Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20160427 - Elementary School Building Committee - Meeting Minutes Hopkinton Public Schools 89 Hayden Rowe – Hopkinton MA 01748 Hopkinton Elementary School Building Committee Town Hall, Hopkinton, MA April 27, 2016 7:00 p.m. Chair Joe Markey called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. Attendees: Joe Markey, Chairman Mike Shepard, Vice Chair –depart 8:00pm Rob Nickerson, Clerk John Mosher John Weaver Dr. Cathy MacLeod (non-voting) –depart 8:30pm Lauren DuBeau (non-voting) –depart 8:30pm Ralph Dumas (non-voting) –depart 8:30pm Norman Khumalo (non-voting)–depart 8:10pm Quorum present (5 voting Members). Absent: Jon Graziano, Pam Waxlax, Kelly Knight (alt-voting), Dave Daltorio (non-voting), Public Attendees: Also present: Jeff D’Amico from Compass Project Management, Inc. (CPM) Jim Barrett from Drummey Rosane Anderson, Inc. (DRA) George Willwerth and Chris Powers from Colantonio Inc. (CI) Chelsea Christenson from Nitsch Engineering (NE) I. Community Input: None. II. Approval of Minutes MOTION: Mr. Shepard moved to approve the HESBC meeting minutes dated April 5, 2016 as written, seconded by Mr. Nickerson. Voted: 5-0-0. III. Review and Approve Payment of Invoices MOTION: Mr. Shepard moved to approve the Invoice #2005392 from Miyares and Harrington LLP dated February 9, 2016, in the total amount of $988.00 for Legal advisory services, seconded by Mr. Nickerson. Voted: 5-0-0. MOTION: Mr. Shepard moved to approve the Invoice #2005478 from Miyares and Harrington LLP dated March 7, 2016, in the total amount of $342.00 for Legal advisory services, seconded by Mr. Mosher. Voted: 5-0-0. IV. Discuss Site Grading, Soils and Utility System Changes The wetland boundaries were reviewed by the Conservation Commission at their meeting on 4/25/16. The commission’s consultant identified the wetlands using a soil auger and has requested adjustments to the wetlands flag locations. Those adjustments are being reviewed by the project consultant for verification. The project surveyor will update the baseline survey accordingly. The next hearing is scheduled for May 9th, but might be continued to a future meeting if the layout is not finalized. Ms. Christenson discussed the site grading and utility systems modifications to the project. The engineering team has come full circle and intends to go back to an open drainage system, but this time it will be set at the water table level instead of above it. Ms. Christenson believes this will be an acceptable solution since the project is interrupting the current natural drainage with the addition of buildings, roadways and parking lots. This open drainage approach replicates the natural water recharge of the area. Mr. Powers noted the latest drainage & grading changes have resulted in additional cost savings to the project, but did not provide a number while the wetlands delineation is still being modified. Mr. D’Amico noted the building elevation is now set at elevation 513.5 and no longer requires a stepped foundation. These changes also contribute to savings to the project. Ms. Christenson answered Dr. MacLeod’s question that the open stormwater system has a low level of maintenance. Fencing of the gravel wetlands will be discussed after the final grading has been determined by the wetlands delineation changes. Ms. Christenson noted Nitsch has reviewed with Town Sewer department that the slope of less than 2% is acceptable without the need for a sewer lift station. Nitsch will submit a letter to the Sewer Dept. for review. Mr. D’Amico & Ms. Christenson both noted that the new roadway base will be built to Town subdivision standards, but other project specific items will deviate from subdivision standards, such as country drainage with a swale due to the wetlands setback restrictions. The design team has requested of the Utility companies to size the lines in the roadway to be able to accommodate a future facility of “similar size” to the Early Elementary School. Compass & the Design team will reach out to the Town Planner to review the deviations from the Subdivision standards. The ESBC offered that there may be other land in town available to recieve soil or opportunities to import soil from other Town owned resources. Mr. Powers noted that there are a lot of considerations that the design team and site contractor must evaluate before importing any soil. He further noted that timing is very critical for cost management of soils. i.e. if soil piles need to be moved multiple times that may cost more than buying it at the time that it is needed. Compass & CI agreed to follow up with the Town DPW director regarding options with Town owned land. Mr. D’Amico noted that the hydrant flow test was completed on Hayden Rowe and the result was a low water flow. The project will require a fire pump, which has been shown on the plans and carried in the budget. The design team will follow up with the Fire Dept. to confirm a cistern is not needed for water storage. Dr. MacLeod noted that she believed a cistern was needed at the middle school because it was serving multiple buildings on that campus. V. Design Review Mr. Barrett presented building renderings, pictures and physical samples of Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) facades. Mr. Barrett presented two families of color in the samples and renderings that DRA is proposing, a reddish color and natural earth tone colors. Mr. Barrett noted that the final selection of color will happen at contract award when a masonry supplier has been awarded. DRA noted that they recommend an all CMU option vs. sprinkling in Brick on some elevations. Mr. Mosher requested to see some options for a splash of design elements on one of the facades. DRA will bring back some design modifications to the next ESBC meeting. Mr. Barrett walked the ESBC through the modified building design that reflected the changes from the value engineering process. Mr. Barrett showed interior renderings of the cafetorium with the new layout and lower ceiling. There is still12ft tall clear glass curtainwall on the curved wall facing the playing field. The gathering space of the cafetorium will still be a signature space. Mr. Barrett showed the option for a 2nd Photovoltaic (PV) array on the gym roof, but noted this is a place holder for a future phase and not in the budget. Mr. Mosher inquired about options for additional renewable energy such as Co-generation plant, thermal solar heating and more photovoltaic arrays. He suggested maximizing the open area on the roof for future PV array opportunities. DRA confirmed that the project does not include mechanical penthouse screens as they are expensive and would limit options for PV array. Mr. Barrett noted that a co-generation is not a valid option for this specific project, but DRA could look into the thermal solar heating question. VI. Project Schedule Mr. D’Amico gave a brief update on the project schedule, confirming that permitting will begin in late May. The next major milestone is the 60% Construction Document pricing set will be issued the end of June. VII. MSBA Update Mr. D’Amico confirmed that the DD package was submitted to the MSBA on April 20th. The MSBA will take the next 3 weeks to review and comment. The project team will then have a few weeks to respond to those review comments. VIII. Other Business None. IX. Next Meeting Dates The next ESBC meeting will be scheduled for mid-late May. A specific date will be determined at a later date based on the availability of the Committee members. MOTION: Mr. Nickerson moved to adjourn at 8:57 PM, seconded by Mr. Mosher. Voted: 4-0-0 Respectfully submitted, Jeff D’Amico Project Manager Compass Project Management, Inc.