According to two estimators, the Charleswood School project is under budget at the 90% construction document phase by $8.7 million, averaging $116.2 million. That estimate includes building construction and roadway costs.

The Elementary School Building Committee on Tuesday heard that update, with Vertex project manager Chris Eberly noting that with an additional $1 million each factored in for escalation and design contingency, planners are looking at a $118 million total.

He attributed the lower estimates to “hitting the market at a good time,” adding there appears to be “a lot of appetite for work” in 2025.

Eberly pointed out the figure is an “estimate” and not a bid, and it was derived by averaging data from Fogerty and PM+C.

“That’s great news from a project perspective and a town perspective,” said Jon Graziano, chair of the ESBC.

He said the committee has maintained a focus on “spending money in places where it delivers value back to the town.”

Graziano said just because there is the possibility of the budget being $8.7 million below what was expected does not mean the committee is going to look for things to spend that amount on and “take on additional debt.”

Committee revisits sidewalk, curbing materials

In a related matter, Eberly presented “items to revisit” putting back into the bid documents, expected to be issued on March 20. Bids from general contractors are due by May 5 and should be awarded on May 22, he said.

The items he outlined were: using concrete instead of stone dust for the sidewalk connection to Marathon School at a cost of $3,834; having granite curbing instead of concrete at the roadways, estimated to cost $321,641; and facilities maintenance equipment at $80,000.

The concrete sidewalk was recommended as “a more durable, safer surface,” while the granite curbing would enhance its life span significantly, Eberly said.

Director of Buildings and Grounds Tim Persson spoke in favor of getting the heavy equipment (plow, snowblower attachment) now as part of the bid package rather than revisiting it at the end.

Following the meeting, Graziano clarified in an email that although committee members agreed with the recommendations “by consensus,” no formal vote was taken.

“As the next step is to receive bids from construction companies, this was a decision about items to add to the bid package,” Graziano noted.

He said the committee would formally vote these features as part of the overall construction bid when it selects a contractor.

Graziano said if these features are more expensive than expected, the committee may remove them from the voted final bid.

Soil removal another issue

At the meeting, Eberly presented other items to consider in the future.

One would be obtaining a licensed site professional (LSP) to classify and dispose of existing soil on site. (This service was done for the Hopkins addition/renovation project.)

Eberly said there are about 9,000 cubic yards of soil (2,000 topsoil and the rest regular soils) to be excavated that will need to be moved off-site.

ESBC member Mike Shepard said that the Marathon School project had a lot of soil that “cost a lot to get rid of,” and, “It makes sense to look at this now.”

Another suggestion was adding sitework irrigation well water connection points to provide “for activities or establishing plantings.”

More information on these topics will be forthcoming.

In other business, it was noted that six residents still had not responded to several outreach attempts to discuss mitigations. There are `for sale’ signs at two homes, while one property “has changed hands,” according to Eberly.

He recommended moving forward, saying planners had met the “near-term burden” of trying to reach out to neighbors to incorporate their input into drawings.

“Jon [Graziano] has been vocal about wanting to do right by them,” Eberly added, but they cannot hold up the bid process or road construction for those who do not respond.

The chair said the other neighbors had “engaged and worked with us to make sure they have mitigations because of the building and road.”

If people reply later, their concerns will be considered then, according to Shepard.

MSBA reimbursement to arrive

Eberly added that the Select Board would address the town funding agreement for the new school at its meeting on Feb. 18. He explained it begins the process for restarting reimbursement from the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA). The result will be the town getting reimbursement that dates back to December of 2023, “a good place for the town to be.”

“The town should be getting a sizable check once it passes through the audit process of the MSBA,” Eberly said.