Back to School Building Committee Meeting Minutes
Minutes for February 8, 2012
Hingham School Building Committee
220 Central Street
Hingham, MA 02043
Minutes for Meeting: 8:00 P.M., February 8, 2012
Members Present: Ray Estes, Tim Collins, Stefan Vogelmann, Peter Bradley, Samantha
Anderson, Rob Bucey and Sandra Cleary
School Resource Staff: Dorothy Galo, John Ferris and Roger Boddie
Professional Team: Jim Jordan, Cari Orsi, Kris Bradner, Kristy Lyons, and Mary Mahoney
R. Estes called meeting to order at 8:10 P.M.
Minutes for Building Committee meeting January 18, 2012 were approved as amended.
R. Estes reported that MSBA executed and forwarded the Project Funding Agreement (PFA) to
the School Department on February 6, 2012. M. Mahoney noted that the PFA includes
information for the District to upload the project budget into MSBA's ProPay System setting up
the grant reimbursement process for the project.
J. Jordan provided an update on design progress:
• Permitting – J. Jordan distributed an updated permitting schedule noting that Conservation Commission hearing reconvened on February 6 to discuss comments
resulting from the Third Party Engineer document review. Conservation Commission will meet again on February 27th and as reported by Cliff Prentiss it is expected that a draft Order of Conditions will be presented at the meeting for Commission discussion/approval. Board of Health submission is scheduled for March 7 based on the anticipated issuance of an Order of Conditions with a hearing expected on March 21st. Martinage Engineering Assoc. continues to provide design updates and documentation to the Health Department to ensure the permitting process will progress as scheduled. Planning Board also conducted a hearing on February 6th with continuance to February 13th for site plan review and March 5th for further traffic review with the expectation that site plan review will conclude on March 5th. R. Estes notes that the review process by Planning Board will require additional services from Coler and Colantonio, Traffic Study Engineer, to attend the March 5th meeting and respond to Planning Board/Third Party Engineer review comments to be provided. A proposal from Coler and Colantonio is forthcoming.
T. Collins and S. Vogelmann arrive at 8:15 P.M.
• Phasing – J. Jordan introduces Kris Bradner, landscape architect for Birchwood Design, and Cari Orsi, civil engineer for Pare Corporation, who have been continuing design and coordination for project phasing plans. J. Jordan reports phasing coordination continues as design and permitting process progress. Ai3 expects to provide a phasing update once the permitting process is complete.
• MSBA 60% Submission – 60% Construction Documents were forwarded to the OPM tonight for inclusion of its documentation and submission to MSBA by February 10th. The submission will not include cost estimates or potential value engineering items as cost estimate and budget reconciliation will be conducted on February 13th to allow for Building Committee presentation February 15th and submission to MSBA by February 17th.
• Energy Action Committee – Last night, representatives of Ai3, their Mechanical Engineer and Renewable Energy Consultant, KBA, and R. Estes met with representatives of the Energy Action Committee (EAC) to review building design, LEED scorecard, and energy model for the building. LEED Scorecards and Energy Model Analysis Report were distributed to EAC members. Three LEED scorecards were reviewed; the original project scorecard including photovoltaic (PV) component with a total of 53 points, original scorecard omitting PV component with a total of 49 points, and third scorecard evaluating the additional energy performance items added to offset the deletion of PVs with a total of 54 points. The original scorecard with PVs omitted results in the project falling below the Silver Certification threshold of 50 points and would negate the MSBA grant reimbursement incentive for energy efficient design. The inclusion of additional energy performance items requested by the Committee increases the energy optimization credits for the project resulting in achieving Silver Certification level safely. Additionally, the energy model analysis performed by KEMA shows that the inclusion of the added energy performance items, such as the radiant heat panels, provides the building with 23.2% greater than code energy efficiency. The KEMA energy analysis report also reviewed the energy performance and payback for the window system proposed in the design and EAC window system suggestions of triple paned argon filled and vacuum type glass assemblies. Based on the analysis, triple paned glazing had a projected payback of 140 years and vacuum type glazing a projected payback of 200 years. These values were based on initial capital cost considerations acknowledged to by EAC. Based on the meeting, the EAC members were satisfied that the project design was meeting desired energy savings and efficiencies. T. Collins asked about the cost to include radiant panels in the HVAC system design. J. Jordan reports the design includes approximately 200 l. f. of radiant panel at $100/l. f. equaling $200,000. Committee discussion ensues regarding LEED scorecard credits and considerations during value engineering to ensure that LEED certification will not be adversely effected.
• Bid Document Preparation – Project legal counsel, Bob Garrity, was contacted yesterday to update the design/bid schedule and initiate efforts to develop the contract, general conditions, and insurance requirements for project bid document. Legal documents are expected to be submitted in about 2 weeks.
M. Mahoney reported that representatives of the Building Committee, School Department, KBA, Pare Corporation, and electrical engineer for Griffith and Vary met with representatives of the Hingham Light Plant on January 23, 2012. The meeting was very productive and resulted in some refinement of designs to reuse overhead electrical and street lights along Rosemary Lane, coordinate service and transformer requirements for the new building, and confirm that the utility has written standards for service installations. Light Plant representatives also confirmed that existing transformers and meters would be removed by the Light Plant once service was terminated.
K. Bradner reviewed the building courtyard design and area features, including an outline of initial design concepts of a small amphitheater within the courtyard that has evolved into a class gathering space with benches for seating. Concrete patio includes exposed aggregate concrete accents within a broom finish concrete surface which is surrounded by simple low maintenance plantings, rain garden, and washed river bed stone. Committee discussion ensues regarding types of plantings, maintenance, and artificial and natural light within the space.
K. Bradner reviewed other site improvements including, design and component features for the retaining wall assembly between the ball fields and building. The wall will be a segmental block assembly with an ornamental fence at top. The ornamental fence is provided at wall locations with a 30" or more drop. Proposed bike racks were presented. Proposed tree planting varieties were reviewed. R. Boddie notes that trees proposed along the ball field entry need to be robust specimens due to student activities in the area.
K. Lyons reported that general contractor and subcontractor Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) were due by 2pm, January 31, 2012. 102 SOQs were received with at least four SOQs per trade category, except elevators for which three were received. The Prequalification Sub-Committee conducted a conference call on February 1, 2012 to organize and discuss the process for review, reference checks, and evaluation of SOQs. The Sub-Prequalification Committee is tentatively scheduled to meet on February 15th to begin the group evaluation of SOQs. Building Committee discussion ensues regarding the prequalification process, response by MBE and WBE firms, and list of contractors submitting a SOQ.
M. Mahoney reported there are no invoices for Committee consideration. The budget has been updated to include in the commitment column building test cuts and foundation inspection for hazardous material sampling/tests approved by the Committee at its January 18th meeting. As requested by the Committee at its January 18th meeting, building test cuts and foundation inspections were confirmed to include three locations exceeding the minimum of two each requested by the Building Committee. Based on all project commitments and expenditures to date the project remains on budget.
R. Estes noted two additional items for Committee information:
1. The elevator at East School had a drive component fail at the end of November. The repair associated with the failed component was $13,000. Kone, the elevator manufacturer and installer, was contacted and discussions are ongoing to consider discounting the repair costs based on the limited time the elevator was in service and other considerations.
2. During the EAC meeting last night there was a very interesting discussion regarding the impact of user practices on energy efficiency measurement and ideas for staff education and training on green features and building operational considerations. Committee discussion ensues regarding options for training the building community on building use and operations in the week prior to student occupation in September 2014.
P. Bradley reported on a public inquiry regarding the changing area design for the boys locker room and considerations for student privacy during changing. Committee discussion ensues regarding parity in facilities for girls and boys locker rooms. Ai3 to review options for providing privacy components in the boys locker room area without impacting balance of space design and attributes.
Meeting adjourned at 9:55 P.M.