 Good morning, everyone. It's December 8th and this is the December 8th meeting of the elementary school building committee and Margaret if you could text a couple of the people who aren't here yet just as a reminder that would be seen. Seeing we have a quorum, I, we will start the meeting and my first task is to make sure everyone who are members can hear and be heard by us. So I will just call out the names as I see them on the screen and just indicate that everything is okay. Jonathan. Good morning. Doug. Yes, I'm in good shape. Thank you. Roger. Good morning. Jennifer. Good morning. Paul. Present. Tammy. Good morning. Alicia. Present. Rupert. I'm here to report that everything is okay. Thank you. And I think. In terms of my screen, if, if as others join us, I will make sure to welcome. So I think we're, we're good to go. And I just want to let people know, and then Margaret will be double checking, but we had a brief meeting with MSBA that went around over the design, but just before that we got the official budget that says, yes, we got more money. And so it was nice to, to, to see the, the confirmed amount of the giant increase in the grant to the school, which really makes everything a lot more affordable for taxpayers. So Margaret, I know you were just going to double check because I scanned it and it looked like basically your calculations so we can make that official. And Paul, I believe they said you'll get the official official letter from them as well. So at first we got the very complicated spreadsheet. Yeah, I mean, I went to the bottom line. I'm going to do, we're going to do a line by line comparison today just to make sure, but sure looks good. It comes into forms of a revised agreement and they said they just gave us seven days to review the numbers before they finalized it. So I'm going to turn it over to Margaret, who will show we have a pretty happy are we recording. I did hit recording. It says recording up at top. Thank you. I'm getting really good at that. But thank you for checking. So Margaret, I believe we will do to share the screen but if not, I've got the agenda right here. Okay. Okay. So we're going to, you know, start as we've been starting looking at the overall schedule for the next few months. I'm going to give you an update on the MSBA comments on the design development. We also had a meeting with them yesterday. We can talk about briefly. We need to give you an update on the design subcommittee meeting that started to look at interior colors updates on the permitting process update on the early site package. I want to talk a little bit about how we might approach notifying the butters who are going to start getting notices about permitting. We're going to Rick and Tim and Don are going to talk a little bit about the timeline for playground equipment just so people are aware of it. As we discussed at the last meeting, we're going to have close the discussion on the proposed use of port and place rubber on the playground and we're going to take a vote on that. We'll give you a little bit of a look forward about the pre qualification committee. And then we, I'm not going to touch on this, but I would like everybody to look at these dates. We want to try to set the meetings for next year. What's changing a little bit about this is that we are now wanting to have these meeting once a month tie these meetings to the monthly requisition process. So these meetings are hitting mid month. I'm going to go talk about that today I just want you to see it on the agenda and then we've got a couple of invoices to look at so that is the agenda, which is packed so and I see Simone has joined us Simone and I just do it and Allison can you both Allison, let us know what you can hear and be heard Allison. He's muted. Yeah you're muted. But she's nodding her head so I think she can hear us. I can hear you can you hear me. Yeah, yeah. And Simone. Yes. So it's just, it's just Phoebe that's missing correct. Angelica, I don't want Angelica. Right. Okay. Okay, thanks. Okay. So I'm going to, we're going to start with the schedule update. I mean, I hope this is helpful to you. It certainly helps me organizing myself. This is, you know, the hopefully now familiar format of looking at a kind of doing a what I would call a three month look ahead on the project. So, here we are in this week. No, we're in this week. So, here's today's committee meeting. We have a committee meeting on January 12. And according to the schedule or proposed, we would have a meeting on February 16, the following week is school vacation week. So, let Kathy know if you cannot make that six February 16 meeting. What's the consultant team doing? They've been really busy. We're submit, they are submitting the 60% construction documents set to the estimators today. And then we will have the estimates back just before the holidays. And late January, we're going to be assembling the submission to the MSBA. And then the team is going to be focused on doing the final coordination of the early site package. Now I will say about this, if these estimates come back and for some reason we need to do value engineering, we may need to kind of rejigger this. But since these estimates are following close closer together now, I sincerely hope that that's not not a requirement. So, early site package now again, this is the piece that Rick just Rick and Tim described in some detail at the last meeting, where we're going to be closing the south side of the site. So, to the school's use and the contractors, the early site contractor, which is only focused on the sort of horizontal surfaces and prepping them for the building foundations is going to come in. We've had a really great process, coordinating the removal of the existing gas line and the installation of the temporary gas service over the holidays and I will say, the Berkshire gas people have just been absolutely phenomenal to work with and we're extremely grateful. And we think that that's going to happen for, you know, quite a reasonable cost at a time that isn't going to disrupt either school operations or the path of the project shall we say because that has to be out of the way for the site contractor to come in. I'm going to talk a little bit later in the meeting about a butter notifications and what that's going to look like. The bids for the early site package will be due in early February. I think we have a date for it but I didn't record it here and then the contract award for that would be approximately three weeks later and then that contractor would be finalizing on site in early March, which is the point again where the site sort of gets cut off from the school's use. As we talked about at the last meeting, there's a lot of permitting stuff going on. There's like multiple processes on top of each other. So we've had a kind of intake meeting I would say with the planning board. And Tim, I think that applications are in now. The application for planning board. Yes, the application is in and there will be some to others following for design review board and that meeting will actually happen before the planning review board. Right. So, yes, there are many. Yeah. Design, DRB is design review board. So there's design review meeting. At the same time, there's a conservation commission process, which is happening. That meeting is December 13th design review board is December 18th. That we're going to be before the planning board for their first hearing probably on January 3rd, not confirmed. And then there would be a follow up meeting on the 17th. Hopefully they're able to close the meeting in that period of time. And then I'm going to take this out there actually is not a planning board approved appeal period. But we're sort of the, I just want to say, give Dennis go a big shout out because they're doing all this permitting stuff on top of trying to do get the 60% construction document stuff out. So they, those guys, these guys have been very busy. In the meantime, there's ongoing coordination meetings with the, with departments in the town. And then yesterday, as far as the MSBA is concerned, we had our design review meeting. Yesterday, and then they are going to be reviewing the 60% construction documents, which they are receiving today. So any quest that was a lot. Any questions about all of that. Before I take this down. I have one more great. It's, it's, it was a request from a council level. Do we have, can we, when will we get a rough date on when the fences go up in the field if people want to come to say hooray that the project is starting. Yeah, to have some sort of a to have some sort of so I know we can see it's the early site package and construction. So just a sense. And will we know that be that won't happen before January 12. So maybe we could just get a wording. So literally it's like a hooray. Well, if people want something physical to celebrate. It's the fence going up. Right. And that I think will be Rick and Tim early March. Mid, mid March, probably. Okay. Yeah. So it's sort of won't be from probably before March, but it'll be right in that. Yeah. Yeah. So, yeah, sometimes we've had like soft. Kind of soft. Kind of groundbreaking. Kathy, if that's what you're referring to. So we could certainly do something. And then have. A little bit of a bigger celebration or something once, once we get the general contractor on board. You've given me an answer. I, I've waved my hands and I said, I've said the spring every time, but I've been asked twice. So I now have a. A guesstimate that's a little. You can say the first day of spring and you'd be pretty accurate. Okay. Any questions before we remove, move on to the next thing on this densely packed agenda. Okay. I'm not seeing any hands. So the next thing we're going to do is give you an update on the MSBA comments. So again, the project's kind of moving fast. The MSBA is moving a little bit slower, but they're doing dealing with a lot more projects. So, although we're submitting 60% CDs today. Yesterday, we had a meeting on the design development set, which was fine because they have some people transitions that are happening. So our project manager is transitioning out. There was someone new, or a couple of new phases actually. So really what it ended up the meeting yesterday ended up being kind of an update for those folks and an opportunity for them to ask questions. Donna, Tim, Rick, do you want to comment, sort of summarize anything about the MSBA comments? There wasn't very much. No, no, I think it's. There were some slight misunderstandings, but no big deal. They kind of were asking for stuff. Sort of redundantly, they wanted a basis of design, but they also wanted this, the specification. So, this is a new format new checklist that they have so. But, but there was nothing missing from our documents. There was just, we eliminate a redundancy, but I guess they like it. So, typical. So no, they were very minor. There was nothing educationally, there was nothing that impacted scope for cost or for anything. And people, it is in the packet, both the questions they asked, and then the, the Dinesco answer responses, if people want to see what that back and forth was like. Yeah, one thing I thought was interesting. I mean, I agree with you, Donna, I think they have a way of breaking up their work internally for review that creates redundancy. So there's chunks of stuff to go to one person and chunks of stuff to go to someone else. And so you do end up with this redundancy. And one thing I will say, and Tony Cunningham brought this up at the last meeting so I want to just sort of share this on the screen. Tony noticed, and we should have stated at the last meeting that there was a difference between what had been in the schematic design schedule and what was in the design development schedule. So I'll just share. That's the right thing here. Here we go. So just to close the loop on this and good job Tony for catching this. So this, can people see this little, little tiny schedule. Okay, so this column shows the dates that we had for milestones and schematic design. This column shows the design development dates. And what you will notice and this is what Tony noticed was that the mobilization of the construction start was late a bit later, and she was asking whether there was going to be a delay in occupancy. So I will say that part of part of that change was us trying to respond to requirements the MSBA has for review periods. So we had to lengthen the review periods and the schedule. And we were able to clarify in the meeting yesterday that some of those review periods can be shortened. So we're putting together now the 60% CD schedule I just want to reassure everybody. There's no change to the intention of having building occupancy for the fall of 2026. Okay. Okay, any questions about that. So the next piece is updates on the permitting process. I was thinking, maybe you could give a little bit of the flavor of the conversation we've had with the permit coordinators and the different groups that we're meeting with and maybe explain their roles briefly. Sure, we've had multiple conversations with Jennifer Mullins, the permit coordinator who seems to be able to connect us to everyone in town, which is great. In addition to the meetings that we've had to make sure that our documents were complete for the design review board, which we had sent in last week. Excuse me site plan review, which was sent in design review board is going in Monday. We've also had meetings with fire department in the past week to make sure that the documents that we are submitting are consistent with what they want. And, you know, upon further review that we will be having with them during construction documents. We're meeting all their needs. So, and why is already in summary hearing on 13th as we already talked about, and then there are a couple more submissions that we will be meeting and hearing on in January. So, Tim, on the concom process, like you mentioned, the first hearing is the 13th on Wednesday, I went on a site walk with our civil engineering with Aaron, a couple of concom committee members and our site design team. And to walk the site and view the wetlands and answer questions and the processes is that Aaron, then pose some technical questions to our site designers, which are answered she includes them in a document. Today that goes to the members so that there'll be a little pre report that they will have seen before a very brief overview we're given five minutes to present the project from 30,000 feet at the hearing. From our standpoint, everything is progressing nicely at this point. We would very much like to have the orders of conditions included in the bid documents for the early site package, because that contractor will be responsible for maintaining the site. And I'm sure that the concom wants once soil is broken, and we are on track for that if not for the day that we're on the streets, shortly thereafter is an agenda so everything on the concom and seems to be progressing nicely at this point. Rick, can I ask a question I should know this is the are the concom meetings in person or on zoom. There's zoom. Okay. Kathy, did you have a question. Just confirm Tim. It is the planning board meeting on this on the 17th or or is it it's on the third. We requested it to be on the third. We did not request a date and we understand from Jennifer and Chris press trip that their agendas are somewhat full and they told us that we may not be on the agenda for the first meeting after the application goes in. We would like to do it as soon as possible, but they did not give us a date. Well, what they said was their agenda for December 17 was full. Yes, the December agenda was full. So on a little schedule that I showed I was showing their first, the dates for their first two meetings in January, which they said subject to their review and comment, were the possible dates for us to go before them. And they also like to have the submittal a month before the hearing date, which left us out of the December time frame. Okay, so we're looking at January. Yes. And probably the 17th, not the third. Could be. Well, I think, I think, I think the communication might not. I guess maybe they're waiting to receive the packet or review the packet before they put us on the agenda. So, we just want to, it probably is more likely the 17th. Okay. Well, as I've said to Christine, you know, the sooner the better, because we have. We'll see what she comes back. She didn't come out one way. What do you think the packet will be ready. The submission is in now. Okay. Planning board submission has been sent. Okay, good. Okay, anything else on that. Okay. So, I'm going to take one item out of sequence here, which is the butter issue, which was one item down on the agenda, just to sort of talk about that piece of the so planning board process will require a butters within a certain, I don't know exactly the distance, but typically it's within a certain radius of the site. Get notifications. However, as a sort of best practice, I think it's a good idea for, especially when it's a municipal project for folks who are direct butters who have property that bots the property where the work is to get an earlier notice from the project. So sometimes in some situations we've sent it as the OPM sometimes the town sends it, but it basically says this project is coming. You're going to receive notice about it. We're going to have a meeting just for immediate butters to kind of give you some information. So I think that would be a good idea here as a kind of best practice and sort of being a good neighbor. These are the properties that I would propose that we notify. So I have a draft of a letter that I shared with Kathy. The other thing that we typically recommend as the best practice is to offer to the immediate butters what's called a pre-construction survey, which they are not required to have, but they can if they want to sort of put their hands up and say, yes, we will as part of the project cost have someone go in and document their property. Now, this is not a situation we're expecting to be any property damage, but it does for some people it is sort of, you know, it's reassuring to know that they have a documentation of their property. It's a good practice for the town in terms of protecting the town. So I don't know that this is more than an update to all of you that we intend to do it. But if anybody has any comments on that, I would love to hear their thoughts. So I think town officials should be part of that meeting with the neighbors for sure. And what is the cost of doing all the pre-construction surveys? That seems like a pretty big, why wouldn't we do that on request? We only do it on request. Okay. But what's the typical cost? I mean, I'm paying attention to dollars here in terms of the, yeah. We just did this in Holyoke for approximately an equivalent number of properties and it cost about $6,500. For all the properties or each? For all of them. For all of the properties. Oh, okay, okay. It's de minimis and it's, you know, it's good for everybody. Okay, okay. I thought it was. Good question. I should have mentioned that. Okay, thank you. We would, we have a typical partner that we work with. It would be a reimbursable cost to our project and we have sort of a bucket of money for that. So if this seems like the right thing to do, we would get a proposal from that company and we would sort of send out a letter relatively soon. I mostly want to get ahead of them getting planning board notice. Anything else about a public property. Okay. So now I've lost track of what was next on the agenda. Sorry. I wish to close my agenda file. I think the next item was in Hill. You've got the updates to the early site. Early site package. Thank you, Jonathan. So, Rick, Tim, anything else we want to bring up about the early site package process. We've been having multiple meetings with the school department. And with Gilford to talk about onsite traffic and getting cars off site. We've made some adjustments to temporary measures to help get people on and off the site. The early site contractor will be required to do some additional some work on the school side of that north south dividing line before they can divide the cut off the south entry point and change change the transportation patterns so that early work will enable parent and new parent and bus and van drop offs. And then the fence will go up finish away across and it's, and then the work can begin in earnest on the south. Yeah, we're probably about 90 95% done with the big documents for the early site package. One thing that we still need to nail down is the form of contract, which we want to include in the documents and Margaret. Get the electronic bidding process underway. Yeah. So we're looking at going out to bid as Margaret pointed out at or after the first week in January we're currently we were currently showing three weeks. This contract has a design component for the site which means bidders will have to contract with somebody and do a quick design to determine the cost for that. So we may want to give the bidders an extra week and go four weeks so they can have their bids completed for that so so and get good pricing on that. We'll start reaching out to people that we know Western Massachusetts site people to let them know that this is coming. There's some people that's actually done work out in eastern Massachusetts are that are headquartered out there that are able to do the work and we'll have a tight package put together by Christmas. So Kathy I see that Angelica has joined the meeting. Welcome Angelica can I just do a make sure you can hear us and we can hear you. Yes I can hear you. Thanks Kathy. Thanks Margaret. Okay any questions about the early set site package. Okay, so not part of the early site package part of the building package is the selection the process for selecting playground equipment and the timeline. So, this is a this items a little bit more of a discussion so we need to figure out the sort of best approach to reviewing and selecting the playground equipment and there's a little bit of complexity to it. But I think what Kathy was hoping Danisco could do was sort of talk about what's worked well for Danisco on other projects in terms of selecting playground equipment who should be involved and how to approach this. Do you want to take the lead. Sure. Yeah. So every obviously every community is different Amherst is no exception to that but typically just just to be clear the equipment is different than the full playground area right so so the color of the surface that the patterns and the activities that may be painted on the heart surface etc that's that's independent of actually selecting the playground equipment. What has worked well in the past is including a couple of community members that have experience and playground equipment or understanding of playground equipment. We would want school department staff, including the principals, perhaps the OTP T person even maybe they from special education, Angelica or others here that also have some experience or understanding of needs for an all inclusive and universal access equipment would also be helpful but opening it up to more than say 10 people will will really become a difficult process to manage. We would our goal would be we can talk about when all of this occurs but if we could establish a subcommittee starting in January that would give us plenty of time to have whatever it is that we need to have incorporated for the bid documents say no later than May. Kathy answer handle. Yeah, at Margaret, you know just mentioned this to me briefly Donna including a description of a possible process. So one of the things I thought on if it if the processes you just was a working group, particularly of users. And then they could, they're working within a budget. We have a yes, yes, and more than a certain amount. And then if there are options if there's a discussion, it might be something we want to open it up not to everyone sitting in the room together but a mini form just on here's the playground, you know where we are on it but after. So if other parents, not everyone in the room together but an early insight so I don't know whether the timeline would allow, you know, a collected group to meet, talk about what the options are, you know what kind of equipment there are, and then come up with some sort of tenant because they're, it's an advice to the to us as a committee, you know, yeah. And then if there can just be one more step so that if it's, you know, a few pictures and stuff that we, that we do something in the evening so other people by zoom, you know so I'm not talking about a So I don't know what the timeline would allow for that. And I don't know whether others on the committee, like that idea. It was a way of, you know, not not excluding people from saying did you think about this or did you think about that. But it would be focused just on playground equipment was a thought. Yeah. No, that's fine. And we will be working with Bill Brown, and Natalie Brown, our landscape architects, as well as working with O'Brien, who is the playground equipment specialist. She did Jessica's. She also, or they I should say also I believe did the playground in town. I don't know why I have a hard time remembering the name of it. The more recent one. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. They're great. We can talk about procurement and all of that. Later, if, if, as far as time and how we procure it, but it, we will have renderings will first, you know, the whole process will be similar to how we approach the whole building design. We'll have ideas. We'll show what is kind of new and out there. That's great. That's all inclusive that provides opportunities for all things really have progressed since Jessica's boundless. And so we're really excited about the opportunities more than just ramps. I mean, there's equipment that's fully inclusive, not just ramps, right. And the kids get to the top is great, but they're still not interacting. So, so there are all kinds of opportunities out there. We are working within a budget, no different than obviously the building project. So the process would follow very similar to this. And as long as if we want to a lot time to have a community forum or community engagement, that just means we have to be diligent about having the meetings, making decisions and moving forward. Yeah, I see Jonathan's hand up my idea was that the small group, the tennis group would be meeting and then the forum would be reacting rather than. Yes, agreed. Yeah. Yeah, let's see Jonathan Sanders up. Yeah. So, I certainly think that's what you described is a good idea for a process. My question was really a bit more about understanding how the procurement happens. And, and the ability to kind of get the stuff that that people will like in a competitive, you know, public bidding process. So Jonathan, the equipment is every, every meant equipment manufacturer are they all have different equipment. So, typically, how it's done is we would. O'Brien seems to have the best equipment. We've worked really well with them we've worked with others as well, but they seem they seem to really get the fully accessible and universal design. So it would be our recommendation to go with them. With that said, that means that we either have to bid it as proprietary, or we can take it out of the general contractors bucket or control at O'Brien is on the state bid list so we can procure it through her with or them without having to put it out to bid. So there are two different ways of doing it. And I don't know if we want to get into it now because it's a whole long conversation. I know our agenda is really full, but there are methods so that we get what we want because every equipment manufacturer or whatever is totally different than that. So it's not like picking a brick. Right. It's really specific to their equipment. The timeline that Donna laid out is the same for either procurement method. If it's not part of the general contract, we have to at least be able to tell the general contractor what's coming. So, start in January. Finish in May is a good yardstick. Bob Parrott, do you want to chime in on this? I know you had an opinion about it that you expressed to me. Certainly, I would agree with the approach that Smith suggested first in terms of equipment selection. You know, getting a group together to provide input on that decision making and then going ahead and working with a single supplier because I agree every piece of equipment is different and you really want to get what you want to get. So the way to do it is exactly as been described. The key on any of this is if we're going to go off of the state bid list and I know Simone's on this call as well and she and I have talked about it is we just need to make certain that what we are procuring through the state bid list is actually what Emma O'Brien is approved to supply under the state bid list and they're good. So I don't have any concerns about that. And what I've done in the past is if you do that process, then you can actually provide the general contractor with the installation requirements, possibly as part of the bid package, depending on the timeline. So they know exactly what the town is going to buy. They know exactly what is going to be required to install what the town is going to buy. So there's no questions going forward. Okay. Anything else on that. So can I just ask so if, if what we're saying is, you know, with Tammy Allison Doug school, pulling together a group of 10 and Angelica, you know, we have one or two people from our committee on it but it's, I'll call it a working group because it's not. It's not literally a subcommittee of the 13 of us, but it's trying to make sure we're engaging similar to what Danisco did when we're talking about spaces and where, where the spaces went. You, you would want to know that that group has been formed by January 12, which is the next time we meet is, is that that would be awesome. Yeah. So I was just looking for, you know, people thinking about it between now and then and having a, and, and, and then let a leave in the logistics to work with you all on how, you know, if those meetings need to be in the late afternoon or early evening, you know, whatever people schedules are so. But so, so that that's all I was asking on trying to get this in place. Yeah, I appreciate that Kathy January still seems so far away and it isn't so. Well, we'll also start working with Brown Sardina and M. A. O'Brien to get a schedule together, etc. And we've started the work already using Jessica's phone list as as a kind of base, and then working, you know, to what what you possibly could have I, I think budget just like with the construction costs is real. And so the costs have also increased so we just want to be mindful of that and stay within the budget that's been established I think it's $500,000. Any other questions on this. And then I think we're ready to move to the next topic. So actually, I realized I apologize. I skipped over one item, which is sort of segues a little bit, which is the design subcommittee discussion I went right past it on the agenda so I want to see, Rick, Donnie you were not at the design subcommittee meeting, I think. So, I'm going to look to Tim and wreck just to summarize. We met with the design subcommittee and looked at sort of had one more look at exterior colors and finishes and mostly focused on interior so Tim you want to give a little bit of an update on that. And I would also invite Jonathan as the chair of the building to chime in but yes we sort of are refining the exterior. There are no surprises there I hope a lot of what we did was show the in real form the value engineering exercises that we did at the end of dd actually translated into the building. And a few of the changes that we made in terms of materials and glass were drawn or simply accepted as described. And then we moved into the building to talk about how we would use color on different floors and circulation paths in the building in the stairs and a lobby to identify spaces and apply a certain logic to the movement through the building whether it be applying color by floor by project area, you know, whether all of the spaces would have their their own color way identity. Talk about what materials we were going to use. And then we got some good feedback but there's still quite a bit of work to do and we're going to schedule another meeting, January hopefully to come back with some of the ideas that we've developed based on that discussion. Tim, Tim, I don't know what the Dennis go. They came on site and we were but we were also looking on screen and looking at materials so I don't know with some of the color images you did whether we want to post it with in the packet with a big draft, you know where you know it was evocative is you know, a stimulated ideas and thoughts rather than this was a final. So I'm not urging you to show it right now but if anyone want that wanted to see some of the potential colors inside and how that change by floor. So do you think that's too much. We didn't reach a decision so I'm just looking for you on how to make some of that discussion accessible to everybody. We have the materials and we certainly can share anything all disqualifiers and caveats, most certainly, but I will forward. I thought we gave some but we will give all and we also give pictures of the materials. So that should be a good balance to it is extremely difficult to get a rendering that looks like a photograph or in real life. So hopefully that is understood in the process and we do try to say that every time. But we will also include pictures of materials. And I would add that the site plan review and design review board packages that have a lot of the materials that we talk about. They also have photos so this difference between representation and what you're actually getting is very real and we'll do our best to make that difference clear. So Jonathan you and Tammy you were both at the meeting I was just thinking that having people see not necessarily the video but that some of the pictures would be helpful as as this moves along. Yeah, that makes sense. Okay. Thank you. So, we're gonna. So the next item was the discussion and vote on the use of port and place forever on the playground so I want to give a couple of updates to questions that were brought up at the last meeting, we had a good discussion which was recorded at the meeting so first of all, I thought it would be useful and I did send a memo yesterday and it's in the packet. Bob parent had brought up something that I wasn't aware of, which was that the Massachusetts architectural access board which is the state group, which promulgates state regulations for access and rules on challenges has developed a rewrite of their rules they their original rules I think date to 1996 so this is an update that was drafted in 2018 it's never. It's not been approved by them, but I think it is important because it does, as I said in my memo it does give the flavor of their opinion about this so. This is not adopted this is an intention there's if you if you go to the actual document you can see there's like tons of things they're proposing to change about their own regulations but the proposed changes here which is, is this highlighted it would prohibit if this were passed. It would prohibit the use of things like wood fiber bark mulch wood chips shredded rubber. So we're not governed by this now for this project but it does, I think sort of give the flavor of their intention. So a second question that was asked at the last meeting is what other architects and landscape architects are doing. So I am. I've talked to three landscape architects who work on schools. I also left a message for Carl Brown at the MSBA who just called me back several days later during this meeting so I don't know what Carlos say about it but I can tell you what I heard from the others so I've talked to first of all to tag and bond, who are familiar to some of us including Bob parent. They have a lot of different kind of policies under their umbrella but one of them they they have a landscape architect group that's been around for a long time was formerly known as Halverson has done a lot of schools. So the Halverson comment really came down to the accessibility and safety. That it was they considered it a liability issue for communities to not go with poor employees rubber and the accessibility issue and notwithstanding, you know, the concerns about that have been expressed about the, what's kind of in the material that in the communities that they work with those two items have dominated. I also talked to Dave Myers, who is a landscape architect who has a firm in the Boston area and does a lot of work she basically confirmed those same things. I spoke with Berkshire design group who commented that they have seen communities struggle with maintaining the engineered wood fire fiber wood mulch. And so, mostly because of that they, the communities that they work with have gone to port and place rubber where they had to make this choice. And then, you know, of course the recommendation here, the core recommendation is coming from Brown Sardina who is this project's landscape architect so if I do get anything back from the MSBA who I literally that's why the phone just ringing. I will let you know but that was what I was able to do on that. Allison you asked a question about documenting the risk I think the best reference is the document that Maria Kapicki has mentioned and Kathy included in the meeting on that since the UMass Lowell document that talks about the issues with that material. We've heard those. Maria's done a really good job of summarizing that information in her comments in previous meetings. So, with that, Kathy do you feel should do you want to have another round of discussion about this here today. I just want to hear if people have comments but I think we need to reach closure and put this to a vote which is why I put it on the meeting as a vote it is currently in the design package and it is in as Rick and on Tim reminded us we are going to concom next week it's it's part of what they're looking at and it does have permeability. So I and then the other comment I wanted to make is as you design the playground equipment, you know this currently how much we need of this. That could change over time I think we've got the maximum we need you know in terms of the pit and it's been put into the cost estimates. So down the road. Who knows exactly where that'll come out, but I see Allison's hand is up so I did want to leave time for to get commit Allison's hand and Angelica so Allison. Yeah, I just one of the things I also asked was about the broken bones, because that was another piece of information that I was worried about, but I didn't know that was any information on that because that's something I am concerned about. I did not find specific information comparing the two. So I can't respond to that question, although I believe there is there is information about them separately, but it's not coming from the same entity so I'm a little bit concerned about comparing them since there's two different frames of reference. You know, again, I think the the one of the big differences between these two things is one of these is a stable material and one of them is not a stable material. So when you talk about having for instance bone breaks on wood, wood chips or an engineered wood fiber, you're not the material can have migrated from the ideal condition. And therefore I think it makes it really hard to compare so I apologize Allison I really wasn't able to find anything that answered that to my satisfaction for public presentation. I see Doug has his hand up. But Angelica was had a hand up. Sorry, Angelica, I apologize. Your hand needs to migrate somewhere out of that book. I know. So, thanks Kathy. And so the question I was asking is that one of the issues with porn in place that's been contentious is the amount of the toxins released. And the parents that have had kids playing in the playground, it's also much hotter, like in Brock Park, we know we experienced that. And I'm wondering if you had any information about what might mitigate that, whether it's additional shading, or anything that can mitigate basically the heat contact on porn porn place. Donna can weigh in on this but when I was looking I looked into that Angelica and the strong recommendation is have it be extremely light color and don't, you know, often, you know, there's one up here with an apartment building where to make it look like brown and they put lots of brown and black in it. And that's not a good idea if you don't want it to get hot, you know, so that the that you have a choice of, of the color and then the color reflects the heat rather than absorb it so Donna, you can, and then that was exactly what I was going to say so and the colors. There are so many. It's limitless. So we really can make it as natural as possible, as light as possible, which is great and fun, right, you also want it wanted to be fun and inviting. It's the north side of the building so to what extent will the building itself in the wintertime when the sun is low it probably protects it a lot, but but probably not midday I mean when it's not. It's it's significantly far away from the building that it will not be in the building shadow. And then after Doug Bob has a parent hasn't. Um, is it too early for a motion or do you want to have more discussion first, because I would, I'll offer a motion if you're ready to have that we can have continued discussion around that motion though I guess. Um, I'm, I'm fine with you making a motion and if we get it seconded then Bob we can also take your comment. Yeah, so as far as motion is concerned, what I'll do is I'll, I'll, I'll move to to approve the port and place for playground as specified in the designs currently. I would like to second that motion. It was that Rupert was that a second. That was a record second. Yes. Okay, speak to it just a little bit. Yes. I think there's a, you know, there's legitimate concerns about materials of port and police, but I think when you sort of, you know, you're making tradeoffs between, you know, different kinds of difficulties and complications that come into play and I think that. Um, you know, I think the in weighing those risks, I think the port and place offers us the best overall package of how to treat that section of our, our play space. You know, but I fully recognize there's, there's, you know, complications with that and, and maintenance things we have to do and ways we can sort of actively manage to mitigate those risks a little bit. So, you know, as a school district, we'll try to do that for sure. And, and keep that in mind, you know, in the fact that this is a year round space for kids, not just during the school year. See, yeah, Angelica, I'm going to call on Rupert first since you spoke and then I see your hand is up also Rupert. Thank you. I'd like to acknowledge the very real concerns folks have about environmental. Rupert, we can't really hear you well. Can you speak up a little better. I don't know. Does this work any better? That's a little better. Does this work any better? Yeah, it's a little better. Okay. Sorry about that. I don't know what's up with my laptop. Anyway, I'd like to acknowledge the, you know, the very real concerns about environmental toxins. And I wonder whether the project might consider evaluating toxins in the school site before we add support in place so that we have a benchmark to see what kind of issues emerge. So, Rupert, you're saying to test the soil before the playground is installed in order to have a benchmark of whether the site develops contaminate contamination. Yeah, that's what I'm suggesting. Thank you. Okay, but okay. Yeah, I guess, Denisco is that I'm assuming we're on some level doing that as we're putting we're actually putting extra landfill and we're doing a lot of work on the site before this playground goes in. But, but that could be part of that before the pip is added. I like pip as a name. Yeah, I'm seeing heads now. Yeah. Thanks. No, I think Doug is right that we have some significant trade off. And I think that that's why it's important to continue discussing about mitigating factors. I like Rupert's idea of having a baseline. I imagine that that also was happening. But I also wanted to raise an issue with, I think, Tim, you mentioned about if it's in midday that the shading of the school would not be enough to provide shading in the playground. And is there a way of mitigating it further with some kind of additional shading added? I know some playground structures have some of the, and I think Grock Park has as well, which there are like sales that are added. So that in Grock Park, there's these like large sales where parents can wait when especially when it's super hot. And it provides some shading. Is there something that can be done, especially with at midday when there's not going to be enough of a shape provided by the school or what are some ideas. Yeah, so I mean that we would incorporate shade structures as part of the equipment. So, you know, it would be just be part of the overall design. And we recognize that's an issue Angelica. Yeah. So, Jonathan, and then I also see Allison's hand us up. I'm just, I'm curious to see if Rupert could comment. I mean, I, in my head, I believe this the school district already has this at the preschool site at that cracker farm. And if so, I'm curious if Rupert would would feel comfortable kind of commenting on how it's held up and what the maintenance was like. You know, I like others don't love this material, but I take seriously the the accessibility needs and the other drivers that are tending to push in this direction. Rupert, you can you can respond. Yeah. Sure. Can you hear me. Yeah. Yeah. Great. I haven't received complaints myself about the port in place portion of the pre K playground being too hot. It's on the west side, so it does get an awful lot of afternoon sun. It is fairly light and color in terms of maintenance. We have to treat it gingerly. And we do so it's more labor intensive than the rest of our groundswork. But I don't have a whole lot of detail to add. I can certainly get some more information and report back at that. Alison. I just, I want to make sure I'm not getting confused, because the motion was to vote on port in place in the current design. What is the current design I just want to make sure I had it clear in my head. What is that. Tim, I don't know whether you have a quick picture, but it's give me one second and I'll pull up the site plan. You know, for at a meeting earlier this summer. Alison, I'm trying to remember you were there or not, but we actually walked the area that would be the playground, you know, from the beginning of it to the end sort of got a sense of both physically where it is. And, and the, of this area that is not the other part of, I mean, there's fast grassy fields to be running in, but this we're talking about what goes under the playground equipment. The area in question is this kidney shaped area north of the building. The area in the similar tone between the building and the playground is outdoor. So I just want to clarify. So somebody in a wheelchair could access all of that area that is in the kidney shape. Correct. Easily access. Any other. Actually, Tim, what, what is the area of the porn place rubber. 14,000. 14,000 is working. So any other comments, if not, I will put it to a vote. So can I just comment because I think Tony Cunningham made a comment at the last meeting that I hadn't heard the number floated before that there was a rule of thumb of 75 square feet per student for a playground and I think she was actually asking how many students might be on the playground at one time. So, you know, if we assume 200 as a number. And that note, if that number is a real number, that would be 15,000 square feet, which is actually a little more than that. I don't think we've actually talked about how many kids would be on the playground at what time, but I don't think 200 kids is an unusual number to be outside at the same time. And it's a little bit over. Tim, Rick, Donna, have you ever, does that 75 square feet per kid have any resonance with you? It seems sort of more. No, it doesn't. So, you know, depending on the age of the students, right, they may be the younger kids love to be on the equipment more than the older kids love to be out in the field and play gaga, have the gaga pit. So, the age and activities that each, you know, grade may be interested in also varies, but it also depends on what the equipment is. So that really plays an important component of to how big the surface area needs to be. If you look at Jessica's boundless playground, it's quite large because it's a ton of ramps and needs more space, right? But if we choose different equipment, that might inform the size of the playground or the pit area. So, in some other communities, we've had a younger playground and an older playground. So then, so then that changes the area that we need. So I, if that's a rule of thumb, maybe that's for planning, but we've never looked at it that way. We've never looked at what are the goals and aspects features of the playground that the community wants. And this one's a little different because we're going to make it an all inclusive singular playground area instead of having to for the young kids and older kids. So that that might be for planning purposes. That's super helpful Donna. Thank you. Thank you, Kathy. I have two questions. One is just about accessibility and the comparison to the to the PIP area as opposed to the other areas on the playground. So will those areas be less accessible or not accessible to students? Like in wheelchairs, for example. And then my other question is about the motion. If we were to vote on this now, does that prevent us from choosing or deciding that, like, we would want to explore a cork PIP, a different kind of PIP or the hybrid option for having the bonded EWF with the PIP. Would that would this motion prevent us from making those decisions at another time? So let me, let me comment on the process question. Alicia, I think that the issue is, you know, and you sort of heard earlier in the meeting how we are headed into the permitting process we've made submissions to particularly con conservation commission. With certain assumptions about permeability of material and the area of permeable materials. So, could you change it later? You could, but the ramifications would be having to go back through the permitting process at a time when you are trying to go out to bed. And I don't think that would work. So I think we need to consider the vote today and there is a vote on the agenda. As binding, unless the building committee is prepared to pay additional costs to redesign and also to sort of throw a little bit of potentially a monkey wrench in the schedule. So repeat your 1st question because I didn't, I didn't hear them both fully. Your 1st question was full accessibility. So full accessibility. Thank you. Donna, you want to talk about that? The playground and the play surfaces around it, including the basketball where you have marked play surfaces. They are all connected level and. Continuously wheelchair accessible. As all the paths and walkways shown. Thank you. I think so just maybe to specify a little bit. My question was more about like a compare, like I was looking for more of a comparison. Like what is the difference in accessibility between the PIP and the rest of the structures. And then in terms of the decision being binding. So for example, like we're saying now that we're going to choose the PIP surface. I wasn't exactly sure if it indicated in our current design. Like what kind of PIP like could we choose a cork PIP with this decision? Or is there something specified in the current design that we would have to stick to. I think I can answer the 1st question. Which is the difference between these two. The playground is accessible on the areas around this. This material is about safety in creating a resilient surface where there's a possibility of a fall. So you wouldn't put this everywhere. If you were just walking on it, it's, it's, it's limited to the area where there might be swings or other kinds of climbing equipment. So, Donna ripped him. I don't know about cork PIP, but. I'm not, I don't know what cork PIP is either. Stay. But, but, you know, I think ultimately the final amount or size of the PIP surface will depend on the equipment that's decided on. If there's a way to reduce it, we can reduce it depending on the size of the equipment. I think we're very comfortable with the size. Of the area that we've identified, but if we can reduce it in any way, we'd be happy to write. So I think that's another discussion point that comes up. But maybe to answer the other question, we're not, none of us are familiar with this cork. And we really need to move forward on this. So this is what's been included in the cost estimates. This is what we all know. We've researched it. We understand it. Everyone understands the benefits and, and potentially the negatives that come along with it as we've all been discussing, but to re to introduce another type of surface cork that we're very unfamiliar with is probably not on the table right now. Yeah, and Alicia just to clarify that process. So the, you know, from my perspective, the committee essentially approved the use of the port and place rubber as it was presented. I don't know, during schematic design, basically, what's the reason that we're talking about it here is there have been a number of public comments that raised this concern and so we've dealt into it. And from the design team's perspective, we're asking them to go backwards when they are trying to go forwards with the permitting and keep the project on schedule. So I see two more comments Allison and then Roger and then I think we should take a vote. I think I had. I think I missed it but even if you're going from a 75 square foot per. That idea. We would, we would at any one time have a third of the school on the playground and that would be the 14,000 square feet. So I didn't know if anybody said that but I just want to make sure that was clear. Roger. Well, one of the things that I'm looking at and thinking about is the other group of 10. Who are going to take a look at the playground equipment that we have on. That's going to have the port in place will be. I imagine under the swings or under some kind of climbing apparatus. And what will lead, what will the materials be that lead the kids to that area. You know, they run on to the, to the playground. That was, that's my question. So, so the entire area is that okay, Kathy for me to respond. Yeah. So, so the whole playground area. Tim, is there a way even just pull up a photo of let's just say, what do you have bright wood. No, I'm thinking just bright wood even just just for people to fully understand, although it's, it's different. So I don't want anyone. Just so you can have a visual what we're talking about. So the entire play area that we had shown a fully accessible. Smooth transition. There's no, you know, differences in the levels or there's no tripping hazards. The hard place surface areas are like pavement that will be painted. And we also will need another committee or working group. We'd love to engage the students as well. Tammy and Allison, and, and maybe another working group to identify the lines and the games that we want to paint. That surface also needs to be able to accommodate emergency vehicles that will also have access fully around the building to so. So, so the combination of and it's also going to support outdoor dining or eating lunch. That sounds very formal dining for an elementary school but so so that would be for, you know, outdoor eating play hard play areas, etc. That would be painted. Typically it's asphalt and then you typically paint over it. Right. And then the port in place. So the transition would be smooth that would be seamless. And then you would have the port and the pip area for that would be underneath the apparatus to prevent falls. Does that answer your question of Tim can pull up a image and when people, I don't want people to think. You know, black top, because it's nothing. It's, it's not Tim, do you need me to pull something up. No, I think, I think perhaps Donna, you know, we don't have to, you know, we've got the other image Roger if that answered enough, you know, there's a, there's, and then there's grass outside of all of this. But the question is just the substance and if people are comfortable, I'd like to move go on to take a vote. I'm not seeing any objections. Right, so this is this is basically voting for what is already in the schematic design and in the cost estimates and is going and the basic landscaping and Rogers correct that once the playground equipment is established. What goes underneath it will be fixed as well. Alicia. Sorry, Kathy, I do have one other question just trying to understand so when we do pick the playground equipment, we're saying that there will be no, or we don't think there will be any effect on the size of the port in place area, or that is subject to change once we choose the playground equipment or are we saying like this is the maximum we might reduce it. I'll let Tim and Rick answer but I think, you know, the amount of PIP will be, it's under the playground so it may not. Yeah, yeah, it really we just we we wanted to actually we have started preliminary conversations with MEO Brian just to get a little bit more of an answer. Brian just to get an idea based on we started with Jessica's boundless and then and then improved upon it based on what else is has is available to date but to answer the question. Yes. Depending on the equipment and the outcome of this working group. This, the area is probably going to change a little bit. Kathy, if I could just quickly quickly bring up just I just want to show people for their benefit. Another playground so so if everyone say I really don't want to spend any more time on this but here is a play area. I don't know if you can see my cursor but there's some shade structures and the circular area that has poured in place. And then there's some other area you see some swings and some other areas that's poured in place and then all of it in the middle, the four square the basketball, the map, the map, all of that's hard skate. So it it we try to integrate it we try to create in a, you know, overall theme and color patterns and everything else when when we're doing this so the surface might be different but we think of that whole area holistically. So if that if that helped you Roger. It helps a lot thank you. Okay. So I'm going to put this to vote. And I will do it in the order of people on my screen because that's easier for me. So, Jonathan, Jonathan's hand is up so just to just to ask you to to repeat the motion. Doug, would you read your motion again. But that would presume I written it down. I just, I moved to, to vote to approve the port in place as in the designs currently. And we will cap Margaret will capture that in the minutes. So, Doug, you're now the first person on my screen. So I'm voting yes. Roger. Yes. Yes. Simone. Yes. Tammy. Yes. Jennifer. Yes. Jonathan. Yes. Allison. Yes. Angelica. Yes. Alicia. Abstain. Rupert. Yes. And Kathy is a yes. So we have one abstention and otherwise yeses with one. One. One. One. So 11. 11. Yes. One. But you can. I won't try to count on the screen. Okay. So. We have invoices. Correct. We have invoices. We have a approach to pre-qualification, but we can save that till January. So we're, let's keep going. Yeah. Let's do invoices and then public comment. Second presenting my screen. All right. So the November package of invoices includes here. Is that big enough for everybody to see? Yeah. So we have an invoice from insert advisory. A package of five invoices that make up Dennis goes. November billing. And an invoice from Berkshire gas. It's already in the process of being paid in order to secure their services for the relocation of the gas line. During the Christmas break. The OPM invoice. It's a $18 invoice less than 1% of a contract. Leaving 2.3 million left to pay. Yes. The project moves on through construction, et cetera. On the design services front against a $7 million contract. This is about a 5% progress billing of 365, 520 and 88 cents all together for five invoices. Leaving a little over 4 million left to pay. And then moving to Berkshire gas relocation was actually quite reasonable at $10,000. I will flip to the invoices themselves and work, walk through them. This is the Dennis go invoice. This is the primary one for 331,500. And the progress payment for developing the construction documents. Summary report of where the billings fall in across all the Dennis go invoices. Here's the one we just looked at. And here's a $2,200 invoice for on the low backstop compliance at 20,000 139 63 invoice for geotechnical services. A 3,181 75 invoice for additional survey services. And then 8,499 50 cent invoice for wetland permitting and monitoring services. So. Presenting the backup to that. This is the 8,400. Wetlands. We're back up from the consultant sub consultant and another one. The $20,000 geotech services with backup. With 2,200 on the low backstop compliance with backup. The 3,181 75 invoice for serving services with backup from a Berkshire design group. The Berkshire gas quote for invoice for 10,188 of a gas line relocation and the insert invoice for OPM services. Do let me know if you want me to slow down or go back to any part of it as I'm going through this somewhat quickly. We'll send back up from the net zero consultant for peer review. And another one of the same. And that's the end of my 39 page page packet. Is there anything you'd like me to go back to? And then I will stop sharing my screen. Thank you. I think. Yep. Go ahead. So Margaret, I am assuming you recommend that these be paid and with that, if you can confirm that. Margaret. Yes. Okay. That I move that we approve these invoices as presented. Second. Kathy, do you want me to call the roll? Yeah, just for some reason, my screen flipped out. I can call the road. I'm really sorry. You turned into one person. So I will call the names as I see them. Doug. Yes. Roger. Yes. Paul. Yes. Simone. Yes. Tammy. Yes. Jennifer. Yes. Jonathan. Yes. Allison. Yes. Angelica. Yes. Elisha. Yes. And Rupert. Yeah. Thank you. So as I open it up to public comments, I want to make sure that everyone saw on this agenda. And if you need me to, I can send it again is both the January meeting date and all the other proposed meeting dates. And if people can let me know if any of these cause a problem for them and otherwise, you know, just put a hold on your calendar. These, these are dates that the team has checked out. And I know that some of the other scheduling, but as always, we can, we can be flexible if they somehow don't work. And all the meetings would be of the full committee would be at the regular eight 30 in the morning. On Fridays. I'll go ahead and send out hold invites for those so that you can see them on your calendar. But yes, if you, if there's, if we have a situation where you don't have a quorum, I'll send it to you. I'll send it to you later. So are there any other comments before I open it to public comments? Then we are open for public comments. And I, I've been asked before to say how many people are in the audience. And there are one, two, three, four, five people. Rudy, Maria, Bruce, Maya, and Tony Cunningham. And I'll go ahead and bring Rudy in. Rudy, I brought you in. Hi, can you hide Rudy Perkins? Cherry Lane. Can you hear me all right? Great. Thank you. Just two comments. One is the, the site work, the preliminary site work. I assume that doesn't include the geothermal wells, but I'm not positive about that. And in all the webinars I attended when I was a project manager about geothermal systems and in conversation I had with a site manager of a net zero school, it seemed like the wells can sometimes be the problematic portion of a geothermal system like problems in the installation. So I just assume if that's part of the packet that there will be some sort of, you know, particular diligence from the OPM and the design team about throughout the installation process and that we're, you know, making sure the lines are kept clear during the installation, all that kind of stuff. They're flush tested before, before finalization, all that. So that we don't have problems down the line. I'm sure you're going to do that, but I'm going to just trust that the committee and the design team are keeping an eye on that really important part of our energy system. And the second is that we keep seeing, seeming to push back the discussion of fixtures and equipment to a certain extent, the net zero checklist. And I appreciate the diligence on the playground equipment and sort of a series of steps to make sure there's good input. The staff is involved and so forth. And I really feel like we need a similar kind of process for the fixtures and equipment, which will comprise maybe as much as a third of our energy use at the school. I know I'm probably sounding like a broken record, but I think it would be good to have more frequent sustainability committee meetings and or separate discussions of fixtures and equipment, especially any of the hard items like elevator walk-in freezer and stuff that might affect dimensions in the building itself. Doing that soon and then things like printers, refrigerators, all that good stuff, the video displays, the projectors, they're all going to use a ton of energy. And we should be thinking about the alternatives and how much old equipment is coming in from the other school, the existing Fort River school, and how that factors into our energy budget. So I hope we will, you know, at least in January start that process of active discussion about those questions. Thanks so much. Thank you, Rudy. Maria. Thank you. Maria Kepke, South Amherst. I want to first agree that testing of soils. Thank you for suggesting that Rupert prior to any installation is critical. I want to also thank Angelica for suggesting shading, which I think is an important thing regardless of surfacing, but especially for any unnatural surfacing, which is known to create high temperatures. Second, I think that it would be wise to ask the concom now to weigh in on different surfaces while they're doing this. I don't think that would be a huge ask to have them consider the use of EWF, bonded EWF and quirk pip. I want to let you know that I took a little field trip down to Springfield where all of their parks with playgrounds have engineered wood fiber and several of them have the hybrid option that you had briefly entertained last time. And these are structures that are not very old within the past year or a couple of years. And the pip is already showing signs of degradation. There are divots in it. The material is degrading and being sent out into the environment. So another thing, the MAAB, you referenced their statement, which says that loose fill surfaces and aggregate surfaces, including blah, blah, blah are not acceptable for accessible routes within the playground. That means that they can be used in other places in the playground. Again, consideration of a hybrid option. In addition, the unitary substances such as bonded EWF and quirk pip would be fine by their standards. And as long as we're talking about future prohibitions, I want to refer to the other document in the packet by EcoHealthy Child Care. In that, you'll note that California and Minneapolis and probably a lot of other states are considering banning the use of rubber pip in playground surfaces. Along those same lines, there were a couple experts in this field who had expressed a willingness to testify and talk to you guys about this before you made your decision today. One from the National Center for Health Research, and the other from TURI, from the Toxic Use Reduction Institute. And I think it's a real shame that you weren't able to hear directly from them their opinions on this. Along those same lines, please, I sent you guys, I think somebody else sent you TURI's updated report on playground surfaces where quirk pip, which is a thing, was discussed. And I would encourage you to look at that. That at least avoids the toxins associated with rubber, which are numerous. This is a really huge area, and I appreciate any attempts to make any of these non-natural surfaces as small as possible. I mean, can we please consider other natural surfaces like grass between things? We are talking about having to have good accessibility and safety, but that does not mean that an area that is the size of three, oh, more than the size of three of the gymnasiums all put together in this project should be this surface. And I will also remind you that in addition, as you've spoken about, in addition to this playground area, there's a whole ton of hardscape. There's basketball courts, there's half basketball courts, there's a whole bunch of hardscape all around the school. Could we please have some more natural substances instead of the man-made? That's it. I hope that you will reconsider this and explore options further and speak with experts. Thank you. Thank you, Maria. Bruce, I brought you in. Bruce called him. Uh-oh. Sorry, I think I took you out. Sorry. You're in, you're back, Bruce. Okay. Did you hear him? Well, I said Bruce called him fine. Yeah, we got it. Okay. I think that I'm speaking to the appearance of the planning board and so forth. I know I'm on the board and I, on Wednesday, we were told to expect you to arrive on the 17th. So I'm basically confirming what I think Donna was anticipating. If you need to go earlier than that, you should contact staff and see. I don't know that our agenda is that full, but then of course I might not know that. We took two hearings to move through the Jones Library process. That was pretty complicated. I assume this is going to be no less complicated, but possibly no more either. So I think two hearings feels to me to be like a reasonable goal. And finally, I would say that probably no surprise or news to you, but just to be sure of the, I would anticipate that traffic onto an impact along East street would be the, one of the dominant interests of the board. I've been a part of this process, as you know, for a very long time. And, and I know that this committee's and this design teams deliberations were initially anybody largely making comparisons between the likely impacts and trouble and so forth on the, on the alternative site. And we were doing evaluative and comparative assessments and so forth. The board, of course, the planning board will be blind to past comparative deliberations. So we'll be simply looking at the, I anticipate at the impacts as it, as it would be projected. So I would guess that that would be a very important issue. So I, I, I commend that you come prepared for a fairly strenuous investigation on that particular topic. But as I say, I've come to understand and appreciate the diligence and confidence of this, this group. So I, I don't expect that there will be confusion and so forth. I look forward to being a part of a review body later in the year, early next year. Thank you for all that you do everybody. That's it for me. Thank you. Bye bye. Thank you, Bruce. And then the next person is Maya. Let me, I don't know. I'm not sure how you pronounce your last name. Eat on. Yeah, that's great. Can you hear me? Sorry. It's a little noisy here. Okay. Great. So I'm just here as a representative of CPAC. And we wanted to follow up on some. On, on a request about making the new school. Available for parents to have to sort of unobtrusively. Observes their kids, which is something that is required by Massachusetts law. And it's presently is something that many parents have trouble doing. So one of the things that we requested is that the school be set up in such a way that, especially for the special ed classrooms, like the building blocks and aims. And other ones that there are ways for caregivers, parents and other teachers to sort of see what's happening in some of these classrooms is going to be done with, you know, special one-way mirrors. There are, there are lots of sort of strategies that we can use. And so that's what we're going to be doing. So I just wanted to follow up about the possibility of doing this. I know a couple of emails have been sent out to all of you already about this. And we just love to follow up and hear what you think. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Maya. And Doug may want to respond. We usually don't respond to public comments, but this did come up earlier in this whole process. So I'm going to call on Doug for a response for that. And then I'm not seeing any other hands. So, but Doug. Thank you, Kathy. Yeah. You know, we just came up a little bit last, at our last meeting. So I kind of circled back to, to double check on some, you know, past work in this and, and the current circumstances and where we are. And so one of the questions was around, you know, sort of confirmation that it would be something that would be considered a meeting approval to do something of some of the ideas that are suggested, like the, the two way mirrors and, and that sort of thing. Those types of observation materials would be ones that would require the union to, to be in, you know, allow would require the union to allow as part of the contract and negotiations. I did have a meeting with the union recently over the last week. We've talked about this topic a little bit. They confirmed their point of view that, that they would not be amenable to that kind of a change in, in the working conditions. So they would be against that. That being said, you know, we do have ways to do observation. That's, you know, they're absolutely correct observations are and allowed and, and required component if asked for by, by parents. We try to accommodate that, and we do accommodate that in, in different ways and, and in talking with him, you know, internally with staff who feel like we, we do a pretty good job to do that. We did a little bit of checking as far as other places that, that have those kinds of, of like two way mirror type observation circumstance. The only one we were able to kind of identify was a, was a preschool circumstance with what they call arena evaluation, which is where, you know, there's a number of adults, multiple adults that are trying to observe. And in that circumstance, because the kids are so young, they will do that kind of an arrangement. But, you know, any other public schools we talked to and any of the other, you know, facilities that we reached out to were not, don't have those types of, of, of kind of devices or equipment. So I think that, you know, for us as a district, we feel like we can meet the needs of parents around the nation, certainly understand, you know, the concerns that are raised around it. And, you know, and we'll work with, with families as, as, as those requests for observation come into place to see if we can do it well and how well we can do it with them. But I think it's, it's a difficult thing at this stage in where we are design-wise, but also knowing how our union feels about it and how others feel about it. It's, it's not a good direction for us to head at this point. Angelica, since this, this, I know you have raised this before and just so everyone knows it's not in the cost estimates. It's not in the building design right now. So the earlier answer was similar to what Doug just gave, but there's been, we can put this back on a, you know, what kind of arrangements, but I think that has been discussed and, and answered in the past. I didn't want to open it up as a whole topic, but I thought it would be good that I know Doug was doing some work to respond to you, you in fact, raising it. And then we had a letter earlier. I think a hand is still up. Yup. Is, I don't, Maya has raised her hand. So Maya, you know, we, we actually don't do a back and forth, but we will record your public comment. So I, Doug had asked to respond because he had done some work. So we'd be happy to address this further, but I'm not going to bring you back in because it was Doug responded. So thank you. Paul has urged me not to, not to break the rule of, of interacting and responding. But so I did break it. I just want to, people can, when we set the agenda, the agendas are usually set because Danisco and or answer has items they need to bring to us. So if people want to have an item on agenda, they should just email me and we can make it a topic for conversation. So it's not, it's not a closed agenda. It's just, it's been particularly driven right now by construction schedules and getting the project ready to go. So any, any other final comments or requests? I'm, I'm worried that we're going to lose more people if we go much longer. We've been trying to be pretty timely. We might have lost Paul. I'm not seeing Paul on the list right now. Yup. We've lost Paul. So I want to, We're also at the end of the agenda. So we're at the agenda. So I just want to wish everyone happy holidays. And we will meet again in the new year. And I look forward to continuing this. And just so people know, I think that on the agenda members, on the agenda committee, and I mentioned this before our minutes ago, did say quickly or Margaret said quickly, there will be other subcommittee meetings, including the sustainability committee meeting. We just need to schedule those at points where it makes sense in terms of the timelines. So I expect we will. Get recommendations for timing on those. And the minutes that Margaret's been doing carry do carryovers of items that have not yet been addressed, which I think has been a very good practice. I don't see any other hands up so I am going to say the meeting is adjourned at 1019 and happy holidays and happy New Year everyone. Hope everyone gets some rest. Thanks everybody.