Elementary School Building Committee chair Jon Graziano noted the Charleswood School project experienced a “significant moment” on Tuesday when the board awarded a $102,270,000 construction contract to Brait Builders Corporation.

The contract is contingent on successful negotiations.

“This is about as great a bid as this town could receive,” said Chris Eberly, project manager from Vertex.

He said the construction bid and street improvements came in $19.6 million under budget.

Eberly explained that Brait Builders was the lowest of three bidders, the others being WT Rich at $105,800,000 and Fontaine Brothers at $106,750,000.

The bid reflects about $584 per square foot.

The Elementary School Building Committee (ESBC) selected an “alternate” proposal that included a turf field.

The project manager said construction contingency amounted to $6.2 million. The owner’s project manager (OPM) contingency of $3.7 million means there is $29.8 million available to handle the scope of the project.

Some items are yet to be decided on, such as moving the modulars from Elmwood School to Hopkins School once the work is completed, he said.

“And, change orders are a fact of life that come up over time,” Eberly said.

“We’re in an excellent position to move forward with [this] award,” he added.

Money left available means the town will not have to borrow as much as anticipated when it approved the project, Eberly said.

Graziano said even though the project is running far under budget, it does not mean the ESBC will start putting “nice-to-have add-ons.”

He noted that typically there are “things discovered through the process, scope changes” that will result in change orders.

ESBC member Bill Flannery said not having to borrow as much money is the result of all the work done to date by Vertex and architect Perkins Eastman.

“Let’s keep this good vibe going over the next few years,” Flannery added.

As a result of the lower figures, Eberly pointed out reimbursement from the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) likely would be “proportionally less than what you thought you would be getting.”

They will not know exactly where the MSBA total falls because it will depend on whether costs are for the building versus the site, Eberly said.

The project manager said the price tag last fall was expected to be so much higher because estimates were being based on “unprecedented, volatile times.”

He added, “The escalation we thought [would happen] did not materialize.”

“You hit the market at a specific time in a certain way,” Eberly said, making the project “more advantageous” for firms seeking a substantial, large-scale job.

Insurance contract awarded

With the advice of the town’s insurer, the ESBC chose Hanover Insurance Company for its builder’s risk insurance. It awarded Hanover a contract of $302,189, which has a $25,000 deductible (per incident) and TRIA coverage (for terrorism and related risk) included.

A total of $250,000 was set aside for insurance so the balance from the budget will come from the owner’s contingency amount, Eberly said.

Flannery questioned how many incidents usually happen for a project this size and whether insurance covers costs for claims of damage from abutters.

Eberly noted it is property insurance coverage for the site. He gave an example of the project burning down halfway through for an unknown reason.

The insurer would cover the cost to get the project back to the point it was at prior to the damage, Eberly said.

He added that general liability insurance covers the costs of complaints from abutters that lead to a claim.

The project manager said it is difficult to predict the number of incidents that may occur.

Less than a year into the Hopkins School addition/renovation project, for example, there have been two claims. The first was covered under general liability and the second was a property insurance-related claim — a fall on the ice in a parking lot.

Yankee Engineering gets contract for inspections, testing

In other business, the ESBC decided on Yankee Engineering as a subcontractor to Vertex to conduct testing and inspections.

Yankee had the lowest bid at $299,997.

ESBC member Mike Shepard emphasized that the Building Department had to be informed about all these inspections along the way.

“Make sure everything is on the same page,” Shepard said.

Eberly said Vertex had worked with the subcontractor before and established contacts who can be reach out to if the project is not getting optimal services.

He said his team has had success working with “these partners to make sure they can fulfill requirements for testing.”

Eberly said he also has had experience with subcontractors (not Yankee) that were inadequate and needed to be replaced.

“We treat your money as we would treat our own money, and we will not accept the poor performance of a subcontractor the same way we have a high-performance standard for ourselves,” Eberly said.

Decision made on authorization authority

The ESBC voted unanimously to name Susan Rothermich, assistant superintendent for finance and operations, as the authorization authority, designating her as ESBC liaison.

The committee also named Graziano and Shepard as ESBC approvers.

The purpose is to move forward with aspects of the project and avoid waiting on decisions that could cost the same or more money in the long run, according to Eberly.

“It takes us out of the ESBC meeting cycle so we do not wait 30 days on everything,” Eberly said.

The process, also used on the Hopkins project, sets change orders costing $25,000 for Vertex approval; $25,000 to $75,000 for ESBC liaison approval; and $75,000 to $125,000 for two out of the liaison and either approver.

“It’s all about expediency,” Eberly noted, adding that the full ESBC would be updated regularly and get monthly reports.