Canton, Massachusetts · Saved source text
FY 14 School Windows
Saved text from 4 source pages. Transcription and OCR may contain errors; verify figures and wording against the original. Retrieved 2026-10-15.
Source page 1
MSBA WINDOW PROJECTS Final Schematic Design proposal GMS Hansen Total construction cost $698,644 $494,991 $1,193,635 $142.83 sqft OPM costs $71,950 $71,950 $143,900 Designer fee $60,250 $52,200 $112,450 Hazmat etc. $219,003 $216,483 $435,486 Design contingency $38,284 $28,483 $66,767 Construction contingency $42,113 $31,332 $73,445 Owners Contingency $16,845 $12,533 $29,378 Total cost w/o alternates $1,147,089 $907,972 $2,055,061 Add Alternate : Doors $184,183 $115,323 $299,506 Total Project Costs $1,331,272 $1,023,295 $2,354,567 Project Costs Compare Russo Barr css Variance construction cost $693,634 $1,193,635 $500,001 OPM costs $0 $143,900 $143,900 Designer fee $60,316 $112,450 $52,134 Hazmat etc. $0 $435,486 $435,486 Design contingency $0 $66,767 $66,767 Construction contingency $0 $73,445 $73,445 Owners Contingenc' $0 $29,378 $29,378 Total Project Costs w/o alternates $753,950 $2,055,061 $1,301,111 Add Alternate : Doors $0 $299,506 $299,506 Total Project Costs $753,950 $2,354,567 $1,600,617 MSBA Reimbursement (45%) $339,278 $1,059,555 $720,278 LESS: Contingency-non reimbursables $200,000 -$200,000 ESTIMATED FINAL MSBA REIMBURSE $339,278 $859,555 $520,278 ADDITIONAL AMOUNT NEEDED TO APPROPRIATE $1,600,617 POSSIBLE SOURCE OF FUNDS SCHOOL LT CAPITAL BUDGET $1,100,617 ONE TIME TOWN SOURCE $500,000
Source page 2
L490 | a6eq bez'ee'h egy yee pa0‘ZPL't fsez‘ezog | ezesus | Z26'206 ero cS yebpng yoelord ED eereZgs Caubiseg Oy) os os joserzs ade [racvees§ esr'vers aso ZPy Ls Sez'ezo' Ls feze'sui [zze‘zo6$ ELC CS 9gb'e$ eeg'Zls [eticrs s[eezoes ese os zee Les £1380 L$ __| 988" 168 oe a = eee peeises Sz 6c Seb'bes pesos pe as ___ $0 ras 229 8Ea$ oe 369$ “fees'eiss bs a2$ _|vss'vers isesvis sdees loses sess y 66a" PS ieee ‘97s fersos ae a Cc Teoxang jeurzorvz eo ~ 92 UO! po posers eze"2ig | REELS NOISHAA “ASUd - UIALED @ UasUeH oos'2$ 00S 28 Fwzox-eo. |e SHOOG PPY-4IED |) oceg - uinjeg WAOL- uosueH py - uesuey aseg- uasueH Eb EL-20 GASIARE yoGpng yelord je}0L }_____________ is 3 wale Gere IND £96 oF yoalans ¢ are atord aU} YIM payeisosse s)s809 j}y :JaHpng j9alorg [P01 | " eday payesajeosy vas VIN ‘uojueg
Source page 3
GMS/HANSEN WINDOW PROJECT UPDATE At last week’s School Committee meeting, Committee member, Bob Golledge, Superintendent, Jeff Granatino and Business Manager, Ken Leon outlined the status of the window projects planned for the Galvin Middle School and Hansen Elementary School. These capital projects, which were initially approved at last year’s Annual Town Meeting (ATM), are awaiting final approval by the Massachusetts School Building Assistance (MSBA) bureau under their Accelerated Green Repair Program. Ifthe MSBA gives their approval to the project, the District will be reimbursed for 45% of project costs. A major issue that was discussed at the meeting was the increase in construction costs from the original estimates.of last spring to what was recently submitted to the MSBA. Initially, the projects at the two schools were priced at $753,950, a number that was presented at ATM in the spring. However, final estimates from the state appointed architectural firm for the project, CSS, now have. the project’s estimated costs at $2,354,567, an increase of $1,600,617. One of the major contributing factors to the increase in construction cost estimates is the fact that polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB’s) and asbestos were found to be present in the caulking around some of the windows and some of the doors that are slated for removal. Whenever this type of repair project takes place, caulking is assessed to determine the levels of PCB’s present before construction begins, As noted in the EPA website, PCB’s are organic chemicals that were used in construction materials and electrical products produced before 1979. They were present in most window caulking used in construction projects from the 1950’s to 1970’s due to its durability and stability. The windows in each building are original and have been in place since the schools opened in the early 1970s. The engineering firm of Cardno ATC, a leader in this field, was responsible for testing the caulking in the two buildings. While the levels identified by Cardno are not out of the ordinary for window projects in buildings that are roughly forty years old, they do need to be treated carefully during the construction and cleanup process and that is where a large increase in the original estimates occurred. The rise in the cost of the project is largely due to the additional testing of the windows and surrounding areas at each of the two schools as part of the preliminary scope of work, the cost of removing the contaminants and the cost of monitoring the removal. In addition, doors were not part of the original project but now need to be removed as well. Moreover, the cost of the project has grown due to MSBA requirements such as procuring an OPM (owner's project manager) and carrying substantial owner's, designer and construction contingencies which were not part of the original costs. It is important to note that the amount of contaminants found in and around the caulking were not out of the ordinary and are consistent with work being done across the state in buildings constructed during this time period. In fact, the MSBA has been involved with six window/construction projects recently where there have been levels of PCB’s identified in the preconstruction assessments, At the Galvin and the Hansen, a majority of the caulking samples show levels that are below 50 parts per million with a few showing more than 50 parts per million. 50 parts per million is the threshold above which EPA approval is required. However, EPA. protocols and recommendations are being followed for the entire project. Once the levels
Source page 4
of PCB’s were identified, the architect had to change the scope of the construction and removal of materials based on the prescribed protocols recommended by the EPA. The concern of PCB’s in the environment usually occurs when the area around the window frames is disturbed from their stable state. In their current state they are stable molecules and do not pose a great risk to people in the buildings. When cut or scraped they become mobile and that is why there has to be extra care given to the construction site when removing the windows. This is akin to the extra precautions that are part of construction projects when they remove asbestos from insulation around pipes or old floor tiles. When looking to see if individuals are at a tisk with PCB’s present in the caulking, the EPA notes, “Although this is a serious issue, the potential presence of PCBs in schools and buildings alone should not be a cause for alarm.” The District is hopeful the project will be approved by the MSBA at their April board meeting. Once the project begins, all necessary precautions will be taken to ensure that the work and disposal is done properly. Construction is scheduled to take place during the summer in 2014 when the buildings are empty for the most part. While no one wanted to see such a dramatic increase to the original cost estimates for this project, it is the District’s responsibility to address the presence of the contaminants in a responsible and protective fashion. Again, the presence of PCB’s in the window caulking is not a surprise in projects of this scope, in buildings built in the early 1970’s. The MSBA is currently managing a number of projects like these and the number of PCB’s identified within the caulking is not owt of the ordinary. Nonetheless, we take this matter seriously and we will work closely with the MSBA, our architect and engineers to make sure the work is done correctly.