Change Orders for High School Project: RESOLVED, That the Board approves the following list of change orders for the High School Renovation Project:I adjusted the change order list to show the maximum of $55,000 for Change Order GC-30-57. Pretty funny how Mary Birks asked about the list of change orders at Monday's meeting. She was surprised to hear that there is no list published on the School District website, not even under "High School Renovation." Mr. Marciniak said that they were waiting for a list from the architect. Meanwhile, a complete list is sitting in "The Book of Klein" that is displayed at every meeting. Not only do "the blogs" have a running total of change orders in the sidebar, "the blogs" provide a photographed copy of Jan Klein's change order list. Shouldn't Mr. Marciniak know about Jan Klein's list? If the list exists in the book that is not allowed to leave the library, why can't that file be posted on the District website?
a. GC-27-54 to Nello credit for -$485 as a final accounting for Change Order GC-08-21 issued in the amount of $36,229 with a final cost of $35,744,
b. GC-28-55 to Nello credit for -$6,204 as a final accounting for Change Order GC-09-22 issued in the amount of $22,945 with a final cost of $16,741,
c. GC-29-56 to Nello credit for -$1,287 as a final accounting for Change Order GC-10-23 issued in the amount of $25,658 with a final cost of $24,371,
d. GC-30-57 to Nello for time and materials in an amount not to exceed $55,000 for replacement of damaged corridor walls on the 6th floor of B Building which had to be demolished and rebuilt.
Update February 16, 2013 4:00 PM From Dr. Steinhauer's blog:
 |
| This morning I took some High School students on a quick tour of the 6th floor of the B Building. They are anxious to get into the renovated spaces. |
With the School District in a quandary over the 2013-2014 budget and may require cutting programs, closing a school, laying off staff and raising taxes, plus a math program that some parents want to eliminate, our superintendent has time to act like a minimum wage tour guide. If this is the stuff he likes to do, maybe he should get out of education and land a job at the new Fantasyland in Florida. I hope the tour was before school and not during valuable class time. I am curious as to his methodology for choosing students.
How much longer will parents tolerate his tweets and tours? Being transfixed by construction and pizza lunches are not in the job description.
61 comments:
Why didn't Steinhauer correct Mr. Marciniak and tell him that his owners rep pal from USC has the list.
That is the owners rep duty after all, you'd think Dr. Steinhauer would know that since he's suppose to meet with him.
"Monitoring Costs
·Advise Superintendent regarding change order requests
·Assist in scheduling Board action when dictated by policy
http://www.mtlsd.org/district/HeadlineArticle.asp?HLP_ID=1342&HL_ID=866"
More "hear no evil, see no evil, say no evil."
Wonder if Mary's eyes glaze over when she looks at the book?
Do not forget the discussion on change orders a meeting or two ago regarding whether the board delaying a vote on a change order might affect the project schedule.
Dr. S replied that he could approve a change order up to $30,000 without a board vote and inform the board after the fact.
In essence change orders could come in all day long - every day under $30,000 and be approved by the superintendent and the board would be powerless to stop them. Even if they had a list.
Quote, " If the list exists in the book that is not allowed to leave the library, why can't that file be posted on the District website?"
Why wasn't the list in Mary's board packet?
This is another example of the Administration withdrawing information when the public questions the content.
Have you ever wondered why they are anxious to withdraw information questioned by the public?
3:33, The finance department never gives board members a complete answer in a public meeting. They should think better of the public!
Do you really think Ms. Klein told the board members the total cost of her 6.9% raise.
Methodology, you ask ? Those are the students with the good PSSA math scores.
Dr.Steinhauer,enough with the tours all ready. We get it, you're obsessed with your new building, but we bought it already. Well at least half of it until we float another bond.
Wouldn't your time be better spent trying to reduce expenditures in next years budget that don't affect the curriculum?
Wouldn't your time be netter spent resolving issues with the math curriculum, lower the tax burden on seniors, parents and businesses. How about the inequities in the reassessed properties?
Just got off the phone with Mary Birks. She called me to say that she does not read my blog, but that one of her friends called her to question if she submitted a snarky comment about James Fraasch or Mark Hart. Mary assured me that she doesn't read my blog, would never submit an anonymous comment to my blog, and would be willing to prove that she did not submit the comment. She works full time, does not have time to blog, but would always take a phone call or meet for coffee. Anything that she has to say to these men, or anyone else for that matter, she would say face to face. She was calling me because I am "the Queen," whatever that means. She wanted to clear that matter up and that is why she called me. I asked her if the call was from Mark Hart or James Fraasch, and she said it wasn't. The call came from a friend of hers who reads the blog and does not comment, but was upset with Mary over making such a snarky comment. Mary wants to be clear that it wasn't her.
Elaine
Mrs. Birks should start reading your blog, Elaine. She would be better informed, "friend of Mary".
Mary wasn't on my short list, but she could be abelievable candidate.
5:39 makes an excellent suggestion that all the school members should consider, I think.
Pay more attention to the people that disagree with you than the ones that do.that way one can find put something they didn't know or open a door to a creative alternative.
Queen, that's quite a title, Elaine. Did Mary say who bestowed that title on you?
Funny thing to say,isn't it?
No, she didn't, 6:38 PM. And I didn't ask. I was surprised that she had my unlisted phone number.
Elaine
A good lesson here-- and I think it would do our elected officials to think about it.
Ex-commissioner Dan Miller, in my opinion mastered the art of making enemies his friends when it came to municipal issues and explains why he is a popular choice for Smith's House seat on this blog.
“Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?” ― Abraham Lincoln
This is not the first time Mr. Marciniak has behaved in an unethical manner regarding change orders in his professional capacity with the School District.
Who will take the next step to file a complaint with the Bureau of Professional Affairs against Mr. Marciniak for the violations of Pennsyvlania Professional Engineering license laws and regulations?
Here is the online form:
http://www.doscomplaintform.state.pa.us/
I don't know about unethical behavior, but doesn't it infuriate you when an item that has been on the meeting agenda for a week prior yields responses from the administration to board questions: "I don't have that information in front of me."
What do they think the agenda is for? Shouldn't you come prepared to talk knowledgeably about the subject at hand?
What infuriates me is that four new change orders have been added to the agenda that were not discussed at last week's meeting. I can handle the credits, but to add a cost that is capped at $55,000??
Elaine
Why do you ask others to do your will 10:22. Do it yourself!
Here's a fund raising idea for the board.
I suggest $10 per entry with the winer getting 50% of the total pool and the remainder going to the district for educational programs.
Each week residents get to submit their best guess on what the next change order will be due to overlooked design elements like not looking under carpet, running an elevator shaft through duct work, not installing a sump pump in an elevator shaft.
If no one guesses right the pool grows until the next discussion of more change orders.
Of course district and cponstruction employees and their families will be forbidden to enter the contest.
Or better yet.
Ever watch This Old House or any of those other home remodeling shows on TV?
We could have pay per view segments on Ch. 19 - .
DIY with Dr. Steinhauer.
This weeks segment... Here's How Your Drywall Should LooK In A Newly Remodelled Room. LOL
Did Mary talk to Mr. Hart first before she sent a letter directly opposing his re-election for President?
I think not.
11:37, Maybe the board could file a complaint.
President Cappucci had no trouble questioning the ethics of Dirk Taylor, PE when she said, "We will not revisit Building C."
Dan Remely had no qualms about questioning the professional judgment of Dan Dieseroth, PE when he wrote a letter instructing the District to repave Stadium Drive.
Rick Marciniak is clearly taking direction from P.J. Dick instead of the District who employs his services through Aramark. When will the board wake up and see Mr. Marciniak is not doing the District any favors based on his lackluster performance during board meetings?
Wouldn't all this be so unnecessary if Mary, her fellow board members, PTA compatriots spoke out against such attacks and things like malicious pre-election emails.
They have the bully pulpit, they could show us the way to get along, to be pleasant and advance conversations.
No instead their silence in effect condones such behavior.
4:28 I believe Mrs. Cappucci's "We have no intention of revisiting building C!" came in response to the CAC's final report.
It has been a while so I could be mistaken.
Clearly, Mr. Marciniac was busted. There is such a list of change orders and it was sitting right there on the table.
As far as Mary Birks, et al.,how about they call back the troops? It is natural to assume that negative comments such as what were submitted about former board members, would be coming from current board members. Remember how President Jo Posti never thanked James Fraasch for his time on the board? There are some stories going around about Mary Birks' unfinished business which causes people to think it could be her. The there is the subject of eyes rolling. So, school board members, talk to your pals and let them know that they are not doing you any favors when malicious comments are submitted about the Harts, Ewings, Fraaschs, Lewis, Matthews or Hustons of the world. Even if you don't send them in, we are still going to believe that it is coming from you.
Elaine
If Mr. Marciniac was busted so was every board member and administrator in attendance.
If the list exist, it didn't create itself. Somebody had to have brought it to the meeting and put it on the table.
More evidence of Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil.
4:48 You are correct. Dirk Taylor, PE was on the CAC. He also spoke publicly about preserving Building C, and wrote letters to the board about it.
This is what Josephine Posti wrote about him:
http://jposti.blogspot.com/2010/04/building-c.html
When will she question Rick Marciniak, PE the same way, regarding change orders?
Here is Dirk Taylor, PE's letter to the board:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2Tqdso8AsFNY2Q1ZmM4ZTktY2MyMi00NTY1LWE4OGQtOWE0NDY4YWVkN2Nm/edit?pli=1
Regarding Dirk Taylor, PE, Dr. Timothy Steinhauer said, "He's not an architect. He's a structural engineer. There are some things (architects) have more expertise (in) than he does." Looking at the change orders, the board has no trouble questioning the work of the architect now. Why won't the board follow-up with Rick Marciniak, PE after they ask him to get more information?
triblive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_643463.html
According to the District, http://www.mtlsd.org/district/HeadlineArticle.asp?HLP_ID=1342&HL_ID=866
Dr. Terrence J. Kushner should be "Advising the Superintendent regarding change order requests"
Not sure what happened to Dr. Kushner, but it looks like Rick Marciniak is now performing that function.
What do you think of Rick Marciniak's work regarding change orders, 4:48?
5:42 my opinion for what its worth.
I'd say the board DOES have trouble questioning the architect now. Otherwise how do you seriously discuss a change order to reroute duct pipes that run thru an elevator shaft!
How do you discuss approving a change order to put an access door to a roof mechanical room.
Like Remely said, no one could lift up a corner of carpet to see there wasn't any tile underneath.
What happens when the change orders put this project over the original referendum limit? Do we get to go back and hold the referendum not to go forward with the project?
As for Mr. Marciniac, watching the board meetings it appears he's the go to guy for answers rewarding change orders.
If he's analyzing them, deeming which ones are justified, wouldn't he have his own list to refer to.
So he could say, I investigated The lack of a power source to the elevator shaft on 1/XX/13 for Change order #xxxxxx. There is indeed no power source there. We need one and in my opinion this is an error by the architect.
That's the way I would expect my building manager to execute his duties for example.
I would expect him to have a binder in front of him with a copy of every change order, dated as when he reviewed it and what his recommendation or thoughts were.
Call me crazy, but is that difficult.
The other reason for Mr.Marciniac keeping detailed records in one binder(s) is that in 25 or 30 years when we need to do another renovation we have a record of where a power line was buried - say to the football stadium, prevent things like nearly burning down the building.
Long after Mr. M is gone there would be records of the changes that might not appear in the original drawings/schematics.
Lets see how reasonable and responsible Dan Remely will act with the change orders tomorrow. http://danremelyforpahouse.com/index.html
This might provide insight into a future debate between Remely and Miller:
Board member Dan Remely recommended further changes to the project as it moves forward, like relaxing the district's pursuit of "green" certification for the building, or fighting the municipality's decision to designate the building as a "high-rise" based on its height from the proposed new entrance on Horsman Drive.
Mt. Lebanon Fire Chief Nicholas Sohyda said the designation has been part of the fire code since 1970, when it was amended to say that any building higher than 50 feet would be considered a high-rise.
The code for such buildings includes requirements like smoke-evacuation systems, pressurized stairwells, communications systems, water pumps for the sprinkler system and a small "fire command" room with alarm panels and connections to the intercom system.
Municipal Commission President Dan Miller, himself a volunteer firefighter, said any conversation about relaxing the building's fire code standards was "a non-starter."
"I've pulled a dead child from a fire. ... I'm sure as hell not going to let them skimp on public safety just to save a million bucks," Miller said. "I tried to save them money on the inspection fees, but I'm not going to let them skimp on that."
http://triblive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_734251.html
Dan's going to ask the tough questions tomorrow, then vote "aye" on the change orders.
Remely should concede and donate all his campaign money to the School District change orders.
I actually think Remely will NOW vote against some or all of the change orders. How about that for a poll question?
Should we expect another Remely website for his school board run too or can he combine them? Also, if someone donates to one of his campaigns can he turn around and use the money for either or both?
"A Responsible Approach to ...
- Education
- Government Spending"
... from danremelyforpahouse.com.
Wonder what the responsible approach is?
Saying you'll keep the high school project under $80,000,000 then voting for a $113,000,000 project!
Perhaps Mary Birk's friend will encourage her to vote against change orders.
I started a new poll.
Elaine
What about 9:47 PM's questions? Neil, can you help with this?
Elaine
Since all the school board directors - except Mary, read "the blogs," why don't you give a heads up to Mr. Marciniak? Let him know about the running total of change orders on this blog. How much money is the District paying him? While you are at it, School Board Directors (excluding Mary Birks), tell Cissy Bowman too. How much does she make again? Or would it be Chris Stengel? Or is Jan Klein up to her old tricks again?
This reminds me of Timmy telling us that YSA was up to date and then we found out that they weren't. Too many stories around here. We never seem to get a straight answer from anyone.
Elaine
9:47's questions are interesting ones. I really don't know the answer to either one, as they would depend on PA state law (laws on these questions are state matters and vary from state to state, at least for elections other than president and US Congress).
Another interesting question is what happens if Mr. Remely wins the general election for the House seat in May (note Elaine's other post reminding that the May House election is NOT a primary; the "primary" for a special election is the selection done by respective party committees) and wins one or more of the school board primaries at the same time (NOTE: I'm assuming, based on what I've read here that Mr. Remely is running for both offices; I haven't heard that from his campaign, so to me this is just a hypothetical until candidates file).
If that were to happen, though, Mr. Remely would take office as a State House member almost immediately (as soon as the vote was certified), since there is a vacancy for that office. Presumably (I don't know the law for sure), he would then resign his present seat on the School Board. The Board would then choose someone to fill out the remainder of his term (just until December, 2013). As for the term he'd be running for on the School Board (if those rumors are correct), he'd presumably (again, not sure of the law) withdraw as a candidate. This would then require the party or parties whose school board nomination he'd won to name a replacement candidate.
I note all this mostly because I think this is really interesting stuff (kind of fun from a political junkie perspective), but you also could make the argument, regardless of what you think of Matt Smith or Dan Remely, that policy-wise, allowing people to run for two offices at the same time is not a good idea. And, again, please note that Mr. Remely has yet to file for the school board race (and couldn't have filed already)--Neil Berch
When a person runs for two offices at the same time I question that person's integrity, especially if by winning one office it leaves the other one vacant and the polity unrepresented for a time. The only rational reason why a person would do such a thing is to keep power, settling for the lower office should the higher one be unattainable.
I also think it is unethical to run for any given office on two or more "party tickets." Yes, I know it is done all the time, and yes, I understand the usual explanation given for the practice. But if one accepts that there are differences in political philosophy amongst the various political parties (and I include minor parties in the mix) any person running on two or more "tickets" for the same office looks both predatory and contradictory, and not "non-partisan." The fact is that there are very few non-partisan public offices up for grabs. I reject the notion that a seat on a school board is somehow different (or more "pure") than a seat in the U.S. Senate in terms of partisanship. (One might argue that a school board director represents ALL the families in the district. But a U.S. Senator represents ALL the people and interests of his or her state, despite the fact that Senate races are extremely partisan.) It would make more sense to run for an office as an independent than trying to convince people that one is, for example, both a Republican and a Democrat at the same time (although in Mt. Lebanon one could make the case that there is no difference between the two parties!). Beware of any person who claims to "blow hot and cold with the same breath."
Wouldn't our state senator, Matt Smith, have an answer on whether Dan can share campaign monies for his run for (if he indeed is) school board and state house?
Did Matt use money from one campaign to help the other one?
Still no show by Brumfield, Linfante or any of the other BOSN people justifying how their position in support of spending a $150 million on the high school would've been the smart move.
Guess it's uncomfortable evaluating your past actions.
Mr. Marciniak n is being blamed for things that are not under his control. Search the public information to find out who is to blame.
I give up. Who is to blame, 8:31 PM?
Elaine
I don't see this discuss as placing blame but instead making sure cost are kept under control as much as possible. The blame train left the station long ago.
The board looks to Mr. M as the district's authority on change order issues.
No one expects any of the board members to be experts on engineering, wiiring, sixteenth, pumps, etc.
That is where Mr. Marciniak becomes important. If he doesn't have an idea on the number of change orders, how they relate to each other and what the fair market value should be... Who in the district should?
The cafeteria ladies, the school nurse?
Watching the discussion on the $55,000 change order several things stand out.
Mr. Lebowitz comments this is the price you pay for renovating an old building.
He's right of course. But, this is an old building that residents wanted to keep! It stands for something.
While listening to the CM destined the reason for the big change order and how we probably see like ones as the progress down thru the floors of B building, the body language, the gnashing of teeth from administrators and board members became apparent.
Now we see why the initial bids came in so far over the budget limit. The contractors saw the work that would need to be done, rather than aiming for a price just to squeak under the $113.4 million limit to avoid a voter referendum.
This is also a vindication for Taylor, Rothchild and the CAC. They warned, they offered a solution to build a 21st century high school with the structures in place and for an amount closer to $100 million.
But no we hadto have our monument to athletics, our vomitirium! Well we'tre getting both! Enjoy.
Did you also notice that Dan Remely was not there to vote for or against the change orders?
Elaine
Remember when Bill Matthews uncovered it would take $25 million to renovate building B?
He said, as a Lebo grad, if it costs that much, tear it down.
Thought it odd that Dan was absent for the vote to approve the preliminary budget also.
Wasn't he going to fight to reduce the amount or at least evidence presented on the blog earlier suggested that to me.
"Here is Dan Remely's take on the fake budget:
From: DRemely@mtlsd.net
To: Concerned Resident
Subject: RE: fake budget
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 18:51:17 +0000
I think the final budget should be much lower. There are too many unknowns to establish a final budget at this time. Dan"
That's the way to slug it out for your constituents, Dan. You could've have at least submitted an email statement to be read prior to the budget vote.
Yes certainly 1:22 you could've torn down building B to avoid the $25 millionth remodel it.
So what was the plan offered had we pursued that option. A brand spanking new building for $150 million. Good answer!
Or we could have looked closer at the building professionals advice (CAC) that we could save both B and C for an amount closer to $100 million.
No we needed a vomitirium!!!
1:37, Bill can certainly speak for himself, but he definitely highlighted the $25 million was a high estimate in order to get community support for an all-new facility.
Since he brought it to light, the District has not revised the estimates to show building-by-building renovation costs.
This was done to keep the CAC from being proven right.
I am attempting to bring up the initial high estimate for renovatiing building B, so we can see the architect may have been onto something several years ago. Remember, Bethel's new construction was much less than our renovation will be. And they have a brand new rifle range.
Don't you think the $410 thousand estimate is inflated due to the anti-gun political bent of the school board?
You are correct that Bill was highlighting the inflated cost of renovating blgd B to enlist support for the NEW alternative as I remember it. Wasn't sure that was your point.
Still not sure that you message is clear. Do you think we should've have followed Bethel's lead? Consider at the same time Baldwin did a renovation for $57 million.
As for the rifle range estimate. I agreed it probably inflated and apparently the coach seems to think so too.
It seems the closer we hold the board's feet to the fire on change orders the more we see them being revised downward don't you think.
Someone asked how the range went from $300,000 in the original estimates to now $410,000.
Did we ever hear a follow up to that question?
We never heard how the rifle range went from $300,000 to $410,000. However Mr. Remely went up to $500,000 by adding operating costs to the capital costs.
Dan, you don't add operating costs to capital costs in a responsible budget.
In December 2011, the rifle range renovation estimate was $411,000.
http://triblive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_773075.html
In the most contentious debate of the two-hour meeting, the board rejected adding a new rifle range, which would have cost an extra $411,000, but made the provision that officials could add it later as a separate capital project. Though the district has a highly competitive rifle team, board member Dan Remely noted, the team consists of only 25 members, who use the range only a few months out of the year. Without the rifle range, the space is proposed for storage.
The coach said the rifle range is used year-round, and 50 teachers use the range in addition to the 25-30 students.
Someone at the meeting 8 days ago did say it was originally $300,000.
Where is it documented?
In Upper St. Clair, the initial cost estimate for repairing the (rifle range) system is in the neighborhood of $100,000.
This is the 2012-13 budget by sport, descending dollars:
Football 248,801
Athletic Office 219,742
Basketball 152,954
Track 141,823
General-All Sports 91,978
Soccer 78,480
Wrestling 63,994
Lacrosse 60,438
Swimming 55,856
Volleyball 49,077
Baseball 38,380
Cross Country 35,549
Softball 34,563
Golf 31,127
Tennis 27,939
Field Hockey 20,754
Rifle 16,988
Cheerleaders 16,602
Ice Hockey 3,000
Crew 3,000
Rifle is down at the bottom of the list.
Football and Basketball's one year budget combined
would pay for the inflated rifle range renovation.
Interesting budget list.
Football and basketball charge admission and probably generate the most revenue in apparel and concession sales. Where do those monies go?
Don't know about the other sports.
Rifle is a varsity sport. If we are eliminating it why didn't we also eliminate the contributions to club sports. ice hockey and crew first?
Also, does track seem expensive at $141,823 per year?
Is anyone else surprised at that high a number for track?
10:45, it's those golden track shoes.
On a more serious notes, I bet none of the rifle participants are doping or shooting roids.
Can that be a given for the other sports listed?
I may try to write more on Building B later.
For now, suffice it to say, it was NOT that I wanted the new school option, the issue was that the Design team, under the leadership of Mr. Remely and Mrs. Capucci, wanted to spend millions on Building B and re-purpose it for something other than the High School.
Maybe 15% or 20% would have been used for district Administration and the balance could be "rented" out, or otherwise re-purposed.
My position was that if Building B's destiny was not a high school, then it should be torn down. We should not spend millions rehabbing a building for a yet to be identified or speculative purpose.
Mr. Remely and Mrs. Capucci and I disagreed on this -- at least until they heard from the Community that their plan was cukoo for cocoa puffs.
Bill
Will someone with constuction knowledge/experience examine the accepted deletes and compare to change orders now? Potential Project Cost Savings Worksheet
How many cost savings are being worked back in as change orders?
Elaine
The $25 million for renovation of Building B was always a joke and it was used as a hammer.
Remely's dilemma at the time was he was told by some historical group (not the historical society) that he would be fought tooth and nail if he decided to tear down building B because it was so much a part of the Mt. Lebanon landscape.
So Dan went about trying to figure out how to "repurpose" Building B. His idea was to renovate it but then to lease it out. And of course that makes no sense at all especially with the existing parking issues. Dan found himself in a tight spot when it came figuring out Building B so he promised a special interest group that he wouldn't touch it.
It was a terrible idea and luckily there were enough people on the school board at the time that agreed that it was a terrible idea so it never went farther than that.
Then, miraculously, the cost to renovate Building B went from $25 million down to something like $12 million.
As a follower of the board at the time, I still believe to this day that the $25 million number was a red herring used by the architect to blow out of the water the idea of one school board member who wanted to use a GESP (like the municipality just did) to renovate Building B at practically ZERO cost. At $12 million, the plan was completely doable. For $25, it wouldn't work.
But that is just this crazy right-winger, conspiracy theorist talking!
Bill, thanks for the trip down memory lane.
This the same period when they were claiming B building couldn't be renovated for 21st century education but one of their suggestion for future tenants in the space was for a university to use it as a satellite classroom facility.
Your cuckoo for cocoa puffs is spot on!
8:54 AM, what does GESP stand for?
Elaine
Guaranteed Energy Savings Plan.
Same thing the muni did with their Linc loan.
Basically you are guaranteed to save more in energy than you pay on the loan to upgrade the building.
A new roof, windows, floors, lighting, HVAC, boiler system, etc, would all fit into the GESP plan. Savings in energy in Building B alone would have amounted to hundreds of thousands of dollars per yet.
This savings would have been used to pay the loan. You would move some money from "energy costs" to "debt service" in the budget. And get a practically new building.
None of the walls being knocked down would have been covered but what building B lacked was windows that closed correctly, a roof that held out water, an efficient boiler system, etc. All things covered by GESP.
Bill Mathews and 8:54, confirmation of your comments can be found here:
http://www.mtlsd.org/highschoolrenovation/stuff/buildingalternativesummary.pdf
See plans 2A and 3 for description of bldg B uses and the projected costs of each.
I believe these are the designs that Brumfield, Linfante and their BOSN friends lobbied for! Thank God, they didn't get their way!
Post a Comment