>> What What is the additional design that you would do for that to to make it? >> Oh, we add like a like a Kevlar inter layer in the wall. We can either do that or make it out of um CMU like >> Yeah. What are the walls? Drywall at the moment.
>> It's drywall. Yeah. So, we can either make a CMU. >> That would be another option. We're going to look at the pricing options for both. It's a small >> It's a small. >> There's not much There's not much wall. >> It's not much wall. Yeah, >> I think it's
>> Where would you um >> architecture? >> I'm just trying to visualize the lobby area. We do this with police stations. This is common. It's not really common with a school. For every police station when you walk in, there's a lobby. There's a bulletproof probably a level
three or level four ballistic transaction window. And then all the walls are either CMU or they have the Kevlar inter layer. And that lobby is in a in a police station is not very big. A little different here. And and it's
almost I'm just trying to envision the the um the entrance to the building. It's kind of open, right? You go right into that. >> You go in, you're in the vestibule, and it would be between the vestibule and where the receptionist is in that wall. So she ducks down below her desk
>> and she's protected. would be two, right? Because there's one on either side. >> Um, Madam Chair, >> yeah, if everybody could just speak up like maybe speak >> right into the microphone. >> Um, Madam Chair, just as a point of information for the committee, typically
security related conversations are there's a certain security that we carry around them um with town projects. And so just be mindful of that. Um, that's been our practice. I'm not sure how that practice would with other previous
facilities security related work and so just um be mindful of that now as we have that conversation. Great point. So maybe what we could do is um if you could price it all out for us and we will bring it back to um to
that design committee. >> Sure. >> If anybody has any comments, we'll hear comments. Now >> one of the um comment Joe I know um several years ago we went through um townwide we went through a security analysis was one of the things that came
out about the current killum how challenging it was. >> Yeah. >> Um so we went through a pretty detailed process. So we should definitely make sure Joe is um in the loop on everything you're you're suggesting. I mean pretty much went through the you know the entire
>> all the town school. >> Yeah. all the town school buildings and and assess them within the last five years for security measures. So, we just want to be consistent with what we've we've done. >> Yeah, to Jane's points, we held discussions debriefing that in executive
session, which is an option here. >> Yeah, >> we have a security team in the town as well, so we can run that through them, too. >> Okay. >> So, >> there's the lobby. What are we talking
about, Jen? In terms of uh the walls which are effective. >> So the wall between the vestibule and the reception >> just just that one or >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Is that a transaction window on the
other side as well? >> Yes. Same condition. >> If the if the doors are not secure, what's the point of having those areas particularly secure? seems to be like >> so John I think the blue line that I put
here is glass and that would be a ballistic glass or a schooler glass type thing situation and then these walls are the walls that have the the red that's that's the actual transaction window there. So we would be talking about that wall or or potentially that wall
something like that >> and I do think it appropriate to maybe have these discussions in a more private uh situation like an executive session, but this I just wanted to show everybody so they they can have a general idea of where we're talking about. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you very much.
>> Um the other uh update um and I'm sorry I can't share because the internet is not working um for me at least. >> I switched >> I have it on hotspot searching my phone. Um, do you want to come back to me? >> Sure.
>> Why set up here? >> Y um >> Oh, because you have the fence design as well. >> That's what I was going to try to show you. >> Okay. So, I put this item on the agenda. It is we're calling it the fence design.
It is the um the fence on Haveril Street where the um the back of the cafeteria is and the Rise preschool. And we have had um discussions as to um
Perfect. We have had discussions um in terms >> Jenny this is one we had from the other day. I don't know if that helps. >> Thanks Mike. >> Thank you. Um, we've had discussions with multiple people about the roadway and um and how that's going to look in
terms of sidewalk and bike lane and parking and how wide each of the lanes will be. Thank you, Mike. And um so we're and then there's a tree line
and then we're talking about that whole fenced in area. Um I don't know if and I I I want I would like to have a discussion um with the committee in terms of the proposals that we got from from the designers.
>> Sure. So where um Mike is indicating in the red, we have two um different fence options that we're looking at for this area. Um, and as Carla said, um, kind of going from the roadway, there's a a
buffer, like a bike lane buffer, then there's a bike lane, then there's the parking lane, then the sidewalk, then a row of trees, and then you get to the fence. Um, and the concern is um moving all these kids, this is the playground
for the three and four year olds, close to this relatively high-speed road. Um a concern has been raised several times by different people um that that um play area be protected from the potential of
a vehicle that might go off the road. Um so we have two options, Mike. Yeah, if you go to that page. So the first option is a vehicular is two fences. So the first is a vehicular cable barrier. So this is um kind of similar to a
guardrail. those cables kind of stretch um if a vehicle um crashes into it and it's designed to stop a certain size vehicle. So, we're using a a 15,000 pound vehicle traveling at 50 miles per
hour as our kind of design um vehicle and it would stop that vehicle within 3 feet. So then, but it has it kind of stretches that 3 feet, right, to stop the vehicle. So then 3 ft away we have then the ornamental fence which is just keeping the kids in on the playground
and out of that three-foot stone. So that is the first option. >> Mike, can you back that up so we can see that? Perfect. So you can see the the the dad walking with the child and then that smaller >> so the dad is on the sidewalk like the
outside side the street side and then the taller fence is on the the the kids would be to the left of them. >> What would the baby's not on the safe side? >> Yeah that baby is in his father's arms and perfectly as safe as can be.
>> What would be proposed to be between >> three feet? >> I know you have like material >> paving. Okay. >> Yeah. >> You want something which well it's not very accessible. So you you want something which doesn't need maintaining. >> That was my concern.
>> And if you go Mike to the next slide, the next option is a um a low wall like a structural wall with some um manufactured stone on top. Um and that would be 32 in high. So same height as
like a jersey barrier. And that's what would stop the vehicle and then an ornamental fence on top. And um what we had a extensive discussion a couple days ago and kind of what um you know about the pros and cons the differences between these two
fences. Um we think they're both equally safe essentially for the kids. Both will stop a vehicle. the vehicular the the cable fence is potentially a little safer for drivers because it stops the vehicle a little bit slower rather than
a wall. Um we think the stone option is more attractive but it's also significantly more expensive. So we did cost these. So, if you might go to the um cost page, and this is like a rough order of
magnitude estimate, but that double fence line one is uh around $270,000 and a low wall plus fence is around $460,000. >> And people see the option three there. We we discussed that and decided to remove that just because it wasn't as
safe as the other two. There was also um discussion with the stone fence. It's just a stone facade that if that gets hit that um potentially pieces of the stone could be projectiles towards it. >> But so to mitigate that we wouldn't have
any stone on the back of it. Um so there wouldn't be any pieces that can fly into the playground side. >> Mo most um vehicular fences are not designed to stop a vehicle doing that. But it's deflection. Mhm. >> That's what the highway fences, do they
deflect? They don't. It's very difficult to stop a vehicle that's going straight like that. >> Yeah. This is Phil. Can I raise a question? >> Sure. >> You know, this is this was the first thing I noticed when I first joined the district a year and a half ago and I
looked at why in God's name would you be putting a child's playground up against Habil Street? Because my first question was what are you going to put up there to stop an 18 will from going through it? So, now we're talking about a fence that's designed to stop a 15,000lb vehicle. Well, that's nice. But, have we
done a traffic count as to how many 18 willers go down up and down April Street at what speed? Because, you know, this is a foreseeable accident. And I'd hate to think that we put up a fence that's going to stop a 15,000lb vehicle and then we have an 18-wheeler go flying
through while the kids are outside because we made a design where we put the playground up against Haveril Street. I I just I I just I I'm just amazed at the decision to place that playground there. And then you're talking about a 15,000
pound fence. >> May I May I speak? This is Lee Sherwood, um the architect. >> Hi, Bill. >> I realize I'm late to the party. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, I just want to give you a little bit of history. Um we've known
from the very beginning that this was something to solve and because it was such a tight site it was actually and and there were a lot of uh discussions with this SBC committee about that area and how to set up the whole thing. It's
safe if we make it safe. And so the reason we're having this now is because the we're we've actually been spending two or three months researching this with not only the um traffic person who did all the traffic studies and does this for a living, you know, on highways
and everything, but also with the landscape and the civil and also with the fence company who actually creates these kinds of fences and they actually have videos and crash data and all that kind of stuff. They literally show a at least for the um you know the fence
would be the low fence. They actually show a video of their crash test with a 18-wheeler slamming right into it. So um we would not first of all we take it extraordinarily seriously as you do and that's why we're here. Second of all,
it's been a lot of um gathering information because they all have different uh criteria and different um sets of um experience. So, um, what we've learned, and I'm sorry if I'm kind of, um, jumping in,
what we've learned is that, um, we're outside of the zone where we are allowed we're we're actually allowed to build a wall because we're outside of a certain distance from the roadway where um, you actually couldn't build a wall. It's actually 20 feet or something like that
on us on this road at those speeds and all of that. They know the speeds. They know the the um they know the trucks and the cars coming in. And um what we're trying to do is figure out which of and both of these can work especially since
we'll have them designed to stop the same criteria which is that monster truck and the height and all of that. Um so uh and the fence person is more verifiable because they've actually because they make a product. Do you know
what I mean? that low barrier table thing. They actually make a product. So they actually have to do all these tests and they can actually say this is what does it this is what happens. So there's a physics behind that. Um the wall is a
little while we can design a wall to take those um forces. It's a little different. We have to design it a little differently with a structural engineer to take all the the forces. Um the uh But there were decisions made
early on about why not to put the building right on the street and to create that space out front as long as we can keep make it safe because it is a big building and um it's better pulled away from the street. So, that was just my quick wrap up of it and um what we're
trying to do is um so welcome aboard and uh we'll catch you up every time >> and I appreciate that. But, you know, my concern is just a parent of a three-year-old is not going to care about the physics. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um well, what we care about
is making those children safe. >> Yes. But but you can't guarantee it. Whereas if you didn't place it there in the first place, you could. That's my point. >> Well, with all due respect, you can't guarantee anybody is safe anywhere. You know, I I think what we're looking at
here is a straight line of road. If I zoom in here a little bit, u sorry, the travel lanes that we're talking about are out here. We have a buffer zone. We have a bike lane. We have a parking area. We have a sidewalk with a raised curve. Then we have tree lines.
And then we're looking at either the the the fence with the wall or the the double fence with the barrier. So I I think we have gone pretty extensively like again we already talked about an option three that was cancelled earlier because it didn't give the safety
factors that the these other two options do. But the general understanding is if this was on a curve or something like that, we might consider it a little bit differently. But where this is on a straight road, straight section of road, um it is less likely that somebody's going to veer off. If they do, they have
quite a bit of space before they get from that travel lane through the buffer, through the bike lane, through the parking, over the curving, over the sidewalk, and through the tree before they hit that first barrier. So, um I I
just I just want to express my concerns and and I have and I appreciate you all for listening to them. Jenny, do you know the current situation? I think right now there's a chain link fence with um with ball fields where kids play baseball on the
other side of it. Do you know where that chain link fence sits relative to the new fence we're talking about putting in? >> Like is it closer to the street? >> Closer to the street. >> It's closer to the street. So we're moving fence. >> We're taking the existing fence is closer to the street than the proposed
new. So, we're we're we're we're not necessarily changing the use because we have small children playing T-ball gathered immediately on the other side of the fence currently with a chain link fence that's closer to the street with no bike lane and no buffer zone. So, we've added a buffer zone, a bike lane,
>> and trees. >> Trees, moved the fence back, and beefed up the fence as an improvement over the current situation, which arguably is is the same same use. We have a busy
street, a fence, and a gathering place for small children. t-ball, everyone in the dugout sideline area, which I believe one of those fields is typically played with home plate up against the fence. So, you have an entire team backs
against the fence. So, where we're not changing the use necessarily, but we're taking significant steps to increase the safety. Okay. One other question. the the the the wire guardrail. Is that from a foreman function effectively like the
same as a a timber or um like a guardrail you see on the highway? >> Is it? >> No. Or is it? >> It's more secure. It's actually designed for like um like like embassies like actually high security installations
because a guard rail as John was pointing out is not actually designed to stop a vehicle. >> It's designed to like keep a vehicle back get them back on the road if they bump up against it. >> Okay. >> So, this is designed for a different use case where it's actually designed for
for ramming. And that design uh case, the 15,000 truck is designed for a truck that is intentionally ramming that fence at 90°. >> When you design a way, like >> you could say overdesigned.
>> I've designed >> I've designed a number of these for secure places like embassies. Yeah. >> And it's almost impossible to stop a vehicle because it's an energy dissipation equation.
You really rely upon the crunchiness of the vehicle to take away the energy. It's almost impossible to design something like this to really stop solid block of concrete at 15,000 pounds running into it at 20 mph. It just
doesn't work. the energy numbers just don't work. Um, so, uh, these are very complicated fences. These energy dissipating fences, they're very expensive. They need maintaining. They don't last forever. They they got the I
don't know about this one, but a lot of them have springs in them and stuff like that. And some of them have hydraulic systems in them. Um, I'd recommend against it is what I'm saying. Having having designed some of them, I'd go with a stone wall personally.
>> Well, I I would um I would just look a little further into this actual fence. I mean, I'm not defending it, but it's just what it's really just cables. It's not hydraulics or any of that kind of stuff. There's no maintenance for the cables themselves. What we were concerned about, uh, John, was if
somebody does hit it, um, if there is an accident and somebody hits it, what's it cost to repair? But those are those are metal guys that are going into the ground and they are designed yes to dissipate. There's a reason why you have that lower cable at least in this case
you have that lower cable thing right there and then three feet away you have the regular fence because what they know is that in about 2 feet when they do all their tests the truck and everything can go about can bend it all you know the cables about two feet but that's it. So
they then stopped it and and they said if we put the fence three feet away, the likelihood is that no nothing will ever touch the fence except something sliding off and then the fence can slow it down. So, you know, give it a chance. Um uh we
can send around the information because I want you guys to make the right decision. >> Um >> Le, excuse me. >> Go ahead. >> I'm I'm having a change of thought here. um is I want to bring this offline. I want
to bring it to a smaller group um of more people than what we currently have. Is there anybody on the committee who's interested in being in a meeting where we're going to get all this information and more
information from these designers that would like to have a meeting um so we can make a decision? Pat, anybody else online? Okay. Um, all right. I don't mean Nancy, Pat, and
myself, and um, we'll get some other people. Um, sorry to derail it, but I just I I feel like that's the way we should be going with this. Okay. Thank you for humoring me, everyone.
Um, financial review. All right, let me just make sure I'm in close enough. Okay, for obviously no construction spent to date yet. For architectural engineering,
we have uh total expended to date 3,92,289. We have for administrative costs expended to date $2,232,893. No, no um expenditures on on FFE, but we do have some um furniture testing coming
up. Um total spent to date is 6,135 uh $135,183. to the next page. So we have this is our uh project budget adjustment.
We have a uh budget adjustment from a soft cost contingency for $8,273.74. This is for the modular relocation uh budget. uh our we have two commitments. One is for uh what is called gov connection.
It's a uh it's a sort of like a I believe like a granger. Uh these are this is a commitment that you saw for the budget adjustment of $8,273. Um, this is, I believe, school committee costs that'll be covered under this
commitment. And then we have the bid ducks online. This value right here, the 7,650. This is a more of a it will not exceed this cost. I know the town currently has uh an existing account. So, that's going
to kind of uh I think that's going to change how much we actually pay when we sign up for our project. But I'll uh we'll be able to get the totals once we once we get everything signed up and locked in. But it it will not exceed that value. Um
our expenditures uh we have seven for gov connection uh our project uh collier project leaders invoice and I believe that's it. Yeah. Do we want to do uh a vote now or do you
want me to keep going? >> Why don't we do a vote now? >> Okay. >> Do you want to do a vote now or do you want to wait? >> We can do a vote now. >> You want So it's the Gov Connection, Inc. that we're looking at. Yes.
>> To uh commit it. Okay. move to accept the $8,273.74 um for the connection, Inc. uh in regards to the modular relocation. >> Second. >> Seconded by Ed. Any discussion?
Take a vote. Pat, >> yes. >> Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. Greg, >> I don't think. Okay, Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. Thank you.
>> Move to an accepted not to exceed of $7,650 for bid docks online for bid hosting. >> Second. >> Second. >> Seconded by Pat. Any discussion? >> We'll vote. Pat,
>> yes. >> Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. Yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. That passes. Thank you. >> We need to do a vote for the um for the
invoices because that was that was effectively for the commitments, right? >> Right. That value for Gov Connection was the commitment that these these invoices are going to be applied to. to crack that Nancy. >> Yeah, I was gonna say so the 7,000 or
the 8,27374 is the equal of all the gov connection ones. Is that correct? >> It's not exactly equal, but they but they cover it. >> Okay. So Mike usually has a total Yeah, Mike. >> Yeah, I I Yeah, Mike. So, I can't show
both the spreadsheet and this. Hopefully, Mike can pull up the spreadsheet. He's he can make us some value. >> Give me one second. I'm pulling it up. >> Sorry. >> Thank you. >> I should have had you ready. >> No problem.
>> So, Justin, in the future, can we just have a one cheater like just a cheat sheet so we can >> Absolutely. >> It would be helpful. >> I' I've actually asked that we in the notes that we put because they break them out per the MSBA codes. Yeah. >> So, if we have the notes off to the side
>> of exactly which which the to what the totals are, but I we can do a one sheeter. >> So, then we can just, you know, >> so this this is the invoices for for Gov Connect. You're you're looking for the total from the 5,000 down to the 700. >> Yes. Yeah.
>> So, the total of that is $9,162.54. So moved for for the gov connection invoices. Moved to pay the gov connection invoices for that total. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Seconded by Ed. Any discussion?
Um going to the vote. Pat, >> yes. >> Sean, >> yes. >> Sean, yes. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Nancy, yes. And Carla, yes. So, we have one more uh invoice. It's
actually a credit from Gov Connection. Oh, that's just that value. The $7,929. >> So, do we accept that credit? >> Just going to accept that, right? >> I don't know. You don't have to vote to accept it or anything. I don't think so. >> I Yeah, I wouldn't think so.
>> Think so. >> So, that offsets the 9,000 that we just voted on or is that >> But there'll be more. There's one there's one more that will be encapsulated. So, >> okay. >> That next month. >> Got it.
>> Okay. And then we have the callers. Mike, do you have the total for the callers? >> The three callers items together would be 56,382. >> Move to uh pay and accept the callers project leaders invoices for the total
Mike just said. Um, dated 12425. >> I want the invoice number. >> Yeah. 1122124. >> Thank you. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Second. >> Seconded by Pat. Any discussion? >> We'll go for the vote. Pat,
>> yes. >> Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. That passes. Okay. Um,
right now we're still tracking just a a forecast cost of uh the parking lot contract and the uh reading clerk salary. >> Um, we'll do an update on that as we move through the budget. >> Sure.
>> Y is an X, isn't it? >> Yep. Um, this is our cash flow. I usually skip past this sheet because the graph does a much better job showing it visually. So, right now we're just just under what
we were predicting to be billing, but as we move out throughout the months, we will definitely be coming in line right in line with that green line. The red line represents what we built to date, not including this month. And as we add to it, we'll definitely start trending upwards >> or we'll stay under budget, right?
>> Yeah. On budget, under budget, not >> good answer. Thank you. >> I had you, you know. >> Any uh any questions, concerns, comments about the budget? >> What was the vehicle speed?
Ridiculous Connecticut. >> All right. >> Okay. So, I'll move on to schedule review. Sorry, I thought I could do something. >> Um, >> demo. >> Want to do
before you do schedule review. Um, do you have anything on bid docs? No. >> Oh, on on the I'm sorry, on the RFPs. You meant bid docs. >> Yeah, that's what we have under commitments. We have bid docs.
>> Yeah, we voted to >> that we have that already. >> Yep. >> Um, and we'll talk about facilities. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, we're going to talk about facilities clerk contact. Okay. So, Um, we have
been working on um a facilities clerk um position for the facilities department. We've talked about it before. Um, and we have um a position description which I'm happy to give some more information on. Joe is here to also give some more
information on the role of Thank you. multiple microphones here. I apologize. Um the role of the facilities clerk is to aid the facilities department working with um the OPM, the construction and the design team on site on a day-to-day
basis. So because our facilities department um is effectively four people plus custodians, is that correct? Um for a million square feet of building space. So um with two projects that passed um
that puts a tremendous amount of pressure on that staff um to manage those projects particularly Joe. So um Joe the director has requested this position of this committee. um this position would be exclusive to the um Kllum project um and would we would like
to bring this person on in the near term to begin looking at um construction documents um and familiarizing himself on a part-time basis initially with the project. Um the OPM team has uh worked up some budget uh information for us to
help make a decision of sort of what's the what's the right feel in terms of um the hours and so forth. Um this position is projected to be 70 uh $70 per hour um and will flex with what the project
commitment is and they will be located on site um for the duration of the project. Um, and we'll be meeting regularly with Joe and then, um, helping to make decisions on site on a timely basis so that it helps move the project forward. Um, I'm sure the committee has
some questions. I'll defer to Joe on some of those questions. Um, and that's where we are right now. So, we'd like to be able to approve a budget and move forward um, with the hiring of the individual. We have someone in mind for this position.
So, I'll open it up if there are any questions or discussion. >> I can I just add >> Yeah, I think it's well worth the time knowing what happened at the library when we went through that. The amount of time that the facilities department had
to spend there was enormous. So, taking that burden off with recal coming up is a great idea, I think. So, I fully support it. >> Yeah, I agree. I think there's um I think though there's a lot to be gained
from just having an extra resource that um I know it's going to be dedicated to um kill them, but that sort of frees up facilities to >> provide resources to recal. It's kind of a lot going on in town. So, I fully support it.
I support it because it's um it's it's a huge commitment when you know we're kind of moving from moving from design to construction. Um construct you know during construction facilities is going to take that hit. Um
and it's hard to absorb all of the hours that you need to in a regular in your regular full-time schedule. So, um, I I'm I'm looking forward to this position as well. >> I think, um, Madam Chair, it's it's a
really important to remember the seasonality of the work the facilities department does. And so, once this project is getting ready to, you know, break ground and doing that work over the summer, the facilities department is going to be working on their regular school building project that they have
to get done over the summer. And so, Joe and his staff will be managing all of those renders as well. And, And then in the winter time, you know, we always experience, we don't always experience, our lost ones are fantastic this year. Knock on wood. Um, but things like roof dilaminations and pipe freeze ups and so
forth. And they do a lot of work to monitor the status of the buildings to prevent those kinds of things. And so that's just the routine day-to-day work protecting our our our physical assets that the department does. And so this particular um role is a highly informed
construction you know person who will represent the facilities department Joe in his role and it is an augmentation to the fine work the OPMS will be doing um they will have an on-site clerk that that also represents the town but is
working differently and um this basically is an extension of the facilities department. we just don't have the headcount that um we really ought to right now. >> It's an extra set of hands. So >> and eyes and and another there's of a
brain as well. So that's um so thank you for that. >> Thank you very much for presenting that. >> Um anybody else? >> Destroys. >> Jane, can you just clarify? Is the intent that this position exists for the duration of the project? >> Correct. Only for the project.
>> Okay. >> Yep. It would be entirely that's why we're asking for financial support for it from the project. It is a temporary position for the purpose of the project for this work within the project. Um and would phase ramp up and then would phase
out depending on you know like they're not going to you know be hanging around all the time until we reach the full closeout stage though that will widen down those hours be necessary once the construction's you know we've met substantial completion I think. Um, so,
um, yeah, it's a good question. >> Thank you, >> James. Is it 70 or 75? >> I beg your pardon. Is it? I don't know. I'll defer to I beg your pardon. 75. I misspoke. >> Thank you. >> Okay.
Uh, no further discussion, then we will go to the vote so we can bring this gentleman on. Um, Pat, >> you want >> you need a motion first? I think >> I'll make a I'll make a motion um I'll make a motion to approve a forecasted
cost of $400,000 to fund the uh reading clerk's salary um as outlined by Jane by assistant town manager >> second sorry >> seconded by us on the other end
>> any more discussion >> when would this person start timeline here >> January >> just to make them >> January they'll be starting to familiarize themselves >> pre- construction pre >> that's correct
>> on a limited basis just to review the bid document to review the design documents >> get to know the team come meet as a team >> yes >> Sean >> yes >> John
>> yes Chris, >> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. And that motion passes. Thank you, Jane. Thank you, everyone. Appreciate it. >> Thank you, team. Um, okay. We'll go on
to church parking lot. Church parking. Um, okay. So, the I'm going to update you with this. Uh, I'll read this statement of the record. Um, so I've been working with Katie Gabriella, our procurement, our director of operations. We do procurement together. Um, and we spoke with Jim Fitzgerald, the business
manager for Christ the King Parish. Um, just before Thanksgiving regarding the potential parking license for Kilum teachers and staff. We've spoken to him a few times. At that meeting, Jim informed us that the parish is currently undergoing a discernment process as it determines usage of its capital assets.
um he expects that discernment to be complete in December or January. Um we also discussed the number of spaces needed 70 for staff to just have how how we want to handle parking, I'm sorry, plowing as the parish typically plows less frequently than we'll need
for daily school use. They do plow when there's a storm, but it's sort of at the end of the day or whenever it's convenient for their their plow person. Um, so we w worked with the DPW director to see if his team would be able to plow our section that we would be licensing
of the lot and he said the DPW would be able to do that so that that lot will be clear in the morning for all our teachers to get in there especially since they won't really be plowing the killing lot right next door. So um uh or certainly so we'll be making those arrangements. Um, so we need to nail
down the the dates that the town required those those teachers bases. We're thinking end of August 2026. Um, and um, then after that statement was put together in preparation for this meeting, uh, we received an email from
Jim Fitzgerald um, to let us know that a set of recommendations has come out um, from parish meetings that they've had 11:22 and then December 11th. So just last week um they're under seal now until their pastor can get feedback from
the arch dasis. So uh as soon as they have something to share they'll let us know. Um we we don't know what this means if if one church or the other will close or what's going to happen um with those particular buildings and there's a lot of emotion involved with that
whereers in that go to the two churches. So um we try to be very respectful and you know of their process. um they are currently scheduling feedback sessions with the parishioners and um so we anticipate that we might hear something um
right after Christmas time is kind of what we're thinking. >> Okay. >> So we we had it on as something we would vote on because we thought that it would be kind of sealed up but it's not yet. >> We we do not have a a licensing agreement to bring the committee to vote
on. So, um, you could, you know, general conversation. I think we'll need to increase our number a little bit on what we're willing to pay for teachers. We talked about that internally, but the board's temperature on that would be helpful. Um, and then, uh, working with our OPM, um, Mike and Justin have
brought some good ideas forward of how we can secure space for contractors and how we might approach that. One one option would be um for us to schedule to to you know claim the space and pay rent on that. Uh another option would be to
put in our bid documents, inform the contractor of how many spaces might be available and if they can make an arrangement with the parish directly. Um or a hybrid of something in between. Um and so there's some good conversation and things that they have experience that have done in other sites. You know
there's not a lot of parking in more urban sites. Um but that's That's where we are right now. So, because of we were not aware of a discernment process until that call we had at Thanksgiving with the with Jim. So, it could work out well in our favor um for the purposes of
parking if that building is used less frequently. Um there'll be more space for us to um to utilize. >> We're fairly comfortable that we will be able to um secure the spots for teachers. We're just waiting to see if we're going to be able to get additional
spots for the contract. Correct. >> Yeah. So, and with the we let them know about uh DPW being able to plow so we can make that early warnings commitment and we'll always have that space open. So, in that regard, um we will we anticipate that we'll be able to start
moving forward on that part of the gift agree of the of licensing, sorry, the licensing agreement. >> Do you want to talk about the cost or do we not want to talk about >> No, I mean there's it's not a it's not a secret. Um we don't have a particular cost in mind. um they they have
expressing interest to kind of move the need a little bit. We were planning on $10 per spot per month was the initial and that so that we're out to about $700 a month. Um so we may that's we're well under you know procurement budgets if we
if we stay at 70 spots. Um, so we can we can have some room to go up there if we need to to um to work with the the parish. And we're trying not to increase their costs either to accommodate our needs. Um, trying to, you know, not and
but to pay a fair price as well. >> Hey Jane, just a quick question. Um, on the snow removal, does that um, you know, in the scenario where we would um DBW would um clear th those spaces.
Would that uh defer a cost for the the church? Is it are they only going to do like one section or would they be doing the whole thing? Um and and that would be you kind of an ancillary benefit to the uh to the to the parish. >> I'm open to conversation um with what
the committee and what DPW can realistically do. Uh for paying for the spots, it's in the back. I think of the lot. So, they would have to come around and and get that access and open that area up. Um, the church
uh currently pays I think a parishioner to do some of that work. And so, I don't know if their appetite is to remove the work from that parishioner or what they haven't had that conversation. I think um we also um it may not be big work for
us. if we're having our contractors parked there, we might be able to do that as well. So, I haven't asked DBW that question to do the whole thing. Um, but certainly if we can maybe diminish change to clear that a whole lot might
be more um advantageous uh position for the barracks to say yes. So, I think we'll know a little bit more when we're talking about what's the what's the full um ability to utilize the parking on that site based on the discernment.
>> Whatever it is, it'll be helpful for the project. >> Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. And we we've so if the church remains in full function, they have sometimes large funerals. They have um sometimes programs that they're offering there that utilize more of the
space. And that would be some of the restrictions that we could be facing or perhaps not. So, >> thank you. >> It's not it's not as easy as we thought it would be. No. So, >> conversation and a close.
>> Thank you, Jane. >> Thank you, Katie. Um, and I can just Yep. I might get Okay, moving on. Um, schedule review, please. Okay. So, uh at the past, um
SBC meetings, we approved the 60% um CD package, which we've submitted to the MSBA, received comments, and we have till we're going to be responding to those comments by this Friday. Um we're still uh working on working towards the
90% submission which should be sometime in I believe February. I think it says here February. Um right now we have the early electrical switch gear package which um after this bullet item on the agenda to approve to submit it and have
it be issued through bid docks uh to solicit pricing for that. Um once we This kind of all ties into the next agenda items. I'm just going to keep going with it. But um as we get closer to uh the base contract bidding,
we're going to need to form um a pre-quall uh committee who will work with uh the designer and the OPM to um pre-qualify general contractors for bid
and subcontractors for bid. uh and uh work that whole process that it that it takes to get these um solicit these these contracts and get them on board. Um so yeah, other than that, we're looking
good. So after this, uh that's pretty much the schedule update. So after this, I believe we're going to move on to vote to submit the switch gear package, early electrical package through bid docks. Any uh any questions on schedule as far as
where we're at right now or where we're headed? >> Did um so we remain convinced that we need to do an early release package on the switch gear and generator in order to meet schedule. >> Just the switch gear. >> Not the generator. >> Not the generator. >> Just the switch gear.
>> Yeah. I I I we were in a meeting. I think someone said something about 16 months. I can't remember if it was with this group or with another group. Someone was talking about their switch here being 16 months out. >> Yeah, Justin, if I can, I think uh we we had an internal meeting last week and and we were talking to some other um uh
colleagues team members and they were talking about having issues with switch gears again. So, uh they were recommending if you could do early package to do it and we said we were and they said you were smart to do that. >> Thanks, man. segated.
>> Yeah, perfect. >> So, um I don't have a document to show for that package other than the the documents for that package, but um it's up to you guys to take a vote to submit it. >> So, we're gonna we're going to vote on
the um early switch gear package. Um and that will be our only early package. >> Correct. >> Somebody want to >> Yeah. So you need to motion to uh I
guess go ahead with submitting an early bid invitation for bids for an early electrical package um for the ele kilum elementary school. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Seconded by Ed. Any discussion? Is is
that um the word electrical package? Should that be >> invitation for bids? Early electrical package, >> right? >> That's how that's where I got it. >> That's where I got it. >> Okay.
>> I could say bid number KS26 >> it's just the switch. >> Just the switch, but it says early, >> right? >> So those those bid documents are complete at this time. Oh yeah. >> And we've gone through
um talent procurement has gone through the front end portion. >> Oh yeah. >> ETA. >> Okay. So we good to go. >> Any other discussion? >> Okay. Go to the vote. Pat, >> yes. >> Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes.
>> Chris, >> yes. Yes. >> Ted, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. >> Thank you. That passes. >> As as a matter of interest, the the existing kilum has a an emergency
generator presumably. Any idea what condition it's in and whether it can be used reused in the town? You know, whether it can be salvageable or what? >> Does it have >> I think the two guys that can answer that question. generator there. Now, I'll ask
>> if it could be used in another town building. >> I'll ask right now. >> Want to salvage not >> except for a couple in a tree. >> Not the water. >> If it's 20 years old, no. But if it's two years old, >> yeah, >> could be used somewhere in the town.
>> No, John. We know. We know the answer. >> Yeah. >> We looked at it at one point like five years ago. A lot of buildings don't have emergency generators now. Um if they if they're not electric, all electric buildings, they just you know your your heat still
runs and then if the power is out then you don't have >> using it as a shelter. >> Yeah. >> That question. >> I have the answer. I just don't have access to it right now.
>> Deep deep in an email. Um I just I just sent a message to Joe and um he's probably driving so I don't >> Okay. >> He gets back to us. >> Great question. >> Um so for uh the next agenda item for
the uh the pre-call working group discussion, I know we talked about the XLT. Do we have the members to to vote to have them be that committee? The names of those members. >> So we have Kirk. He's not He's not on there. He uh he's
on the meeting. >> Oh, the pre-all. Sorry. Sorry, Kirk. Um >> that's okay. >> No. Who do we have for >> We didn't offer him. >> Did you? >> I thought I thought we volunteered him, but
>> he's not here. Greg's not here. Volunteer him up. Um, does anybody remember who volunteered? >> If I can, I I thought Kevin may have said he was doing it for the senior center and he >> he offered
I I think you're right. And I I will just let you know whoever does volunteer or gets volunttoled here um Collers and um our design team as well as uh the the bid docs online people will be doing the majority of the
uh you know the leg work if you will as far as doing um calls to to people about um references and stuff like that. really to meet with us to have an over general overview with it. So, while we we'll certainly uh happy to let uh the
other committee members help us with it, uh we will try to to make the the work as light as possible for the committee members. >> Okay. So, we we Justin is on that and Dave from LBA Dave Harris. Um and Kevin,
>> do you need additional people from the committee? >> Typically, there's one more that way there. There's four people. It's kind of two from the town and and and one from OPM and one from the designer. >> Yeah. Needs to be two from the town. >> Yep. >> Yeah. I think that the statute actually says three from the town, but the OPM counts technically as one of those
three. >> So, can you just explain to anybody who's wondering if they would like to be on the committee what that would entail? >> Sure. What we're going to do is we'll we'll have a kickoff meeting initially just to kind of explain the whole process. video. The the short version is
we'll be putting out a a package to general contractors and to file submitters. Um that package will require them to pre-qualificate uh provide pre-qualification. So they're pro providing proof uh that they've been in business for so many years that they've done projects of similar size and
similar nature. Um they talk about their uh past court procedures if they have any. They talk about uh safety modification rates which is ho how safe their workers are on site uh various things like that. We we have the ability to look at their finances as well as
their DAM rating. Dam is the state uh uh department of uh capital asset management and um they they they rate every public um contractor in every job. Uh they actually they collect ratings. We we actually do the ratings. So on
this job, we'll be rating everybody from 1 to 100. Uh anything over 70 is passing. Um but we we'll be reviewing those really to make sure that they're they're qualified people. Um so the first meeting is just to kick off kind of being a little more detailed than what I just did. Um and letting
everybody see what we're going to be setting out as a package, if you will. Um again, call yours will work with the design team to pull that package together. Um the second meeting would be after we receive all of the packages and we're going to be able just we'll start
by just saying hey we've received 100 or 150 or 200 packages um we will in that meeting divvy those packages up that if we have to make any additional calls any follow-ups that colleagues would do this maybe this trade maybe we take HVAC and
LBA takes electrical or things of that nature so we we divvy it up we let the committee know if there's any any irregularities at that point if there's anybody that maybe submitted an incomplete package or something like that so that they have a heads up. Again, those first two meetings are relatively short. Um the third meeting
would be after we've gone through and done the review and we would bring it to that committee to give them a heads up of anybody that is either below that that minimum standard or close to that minimum standard and we would focus on that and we would ask the committee
members to maybe assist us with that. Again, that's the those few would be the ones that they might review. I would say on any given project, we might have somewhere between 130 and 170 of these and we might have two or three that fall into that category. So, it's not it's
not a whole lot of them. Um, but we do want to review those ones. uh you know uh and then then then we would go away for a week or two and we'd come back and at the fourth meeting that final meeting we would agree collectively that these people are
in and these people are out and that's going to be our recommendation back to this group that is sitting here in the building committee and we report back to the building committee and say that we've rejected this one or these 10 however many it is um and we're making a recommendation to move forward with you
know the balance Madam Chair, um thank you for that. Thank you, Mike. Um two things. One, um when is the pre-qualification process starting? >> I believe it would start in the next uh month. I just dropped my schedule out.
Hang on. >> According to the schedule in the um that was presented were started a couple weeks ago >> and it goes through the middle of of March. So, we're we're >> we got plenty of time. >> Yeah. >> We have a little bit of time. And I think within Docs online, my
understanding is that they're going to actually help accelerate that a little bit by by working it through them because they're they have kind of a database of a lot of the a lot of the um >> the references already done. And that's that's the majority of the time is is making calls. You know, if you have five
references for every every, you know, submission and there's 150 of those submissions, just imagine how many phone calls you're talking about or uh emails you're talking about. I did I did this on the recal project and if the committee needs me to I will also do it on this project. I'll be on vacation for
two weeks at the end of the year. So I was not raising my hand in the middle of that but that I can I can do that if need be. Um uh so Bidoc is great. We do have all of the references that come in. It's a little bit clunky to get to to
learn to use at first but um then it's it's pretty easy to actually use um just once you get used to it. But um I think Joe Hawkins also did uh pre-qualification on recal. So we had a pretty good team from the recal
committee that that worked on that. Um and uh we all took like two or three different trades. I think each of us took three trades. I had elevators. We had no bids. So that was shorten works. >> Yeah, there were no bids. We had to put it back out and then it just goes out to
the contractor. So, um, but it really is a it's a neat system and it makes it a lot easier on the procurement team to do that. And then additionally, um, I would just request that, um, as on the recount project, the procurement team Katie and Josh want to attend those recall meetings as they kind of work through
the process of the town. So, >> and for recap, those meetings were um, open. >> They were all posted. Yes, they were posted meetings. Um, nobody attended them except us, but um, they were all posted and um, yeah, the OPM scheduled all the meetings, posted them to the
clerk's office, um, and then sent a meeting link and we met, went over any questions we had, walked through it, they sent us all the directions on how to use it. worked really well. And um and so we initially looked at them and when each option came in and read what
the submissions and then it ducks fills in all of the um the recommendations from design teams and other towns and so forth, you could really kind of nail it. Well, this is a project very similar to what our project is and and then they also rank them. And so you already have
that work done based on the rubrics you're supposed to use. And so you can change your score based on what you've read if you want to and then that and it just all calculates everything for us. So, it's a really robust, you know, system.
>> So, it's about four meetings. It's a few hours worth of work. You don't need to have construction experience. Um, and it's pre-qualifying um subcontractors in certain categories for the project before it goes out for
>> and and the general contractor too. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. general contractor and filed sub bids. >> So, do do we have anybody who might >> I can do it. I'll I did it for the librarian. >> That was even worse
>> because it wasn't all the bit docks. It was all making >> it was a lot of work, but this sounds pretty >> okay. All right. So, it'll be um Kevin Kabuzi, Justin, David Harris from LBA, and Nancy.
>> Super. If you need a if you need us an alternate or you need an extra hands, I'm happy to help out because I've already got this. >> I already know how to use the system. >> Thank you. >> And I don't think we need to vote on that, D. >> I think I think you do. >> Okay, let's vote on it >> because it's like a subcommittee. We're
post. >> Thank you. >> Um me make a motion, please. Um motion to approve a subcommittee for this for the prequalifications. Uh include Do you want me to include the
people? >> As a working group. >> As a working group. As a working group. >> Sure. >> Um Nancy Tumi, Kevin Kabuzi, Justin. No. >> Yep. >> Yep. >> David Harris. >> And David Harris >> from LVA. >> Second.
>> Seconded by Pat. Any further discussion? the vote. Pat, >> yes. >> Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. Perfect. Thank you
everybody. >> Um, okay. So, um, we want to have a discussion about, um, offsite improvements and add alternates to, um, the site work. I'll give it a crack here
and everybody feel free to jump in. Um, right now in our current bid documents, we have um so let me rewind. This project has a um a border, let's
call it, and it's the the um the site, right? and MSBA it will pay for a portion of that um site work but it does not um participate in the roadways and
sidewalks around the site. So right now in our base bid we have the adjacent roadways and um and sidewalks on Charles Street on Haveril Street. We have um our um traffic sub consultant
has worked on all of the traffic um work and parking on um from Wakefield Street all the way on from Charles Street from Wakefield Street all the way up to Haveril and at that point on all the way
down Haveril to um the Simon's Way intersection. So um and and the traffic consultants I mean we've had so many meetings um public meetings um that we think that work um which is under and I shouldn't probably throw out
numbers but under $3 million um for two ad alternates. Um we're bringing it to the committee to I I personally feel like we should be kind of buttoning up the the whole project
and that whole area. If um if we push it back to the town, their budget is going to be um you know, I don't know when they would be able to get to it. We have um we've had some meetings on it. Andrew
McNichols is um looking at different grants and seeing if he can secure different grants and if he can, if we have to make slight changes to the design, we would do that. So, I wanted to bring it to the committee. Um we did
run this by um Jane um wrote a letter and we ran this by um the chair and vice chair of Fincom to um ask their opinion and just to um ensure just because of
the temperature in in um across the town that that they're good with this process that we're going through. and um and they they did feel like it was within the scope of our project and that this committee is um good to make that
decision. So if it if our bids come back and um we are you know within budget and we want to accept those ad alternates, that's something we'll be able to do. If it the bids come in and it's out of
budget, then obviously we wouldn't be including those ad alternates. So, um I don't know if I've confused people, but that's how I just justly um if we want to um have a discussion on it
and um kind of hash that piece out. >> I I I think it's a great idea because how can you have the safety around the school if you don't look at the adjacencies to that school? We're doing work on Simmons Way, bringing that road all the way down to Simmons Way where
there's a traffic light makes a lot of sense to me. So, I I don't see any problem with it being an ad alternate. I think also having one company who's in charge of doing all of the roadway work instead of having just the roadway work under one contract and then coming back
and trying to finish it with a different contractor doesn't make sense to me either. So, I'm I support having that as an alternate >> and that design work obviously was done. Yeah, that's already included and done through LBA.
>> How many ad alternates are we currently thinking about? >> Two. >> That plus >> just those two. So, one is the Charles Street >> um >> off-site improvements and one is the Habil street offsite improvements. That gives you the option to accept them in
two chunks. I think the Charles Street is probably the more important because that includes some of the parking that we kind of had said would be part of this project. >> Yeah, >> if I can, John, I think that was an
important question. Um, I think when you're doing add alternates, they need to be simple alternates. Uh, they need to be easily biddable, if you would. And the more alternates you have in there, that tends to make the general congress maybe a little bit concerned that you're
not sure what you want to do. But I think this is clear that you're doing it probably for budgetary reasons. Um, and certainly you want to be able to do it. >> Do we um the wording of the override or the debt
exclusion that went to the town to be voted on by the citizens? Um I I can't remember exactly where said um I think we should look at that and find out whether that
the wording of that override was consistent with doing stuff off site. >> The Warren article you're talking about when we did the exclusion >> I'm talking about what happened to the voters as well. the actual wording that
right >> that people voted on. >> We keep you know we keep those very vague to account for things like this. So I mean we could take a look at it purposely um based on what bond council tells us and town council um you know
something like this I think would fit easily into that where it's right next to the project that's envisioned. >> We should have it available right? should be. Yeah. No, Jane's looking at it up right now. We didn't have that. >> Should be on a website. >> That's where I'm going. >> Yeah.
>> I I just pulled up the drawing, too, just so everybody understands. I think Carla, you said it a minute ago, but our site is here in the middle and we're talking about doing Helil Street improvements and then Charles Street improvements. And I think the reality is that most if not all of these would not
be being done if we were not doing the project. >> Exactly. So, I think I think that that's that's kind of where it's at is that this is really is kind of integral to the overall idea of the project. Like Jenny mentioned earlier, some of the additional parking along Charles Street is is kind of part of the the whole plan
with the drop off loop here and the additional parking, things of that nature. >> Yeah. And that's an important point. You know, were it not for this project, we wouldn't be doing this at all. And even with the project, if it's not funded through this project, we may not be doing it at all because there's no other
funding source. And you know, this is something neighbors have asked for. It's certainly a safety issue, crosswalks. So, we think it fits in and makes perfect sense. >> It's not absolutely necessary to do for the project is what I'm getting. >> Absolutely necessary, meaning if we
don't do it, the project won't go forward. >> That's why it's that's why it's an alternate. >> Yeah. Right. Exactly. It's an alternate. It's not an >> So, the project is viable without I would say yes, I'd defer to the OPM on it, but it would be, but this would be a very valuable add-on.
>> Yeah, I would argue >> the warrant the warrant article included the language and all other costs incidental and related there. >> Um, which I think is fairly broad language that probably covers this pretty well. >> Yeah. And that's why we keep it broad.
>> I think the other thing to keep in mind is we we presented these as added alternates with the MSBA before and I don't believe they took any exception. we can certainly follow back with them again to make sure that they understand that we intend to move forward with these and if they if there's any issue I'm sure that they would bring that to
light as well I can read the whole language into the record if you would like Mr. code um from the article. So to see if the town will vote to appropriate, borrow or transfer from available funds an amount of money to be expended under the direction of Kllum school building
committee to design, construct, reconstruct, remodel, add to, equip, and furnish a new prek through grade 5 elementary school to replace the JW Kllum Elementary School with an approximate square footage of 122,941
uh located at 333 Charles Street Reading Cessors Parcel blah blah blah inclusive of the abatement and demolition of existing school structures on said property, the design and construction of new parking lots and new multi-purpose fields, and all other costs incidental and related there too, which school
facilities shall have an anticipated useful life as an educational facility for the instruction of school children of at least 50 years, and for which the town may be eligible for a school construction grant from the Massachusetts School Building Authority.
>> There's a little bit more, but it just acknowledges the grant information. Yeah. Um, >> construct reconstruct remodel. >> The fact that MSBA won't have anything to do with it is kind of contrary to an idea that it's included.
>> No. Uh, Mike Carroll does a really good job of explaining this piece about the compare the way the grants work and what they all lot for off-site improvements so that there is equity given to school building projects whether it's rural or urban or suburban and so forth. And I
would I would defer to Mike, but he does a very nice job of explaining that while it may not be included, these offsite improvements may not be included in the grant, it is not the intention to exclude that particular work from the project and and it all works together. It it would almost seem like an
oversight on the part my opinion of the committee if we didn't do it because people be like, why didn't you do this when you were here opening the road anyway and you've left these pieces undone? It would, you know, but I would defer to Mr. Carol. So Jane, just as far as the the off-site improvements here,
the MSBA is not excluding the off-site improvements. What the MSBA does is they do have caps on certain items. They have caps, for example, on site work at 10% of the construction value. Um, and I think I've explained to probably some, if not everybody here before, I did a
project years ago in Revier which the four sides of the building were touching sidewalks on all four sides and we still exceeded the 10% sitework cap of that project. So um while I understand the the process the MSBA goes under uh they are trying to do equity to your point
Jane whether it's at Rier site which is a very urban site without fields or if you go out to Western Mass and somebody's doing you know a fieldhouse and and track and field and and six baseball fields and everything else they're trying to get an equity there.
So I I I I applaud them for putting a cap in there. I I think the cap is probably a little lower than it should be. It should probably be a little bit higher percentage I think in general. But um they do put a cap there and I will tell you without a doubt without this site, without this work, we're over
the cap already on the site. Uh that's what I've seen on every project I've ever done. I thought that Reier project would be the first one that didn't go over the cap and even that one did. So um it is very similar. They they they don't um they don't allow for for
abatement um cost. They don't allow for OPM over three and a half% or designer over 10%. There there's lots of of different caps that they put in there, but uh there's nothing specific to the off-site work here. And I think uh as we said, you know, maybe a couple times already, I think if not for the project
that the work wouldn't be happening. And I think in general this is making the site a lot safer um for the students because we have to realize that the students are coming for school uh for education at the school but many of those students are coming from this neighborhood right they might be walking
in or they might be be dropped off and and I think having you know the the the parking that we're we're proposing on on Charles Street and having the the crosswalks adjusted and even the Dana Road being narrowed down a little bit just you know it's it's all for safety. It's all for safety. Uh it's also
actually for for better flow for the the buses to come and go and for the parents to come and go and and you know in in the vein of being good neighbors to the neighborhood. I I think it's going to show a great improvement of traffic in that area. But we're not doing it for the traffic. We're really doing for the kids and for the school itself.
>> Thank you Mike. Thank you Jane. >> Any other comments? >> One question. Mike, could you give it any thought to when this work would be done in the project schedule, phase one, phase two, special phase over the summer?
>> I I haven't thought about a lot, but it's definitely something we should think about, Pat. So, I I think um you know, there's kind of two ways to go about the go about this. We can dictate it or we can get the contractor on board and have some discussion with them. Um,
but I think to your point, um, certainly doing some of this over the summer might might might be advantageous. I think the other thing that I always like to do whenever I'm doing paving, for example, I like I like to try and get the early work done early, get the binder down and let it sit for a season, like let it sit
over the winter so that you have any frost or anything that develop. If there is any poor areas of of asphalt, we can un, you know, find them before we do the finish coat. So, um, my initial thought would be the sooner the better as far as getting the the general work done and then maybe you let it sit over the
winter, you come back and, uh, that does require you to kind of raise the structures again. You do a second round on the structures, but I think from a long-term viability standpoint that that's something that I I I always recommend it on the on the sites and on a on a roadway, I would probably recommend a very similar approach.
>> Okay. It's gotten to be a increasingly complicated site, geothermal wells, contaminated soils, occupied site, off-site road improvements. So, it's something that's going to need to be given a lot of
thought in the next several months how it gets phased. >> Yeah. And to your point, you might do one road first and then the other so you're not kind of taking up everything, right? >> Yeah. Kind of boxing in the site if you do them both at the same time. It'll be a
be a busy really a busy spot. No doubt. >> Yeah. I mean, with that in mind, um maybe we're doing Charles Street while we're doing the school on the other side and then you kind of flip-flop so that you're you're doing Hel Street once the school's in. I I don't know. I'd have to
think about it a little bit, but uh it's certainly something we could come back to you folks on uh with with some better thought. >> Thank you. >> Any further discussion? Thanks and thanks Carla. I think uh just like the fieldhouse project I felt
a majority of that was covered by the warrant article. I think this one is similar in that fashion and it helps that we're trending under budget because if we weren't this would be a different conversation. So I'm all for it.
And the fact that it's an ad alternate allows us to not include it or include it depending on where when the bids come in. >> Okay. >> All right. So we need a motion for two add alternates. Is that how we want to make this motion or
>> So do you need two separate motions or just one motion to make it into two? >> One motion. Okay. >> Which one's first? >> Yeah. Which is the first of the two? The I would say that Charles Street is the first. >> Okay. Move to um add two alternates to
the project for offsite improvements with Charles Street being alternate number one and Hero Street being alternate number two. >> Second. >> Seconded by Pat. Any more discussion?
>> Okay, moving to the vote. Pat, >> yes. >> Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. Kurt, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. Perfect. >> Thank you. >> Thank you everyone.
Thank you. >> And we will go to prior meeting minutes of 1112. We have a motion for that. Move to uh accept the meeting minutes dated 111225. >> Second.
>> Seconded by Pat. Any discussion? >> Okay, seeing none. Pat, >> yes. >> Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ted, >> yes. >> Nancy,
>> yes. And Carla, yes. Thank you. Um, anybody have any future agenda items? Our next meeting isn't until um January and we're moving to the third, right?
>> Third Monday. >> What was that? >> Third Monday. >> The 19th. >> It would be the third Monday, but that's Martin Luther King. >> The 19th, >> so it would go to the Tuesday. 20th. I put the calendar on the screen. Carla,
>> you're the best. >> I think I think we're seeing ourselves. >> Oh, that's funny. We can see it. >> We can see it. >> Okay. All right. >> So, the 20th. Yeah. The 20th. >> I had something in front of it. Sorry. >> So, it's um our next meeting is January
20th and we'll have the XLT um on the 12th. Perfect. Any any other discuss any other items that people want to um add to future agendas? No. Okay. Um
one more motion. >> Yeah. Move to a journ. >> Second. >> Non-negotiable. Um, I want to say before we vote that I hope everybody has a merry Christmas, a happy Hanukkah, happy holidays. Um, I
really appreciate and I know a lot of I know probably everybody on this committee appreciates all the work that um that our consultants and our employees and our volunteers have done. So, um, the project is going really well and it's going really well because we
have a lot of talented people and a lot of hard workers. So, um, thank you to everyone. >> Thank you, J. >> Thank you, too. >> And we will vote >> to adjourn. Pat, >> yes. >> Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris,
>> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, we're ajourned. Thank you everyone.