At the Tuesday, November 23 regular Permanent Building Committee (PBC) meeting, members were surprised to hear that over 1,000 yards of fill are being trucked off site from the new high school per day after many discussions had been had regarding stockpiling the excavated fill on the campus. The astronomical costs of fill removal were a frequent topic of conversation earlier in the year and are a sore spot as previous attempts to potentially reuse the materials wisely and more widely were stymied.

Colliers International’s Mr. Mark Schweitzer explained that a decision was made on the fly with O&G and school officials to not stockpile on the site as previously discussed, because the potential pile locations were deemed unsuitable. PBC members were not made aware of that decision. Schweitzer noted that some materials are being trucked to the New Fairfield Drop-Off Center for reuse, but that they can only take so much. Clearly frustrated by this turn of events, PBC member Mr. Paul Boniello reminded everyone that the PBC’s direction was “not a yard comes off that site until we figure out what we’re going to do with it.”

PBC member Mr. Don Kellogg asked for clarification that the correct amount of fill is being held for berms and other suitable reuses and said “Please tell me they didn’t bring in any fill in.” This got a lukewarm assurance from Ms. Katie Gagnon from Langan Engineering, who said, “I mean, I guess I would assume that Richards is accounting for what soil will remain on the site and not trucking it off.”

PBC members were not ready to concede that a Consolidated Early Learning Academy (CELA) schedule push is necessary. While school officials recently noted that the schedule shift to a mid-year opening is likely necessary, PBC members are not seeing substantiated cause for the delay. Given that O&G points to the large amount of unsuitable soils found in the fall as part of the delay, the PBC has asked for all logs related to the issue and asked for Colliers’ help in making a determination. They’ve also asked repeatedly for a recovery schedule from O&G and haven’t received one. Boniello noted that he is “very upset with the way this is going down.”

O&G’s Mr. Jason Travelstead said that “There were not many weeks of float within our schedule” and that there will be a “six-day week moving forward, once more trades populate the job site.” He went on to say “we have put our best brains together and we don’t know that there is recovering from that position, given the lack of float in the schedule…there are ways of recovering the schedule that would involve dipping into your pocket. For, you know, things like double shifting. If you want us to explore that, we can explore that more in depth.”

Boniello replied that he disagreed with this logic, saying “We magically lost a month to a month and a half that direc tly correlated to your ability to get the roofing material in January…It just did not make sense. And I just asked our team to go back and review those schedules because, once again, I’m not there every day. They are.” He appealed to Colliers, saying “I’m looking to Mark, I’m looking to Scott, I’m looking for those guys. So when you say that we got delayed by five days or something like that, all of a sudden I just want to make sure that we’re not allowing it to get pushed out because we all know how that works…we need to go back. We need to vett everything after September or even before. The PBC has not accepted those schedules.” Boniello stressed that he’s “not in a position where I’m conceding any of that until it’s proven to me that we truly have that delay, because you can make a CPM schedule say anything we want. And I just want, I want to be careful. It’s really important that we hold these dates.”

Another topic at the meeting concerned the mounting list of errors and omissions, the cost responsibility for which will revert to parties responsible once a threshold is met and if deemed appropriate. At issue are many “gray areas”—in what’s an error, an omission, or an unforeseen condition—which can be very costly and which are being tracked by Colliers International. Colliers has recently added their determinations of error and omission status to a tracking sheet and released it to PBC members (on the morning of this meeting). PBC members bristled when JCJ Architecture’s Ms. Christine O’Hare stated that she should be able to see the list before the PBC members and “talk through some of these” with Colliers. Kellogg made it clear that this was crossing a line, saying “Christine, you know, all due respect, I don’t think that you get a preview of that

. Colliers is our agent.” It was agreed that all parties should be able to view the tracking list.

Regarding CELA construction, O& G’s Mr. Zack Rowley reported that the addition is progressing. The focus has been on erecting steel in recent weeks. He went on to note that they are working on the decking and the framers are on site prepping for exterior walls and will begin sheathing in the next week or two. PBC members clarified that updated schedules will be made available more frequently and asked that all trades that can be working on the site before the roof materials arrive do so. At the new high school the slabs are being poured and underground roughing work is being completed.

The PBC went through the current list of Value Engineering (VE) items for the high school and agreed that some could be incorporated into the project, including approving aesthetic changes that will decrease cost, such as tile sizes and countertop colors. There are other VE items that need more discussion to determine accuracy in value.

The next regular Permanent Building Committee meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, December 14, 7:30 p.m.

By Sarah Opdahl