 Good morning, everyone. This is the Friday, August 12th meeting of the elementary school building committee. And we're conducting the meeting by zoom. And that means I have to make sure that all members of the committee can hear and be heard. And as people join us who haven't joined already, I will do the same with them. So I'm just going to call out names in the order I can see them on the screen. Sean here. Angelica. Here. Paul. Here. Jonathan. Here. Ben. Here. Phoebe. Here. Simone. Here. And Alicia. Here. I think. Okay, I don't think I missed anyone. So I'm going to call the meeting to order and have Margaret pull up the agenda for us, but I just, I want to, I heard from one person, Paul, that he needs to leave just before 930. So one of the items on the agenda is a vote on the high HVAC system. I'm going to call it up from the net zero subcommittee on what we heard. So I think I want to move that a little bit earlier on the agenda to make sure we have a quorum when we're voting. And can you have someone bring me in? Okay, I'm just looking at someone is texting me. Nope. I don't see anybody. I don't see any phone numbers in the audience. I don't know if any of the phone numbers are what, what phone number of texts did you begin with? It's, I don't know. Oh, Tammy. Can you raise Tammy is saying I'm coming soon. She's just having trouble logging in. Okay. Someone was emailing me, but I don't see anybody in the audience. So, we'll keep an eye out. Yes, Alison. I'm just doing, we're just starting. I'm just making sure everyone can hear and be heard morning. Hello, I can hear and be heard. Great. Okay. The meeting is beginning, Margaret. I'm turning it over to you. Okay. And I see Phoebe is here too. And Phoebe, I think I called out Phoebe. Did I miss you at the first time around. No, you call me. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Okay, here's the agenda. Thank you. Thank you. Just briefly. We were going to start with the MSBA comments. We're actually going to take this vote. And net zero subcommittee discussion first. Then we'll go to the MSBA comments. We're going to give you a recap on the conversation with the facility assessment subcommittee. And then Denisco has some updates on their drawings. And I do have one announcement or a question for the committee that's in the 48 hours. So I'll do it at the very end. Perfect. Okay. So that's your subcommittee. I'll turn it over to John. Caught him. Caught me while I was, while I was taking a sip of coffee. Jonathan, Jonathan, would you like this just to bring up, you know, our presentations. You have some slides to speak to. Okay. And while you're doing that, I see Tammy has joined us. Tammy, I just can wait. You let us know you can hear us and we can hear you. Yes. Good morning. Thanks. And Kathy, you sent around ahead of time the kind of report that we. I did. I did. I, I, you know, so. I gave everyone a link to it, Jonathan, rather than doing a large set of attachments. You know, I can see it. Yep. Thank you. So the floor is yours, Jonathan. Maybe we can go to it. Sorry. Yeah. Why don't we do it a little bit? Let's get down to it. This. If this will be helpful, we'll start there. I don't know if you saw it. We just have like the five slides. Yeah. That's okay. I think, you know, if you can. Yeah, there we go. Okay. You know, as folks know, we've, we've, we've been looking at this for a little while. And the, the. I don't want to say things have changed, but we've gotten more information, particularly in the way of utility rebates. And I am not going to remember the exact numbers off the top of my head. But they have made it possible for the two systems to be what I'm going to call close to comparable in, in terms of cost. In terms of cost, cost is a little bit more expensive. But in almost every other category, when it comes to a long-term, you know, energy efficiency and being green or maintenance or the rate at which parts of the system will we have to be replaced. And occupant comfort and occupant noise or exposure of noise to the system. I'm one of the sticking points. I think for a lot of folks has been just the overall cost, but the utility offsets, like now they're up here, aren't they? Are at this point quite substantial. So I, Oh, this isn't the slide I was thinking it was, but I believe that the net kind of difference between. There we go. Between the two systems, if you look at that bottom line. I think that is, is now, you know, I'm not going to say it isn't something, it is something, but it's in the order of $300,000 or $400,000, as opposed to several million dollars, which is I think where it was when we were looking at. The first versions of this. And so at a super high level that, that is kind of the, that is kind of the. The reason that the subcommittee was, was able to sort of unanimously, unanimously recommended this committee that. That the ground source heat pump was the better system. And I've kind of gone over that at a really high level and I suspect there may be questions and I don't know, Donna, do you want to chime in on some things I might have. No, no, no, this is great. And Tim's here as well. But, but I think what's, I also just want to point out is that this is the cost of the entire system. So whether we went all electric air source, ground source, fossil fuel, you still have a capital, right? There's still cost incorporated into the budget regardless of the system for mechanical equipment. I don't know if anyone to think this is additive to what the mechanical system would have cost if we just want fossil fuel, right? So, so really this is just from a comparative purpose between air source and ground source recognizing Tim and Rick, off top of my head, I don't recall, but you would be paying somewhere around, you know, 10 11 million, I have to pull it up for any, for any mechanical system. So I just don't want people to think that this is additive. If that makes sense. Paul. Yeah, so I have two questions. One is, is the mass save incentive a guarantee or is that a competitive program or is it something that if we do this, they will give us those funds on either project. It is unlike the smart program. This would be guaranteed. We have to enter into an MOA, I believe with them. And then as long as we adhere to, you know, the 25 EY or less, let's just say less than 25, we'll get certain amounts. And then the post occupancy money, they have to come and test it. But yes, this is not hurry up and get line. The money is there. And we will hit, we will hit 25 or EY or less. Right. Yes, yes, we will just have to work with the occupants to ensure that we're, we're able to keep that number down low. And kind of from a, you know, committee, subcommittee perspective, it's something we'll probably have to come back and touch on because it means you have to constantly, you know, make sure that your envelope is still going to get you there. And that's why we do several iterations of the energy model. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. So it is, you know, during the design process, it's really important to make sure that we constantly test, test the energy model, but in the actuality for the post occupancy, you know, that's sort of where the proof is. Right. But, but I will say just anecdotally, the Hastings Elementary School that was just completed in 2020, they had their first full year cycle being back from COVID. And it's actually, we were anticipating it being a 28 EY, just with the amount of use in the building and, and all of the other parameters. And it's actually trending somewhere around 20, 23.5. So, so, you know, we want to be conservative on the energy models to make sure that we can actually hit it. But the built environment is one thing. And then it's the use that we also are going to have to stay on top of. And my second question is, given the geology of the site, is there any concern of a ground source system being placed at Fort River given the high water table, et cetera. And in terms of lifespan or anything like that. Tim, do you want to take that? The short answer is no, but go ahead, Tim. There are some minor things that you have to deal with in terms of the installation of the system. If you have a high water table. But once the installation is complete, the system is watertight so it can function just as well if it's constantly under the water table as if it were not. So there may be some dewatering that has to happen during installation that would add some cost. But in terms of the lifetime operation maintenance and functionality of the system, there is no concern versus the other side. And I believe, Tim, we've captured that additional dewatering in the cost for the Fort River itself. Yeah. Sean? Is this incentive similar to the one we've looked at before where the MSBA, they're not going to take this from us, right? This is something that will lower the town share. So I'm going to speak to that. The MSBA is awfully fuzzy about this issue, but yes. I mean, I understand that we have been changing their policy. And I asked this question directly. About a month or so ago, I haven't gotten a hard answer back. I am curious. Denisco on your. Hastings project where their utility incentives and how is that handled. At Hastings. Yeah. There were, but this so. It was with. I don't know. I don't know. Ever source as well, but. This goes back to 2016 at, you know, they got, they got the normal. I think we got 15,000. For to, to assist with the design process. And then. I don't know, maybe a couple of hundred thousand. But, but there was no. There was no source or non-file. There was none at that at the time, but MSBAs. And didn't take away the utility incentive that they did receive, which was a few hundred couple, two to 300,000. I attended a presentation recently. And I think. Kathy might have been there and perhaps Donna as well. Yeah. Where they, I won't say they were crystal and clear, but they definitely indicated that they understood that it was. That was the right thing to do. So I, you know, as always, they have trouble. Changing policy, but it's my understanding that it would be embedded. I will try to get a hard answer out of them, although I think they're going to continue to be. Somewhat wobbly. Yeah. And I think that would be maybe after a few, and I can connect about, yeah, just getting them to put something in writing. I know we might do this anyway. But I think the cost argument. You know, only holds water if it actually reduces our share. So. Well, I think this is a good. I don't think the answer to this should change the committee's decision, but I think the fact that you have committed. Puts it in a different category in terms of trying to get an answer out of them. So. And then Sean. With that. They wouldn't take the full amount of the incentive away from you. They would. They would share. So, so worst cases, they take a share of it. Best case we can use the whole. Yeah. And, and again. Without, without having any formal. Written confirmation. They. They have stated as much, right? But, but I agree. I think. Getting written confirmation is really the. Yeah. All the words say yes. And none of the, none of the. Written words. Yeah. Can I just follow up on that? I mean, is it something we should just go to Jack McCarthy and say, we really need it. We're making a crucial decision that's, that's affecting the, the design of the project. We need a yes or no on this because it. If they're. Depending what the percentage is, it is a substantive. We're looking at every penny, right? Yeah. And this is a substantial, even with this, it's more money than we otherwise would be spending, spending for air source. I mean, I will say that if it, if we're asking for something in writing, it will ultimately go to Jack McCarthy, but I wouldn't start with Jack McCarthy. Okay. I think we start with our project managers and say, we're going to need a red response. We understand this over your head. Can you get back to us? Yeah, I just think the timely, the timely process of making this time sensitive for them is really important. Yeah. Well, I mean, Jack was actually. Conceptually led this presentation where they. Sad and, you know, in on a presentation that that was their intention, but again, their policy tends to lag far behind. So I, I hear you, Paul, we do need to get it in writing, but I wouldn't start with Jack. I would start with our project managers. Okay. Okay. I'm just looking, I have a question. I just want to make sure that I don't see any other hands first. On the construction part. So the one point, almost 1.5 million. That the first two lines. Is that. First of all. As I understand it, you know, we've, we've. We've got a total project. Budget for Fort River and design. Build and we built in without this incentive. So this is actually lowering the total. By it. I'm not taking the operating one now. I'm taking just the one point. Almost 5 million. So would they pay that. With the payment. And I'm thinking in terms of as we. Turn to how we're financing this. Would the payment be. At the point we're going forward and are about to build. So we'll be getting it along with, as we're putting the wells in, or do we get it? It sort of is the timing of it in. Since we're putting the wells in first. On this would be, we'd be getting it in that first time period. And if you don't have the answer, it's fine, but I'm just thinking that that money comes in and it offsets money that we would otherwise. Having to be. Spending from the town. Yeah. And that's it. That's a really good question. Kathy. I don't, we have not. Gotten into. That detail with them yet. Okay. I don't, we haven't, I don't believe we have. Margaret. I don't know if you have anything else to add, but. But I think it's easier to get something in writing. That we can ask. Right. We can certainly have something in writing that you can depend on as you present it to the community. Okay. That was my question. So there are any other questions on this? Yeah. I don't know if you have anything else to add to this. Cause the. The reason we moved it up, it is, it's as one of the things as Jonathan mentioned, it's a. A more efficient system and that grid. We can make sure. Everyone gets this grid and. And has it to be able. It's a quieter system. The school we visited in Lexington. You really could feel that the. It's a constant and pleasant temperature where the one was more traditional air condition was cold in some parts of the building. Others. So there are. Aside from it. In addition to it being. More efficient. It has these other attributes and it takes up less space in the walls. There's less ducting work correctly. Correct. Donna the way. Kathy. So, so yes. So that, so actually it's kind of a. Two part. So the ground, the ground source. Is, you know, the geothermal wells and that system. And then once, once you bring that into the building, there's a distribution. Of, of how you distribute distribute the heat and cooling. And our recommendation on what you experienced in. Lexington at the Hastings school was to chill beam system. And so our recommendation would be now that we have the incentive. Pretty much. Almost paying for this is to, to go with ground source, but then the distribution of the heat and air would be the chill beam as well. Because what you were experiencing over at. The, the heat and air would be the chill beam system. And so what you were experiencing with the Williams and need them was a displacement system. And you heard all the trouble that they were dealing with that. So it's, it's kind of two part. So. If I don't see any of the questions, are we. Paul. I have a. I have a request. This is Allison. Okay. This is just a suggestion. I think it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's much more cost effective. In terms of maintaining the building and heating the building and things like that. In the future. And I'm hearing that there's also some incentives. That are possible from the utilities. And I just, I think as the public relations move, it might make sense to make it. Highlight these efforts to help. The public relations and the public relations. There's a lot of work ahead. So the ongoing savings that we will have by not having an oil, you know, whatever. System we currently have in the Fort River and Wildwood schools. And then also highlighting the one time type of incentives that are being accessed. So that people are aware that there are some. How this is impacting our bottom line. And we also have a number of this is how we're also saving money and being cost efficient in other ways. Thank you and I totally agree on some other slides we've to speak to your compared to the two schools that are currently operating. We'd be fully offsetting the electric cost with the PV so it's in the current world level it's $250,000 a year. So it's it's that's the ongoing and then there's so it's a substantial amount of money in both directions. I think that's great trying to we are now that once we vote, I will work with others to try to write up something simple that makes this clear to people that this is a it's a it's a fiscally responsible choice, as well as an environmentally and climate responsible choice. So, I see both Paul and Jonathan. Yeah, I just wanted to thank that I felt well served by the subcommittee and the work that they put into this and I feel a lot of confidence and the people who are participating in that in that decision process and that review process so I just want to thank the people you know Jonathan and everybody else who served on that in the staff that supported them as well. And just real quick, we should note that that we would have those utility savings, particularly the electrical, but even the fossil fuel piece, regardless of which choice we make today, because both the ground source and the air source are aligning us up to achieve the towns required, you know net zero bylaw compliance. That said, the ground sources yet a bit better than the near source. Are we ready to vote as a committee on this. Any other questions. Like a motion. Yes. I think we can move that we direct the design team to move forward with the design based on the ground source to pump system. Is that an okay motion. Yes. Second. And I just kept her who said second. Ben. And I will do a roll call vote. Just in order of people on the screen Paul. Yes. Yes. Jonathan. Yes. Tammy. Yes. Angelica. Yes. Sean. Yes. Ben. Yes. Simone. Yes. Elisha. Yes. Allison. Yes. And Kathy is a yes. So it is unanimous with two absent Margaret when we write it up in the minutes. Thank you everyone. Now we can go go back to the rest of the presentation. All right. That's that's huge guys. Thank you very much. And we feel. That it's really a great opportunity to do the right thing as Kathy said for the employment and climate. And we thank ever source for their continued support on this. So going back to kind of the other parts of the agenda, we did receive the MSBA review comments back from our PSR. We received them on August 2nd. I think the day before facilities assessment subcommittee meeting. And it was very thoughtful and overall they were very appreciative of our work. Very, very minor comments. Some are just clarifications. But, you know, they touched on the overall aspects of the project, the ed program, building project cost. They're asking for clarification or additional information as it relates to the design and approval process. And we have assembled our responses, but Mike Morris is on vacation this week. So they're doing the 16th and we'll just want to circle back with him when he's back from vacation before we submit them. Just a couple of comments noted as, as a kind of our, our important. We also had the facility assessment subcommittee meeting on August 3rd and just as a way of an explanation. Subcommittee is a presentation. They've already saw our PSR and they, they are thorough. The subcommittee includes three board members plus MSBA staff. And it gives them an opportunity to ask questions, provide some ideas, thoughts as, as they've seen so many projects. And so that this can be a fluid process, and that it will just be a simple vote at the MSBA board meeting on August. Margaret help me out 23rd 27. 27. Yeah, or is it the 31st. Anyway, at the end of August, I'm sorry, all my days are really merging here but so so as an extension of the review comments, our facility assessment subcommittee had had some really great thoughts. They, they were appreciative of the compact design and small building footprint. They were appreciative of the educational program. They had asked some questions after PDP and you know we never get any feedback after we give them their question after we respond to their questions but they really did appreciate the thought and response that went before them. They have approved the educational program and the gross and the program space the net floor area of 70,500 with one minor caveat is that they are asking us to increase the classroom size of the ILC spaces from 800 to 900 square feet to the same size of all the other general classrooms. I've been speaking with Mike Morris on this. This was a very thoughtful and intentional decision on the district's part to really keep those classrooms smaller than a full size classroom. It's the nature of the program, the number of students with staff in the program. So we have to look at ways, one, possibly have a conversation with DESI because this is coming from DESI to we're also looking at how we might be able to increase the size of the classrooms without impacting the gross of the building because we understand that is extremely important from a, it's a cost driver. So I just Mike's been on vacation this week so so we just need to circle back, hopefully have a conversation with DESI so we can finalize the overall gross and program space of the building. They made a couple of mentions of the location of the ILC spaces on the second and third floor. We appreciate that. We'll continue to work with Mike and his team on the location of those. I also understand the project cost and what the cost drivers are, and they acknowledge Amherst commitment to sustainability. They asked you really need those 170 parking spaces and Mike eloquently and and rightfully responded to that, and he's, he's responded to us because we've all asked the same questions. We recognize the site constraints and appreciate what we're doing to maximize the beauty and outdoor opportunities on the site. And they made some nice comments, because again this is at the very preliminary stages of design to, you know, make sure that we keep an eye towards the look and feel and access to the main entry and how that's going to feel when schools when people approach the building how students are going to arrive into the building. And then again how how the building may have a civic expression as the everyone kind of enters the site so all of those were really helpful. It was a really nice dialogue, Kathy Margaret. She wants to chime in but it was a really nice conversation with them and they appreciate the efforts that have been put forth to date. You know, Donna I will say that I was mentioning this to Kathy yesterday with the architect representative on the board is essentially sort of the design peer reviewer in this process was commenting about, you know the research of entering on the are the architectural challenge of making the entrance clear when you're entering on the short side of the building, and I really will say very much wanted. I almost texted you but I knew that you would, we're not going to be looking at your phone to say that you should really share the image of the Mariah Hastings, because that it's exactly the same configuration. What's different at Mariah Hastings is you actually approached the end of the building more directly, whereas in this one, you guys sort of going to be coming in sort of from the side, but to, from my perspective, I think that a lot of that, how the entrance is perceived is going to be developed through the development of the landscape. I don't know this is a piece that you haven't really launched on but I think it's going to be a really critical piece. So, yeah thank you we agree we also want. And, and you'll see we've started to manipulate the building parts to see how we can make that entrance, you know, a civic expression as as. As I was saying, but at the same time, making it open and transparent and welcoming, and, and being able to embrace the site so this this kind of is where the fun part starts, and really look forward to. This is where you get to show your chops. Yeah. This is Angelica. I have a question I done and I'm not sure if I missed this, but I just wanted if you could speak a little more about what the concerns were with the location of the ILC classrooms. On the second I think it's on the previous slide it's and I'm just curious to know what that is and if you could also as a second question I just wanted to know a little bit more about with the process of this, sending it to desi schematic design and if there's any input that we can present to say from, you know constituent groups like CPAC or others that might have some input on issues related to our special needs students. Yeah thank you Angelica. The first to respond to your first comment, I don't know if I can zoom in here. This is what we presented to MSBA as part of the program. And as you'll see on the first floor here connected with the group of kindergarten classrooms. On the second floor, it's located, you know adjacent to this group of classrooms, and then on the third floor is located here and their concern was that it might not feel as integrated with the other classrooms but if you look at the third floor, there are lots of three. So it's six group grouping of six classrooms across the hall from each other. So this ILC room is integrated with the fourth, what we're calling a fourth grade but with this, with this grade level grouping. And I think it's just going to be a matter of having that conversation with desi before we finalize everything because if they're not satisfied with what we're saying, and we just submit it at the end of schematic design it's this process we have to provide them a narrative and show on the floor plans where all of these special ed programs are, and if they don't like where they are, they will not approve the project for to be approved by MSBA. At that point they may they may hold us up or or the town might not be able to and they'll approve the project to move forward provisionally until we resolve that. So we think it will be really helpful to have a conversation with desi to make sure that we're addressing their concerns and how and why these programs spaces really have been thoughtfully placed where they've been placed. And you know we've even talked to Mike do you want the door entering a project area. Maybe not right so it might be more important to have them with their grade level peers, but also a little a little removed just so that they have their own area so we happy to have continue to have that conversation with you and others were going to be reviewing the room data sheets with Faye and her team on next next Wednesday to really make sure that we've addressed all of their concerns and location of spaces and things like that. So it's going to be a work and and a conversation with desi. I don't think this is a slam dunk and we just submitted they really need to understand the importance and why the spaces are where they are. So just a quick question for something like that. Did they say, you know, we have concerns about where the ILC rooms or whatever it is are located or do they say, you know, we have some questions about this or we have concerns about this and have you thought about and then give a recommendation, or do they just question and concern and sort of push it back and say, Now you figure it out. So, so you're right. So sometimes they will provide. Have you thought about Terry Kwan, who is a very active vocal member of the board who's also an educator, typically really weighs in on the academic aspect of it. And she had all of those questions at PSR. And the response was this time around. Thank you very much for your detail responses so so we've satisfied so many of the questions that that we typically get and again understanding their thought process. So that was a very deliberate and successful response to them. The ILC is probably that the special ed programs are the one area that desi not even MSBA but desi will approve they need to approve it. Sometimes they'll say we don't like where it's located, but they won't tell us where to put it. They will say it needs to be more integrated. So maybe instead of putting it here you put it here at this fourth grade classroom and then right so so it's those types of things. I think it will be very helpful to have a conversation with them before we make wholesale changes to really understand would you be okay with this like have a dialogue with them. Yeah, Phoebe it was complicated by the fact that the gentleman who made this comment who's terrific. Honestly representative for a desi in the board process was not at the meeting. So that conversation that would have naturally taken place in this meeting did not take place and Donna has to follow up with him. Yeah, a staff staff person read his comments rather than you know so it was reading a sentence to it, because the edge. I'm just going to say what I've not been to one of these before but the comment on the education plan and how we responded to this fantastic education plan. You really responded. We think you've really thought through, you know on the language programs and the outdoor. So it was a very strongly positive. A positive comment for the for the person from the person who is generally the most critical in particular member of the board so whether whether someone had written that answer for her because she also wasn't an attendance will never know. Yes, no one speaks for her. Okay, could you have a, it's your hand back up. I just said yeah I just have another question just in terms of that. I think maybe a question about the process of whether like, you know we would get feedback about design changes or not just prodded another question for me which is, you know, given that the ILC classrooms and they have concerns about integration I could see some of those concerns on the second floor. Would there would there be like a conversation going forward say with special ed teachers and educators about well what if we would there be concerns about putting them smack in the middle would there be concerns about for them in terms of access. Is there is this design better for them or not as we're moving forward, or is it something that they dictate like what the choice will be in terms of what the changes are required. Great question Angelica so the process now, and this is the floor plan that we submitted at PSR. And we know we there was a lot of work that we wanted to do to this going forward. So taking desi's comments, and we weren't done with the layout of all the spaces we you know we're again we're meeting with Faye and her team to make sure that the location of the programs are appropriate, and that they have enough of their integrated big yet separate as as required by the program and the students so. We are now fine tuning the layout of all the spaces, and we'll get into that in a minute. And I think at that point in time and we're going to push and pull the building and see if we can pick up a few more square foot square feet from the ILC program without any impact to the gross square footage because that would be the easiest way to resolve this. And then we'll go back to desi. So I think it's going to be a multiple step process, but but maybe with that I can, well, I'll wait if anyone else has any other questions. I'm not seeing any other hands up. Okay, so so again, this was a concept general organization of the building as as we talked and submitted the preferred schematic. And what we really were basically saying is the academic wing is kind of to the rear of the building and the lively community spaces that would be used by the community or in the front of the building, and that the academic spaces can be safely secured, while the academic, while the community spaces are being used. The other thing that's important to note is that again, you know, we have clusters of classrooms we have five classrooms per grade and then if you add a special ed program that makes a great cluster of six classrooms per grade. And so everyone from the educational perspective really appreciated the organization they appreciate the collaboration both vertically and horizontally within their grade. And after looking at several schools, everyone really liked the project areas outside the clusters of three classrooms for many reasons. So now what we're going to do is start refining the plan. And then it's also going to be informing us what the building is going to look like, you know, from from a form shape outside of the building but this is where we left off. To do that, we wanted to, if at all possible, move the music spaces down downstairs to the first floor to be close to the cafeteria for that relationship so the music program could even use the stage but it's also a nice synergy to be able to use with the space. So that was one main factor that we knew we wanted to do was to move the music downstairs. And then we were going to continue to refine some of the other spaces. So we've had a couple of working sessions with Mike Morris is going to make this a little bit smaller, and his team and we haven't had a chance to kind of circle back, but we've started to play with how we're going to move everything through the building. The other thing I just wanted to know is, we had always talked about this learning stare, kind of being a focal point at the entry of the building that this could be a nice both architectural and educational where it would serve for egress and access but it could be a fun kind of impromptu or an additional opportunity for educational programming. And we did a lot of studying and talking with Mike and the team. And although it looks great. There's there's probably more concerns than benefits of having the learning stare. So it was decided that from an educational perspective the learning stare probably wasn't the best and highest use of space of what would it really be used and then there was some issues about noise and access and equity because not all of the students would be able to utilize the stair and the way it's intended etc. So it was decided that a learning stare probably wouldn't be appropriate for the school and Angelica. I think very much related to that comment is in looking at the design for the first floor, I just wanted to hear what Mike and Faye and others had as their thoughts from a special education perspective about having the ILC so close to the I know in previous in the past noise has been a concern and you know one of the concerns with the classrooms say like the way in which there were open classrooms was that that was a concern for special ed students having so much noise so that was a design flaw that was a really problematic in the old sense so I would really love to hear their perspective on having you know some things being adjacent to things that you can imagine are very noisy and you know so those are questions that arise from me now as we're moving into the design phase. And thank you and continue to to you know and I don't want to say interrupt but it right this is more of a conversation so we appreciate that. So, so just so as a departure from where we were, we started pushing and pulling and looking at the organization, we had already started looking at this corner here. So, if you, let me just if you come down the site, let me just show you, right. This is the corner here that we're referring to which is the admin you'll be coming in and this was the comment from the facility assessment committee, you're going to be entering the site, you know coming down here, and you're going to be seeing this corner. As you approach the building and how are you going to treat that is architecturally make sure that it's clear this is the main entrance, etc. So as we started thinking about form and function within the building. We started saying, okay, what makes the most sense. That was our first four concept, the first PSR, and then we started looking at, okay, let's at least make some certain decisions so it was agreed that the learning stair really wasn't appropriate for for the new elementary school that we really wanted to bring the music downstairs and Angelica I'll get to the ILC as well. Those two were pretty, pretty high priorities as we started making decisions moving forward. So, we move the music downstairs and it actually in this scheme and, and again we want to talk to Mike and the team and how this may function and operate but we have it directly across the way from the cafeteria. And we have the main administration spaces in the front overseeing the arrival and drop off and pick up. And this would be could be a glass stair overlooking the, the bus drop off loop. We started looking at it and then the other consideration was most of the site is going to be facing north. And the fact that the cafeteria which was originally on the south side of the building really made sense to be on the north side of the building so it opens up to the, to the site, to the play spaces to recreation. So originally it was here to the north to the south, and now we've located it more to the north so that actually flows and works better for recess for access to the play areas and then the views. So that was decided that probably that makes the most sense as well. So then we started now looking at our, what are the ways to integrate the music integrate the receiving and all of the service areas because this is really important as it relates to the kitchen and access for deliveries for trash, all of that. And then how do we integrate that into the site because all of the deliveries are going to be serviced here. So we're continuing to refine that. Angelica to respond to you this is the ILC motor room. So this isn't the classroom itself but it's it's the motor room for the students so having it across from the gym or whatever is is fine you know we envision this to have, you know, some maybe PT equipment and things like that. So this is a more active space than the actual ILC classroom itself. So that seemed like to be a good location for it. It's adjacent to the ILC the elevator is here students from upstairs need to use it or whatever the elevator is directly across across the hall as well. And now what we're trying to do as you know we start to the first floor starts taking form. We start looking at what is that impact on the second and third floors. We know the gym is a two story volume. And that we really would like to have the cafeteria have as much height as possible because it's also the assembly and performance space. Sean. Sorry just the thing you said a few minutes ago. If possible maybe Rupert's already weighed in on this. I would just check in with Rupert and maybe some of the food service staff on what you said about the receiving area. And if you know how they envision, you know if everything's brought in on that side of the hall, you know bring everything across the hall and garbage going back and forth and things like that. So that's that main hallway. I'm sure I'm sure it's done in other schools but I know a lot of our schools sort of have direct access from their cafeterias to trash areas so. Yeah, that's all I'm going to say. No thank you Sean and it isn't, you know, I hate to even call back at the house right. You know, Rupert and his team are the quiet heroes of the building they truly are so we understand how important that is. And then the other consideration when we're looking at the receiving is where is it located on the site and making sure that there's no conflict with students and play. So it's kind of a tricky dynamic and and how we can satisfy all of the requirements but keeping the safety and students in mind as we go through it. We haven't had an opportunity to fully get into the conversation with Rupert and his team. But when we to go on our field trips, the Mariah Hastings School actually has this organization that the service is, you know, across the hall from the kitchen, and there is appropriate. It's not kind of loading dock area I don't want to say necessarily it's going to be loading dock but delivery area on the north side, in your case the south side of the building which is separate from all of the active play that occurs outside and around the cafeteria. This relationship actually works out great, but we do want to continue to have that conversation with Rupert and Ben, and what works best for them while I'm trying to keep the safety and the service separate. So this was option one and and we haven't had a chance to circle back with Mike and his team yet. Our goal is to maximize the space internally for program and, you know, really minimize the overall gross square footage of the building. So here's another concept that we've come up with again the cafeteria, looking out into the play areas and the fields, the gym, and to the, it's to the south which, and looks monkey to be saying that here but where there's not a lot of visual activity going on on the site and then we have the neighbors behind us and there really aren't many neighbors behind us so this actually is probably a better location for the gym. And then we've also started looking at okay, what makes the most sense for the administration. They can have clear views of people coming in this might be a better location. They can have clear we can make this a nice glass corner where they can keep their eye on all of the parent drop off and activity that's going along the drive this way, and then they can also keep an eye on the buses that would have a bus off drop off along the second, that can drop off area. So, these are just some considerations and we look forward to meeting with Mike and his team, what, what they like about each of these. It's not pick one right now it's we just we're looking for feedback, as we move forward and and finalizing the floor plan. Donna in the diagrams we're seeing have. I don't know what the right word would be but it's the back part of the building is all zigzagging, you know in and out, but the schools we saw were flat, these will be flat, these will be more rectangular right you're just showing us room sizes. Because I'm just, you know I'm just thinking that the ins and outs just as we're start, as we start to see massing we're going to get a better sense of what this feels because it, it doesn't seem like that would be a good way of doing an envelope for the school, you know, on, you know the all these little, No, no, you're right. You're right. Yes, so, so we will we want to study. We also, you know, want to be mindful that it's probably very similar. It is this is 105 750 I'm just going to call it 106. I have to say it's 105 and and the Mariah Hastings that we saw was 110. And I had a very similar organization from the academic perspective. And what was just really important is, you know, this is this is going to be a long building and how can we do it so that we break it so that it doesn't feel like, you know, this, this massive, you know, presence on the site. What, what we do want to look at and we 100% agree, is if you look at, for example, this option, does this work, you know, you do have these little pockets, you know, is light going to be infused in there is it going to cash it like all of those conversations also need to occur. But what you'll also see is that there definitely be a little bit of kind of extensions on the first floor because the garden classrooms are slightly larger than the general classrooms. So if you look on the second floor, right, you'll see how the first floor might extend a little bit beyond the second and third floor, but we agree from a construction and cost perspective that it makes sense to keep the form as simple as possible, while treating it whether whether now if if that's the goal, we maybe will kick the building a little bit so it's not one long linear that maybe we can kind of break up the building a little bit by introducing a little bit of a shift up here so we agree but we also want to be mindful of how large the building is actually going to be, if that makes sense. I see Jonathan sand us up to find the unmute button. I guess I would say yes, I'm glad that you're thinking about those things and that you're not necessarily going to try to turn this into one gigantic rectangle I think that would be that has potential be for being kind of a harsh building on the site and potentially. And certainly I think you're right that this option you're showing here with the admin to the south is probably will probably serve the administration better. But there is a challenge architectural I can see and you probably realize it too that as you're coming in on that entrance coming in at a diagonal. It's going to be a more opaque object, which will do that administration way and kind of facing the approach and achieving that that civic presence that they were that the MSBA was kind of talking to. That'll be our interesting architectural challenge to see you solve. We see it as an opportunity. Yeah. I think one gets gets going and that's when I turn it over to Tim Rick and Vivian, but, but yeah so. If anyone has any other questions so so all we're saying is we're just we're just letting you know kind of where we are with the process. Nothing's finalized there's still a lot of work to do in a very short period of time because we you know we really need to wrap this up. It's going to be the end of October. But, you know, we're going to continue to push and pull. And, and now the building's going to start taking form three dimensionally as well so when we come back might not. Well, maybe it will be the next time if we can make some, you know, moves next week at one when Mike and his team are back to start really seeing three dimensionally what this building is going to look and feel like, and we can treat this whether it's with architectural elements or glass or whatever. Tim, did you have anything else you wanted to add. Maybe the site plans if we just want to cover that the fourth site plan in the deck is new and has not been seen by this group and it just addresses some of the comments that we've two more slides. So if we, yeah, so so from from a building perspective I just wanted to make sure everyone was okay with that as we move into the site, and I am excited starting sound like Kathy I'm hearing and saying no one so. But, but, oh Phoebe. I'm sorry I have to take a call so I may have missed this and this goes back quite a ways in our conversation but just briefly did when when you were talking about needing to increase some of the size of the classroom, because of the concerns that we received. Was there a general conversation as of yet and I know Mike's on vacation so possibly not but was there a general idea about how or where to get that additional square footage from within our overall square footage yet. So, we had it we had an overall conversation, you know, Mike and his team really thoughtfully felt that 800 square feet was was the right was the sweet spot. But with that said, we left it with Mike before we went on vacation that we would continue to look at ways that we can increase that program area. So would be an additional 300 square feet 100 square feet per per classroom per ILC classroom without increasing the gross square footage. And that's going to be kind of the challenge as we start looking at the shape. So all of these so to answer your question, we're going to try to do everything we possibly can to increase the group the square footage of the classroom without increasing the gross square footage of the building, and that would be the easiest way to have MSBA or really, really embrace this project. If we need to have a separate conversation with them, what we'll also do that and we're going to want to anyway to understand what they felt was inappropriate or not ideal with the special invocations but as we start moving and you see this so that the learning stair has has been reviewed has been removed, but as we start pushing and pulling and putting these large elements in place, understanding what we need from an access. So any stairs we're going to need depending on what the number of people are on every floor from a co perspective. So Phoebe what we're doing now is we're just pushing and pulling and seeing how we can accommodate everything within the 105 750. So we're not done yet and we recognize how important that overall number is. Thanks. These slides are in the packet and there was a slight change in them so they'll be updated for people to already were. Yeah. Yeah, you can be staring at these later, not just now. It's just so everyone knows they have them. Yeah. We just made some minor adjustments that we just added north arrows and stuff, but so then we started looking at the site plan. And again, very much like the floor plan. This is an evolution and process. This is what we started talking about and Tim I'll go ahead and turn it over to you but I just want people to see the progression of the thought and discussion that's been put into this. Sure. This site plan is closest to the building plan and site plan that was included in the PSR submission. It has the building for pretty close to what was there. And then the outdoor play spaces and outdoor learning areas to the north of building or distributed around the building has a drop off for the buses to the south and there's athletic fields distributed to the north and south of the building. In speaking with Mike and his group. There's concerns about monitoring and safety. For kids during recess on playgrounds, adjacencies to the cafeteria which wants to be on the north side of the building. Let us to look at a few different options. And then there was also some concerns about mixing the stormwater features and I don't want to call the bridges but walkways that would be in the middle of the playgrounds and it was sort of felt that a consolidated playground with all of the different play structures and hardscape play together in one area might be better for logistic safety and control reasons. Here's another version. So here is the version that was option C that responds to those comments. If you look directly north of the cafeteria, there is a consolidated play area with both hardscape and the two amorphous or oval shaped areas would be structured play with permeable soft rubber surface. And then there's also a fairly off the parent drop off loop. So, during a drop off a pickup kids could assemble either on the playground or in climate weather in the cafeteria so that there's a sort of adjacency of all those elements that will contribute to the smooth functioning during drop off and pick up. So learning in this model is distributed a bit more widely around the building when kids are in those outdoor spaces they will be supervised, but we have heard that if they were directly adjacent to the playground. That can be a distraction for kids that are outside trying to learn so we've also tried to move it a little bit away from that and take an advantage of some of the great site features that you're looking at here. So if they're a little bit further away from the building, get closer to the river bank and the wetlands. And then if there are multiple outdoor learning sessions going on they're just separated from each other. And this also has some athletic field close to the building and some a little bit further away. So it can be used by the school or by the community at large. And so this is, you know, a first round of taking the feedback that we've heard from Mike in his group, and pushing the site features around to where they want to be. And then you can see in this site plan also we've the, as you approach the footprint of the building has been adjusted a bit you can see where the admin suite sort of creates a corner. And then those two options of the plans that we were looking at sort of flipped whether the glassy entrance of the building would be facing north or south. And then we'll talk through those options with Mike and see maybe it does want to be to the north as parents are dropping off and kids are coming in from the playground, or maybe it does want to be more south facing so you can see it and really create the identity of the building as the approach but as we refine the plan and bring that plan into 3D and put it on the site we'll be able to really see what's best for this building. Yes, thank you, BB. So I want to make sure and I know that like, you know, we haven't planned out exactly the the play spaces yet I know that that's like down the line. But I want to make sure everything in the back of my mind goes back to, you know, this is a big project that our community is is generally I think on board with and I know how big the whole is to our community. Big in terms of importance. And so I want to I just want to make sure that as we plan these things out and as you guys talk to Mike and his team and and all the teachers and you know staff and facilities and all of that kind of stuff. I think that we really really insightfully plan this we can't. I think it's going to be hugely important that as we're planning the site and planning the play spaces and all of that kind of stuff that we ensure that we don't lose anything that we currently have at Fort River. I think that were that we are adding to what we have and not detracting from what we have so things like, you know, the hard top for basketball and soccer fields and, you know, I mean I'm glad to see that there's a softball or baseball in there and you know I mean all of those kinds of things so I'm I'm going to you'll hear that a lot for me as we as this continues to get planned out, because I know how important, you know, this site was chosen for the site. And in my mind anyway, and that's hugely important to our, our community so I just want to make sure that as you guys start to have those conversations that that is, you know, up there along with how the school is going to use it so Thank you. And no, we will. I think, you know, we, we want to make sure, obviously, first that we understand what what works best for the students and the safety, and etc. But we will be going, we want to continue our conversation we had an initial conversation with Park and rack and we absolutely want to make sure that the community amenities are there to support your needs. And so, we're not putting one, you know, before the other it's just collectively we want to make sure we get it right so thank you feeding. Sean, Jonathan. Thank you. I'm sorry. This was already said because I had a somebody knocked on the door. I really like this design I think the improvements from the what we looked at last time or are good. This one question so if kids are in gym class and they're going to go out to the fields from gym class. What would be sort of the flow that they would follow to get to a field. There was a gym here. They could go out right now we have we have this door right here this glass that they could exit out. But that's a that's a good observation and point. It would probably just make sense that they just go right through the store so this is the gym, they could just access directly out the else. Yeah, thank you. And I do just want to point out, you know, we understand how important it is from a traffic perspective, and to manage and maximize the traffic on the site. So we're starting to explore how large this drop off needs to be versus the parent queuing up here does this make the most sense to we flip them so we're not even done with those and then for for Ben and Rupert, you know we we want to be having conversations as well, how we access service into the building, and how we want to make sure that the students are protected and are safe from that activity, etc. So, so again this is kind of just the beginning as we really start it. So we start kind of identifying the priorities and like you said Sean you know wow this is an improvement well that's great now now let's go to the next level right. Jonathan. I would just like to echo what Sean was saying this is very nice development from from what we saw last time. I don't think I was necessarily said this before but you know all that you've been presenting is an improvement over what we have today. In elementary school, do I find that the outdoor play areas particularly attractive or inviting or engaging. And so, I think we're moving in a great direction and it'll be a vast improvement over over what our elementary school students are used to it for river and while would. In particular I like in this evolution that even though a lot of this play spaces to the north you've introduced kind of a landscape buffer. And so that lots of the largest, the large area that that's called player will still be sunny in the winter time. And won't be, you know, won't have kids in a kind of shadow pocket. And we've been talking about that as well, Jonathan that we're going to want to do some daylight studies and understand, you know the mass of the building and how that may impact the play areas. You know, if we push out the play areas just enough and have some kind of plantings to prevent people coming up to the building, and just be able to push it out a little bit we were going to absolutely push the shadows or the daylight studies to make sure that there's ample light and we recognize it's on the north side of the building so. The ultimate pros a question of exactly where you're going to put the dumpster. But I'll let you figure that. Yeah, I mean that that that that that is all part of it and again these are the quiet heroes of your building that we really need to be sensitive to so. And what will be evolving over the next few months. Kathy at the Sunita Williams school they had a green outdoor play area, which wasn't real grass that they said that they drains really well. It's all season, and it wasn't expensive turf like the professional turf. And that they had some some kind of roller brush thing that could clean the hard surface and clean that. Are you going to, I'm not asking if we're going to have that but are you going to look at that where whether one of those play spaces could be something like that because they use it for kickball for running around, and whether it is a huge price about the same price. You know, in terms of what choices we have without escalating the cost of the project. You know so it's, it's not I don't need an answer right now it just, it seemed to be something that would address the fact that in the winter it gets icy and then the spring it gets muddy. Yeah. Yeah, we actually have we actually so I'm Bill Brown our landscape architect was the same architect, which, which is wonderful on the Sunita Williams school project and his recollection is that the cost is about the same cost as as real as as proper turf as proper turf would be so so there's definitely an added expense to doing that. What we want to do is look at the project as a whole. Let's have those conversations can't they what if what if what could we do to be able to use a field year round right because you're not going to be shoveling them. Let's talk about the outdoor learning areas and the importance and the cost of those talk about the play equipment which is also a large investment. So we'll be looking at everything I think as a whole and then and then you all will be able to decide what's most important to you but those yeah bills recollection was that it was that as expensive so yeah yeah. It was small kids size so that was one you know you it wasn't like a ball field but but it right so maybe that's what they meant right. It wasn't so expensive because it wasn't the size of football field right. Okay, right. Thank you. Yeah. Can I just add Kathy you know I think the. The decision point around using artificial turf is often about the lesser maintenance. I do agree with Bill that the cost is pretty similar and I honestly I feel like they price their products that way. It's there, but there's a maintenance savings so. Thank you. I'm not done. I don't see any other hands up right now. Right. So, so really that's it we took the most important item first which was the ground source so I just to give everyone an update this is where we are and and now you'll start seeing the building come to life you'll start seeing dimensional views of the building and and it will really start getting exciting. What we have teed up for next week is we're meeting with the special education educators staff on Wednesday reviewing all of the spaces the location of the spaces, making sure we have addressed or know what we need to put in the building for the safety and security of those students, and we'll be developing what goes into their particular spaces. And on the afternoon, Mike has reached out and has asked for grade level teachers to come in and meet with us to talk about their spaces so we're trying to group it so kindergarten will have about an hour to sit down and we can talk about, you know, the spaces and what they envision their spaces to be, and then we're grouping first and second graders for an hour because they kind of are aligned educationally and programmatically, and then third through fifth grade teachers and I haven't had again had chance to connect with Mike, but we're hoping that we get, you know, two to three teachers for each grade to attend those meetings we're going to be in person. So, if anyone wants to come and say hi we'll be hanging out. I'm not even quite sure if it's at the Fort River School where we're going to be but that's that's our big milestone for next week as we start to make sure that we address any environmental or other requirements for these spaces while we continue to push and pull the I think that's it for us. Okay, that's great. So, we have invoices, and then I had one short set of a piece I wanted to bring to the committee, I want to make, and then we have public comments. So I think let's do invoices to make sure we have a quorum for those. So we have two invoices and I can bring them up Margaret if you want or if you want to bring them up. I actually have them on my screen. I apologize because it feels like my internet connection is a wobbly here so, but let's try this. Can everybody see this. So, there are two invoices there's one from Janisco. And this is a summary so it's for 33 335. It's for the next. See where the other pages are. This is their summary sheet that shows that they're now billing the final piece of. Okay, this is not. Yeah, we might have the next one. Yeah, we have, I think that was the last one we approved. Actually, can you pull that one up because I could not find that in my email this morning. Yep, I'll put up right now. I feel like I saw it, but I couldn't find it. And then I have the answer invoice. Why don't we do this one first and then I'll pull the other one up. Do you want to do the answer one first Margaret, or. Sorry. Do you want to do you want to review the answer one first and we'll prove that one of them. Oh, sure. Yeah, that's easy. All right, so here's the answer invoice. The X for about $8600. And as always, there's a sort of detailed summary of the work that we done it was a little lower last month after we in July after we got through the submission of the PSR. Yeah, it's not showing on my screen. Is it showing on others? Okay. Okay, thank you. Kathy is okay if I just give a quick update on this our discussion yesterday. So, so this invoice from my perspective looks good. It's consistent with the contract we have just want to make the committee aware that we started having some conversations with answer about the end of the study because the original contract only went through November. We now know that the dev solution but we'll probably go through March so there's going to be some gap in time there that we're going to have to address so we'll bring more back to the committee when we we have something further but just to give everybody a heads up. Exactly. So Paul, can you bring up the Dennis go invoice. It's. Yeah, I got it. Yeah. I mean, noteworthy thing here is that we've fully paid off sort of the feasibility portion of our initial contract and we've entered the schematic design phase which sort of evident by what our discussion today. So they're billing now on the schematic design line, and they're billing 16 about 17% of the total 250, which is for this phase. And then they're billing a little bit of money for consultant work. The next, I think the backup page, the third page will show what that yeah there we go. That's sort of showing that it's billing for traffic engineer, a little bit of time for traffic engineer so that's it. So I moved to approve the invoices that we've looked at for Dennis go and for answer. Sean, are you moving to improve them at both invoices so one vote on the two. Yeah. Yeah, I think I second it. And I will do a roll call vote. Sean. Yes. Jonathan. Yes. Angelica. Yes. Phoebe. Yes. Ben. Yes. Elisha. Yes. Who did I, who did I just miss because it's Simone. Yeah. Tammy. Yeah. Yeah, I can't look at this other screen. And Kathy is a yes, and I'm not seeing Allison. So I think she's not on the screen. I don't see her in the list. So I think Allison left so it's unanimous with three missing. Three absent. So I have a just a quick in the late breaking news this 48 hour that there's an offer that Bruce Coleman has arranged in terms of an offer from Margo Jones at Joan Wetzel. They're building a new school at Gardner that has paid particular attention to day lighting, and they've offered to do a seminar for us if we would want them to. And so I wanted to find out interest at the committee of doing that. And if there's enough interest, whether I would talk with the NISCO, whether we can make it as part of one of the next two meetings. Meeting on August 26 and a meeting on September 9 to try to, they were telling you about a 20 minute present 45 minute total, but with question and answer. And so this would particularly focus on this, and it's a school that's being built so we can't go visit it. So we would be hearing more of what kinds of things they focused on. So I don't know. I just would kind of the simplest way might be a show of hands of people who would be interested in hearing that, because for them to put something together. I think I was just trying to make sure we didn't ask people to come to another meeting or a meeting at a time of day that we couldn't do it. So I will stop with that Jonathan. I just want to make sure that the Donna and her team is comfortable with this, you know that there's no kind of stepping on toes here. Thank you, Jonathan. No, I think we all learn. And that's, you know, what actually we were excited to go look at some of these schools that we didn't design because I think we can all continue to learn and improve from each other. So we appreciate your comment, but we're excited to hear what they have to say as well. And I did, Jonathan, I should have, that I double checked first whether they're, I kind of figured you did basically. Public record here. And, and, and the other thing I should mention for people who weren't at the net zero meeting last week the Dinesco. Consultant team Tom Thompson Thomas said he brought two people in that I thought did a really, especially for me because I'm a lay person. I'm not a builder. I would look on what do's and don'ts on bringing daylight into class on both how important it is with the heavy emphasis but worried worrying about glare worrying about what it's bouncing off of. So I would, even without them talking it through the set of slides that in that packet I'll send everyone a link to it. I thought we're excellent on why it was good we made this a top priority for the school, but sort of thinking that through. Is there. And as again, I'm not positive that they can do a morning slot, and I try to do it at the last half of the meeting is there in is there are there people who are interested in hearing this and maybe just do the little hand sign raise hand if, if it's a yes. I think that is enough interest. And so I will, you know, and I'm, I'm interested as well. So, let me, let me just see whether that time slot works and Alicia's hand is up to and I know we had an issue of starting earlier than 830 because of when so now we're hitting school starting time, and then going later so I'm, I'm conscious of people have busy lives. So I will, I will get back and see whether that can be arranged. So, let's see, I think I would like to turn it open to public comments if there is anyone else who has any comments on the committee before I open it up. Not seeing any hands. Okay. Open to attendees, and I brought in Bruce. Okay, great. Kathy, I just wanted to add a little to the day lighting opportunity that my go and I have friends, we were traveling to fellows dinner in Boston when I discussed this with her. The special opportunity with Margo is that she went to MIT with Lisa Hirschung. And she and Margo and Lisa along with Dan Wasserman did a day lighting presentation at the recent day I a conference and that's what. So it's already kind of in the can so to speak. Now I'm not sure whether Dan would be involved or Lisa for this, but this is very current and it's in the in our area. Yes, I just want to clarify for this listening. Margo Jones is not Margaret what so he's talking about Margo Jones is the lead that the head of the firm that would make the day lighting presentation. Yes. Yes. Margo so she lives in the areas of Greenfield firm. Lisa Hirschung. I see a lot in schools that day lighting is coupled with the possibility of increasing reading scores and math scores and things like that well it was Lisa and her colleague Doug Mahon, who did that research over 20 years ago and it's still often quoted so she's had a long history in day lighting design and Margo is being a very close friend you can imagine two women attending MIT architecture school in the 70s with bond no matter how distant they were but they're very good friends so it's a very good opportunity I think to get get some additional insights into a school that's really looked at day lighting and it's in that area and it's current so that's why I asked Margo whether she'd be interested in then I asked Kathy whether the committee might be interested and Kathy asked whether you don't know at all might be interested but because I'm getting to know you quite well I would be really surprised if you weren't so I'm glad to hear that you are so that's all I wanted to say just add that little bit of additional context to the offer. Thank you. Thank you Bruce. Sean is there one more person who had their hand up. Yeah Tony's coming in. Okay. Thank you. Tony. Hi. Thanks Tony Cunningham and Owen Drive. Thanks for selecting the ground source heat pump for the HPAC system I believe it is the right decision and it will have the added benefit of keeping pressure on to ensure the project hits the target E UI of 25 or below. So regarding the building outline, I had the same thought as Kathy about the rooms jutting out. Would it add cost and have a negative impact on thermal insulation to have that many insets and juts. And might there be shadows of some of the walls on the rooms that are inset. I don't know the answer but perhaps you can explore that at a future meeting. Yeah I would echo Phoebe's call to ensure there is a net add of the facilities on the site. And I think the basketball courts are in regular use, but I don't see them on the site plans as yet. Perhaps they're intended for some of those faces, if they could be added, and that would be really great. Thanks so much. Thank you Tony. I think that is it for public comments and amazingly, it's 1006. So, if, unless I see any other hands up, I think we can say we are adjourned and thank you, thank you everyone and you know I prefer school people Ben and Tammy I know you're getting ready to reopen the school so I really a big thanks for during what could be some contribution time for you that you both took time to go on site visits but also are making space for this so thank you very much. So we are adjourned at 1006. Goodbye everyone. Thank you.