 So good morning, everyone. This is the 830 April 14th special meeting of the school building committee and the reason I made a decision to call this a special meeting I actually talked with the town clerk about it. Sorry. Can everyone hear me. Yeah, yes. The main the main reason is we want to have just a discussion today we're not reaching a decision but we wanted to talk through the criteria and make sure we had an hour to do it so this is a dedicated hour to that. Margaret will take notes, as we go through the potential markup that Phoebe and I thought through. So my first order of the business today though is to make sure everyone can see and be heard so I can call the meeting to order. So I will just read in the order of people I see Mike. Here, Jonathan. I'll move on to Paul. I can hear me. I'm here. Yes, I'm here. I'm working to get Ben into but he's not in yet. Okay, Phoebe. Hi here. Sean. Here. And Alicia. Here. You know, at least a couple other people said they could come or this time work so I'll just recognize them when they come in. So I wanted to say a few words which was already in the memo that with that Phoebe and I. Actually, I wrote the memo but it's what we, we discussed doing we wanted to take another look at the criteria list that had been we looked at in February, because we felt that there were some areas that the rows seem to be very similar. We thought we could avoid duplication and then try to group them in ways in some cases move something around to a different category because it made some sense to us. And then the other thing we did is we thought if there was something missing that we an aspect and throughout it we were talking about which things might vary as we looked at ad reno, or new, or one of the two sites. The criteria to be useful for us shouldn't be the same across all four of those choices that we should, some can be the same, but at least some should vary. Then the other thing we noticed when we went through and then we'll talk about this is some of the original rows, because we had asked for it really started to get into the operating high HVAC system of the building, and the amount of PV. And so we thought it made some sense to create a separate table on that we're getting good information from the Dinesco, Thornton, Thomas said he team, and be able to evaluate that that doesn't vary as much by site, it varies really by ad reno, or new, and the choice of which HVAC we use. And then the other thing that came up actually out of last Friday. Phoebe picked up on it in particular was that two story versus three story matters but three story two stories really a decision around the new building the ad reno new edition. We thought a separate table on that with some of the things we think will vary would make sense. And that's just a brand new addition, and it became too complicated to think of how many columns that would be. So with that said, that's the background of the what I call the messy markup and market. If it's okay with everyone. The purpose of today is to get as much input as we can really hearing from is everyone on a don't like it like it. What do what were you thinking here. We're going to come up with a final decision. So the one other thing I should point out and it's right at the top when we originally did the rating system and thought of coloring it we had two options the 160 we had the 165 students school which was going to not fit. So we had some that were not acceptable. Everything we have now is acceptable. So we're getting down to a three point scale would make some sense, but we can talk about that next week and we just thought we should have a middle one called neutral. Because a few of the things look like it's a plus and a minus but there's no real difference between the sites. So more favorable less favorable. I think I'm turning it over to you Phoebe right where that's what we agreed you're going to do the start so market if you can scroll down to where we start to see the markup down on the rose. And actually do you do you want me to close up the columns with the options so that the text is bigger is that better for people. Anybody can save it. Do they need bigger because we're not we're not really look we're not going to be looking at these at the options today we're really just looking at the text correct. I think so. Okay, is that okay with everyone. I mean just shout out. Yeah, I think just having a B and C rose columns available is sufficient. Okay. Okay, there we go. And the only thing I will say is just because it's still there. When in terms of usable size of site that is something that we need to enter information into realized that we did have some incorrect information in there. So if somebody can fill that in at some point, that would be fantastic so we know what we're going to hear you. We did a correction on the actual side of site. That's now in on. Yeah, because once. Okay. Okay baby you're on. All right. So, one of the first things so I just talked about usable size of site one of the first things that we did was we took out some of the wording which you'll see later in terms of the net zero energy use and that kind of stuff and we bumped it up into a fact that is a fact that we know that we are going to achieve the town's net, net zero bylaws. So that was moved up. So you'll see later where where some of that came out of, but moving on to. So we originally had equity in here, just as equity and Kathy and I were both a little bit. So what are the what are we really trying to get to with that I don't think we ever really defined it so we were working with some sort of assumptions here and then we realized that there was a piece missing in in our thought about how all of it affected the transition impact and those kinds of things. So we ended up with a category equity. Equity and transition impact so this has to do with some of the things that were brought up last week. So we actually removed sped pathways and impact because we go into it in a little bit more detail. Later on, we did add access to public transit of course. And that came up obviously because we just want to recognize that not everybody in town has a car and it may not be as easily accessible as, you know, driving to a school so there's also proximity issues between between the different sites. And that was something that we added in here because it felt like it was at least something that we needed to take into account something that we needed to think about when when looking really specifically at the different sites. And please feel free to chime in. If anybody has any differences of opinion or questions. So I'm just want to get clarification because I have thoughts on all these things so I just wondered, do you want to go through everything to be and then come back for discussion maybe but maybe that's the most efficient way. I'm sure either. So Paul do you want to I want to make sure we everyone who got a chance to look at it do we want to just do want us to walk through the rationale. I'm going to just look for a group, a group thing, or do you want us to just first see if anyone has any comments anywhere. I'm open to either way. Sean, maybe we could just do section by section so maybe Phoebe could give the rationale for like building insight facts and then we can open that up for questions and discuss those. And then go to the next one and that way, you know, we get the overview but we don't get so much that we, you know, can't remember when we talk about the specific categories. Okay, so we've just done to she's basically done these first two so why don't we just stop and see because some of the things we move from another category so Paul. So under building insight so usable size of site acres. Who, who gets I mean the size of site is a definitive that's that's a fact usable size of site, who gets to determine what that is, who will make that decision. That was originally there, primarily more for Fort River because there's a lot of area that is no disturb or not buildable or usable. So, Fort River will have probably, obviously, less acreage for usable where, where wildwood, you know we can cut into the hill I mean it's only money right but but really primarily the whole site for while would be accessible. So, it just looks a little bit like there's a disparity in the size of the sites but once you start looking at the usable area, they become a little closer. There's there's less of a difference. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And my other, if we're doing the under the second category, access to public transit impacts. I mean, I guess the question for me is, you know, it's not just access to public transit but where does that bus line go, right. And also, I'm just don't know if there are many parents who actually use the public transit as opposed to, I mean how many parents are using it now in essence. Do we know, do we have a count of honor off boarding of public transit side that will help me understand the relative value of that. It's always a value for me because I big believer in public transit but just in terms of, you know, there are there are a lot of parents who use public transit so that's a high value versus most people use school buses. Any other thoughts on that. This one was actually a new ad that we did because when pure transit impact was in their Paul before we couldn't think of how in an equity concept we couldn't think of it how it vary by the site per se because, you know, so any other thoughts on that so it came up. It actually came up last Friday. Right, it's where the bus routes go so I see three four hands up so I wish we were all in a room you could just all shout out but anyway Jonathan, and then Mike, Sean, and Alicia. Jonathan go. I'll be I'll be quick because I think the topic wants to stay on the equity piece and my comment was really about the usable size of site I was just going to suggest that might be called buildable site area or something like that because obviously the their portions of the site that can't be built on, but that the town can still use for soccer fields or baseball fields. It's not like they're unusable from from that perspective and that if folks were not intimate with the process we've been going through look at this, they might think oh you can't use those areas for anything. That makes sense. Definitely. Okay. Mike, Sean, and then Alicia. So, I was going to say what Jonathan was going to say but less eloquently so thank you, Jonathan thing for saving time so I just a couple others one to Paul's point in the public transit did check with our folks in the family center and it's a mixed bag because we don't have many families using PVTA to get to some of our sites frankly because it takes so long, right it's there's not like a direct line to the Fort River one where it's really convenient and people can access that in a way that that works in a schedule. So, I'm not suggesting it doesn't matter but I would say that right now, it's incredibly infrequent that any family member uses the PVTA to get to the school because it just and that's not a critique of PTA just the reality is that's not like downtown where there's lots of roots that can get downtown in a fairly quick order that's not the situation at the sites that we have the same for Parker farm other schools that are more connected to the PVTA. I think, you know, it's great to have a stop and it looks good on paper but the reality is, our families don't access it to get to the school. That could be changed, right, there could be more direct lines that go there I'm not, you know, that's way out of my wheelhouse. The two other things I wanted to mention were where I struggle on this when I know we've talked about before is how these are weighted, because personally I wouldn't wait all the items evenly and I don't know how that can be managed. Like, things that I care a lot about and things that I think are, you know, bluntly auxiliary to my particular focus on this and so someone smarter than me can figure out how to how to manage that but I just wanted to share that. Also on site, you know, I think at the last meeting or one of the last meetings we talked about the architect shared that you could build three stories on Fort River but you'd be adding extra supports to it. So, and we've heard a number of concerns about, you know, wetness in the former said not about flood zone and that I'm not thinking about a legal sense, but just concerns about site issues and I don't see that represented here and maybe it's just because we feel like it doesn't matter. And maybe it's because it's below and I haven't looked down and he'd be nodding your head yes so I didn't that it's because I haven't looked down and I didn't look at this incident first was sent out so I apologize. The last is I'm, I'm always biased towards four point Likert scales right just my research background says forced choices are good things. And if we leave it open to a neutral account then we end up with people's natural bias to saying yeah it looks kind of similar. So, I can live at the three point scale, I just wanted to share that I have that personal bias and I'll stop talking. Thank you. Okay, Sean. Thanks. I guess this is more of a question, or do we want categories that we know are going to be the same for all building so for example, and maybe this isn't the case maybe I'm thinking about this run so achieves the town's net zero bylaw requirements. Won't all these projects achieve that. That says a fact. It's, it's, I don't know that we're going to rate the facts because they're just facts. So that's why we moved it up into facts as opposed to having it in a in a category within the actual matrix itself. But I think, I mean we will want to rate things like cost right I think that's so that's a fact that we would want to rate. So I mean the other facts I can see how we would rate them because one might be bigger one might be less expensive. And with the students movement in the fall of 2026. I don't know if there's options that that's not possible but I could see if there is options is where that's not possible, then those would be rated worse. But the net zero bylaw just my assumptions they all have to even the renovation, we saw the follow the parts of the bylaw, you know when a billions renovated. So that's my only thought on that piece is, if it's has to across the board do we need to show or should we just include some caption that says all these options will comply. And then the, and then the other thing was, and it may be down below to do we want to include something that around site that talks about access to adjacent sites. So some of our sites have access to the Hawthorne property or to the middle school fields. That's not technically in the size of the site but that's a huge benefit to that location, and somehow capturing that somewhere in here I think would be a good idea. So that's a suggested ad when we get down to site right correct, Sean. Yeah, yeah, I think jumping around is is actually good because we sent this out an event for that purpose, Alicia. And then we add to the transportation piece and so while taking the PVTA might not be a prevalent choice I think that we still should consider all of the modes of transportation that families take in order to get their kids to school and so I know that there are. I would call it a large number but a number of people who walk to school because the school is close to them and will those people then need to be best or do they have cars or so I think those are still things we need to look into. I think let's move down. So one of the things just on equity on on on on relative weights on the criteria one of our first look when Phoebe and I looked at it we weren't sure that we had a concept that measured equity very well. We put the word transition in equity and transitions because we have some that there's more transitions or less so that's so we were we equity is a priority and a goal of everything we're doing but just to keep that in mind. So let's go to educational on because we and Phoebe you can talk about this next section. I'll open it up. Um, before we get into into all the different categories under educational. I wanted to ask because I was not clear what pedagogical flexibility was. So I struggled with what to put there because I just wasn't clear on that. Donna you want to take that. You want to define. Yeah, well my God. Yeah, well Mike has his hands up so I okay I'll follow up this. Sure, so I think it's really thinking through. Can we design spaces and Donna you can do this better than me if you like but can we design spaces of where classrooms are located where specials are located that provide flexibility over time so that as population changes. We're not creating scenarios where sixth grade students or fifth graders in this case are all over the building that community use can be designed in a way that you know protects the safety and security so, and that you know what doesn't what's not true in our schools right now that special ed to a certain extent ELL spaces are integrated into the building that's a requirement of desi desi you know if we're building a new building we built the same buildings we had. They would rightfully say no you're you know you those students aren't integrated the spaces where students receive specialized services need to be integrated into the programs and so you know for me. You know right now if you look at where specialized program spaces are and even some of our special ed programs students are walking quite a distance. And there's a piece around where students are physically located that will align with pedagogy right like what we what we want to do. I think the other thing that kind of promotes it is some of these breakout spaces having been to the school in Springfield last week with Allison with some folks from the district, you're able to see that there are multiple teaching spaces all integrated into wing. That's not part of our current programming. I need to jump in here the people in town hall are having a fire alarm. So we need to vacate the building to so you're aware, but you should continue. So, so Mike can I just ask you with the way we're looking at the four columns to the right. So we're designing those breakout spaces and the space is going to be the same that Donna and team are trying to fit into each of our four possible configurations. Would that vary we were trying to say let's delete Rose, if they're going to end up being. Whatever the ranking is red, blue, pink, you know, if they're going to be the same so if we're going to be designing educational space to be flexible. So Donna, so it was like that will this vary across the four. So, just just also to add to Mike's I think originally we just said educational flexibility or something so we were trying to define it a little better. But as the program changes over time, as Mike said just having the adjacencies and spaces be near each other having the adjacencies, being able to expand a grade or, or even more so how maybe integrating the arts into the general classrooms and it could be anything right but as far as how do the four options vary, it will vary. When you look at a renovation addition versus new construction, because we're utilizing the existing building and so the spatial relationships and adjacencies and flexibilities aren't going to be as clear or flexible. Than a than a new school, because we're utilizing some of the existing schools so you know I don't. I mean it clearly. When we had the hundred and 65 that was obvious there was there was no room for expansion or flexible changes in educational programming and the delivery of it but even even when you look at a renovation addition it. It won't meet that requirement as much as a new school. Jonathan I saw your hand go up and Margaret maybe could you scroll down just a little bit to show the building part, just get down a little bit more. I was just going to, you know, I should I should have known that Donna would say it before I did but I was imagining that the, the, there would be variants between the new building and renovation on that topic. Okay, so, so then it's a keep, and we have a definition of it that's great. Because we, if we go down to building I think we had. All right, just. No, there isn't anything in building so, so it is unique. That's what I was looking at it uniquely measured in this education so that's fine and we were trying to not have two rows say the same thing. Any other comments on education and before we get down to building. And I just want to, I saw that both Simone and Ben are here. And I just want to make sure Ben and Simone, you can hear and be heard, if you can, Ben. Yep, I can hear. Okay. Okay, and Simone. She's likely at the fire drill. Oh, right. She's camp here or be heard right now. Okay. So, scroll down a bit more Margaret to do all of building. Can I, can I jump in from a prospective I don't actually think we have a quorum on the line right now. Ah, because of the fire drill. And I know we're trying to get through things but I think from an open meeting well perspective. Oh, absolutely. President until the fire drill ends, unless I'm counting wrong. No, no, I completely right. I mean, just, I guess. How many do we need. We need seven. Alicia is Alicia. Yes, I'm here. One, right. Three, four, five, six, we're at seven. Yep. Okay. Sorry, I counted wrong. I apologize. I just wanted to be sure. Thank you Mike. No, we, we shouldn't yet. I did want to, I did want to mention one more thing in educational. In terms of you'll notice in here that outdoor learning is in a couple of different places, both in education and in site. And the reason for that. We thought about not having it in multiple places. But the reason for that is that we wanted to deal with that in two separate, two separate pieces. Under educational, it really is about what we can, what we can use from the surroundings, educationally towards our kids. So things about each of the sites or that they can study those sorts of things. Whereas when it's when we see it again in site, it is very specific to site itself. We also wanted to just say more on a general level. We can, we can talk about sort of better or worse rating category, all of that, but we may want to save that for next week. Just to be able to get through this entire matrix and talk about what the things are that are actually in here. And, and, you know, hash out kind of what we need to use this for when we're voting at our next meeting. Jonathan. I was going to ask a question about school disruption impacts. It sounds like good category that if it is what I think it is would be important to leave here. But, you know, if this is, you know, kind of ranking the the options on, you know, kind of an option to kind of students who need to move around or might need to, you know, access special services. If that's the intent of it, I think that makes sense to leave here. Otherwise, as the note says, is it really about, you know, a constructability and process the question. And Jonathan, that's what we, we actually moved it up to here because it was down in construction and it felt like it was. So, so I think you're saying this is a better category for it to sit in. Yeah, it might, it might need to be reworded. I don't know if just, you know, school disruption impacts. You know, I don't like my better, better way to phrase it, you know, in being least disruptive for the students, you know, in accessing what they need to access on a daily basis. Yeah, I think that I like Jonathan said, I think it should stay here. I appreciate and I should have said this before I really appreciate Phoebe your work with with Kathy to work on this. Because I think it's a much better document because of your work. So thank you. I think it should stay here. It's certainly in the minds of staff and students and families is, you know, where will we have a play space while construction is occurring. Will we be able to how loud will it be will our students who are distracted by loud noises and staff members like me who are distracted by loud noises be able to continue working in that context. I think it's spot on. I think it's going to be the predominant thing we hear about once we get through, hopefully knock on wood the next couple phases is, what does it mean for the two years two to three years of construction for people who are actually there because there's multiple hundreds of people who will be impacted, some of whom will never see the benefits of the project and they want to make sure that their education continues during construction so I appreciate you putting it there I think it's spot on. Does anybody have an idea about a better way to phrase that. Because I agree I don't like the wording of it. Maybe impact, maybe just impact on education during construction, right I think it's not just about the, the indoor education it's also about the outdoor education and play spaces. It's not, it's not wonderfully articulate but maybe it communicates it a little more acutely. Is it, is it teaching impacts. It's broader than just the teaching, right because it's it's also about where the kids have recess, right with the, you know, for some of our students to be a little more focused and their math class. Yeah, so, you know, I think it's broader than just what's in the room in the school I think it, you know, I'm talking about the superintendent says, lots of impact with recess and other really important stuff are important things in our curriculum that aren't simply about. What happened inside. Could you change school to student student disruption impacts, because I'll cover sort of, it'll be more specific to focus on the kids. And our fire drill is over by the way, for everybody. I was going to say that was quick shot. It was, it was a successful fire drill and we're all back. Well, maybe not all all those. I, I, you know, it's under educational. So maybe we just say disruption impacts and and or you could then in the column C, just elaborate a little more impacts to the public learning, right, because that encompasses noise, it will encompass site, as far as outdoor learning or recess or P. It also impacts staff. I'm going to why I guess maybe below here will be temporary profit onto the site right we're going to have to come up with maybe a temporary drop off and pick up I mean there's so many things that this hits on so. I think, I think also that we can use so we added in construction impact further down. So that may be the place to deal with those kinds of more physical impacts of moveability on the site during construction that kind of thing, parking or all of those sorts of things whereas the educational impacts can stay in education. So what Kathy and I found is that we didn't mind having some of these things in here twice under different categories, because they impacted different things. As long as we, we know exactly what we're talking about Sonder when we're talking about under education. We really are talking about the educational impacts versus when we put it under construction impacts we're really talking about. You know, the, the impact of construction on the physical site how people get on the site off the site, breaking things down, setting things up all of that. Okay. So we'll word Smith that and you're muted. So what I was going to suggest is moving down and the one last thing just to keep in mind as we get lower is this number five flexibility for future growth was in more than once. So it felt like it's part of the building, but we weren't trying to remove it we were just trying to figure out where it would go. So coming coming down if you scroll down Margaret all the way to get most of building on. Yeah, it's this one will both jumped in we addresses all building deficiencies was one we added and provides easy access to common spaces for all students we weren't sure whether this was an equity or one, but we were thinking that we that this will vary across well, deficiency between add rental and new, and then the common space depending on what the nisco can come up with design, you know how far do people have to go to get to the gym how far do they have to go to the get to the cafeteria. So we thought of those as two, and we weren't sure what optimized connection with the outdoor space and integration with site was here, because outdoor space was up in education and outdoor space was in site so we were just trying to figure out whether these were three different metrics, or, and part of this was my mind. I do better with fewer criteria that vary than nuances when I'm trying to have it inform a decision, but I don't mind lots of rows if all the rows. It's just the way I think, as long as rose measure something different, then I'm comfortable with them so I don't know whether people like these two ads, the connection with outdoor space. We already shown already I thought made a good suggestion that if every design is going to achieve net zero the same way we did they're going to be all safe to enter and stuff we just put up a given is that all our choices will do the following. Any comments on this or interactive with site. That people saw before they got in or is they see them up on the screen. I can't find my little hand button but I have a question. Okay, let me get shown first and then you. Okay, yeah. I guess this is just a, how do we evaluate the first one. Contextually sensitive design I just struggle how we how we evaluate those the options for that one. So, so Donna that was what we actually left it in because we probably because we weren't quite sure what it meant, and we were. I can't imagine what it might mean but then it's like new building at Fort River new building at Wildwood, would they be the same is the question. Well they will, you know I think that the, we're looking at a multi story building at this point, other than a renovation addition, probably right now let's let's assume it's a three story building. How well does it fit within the site and the neighborhood would be. Now you have a single story building right it's, it's really kind of sets into the, into the site it's not very as visible, especially you're coming down the hill, you're actually looking on the, on top of the roof or whatever but so to a three story building that might start looking a little different and how well does it fit into the neighborhood. I hate to even say things that I'm trying not to sway people's opinions but for example if you look at the Wildwood site, you know middle school, right which is a multi story building there and and that sites a little more built up where at Fort River maybe it's more residential and smaller scale neighborhoods surrounding it that a three story building might. Well we can architecturally design it obviously to fit in with the exterior materials and everything but that might look a little different. In that neighborhood and in that context. So don't it would be better than in this little table we have that says two story versus three story would be better to have that criteria just for that. I don't care. I know I know I'm just thinking and maybe you know maybe at this point it, it, you know, for if we make it necessary, right. Is this a necessary criteria so Mike. Yeah. Yeah, so I'm going to have an audit response that so this is one of the ones I don't feel strongly about but I know there are people who feel really strongly about the site differences between the two, you know, like you know Wildwood and a more residential neighborhood. Fort River is, you know, on a more main road that's traveled that that doesn't have as many residential characteristics. To me, this is one I don't feel strongly about but I want to leave option to me I actually would leave it open because there may be members of the committee who do have really strong opinions about that. It's not really public and clear that I don't. But the sites aren't identical in terms of how they fit into a neighborhood and as Donna said how they fit in, you know, for educationally, you know, in terms of the campus from the elementary to the middle school to the high school so I'd be I'd be in favor of leaving it and you won't see me talk much about this because it's not something I particularly care about but but I know there are others who perhaps aesthetically or have strong opinions about the feel of that so I don't know how to reword it to make it more clear but I know I've received casual comments from staff members in the public who do have strong opinions on this particular matter so there may be building committee people who do as well. Jonathan. I have all confidence in the world that the nisco will handle integrating, you know, the either side, the building into this, the neighborhood contextually that said, I think it's something that members of the public may have concerns around. And we may hear at public forums, you know, there may be some people who express a concern over a three story building. And so, I think it is good to leave it in here for now and it may not be weighted very heavily. I think at some point we do have to sit down and have a separate conversation, as Mike has suggested about how to wait these. Some should be more and more important than others. But I would vote for leaving it. Okay, any other comments on this building section before we move to site. Margaret had a question. Margaret, sorry, Margaret. Yeah, I can't I can't find my little hand button because I've got the, I'm sure. So my question was about this issue that Phoebe started with, and the, and the distance issue. I'm just wondering if the distance, the travel distance issue is an educational issue, or if it's, if it really belongs here as a building issue. I don't think it's an, I don't think it's an equity issue, because it's sort of more about, you know, the, the building option that's chosen. So just a question to all of you. So you're suggesting potentially moving it to education. I'm looking to Mike to see if he and Donna also to see what they think about that. Yeah, I mean, I think it is an educational issue. I mean, just, you know, if you look at where our specialized program space, I don't want to harp on that but I think it's the one that comes up, you know, really close to CFTR really far away from the gym space and you sort of couldn't design a space that's further away. So for students who receive extra adaptive PE you can, you can design a space that involved a longer walk to get there. Whereas the classroom spaces are predominantly much closer so education I think it makes sense I'm not sure it makes sense to be in the billing category I tend to agree with what you said Margaret and. Okay. Okay, so we're just, and I take it that people like it this was an ad so we were, we were trying to get smaller. Okay. I think it's a good one actually because it's not captured elsewhere. So, and also just to note that Tammy's here. Okay, Tammy, can you hear us and be heard. Great. Okay, if we scroll down to site, we didn't. Okay, so we just added words to the outdoor space for educational play and green space to make sure it was there. And then the additional site cost wasn't there before, and I looked at actually a couple other towns and when they were making decisions so this is going to vary by site, but it's clear some of the sites will have additional and then Phoebe and I both thought on does the acts future access to the ground source wells once they're in, you know, what is it they're underneath and is it easy to get to or not so this was something we added here that clearly if we don't have ground source wells. This isn't an issue. So, so this was, we did, and we didn't know what pedestrian safety and access meant. And if it meant sidewalks, if it meant crosswalks, we just weren't sure what it meant. So we just had a what did it mean. This last one address ability able to add address all issues with ground stability and weight bearing that's where Phoebe said we added it later because we added it here because we didn't see it earlier. So those were this section we actually had some ads and no deletes. Sean. Donna had her hand up first I don't know if you want to go to Donna first on that. I was just going to respond just for clarification purposes. The additional site costs I leave it to you all you know that that will be identified in the costs of the in the cost estimates right and and it will be reflected there but if people would like to address it here as well. That's fine. As far as future access to the geothermal wells. Those will be treated in kind, we are going to put them on, we're not going to put them under the building. So, and either site so those will be treated and kind and will be accessible. So if they're, they're kind of set it and forget it, you should not need to access them, but just in case we would never put them under the building right so. We think we could just delete that and then I guess the suggestion is instead of additional site costs as a qualitative metric will actually be able to see the dollars on it is what you're saying so we can. Okay, so we can delete, we could dilute this new, these two new ads could both disappear. Yeah, unless you know I totally defer to that's just that's what your suggestion right. And then, and then just to, to identify item eight improve pedestrian safety and access. It would be making sure that we had sufficient sidewalks. We're not we're not talking outside the site right because that's beyond our scope of work a limit of work but it would be for kids that are riding their bikes and pedestrians that we have curb cuts how you know, are they crossing parking lots are crossing driveways that type of thing so one site might be less improved than the other just given the access points on to the site but again, you know you, you have both both sites are pretty large so that we shouldn't have as much of a concern as we would in an urban environment. I see Sean's hand was up and then Phoebe I do see your hands up to. Yeah I was just going to kind of concur with what Donna said about the additional site costs I feel like that's already going to be evaluated in the construction costs so having it twice. Feels like it just it's, it's making it count double. So I think that once I would agree with removing that one and having it just be part of the construction costs. Okay, the, the only one, and I'll just Phoebe, you should chime in the one thing I was, I guess we're going to talk about this at the next meeting because Dennis goes going to bring in more information about these sites. The mitigating water issues was is likely to vary between the two so just keep it's not just about dollars, but it's trying to think of, you know, are there any risks in one site versus the other so maybe the word cost is the wrong one and we can come back to this as a mitigation of site issues. I also, I also want to say that I, when we were talking about these Kathy. They were, I think we were taking them also in a little bit of a different direction in terms of with the site costs I think we were also kind of trying to get to what is really a project cost and verse what is kind of. I mean, all of it's a town cost but but the difference between, you know, what really can what really should be rolled into the project versus the town cost, if that makes any sense I don't know how to better describe that at this moment. And then with future access when I when when this was raised and we were talking about it. My concern was a little bit more. For instance, if we're talking about Wildwood, those wells are not actually on the Wildwood property there on the middle school property right, which if I'm if I'm understanding it all correctly means it's regional we'd have to talk to the regional school committee so are there differences in terms of that what what happens if we need to access them in the future. Are there more homes, hoops to jump through those kinds of things. So not necessarily about physically how do we access them. Those kinds of things but what are the potential future impacts of needing to change something needing to, you know, go back in and and I don't know do whatever may need to happen in the future. So I don't know if that changes whether or not we we as a committee think that these things should be deleted. But I think it's not necessarily just sort of a shortcut, maybe. And then the only other thing that I wanted to say in here which is off of that is, I would like to be able to sort of figure out when we say in number one maximize efficient utility utilization of site. What are we talking about when we say efficient, I'd like to be able to define that in my mind, and I don't know what that means right now. I've got Jonathan and Paul. Unfortunately, this is being recorded because these are all great comments, Jonathan. You know I actually wanted to talk about the last you added 57 but but after Phoebe's last comment I wanted to actually, I'll talk about my thoughts and number one to. I actually think that if we had major differences in the efficiency of utilization of the site, they, they would, I think we'd already see them. I'm wondering if when is all that valuable. But I would defer to others. I have the suspicion that, you know, as Donna and her team have been placing options on the site and dealing with initial thoughts and parking and access. You know, if they're real red flags here I think, I think they may have already come to the forefront. But on what I guess would be number nine or line 57. I think that's going to be already, you know that that will have to be addressed in any of the three story schemes that are on Fort River. And it's going to be in the cost, you know it's going to be, it'll show up in the cost. And so to me, I think it's a given that it will be dealt with. But so I'm not sure if there's, if there's something else that can be that this was waiting other than the extra cost around those concerns Jonathan to just so you're suggesting maybe delete number one all together because it. I'm wondering if it's, it's valuable because you know I think if I hear Mike on the on the topic of you know not having a neutral. And even for this, you know one might be, if we if it's ABC, even one might be B and one might be C is it really differentiating a lot I can imagine there's a lots of other criteria that are going to be more, more meaningful for for choosing between the options but that's from my perspective others, others may agree, you know, completely. Okay, and, and just on the ground stability I mean we'll hear more about that next week but in. I think that I added this for free and I both added it that, you know it's possible we wouldn't put a three story on on a Fort River site but the other thing that the write up on the site said that if you do an ad runner you would be able to say with the new addition destabilize the existing piece because of the stability of the ground. So I don't know whether that's different by site but I think you're suggesting we delete both of those. I am because what I, my gut says that if there's a major issue there, Donna is going to come to us and say, we can't consider a three story building on the Fort River site because of XYZ. It's obvious that, yes, we can do a three story building but you're paying. Look at this penalty you're paying in the cost estimate. Okay, Mike, and then I see both Donna and markets hands are up on this so this is, this is a suggestion of at least two deletes and potentially on this ground source well on it potentially for deletes from this section. I agree with Jonathan's comments but mostly I'm just saying I have to go I have a 930 solidate a meeting and Tammy's going to have to go and inform and it's because she's a participant in that one so. But I really just want to thank Phoebe and you for doing this work it's, it really is important that we get the criteria right and just want to share my appreciation. Well, if you're running out and Tammy is running out. Are there any comments you had just the idea of this was really a discussions because we tend not to have any time during the meetings to do this. And on others, either send them in but also the idea of moving all the net zero HVAC into a separate table and the comparison of two story three story into a separate table if if you want to weigh in either now on those or send comments because, you know, down here on construction impact is. This is where shown is saying we're going to measure it later, you know so these, these seem to be facts, you know, we're going to have cost facts. And so any, any thoughts on any other parts before you leave. No, I think I'll share them along. And I'll watch the video of this and hear the discussion because I appreciate we're doing this live instead of just electronically and I'll share them along with with you all if I do but thank you everyone thanks for everybody. Thanks for everybody. Thanks so Margaret's hand is up and Donna's hands up for clearly we're we're moving quickly on to the the witching hour of one hour where we said we're only going to take an hour of everyone's time. I want to defer to Donna to go first because I'm guessing she and I have similar comments. Okay, two things one was kind of right behind Mike I can probably stay for another 10 minutes and hopefully my responses some of these questions are helpful, but but I just want to echo Jonathan. I would not be putting forward any options that are problematic so to address groundwater to address ground stability weight bearing. I mean, clearly, we would have said you cannot have a three story building on a site, if there was going to be problems with it. So I really just want to make sure that everyone understands that if there's additional measures that are required for a three story school or, or renovation addition we don't think there's any issues with that you know it's it's really just treating the site, whether it's with foundations or whatever to make sure that these can be done so just I just want everyone to know that it might just be reflected in the cost, but we would never put anything forward to you that was not doable. And we didn't think was practical so I just want to throw that out there and as far as maximizing the efficient utilization of the site. So getting there on Wildwood that the differences are that we have an existing building there so the placement of the new school is really a derivative of where the existing building is which then some options may not be the best use of the site, because we have no choice. So, so you know that might be more of a subjective or irrelevant at this point because I think it's plot, you know, we can address the site and lay out of the site in a way that maximizes the site. So super quickly on this issue about the ground source wells. PB it's actually an important issue. If there were part of the project that was outside of the site. I do think there should be some indication here which I would probably note as you know requires outside agreements right for the use of real estate, and it's also something that the MSBA cares about so I think you have your finger on about probably just want to reward that so. Okay. I'm looking for other hands. I think we're, if we scroll down the suggestion was moving all the net zero related to a separate table. And I started to do this table. This is not I didn't go. Tom torten Thomas said he provided us with a bunch of information I forgot to put life cycle cost analysis they've already been starting to populate this table so it allows you to compare the high back systems. It's still in process. So, I thought it would be simpler to move it out because, as you can see on this one, the new building versus Adreno it's not really varying by whether it's wild at Wildwood or for river. It's not really varying by which high back system so if people are comfortable with that it just gets moved, and then we can get away from this issue that we've somehow not identify some of these causes high back which is each back which is part of the building. We're going to have to have heating and air. That was just my points of Margaret when you go back we just removed a whole bunch of rows and tried to figure out where they would fit somewhere else. So, all of those are then in the, in the, yeah, so they would just be moving because they were all around the HVAC and the system stuff. It was not as much site specific. So, any other comments and I did, I do want to honor the one hour Sean is here and the other thing is every, let me get to Sean and Rupert, people can send in comments and we'll just collect them we won't make any other changes after this. Sean then Rupert. This is just something to think about further. I feel like the, the HVAC table and the two or three story table. Those are almost tables we do after we select add Renault or new construction, because then it's within each of those options deciding between two story or three story. I feel like doing it at the same time makes it sort of adds. It makes it I think harder to think about because you're comparing like a three story here to a two story there. And so I think for this section it would really be is there anything about add Renault new construction that affects the net zero component as opposed to the type of system we would use is there anything specific to those sites are specific to new construction verse Renault that might impact that. And I could see, for example, like, maybe the cost for the renovation might be more expensive to redo the ventilation system, for example, to put that into an existing structure. I feel like that's the kind of stuff that should be captured here and then the decision about what type of HVAC system should be once we pick an option, then we do that analysis between the two. Okay. That makes sense and that that was partly the thought of moving them to those tables that those were separate decisions but there is some very so you're saying can we put something in that would capture. Yeah, I agree with that so I'd have to go back and look at the information we have so far because it's, it's, it didn't. It's Jonathan Sonny said it doesn't vary as much as you might think it does. Rupert. Thank you yeah I Sean already said, most of what was on my mind. It does occur to me that there could be differences in the cost of the well installation at two different sites. So there may end up being some, some variation there that could, could have a cost difference. You know and it might be shown on your Adreno versus new. I don't see it in the initial estimates but the Adreno may be a less energy efficient building just because of its, the way it's single story and doesn't have the tight envelope. So if we called it energy efficient, you know, that's a good idea. Just just didn't link it to any kind of energy it doesn't matter how we heat it. How we condition it. Okay. Any other comments. So, I want to, I want to just thank everyone for making the extra hour time it's 932. So I think the plan is we keep what I call the messy, the messy mock up table will reword some and there were a few suggestions of deleting things that Phoebe and I added. We can do that and bring it back to the full committee with a. Here's a mark mock up, and here's what it might look like if we made all these changes to see whether we can get to a final table that we all like at the next meeting. The reason we were trying to push on this as we are meeting on April 22nd, then we're right away in May, and we're going to need this to start filling this out to help us think about our choices. So if there are any other final comments and really just please send them in if you look at this, Jonathan. Yeah. The other thing I think that we need to do before we start using this is to, to give some thought to, to how we're going to wait it. Mike was, I think quite right that, you know, certain things are more important than others. Donna and her team are going to do a great job of, of giving us build the best building possible in each of the options. I don't want to think about that and to say I haven't thought one with about it yet, but, but I think we want to. And so that would become to have initial thoughts you know are there a few of these that are more important. So even if you added up all the positives, if they didn't have a few things in them, you know, positive. There's still a, is there a four point scale. If anyone can think of a four point scale. You know, shades of better. If with no neutral, it's just like some of these just really felt hard to say this is better or worse. Not the same in different ways. So both of those. And we'll see whether we can make enough time on the agenda on next Friday to come back to this and get people's thoughts to get to at least nearer to something that we're willing to use and I'll just send out with a people put stars next to the rose they think are more important to them. And we can go around the room and just get people's initial thoughts. I mean I think everyone has the cost of the project matters a lot. So, is that above and all above up. So, any other comments, thoughts. And since, since we are doing this just as a special meeting. You should still send comments mainly best to me and I'll just collect them all and without any attribute and put them in a memo on here's additional comments we got so that nobody has to be influenced by anybody else's ideas. So just send them to the chair. You can send them to Margaret too since she doesn't get to vote on anything but you can send them to me. Thank you all thank, thank you very much for being willing to meet on such short notice, and I am going to declare the meeting adjourned at 939. Bye. How do I stop. I'm Margaret say I'm trying to figure out how to do this recording pause recordings, record, stop recording. Yes, we stop recording to the cloud. Yes.