High School Building Committee Billerica Town Hall 365 Boston Road Billerica Massachusetts Meeting Minutes for July 10, 2014

Transcription

1 High School Building Committee Billerica Town Hall 365 Boston Road Billerica Massachusetts Kevin Heffernan, Chairman Mark Efstratiou, Vice Chairman Steven Smilgis, Secretary Richard Colantuoni John Curran David Kinsella Mark LaLumiere Marc Lombardo David Mackwell John Magliozzi Kevin McCarthy Thomas Murphy John Piscatelli Timothy Piwowar Samuel Rippin Robert Maynard Meeting Minutes for July 10, 2014 A regular meeting of the High School Building Committee was held on July 10, 2014 at Town Hall, Buck Auditorium, 365 Boston Rd. Billerica, MA. 6:30 p.m. Present were Kevin Heffernan, Mark Efstratiou, Steven Smilgis, Richard Colantuoni, David Kinsella, Mark LaLumiere, Marc Lombardo, John Magliozzi, Kevin McCarthy, Thomas Murphy, Timothy Piwowar and Samuel Rippin. Absent were members John Curran, David Mackwell, John Piscatelli and Robert Maynard. Chairman Kevin Heffernan called the meeting to order at 6:31PM. Status Timothy Piwowar provided an update on the project. The posting of the request for services for an owners project manager has been pushed back one month due to the MSBA performing a legal review of the RFS. Approval of encumbrance to perform testing of Cider Mill property Timothy Piwowar detailed a memo from John Curran outlining the scope and price of the testing. Three firms submitted proposals and the proposals were reviewed by John Curran, Kevin Heffernan and Timothy Piwowar. The recommended firm with the lowest bid of $41,600 is Compass Project Management. This testing has been approved by the MSBA and is reimbursable. A phase one report will be available in August and a final report will be available in October. Mark LaLumiere inquired about the number of borings, would the firm conduct as many borings as they can in one day. Timothy Piwowar confirmed that will be the case. Steven Smilgis expressed concerns regarding rushing into testing this site before we have information on any other possible sites, as well as this testing using up 20% of the testing budget. Timothy Piwowar explained that testing of other sites will be part of the OPM contract. David Kinsella expressed concerns about the borings being duplicated when the building is sited, about past uses of the land, the fact that Compass would be using a subcontractor to perform the testing and limited access to the site. Timothy Piwowar explained that there were test borings done on the site in 1998 and those were relatively clean, this study will perform a limited number of borings due to the fact that the past borings were 16 years ago. Mr. Piwowar also explained that the MSBA is only allowing the town to perform site testing during this point of the project. A traffic study would be part of the feasibility study. Kevin Heffernan explained that joint ventures are very common for this type of testing and that the recommended firm is also the lowest bidder. Mr. Heffernan also explained that access to the site will be part of our due diligence during the site selection process.

2 High School Building Committee Meeting Minutes July 10, 2014 Page 2 Approval of encumbrance to perform testing of Cider Mill property Continued Marc Lombardo stated that he would like it to be clear that he is in favor of the project and that asking questions does not equate to not supporting the project. Mr. Lombardo asked if it was the position of the committee that the existing High School site is the default site, unless the existing site is deemed unsuitable. Kevin Heffernan and Timothy Piwowar responded that the answer is no, the MSBA does not allow a community to have a default site. Mr. Lombardo asked if there has been any evaluation of the buildable portion of the 43 acre back lot at the existing site is buildable? Timothy Piwowar responded that during the Parker School feasibility study, the back lot at the HS site was evaluated and it was determined that there was 6 buildable acres. This committee will need to re-evaluate the back lot during the HS feasibility study. Mr. Lombardo asked a series of questions specific to the Cider Mill site: Why rush? What is the purchase price? Has renovation of the existing building been ruled out? Is the Board of Selectmen willing to purchase the land? What happens if the town purchases the land and the HS is not built there? Is there a clear title chain? Do we have any input from the neighbors of the Cider Mill property? If Cider Mill is chosen, what will the current site be used for? Shouldn t we have a contingent sale in place before spending any funds on this site? Timothy Piwowar provided feedback and answers to these questions: Town Counsel will determine if there is clear title to the land. Renovation to the existing building has not been ruled out and exploration of that will be part of the Feasibility Study. Purchase Price, What will happen if Cider Mill is acquired and is not chosen as the site for a new HS. What will happen to the current site if Cider Mill is chosen and would the BOS be willing to purchase the land are all out of the scope of this committee and would be the purview of the BOS. A contingent sale in place is not a requirement of the MSBA. This site came up during the Parker School Feasibility Study but was ruled out as too large for that project, when the Locke site was discussed as part of the Facilities Study there were concerns from residents that the HS should remain in the center of town. Cider Mill is in the center of town and is believed to be large enough for a HS project. Input from neighbors will be part of the Feasibility Study no matter what site the committee chooses. Moderate discussion regarding exploring other sites and the process continued. A motion that the committee formally request from the Assessor s office or any other applicable town office, a list of all 25+ acre sites within the town of Billerica was made by Marc Lombardo, seconded by Steven Smilgis. The motion was defeated 3 to 9 with David Kinsella, Marc Lombardo and Steven Smilgis in favor. A motion that no funds be expended on Cider Mill until a contingent sale price is reach that includes site research as a precondition of sale was made by Marc Lombardo, seconded by Steven Smilgis. The motion was defeated 3 to 9 with David Kinsella, Marc Lombardo and Steven Smilgis in favor. A motion that no funds be spent on site testing on any site except the existing High School site, until the following criteria has been met: the committee has researched the top 5 alternative sites to the existing high school, ranks the sites based on accessibility, impact to the neighborhood, acreage of the site, buildable/usable acreage of the site, amount of wetlands on site, and the condition of the land which includes examination of the topography of the site; the top 3 sites, as voted by the committee are compared to the existing high school site and any of the sites are voted by the committee to be better sites than the existing high school site was made by Marc Lombardo, seconded by Steven Smilgis. The motion was defeated 3 to 9 with David Kinsella, Marc Lombardo and Steven Smilgis in favor.

3 High School Building Committee Meeting Minutes July 10, 2014 Page 3 Approval of encumbrance to perform testing of Cider Mill property Continued A motion to enter into an agreement with Compass Project Management, Inc. for up to $41,600 for testing at the Cider Mill property in relation to the memo from the Town Manager that will be attached to the minutes was made by Steven Smilgis, seconded by Mark Efstratiou. Motion passed 9 to 3 with David Kinsella, Marc Lombardo and Steven Smilgis opposed. Authorize the Chairman to appoint a sub-committee to screen designer applicants Kevin Heffernan explained that this is simply to give the chairman authorization to appoint a sub-committee. A motion to authorize the chairman to appoint a sub-committee to screen designer applicants was made by Steven Smilgis, seconded by Marc Lombardo. Motion passed 12 to 0. Update on Site Visits Kevin Heffernan explained that during these site visits, the committee receives feedback on the construction companies, owners project managers and designers. Tim Piwowar filled the committee in on both the Wilmington and Dracut site visits: Wilmington is under construction, is not a model school and they are using the CM-at risk construction method. It was difficult to see much due to it being so early in the construction process. Dracut is a renovation/addition project and we received feedback on how the project affected the students. Mark Efstratiou noted that Dracut did a good job with what they had to work with. Steven Smilgis thanked Mr. Stone for the tour and his feedback and mentioned how he has been struck by how the students, parents, faculty and community members of every site we visited all pulled together to make the project work. Thomas Murphy and Richard Colantuoni mentioned that they were impressed with how happy the Wilmington superintendent was with the construction manager. Mr. Colantuoni expressed that he hopes the committee looks into using the CM-at risk method. Mr. Piwowar announced that tours will be scheduled to visit North Reading and Concord Carlisle. Mr. Heffernan requested that we seek out tours of Marshfield and Duxbury. Community Outreach Steven Smilgis spoke about the centralized address that he had brought up at a previous meeting. A short discussion ensued regarding this being a good idea, but that copying all members of the committee might be a violation of the state open meeting law. A motion was made to create a central address BMHSBC@billerica.k12.ma.us. All committee members will receive the initial . Only the Chairman, Town Manager and School Superintendent are authorized to respond. All responses will be shared with the committee at the subsequent committee meeting was made by Steven Smilgis, seconded by Marc Lombardo. Motion passed 12 to 0. A page will be created on the BPS website to place pictures of the various sites that we have visited, along with information about the sites. We will obtain permission from the individual schools before the pictures are published. Minutes of the June 24, 2014 meeting Motion to approve the June 24, 2014 minutes as presented was made by Steven Smilgis, seconded by Mark Efstratiou. Motion passed (Marc Lombardo abstained)

4 High School Building Committee Meeting Minutes July 10, 2014 Page 4 Agenda Items for next meeting Steven Smilgis reminded the committee members that they can either himself or the chairman if they wish for an item to be placed on an agenda. Future Meeting Dates A brief discussion was held regarding when to hold the next meeting. August 20 was chosen as a tentative date. Steven Smilgis will poll the members when we are closer to that date to finalize. The July 22, 2014 meeting is being cancelled. Open Microphone Rome Capobianco of 29 Andover Road spoke regarding his claim to ownership of a portion of the Cider Mill property and his concerns about keeping the land as farmland. Mr. Capobianco is also concerned about the town taking on more debt by acquiring the land. Tim Morgan of 499 Boston Road asked who currently owns the Cider Mill property. Mr. Capobianco reiterated that the MEG trust owns land in the middle of the 49 acres and that it cannot be sold. In response to a question from Marc Lombardo, Mr. Capobianco stated that there are problems with the title to the land. Kevin Heffernan explained that all documents regarding ownership of the Cider Mill property are being researched. Eva Marshall of 1 Concord Rd. spoke about her concerns that the title search had not been completed. Kevin Heffernan explained that Town Counsel will perform all work to determine clear title. Motion to Adjourn A motion to adjourn was made by Steven Smilgis, seconded by Marc Lombardo. It was voted 12-0 to adjourn at 7:59PM. Submitted by Steven Smilgis, Secretary.

5 High School Building Committee Meeting Minutes July 10, 2014 Page 5 Addendum A Memo regarding the Cider Mill testing attached below.

6 M E M O R A N D U M TO: FROM: CC: SUBJECT: School Building Committee John C. Curran, Town Manager Tim Piwowar, Kevin Heffernan Geotechnical Evaluation of Cidermill Property DATE: July 10, 2014 The geotechnical evaluation of the Cider Mill Property will allow the Town to determine whether it is a viable property to be considered as one of the possible site alternatives. This site is different than the existing site in that the existing site is already within the Town s possession and it is already known to be a viable site. The exploration of the Cider Mill Site gives the Town the best opportunity to ensure that it is exploring all alternatives to select the best site possible available to the Town. Specifically, if this site does appear viable the early exploration of this site, sanctioned by the MSBA, gives the Town every opportunity to take the necessary steps in the necessary time frame to make sure this site is available for consideration by the Town. Engineering services are exempt from MGL Chapter 30B in accordance with Section 1(b) (32A): This chapter shall not apply to: contracts with architects, engineers and related professionals Best business practices were used and have been approved by the MSBA. In accordance with the FSA, this included the solicitation of three quotes from three firms: Dore and Whittier, Woodard and Curran, and Compass Project Management. All of these firms are capable of fulfilling the scope of services the Town has established for the Cider Mill Property. These quotes were reviewed by the Superintendent, the Chairman of the Building Committee and the Town Manager. While all of these firms submitted impressive proposals, one firm, Compass Project Management submitted the proposal that best suits the needs of the Town both in scope of services and price. The total encumbrance necessary for approval by the Committee is $41, I have attached a listing of the three quote prices, and a scope of services for the proposed work for your review.

7 Summary of Quotes Firm Price Compass Project Management, Inc. $41,600 Dore & Whittier Architects, Inc. $48,150 Woodard & Curran $55,000 Scope of Services (provided by Compass Project Management, Inc.) Provide preliminary site investigation services. We have subcontracted with Pare Corp. from Foxboro, MA to perform the geotechnical / geo-environmental services. Those services would be developed in accordance with the following phases: Phase A: Initial Report Phase I Environmental Assessment: 1. PARE will conduct a Phase I ESA in general conformance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Document E Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process, as amended. The purpose of the Phase I ESA will be to evaluate the Site with respect to the potential presence of Recognized Environmental Conditions. Per the ASTM document E , "Recognized Environmental Conditions" means the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. Specific elements of the Phase I ESA will include: Site Reconnaissance PARE will visually evaluate readily accessible portions of the site for surficial indications of Recognized Environmental Conditions and identify general uses of abutting parcels. Records Review Review historical (e.g., Sanborn fire insurance maps, city directories, historical topographic maps, aerial photographs) and regulatory records as appropriate and as readily available from state, federal and local agencies and/or other sources concerning the site and nearby properties, in an attempt to ascertain information concerning past and present uses or practices that may reflect Recognized Environmental Conditions. We will request and review readily available files from the MA DEP for the site and for selected properties and/or areas of concern identified in the data research company report that may impact the site with respect to Recognized Environmental Conditions. Selection of properties and/or areas of concern for additional review at the MA DEP shall be based upon our professional judgment as to potential impact to the site. Interviews/Inquiries PARE will interview readily available persons associated with past and current ownership of the site relative to the history and use of the site, and any known Recognized Environmental Conditions associated with the site. Interview of Local Government Officials PARE will collect information from, and conduct interviews of readily available local regulatory and licensing agency officials regarding the Site, as required by the ASTM E document. Reporting PARE shall prepare and submit to the Client a Phase I ESA report for the site. The Phase I ESA report will detail the scope of work provided, our findings, and conclusions, as well as a recommendation regarding further investigation, if warranted.

8 Wetlands Delineation 1. Record Research: PARE will review published and on-line mapping, previous development plans for the site as available, and municipal bylaws and regulations prior to performing wetland delineations. PARE will coordinate investigations and research with Compass Project Management, Inc. (Compass) to obtain permission to access the subject properties and abutting parcels for the delineation of offsite wetlands with potential jurisdictional impacts to development on the subject properties. 2. Wetland Delineation: PARE will perform a site visit to review the areas of potential wetlands, and delineate wetlands on and adjacent to the site. The delineations will include Bordering Vegetated Wetlands (BVW), Isolated Vegetated Wetlands (IVW) and the bank of streams, rivers, and ponds, as applicable. The delineations will be performed in accordance with current Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP) wetland delineation criteria. 3. Wetland Delineation Documentation: PARE will prepare a letter report documenting the delineation. The letter report will include a description of the wetlands identified, the delineation methodology, and completed Wetland Delineation Data forms for representative wetland conditions along the delineated edges. 4. Site Walk: PARE will arrange a site walk with the Billerica Conservation Commission Agent to review the wetland delineations. The site walk will be documented with a Memorandum of Meeting. Geotechnical Evaluation 1. Data Review: PARE will review available geotechnical data for the site. Documents may include, geotechnical subsurface investigations previously performed by Pare and others on or near the site, and available geological maps and reports for this area. 2. Digsafe: Prior to commencing the subsurface exploration program, PARE will file a Locate Request Form with Digsafe and coordinate the locating of private utilities with the facility. 3. Field Observation: PARE will provide field observation and coordination for a Feasibility Level investigation program. Field personnel will observe drilling conditions, visually identify the soils encountered in the borings, and record groundwater levels (if encountered) during the advancement of the explorations. All samples will be visually identified using the Burmister classification system. All retrieved samples will be placed in glass containers labeled with the boring location, sample number, sample depth, and other pertinent data, and transported to PARE s office for review, analyses, and storage. 4. Borings: PARE will subcontract a drilling contractor to undertake one day of borings to preliminarily characterize the subsurface conditions at the site. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) will be performed in the borings in accordance with ASTM D1586, continuously from ground level to 10 feet then at 5 feet intervals or change in strata thereafter. No rock coring will be performed. All borings will be backfilled with granular material on completion. The boring locations will be mapped by handheld GPS. 5. Laboratory Testing: As a part of the preparation of the report, geotechnical laboratory tests on selected soil will be performed to verify field visual classifications, refine soil properties, and evaluate the potential for reuse. PARE will complete up to 3 grain size (sieve) analysis (ASTM D 421/422). 6. Exploration Logs: PARE will prepare typed logs of the explorations. The logs will include estimated surface elevations based upon available topographic mapping, identification of soil strata, sample identifiers and data, field test results, and groundwater levels. 7. Report: Upon completion of the subsurface investigation, PARE will prepare a Geotechnical Schematic Report for the project. The report will provide preliminary design parameters required for the schematic design at the

9 site, together with a summary of the review of any previous geotechnical subsurface investigations performed on and around the site. In addition to foundation recommendations, the report will address the location of the water table (at the time of the subsurface investigation); and a preliminary assessment suitability of the in-situ soils for reuse. Recommendations for any supplementary subsurface investigations will also be made. Initial Report and Presentation 1. Prepare an Initial Report based on the reports generated by the three tasks noted above. This report will present initial observations and comments on the parcels suitability for a new High School as well as identify areas of further testing in order to more accurately assess the site. The report will be presented to the Building Committee or their designees. Phase B: Further Sampling and Final Report Limited Soil Sampling and Analysis 1. At the direction of the Town and in consultation with the Compass and Pare, perform limited soil sampling and analysis at each of the five parcels included in this program. The exact nature of the sampling program will be based on the findings of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, but for budgeting purposes PARE has assumed that up to three shallow soil samples will be collected from each parcel (15 total). PARE personnel will collect the samples using handheld equipment and will be collected from a depth of 0 to 12 inches below ground surface. Each sample will be field-located using a handheld GPS unit. All samples will be collected in laboratory-provided glassware and transported with chain-of-custody documentation to a Massachusetts licensed laboratory for chemical analysis. PARE has assumed that each sample will be analyzed for the following suite of analytical parameters: Volatile organic compounds; RCRA 8 metals; Pesticides; Herbicides; and Total petroleum hydrocarbons. This suite of analytical parameters may change based on the findings of the Preliminary Due Diligence and the Phase I ESA. If, based on the findings of the Preliminary Due Diligence and the Phase I ESA PARE recommends a different or expanded suite of analyses, PARE will notify the Town. At that time, PARE will modify the scope of services to accommodate the budget available, or prepare a supplemental agreement to address any added laboratory analytical costs. Upon receipt of the analytical data from the laboratory, PARE will tabulate the data and prepare a brief letter style report that details our findings and recommendations for future investigation, if warranted. Prior to performing any soil sampling at any of the five parcels, the Town will need to provide Compass and PARE with written authorization from the property owner(s).