Project team keeps major contractor credits pending; staff told to prepare contracts ahead of May 19 start

A presenter for Regional School District 13's project team said the group accepted a number of minor scope clarifications but left several large proposed contractor credits pending, keeping the guaranteed maximum price short of the district's target as staff worked to finalize numbers.

The project team reviewed change-order and alternate bids, agreeing that small items such as labeling PVC jacket color in mechanical rooms and eliminating windows on AHU access doors could be accepted in concept. The team asked technical staff (Eric and Chris) to verify mechanical, electrical and plumbing details during the shop-drawing phase before making final commitments. The presenter said they would not take larger credits now because the low bidder could change and that could alter the credit amounts.

Why it matters: the group reported pending credit subtotal of $871,000 while the target reduction needed was about $1,054,000, leaving a gap the team said must be closed before a final GMP is set. That shortfall means the district will either need additional credits from trade packages or adjustments in the overall scope before awarding work.

Key decisions and technical points

• PVC jacket and attic duct insulation — staff clarified item 13 conflated two distinct changes: white PVC jacket (used to differentiate systems in mechanical/boiler rooms) and a change to attic duct insulation. The team accepted the PVC color change in concept but asked staff to separate the credit values so each element is accurately accounted for.

• Equipment 'train' and chiller alternates — the committee discussed a basis-of-design submission that described training equipment for air handlers, chillers, fan coils, reheat coils, chiller splits and VAVs. Staff said air handlers and chillers are expected to be part of the 'train' but some components (VAV boxes, splits) are typically procured through open competition. Two larger alternates that proposed different chiller types — including a multistack chiller option quoted as a $313,000 credit versus a prior $242,000 baseline — were rejected and the team said it would keep the baseline train chiller and ask MEP reviewers to re-check item 14 with Ferguson and the contractor.

• Stud gauge substitution — a proposal to use 20-gauge metal studs in lieu of 33-mil studs produced a quoted credit of $31,000. Staff said the structural team must vet locations during shop drawings (pull tests and existing metal-deck conditions could affect applicability) and the item was left pending in concept.

• Acoustics and ISO curbs — the team discussed a leftover ISO curb specification intended to limit vibration/noise transmission in order to meet Connecticut high-performance building standards; acquisition staff were asked to examine whether built-in mitigation (additional ceiling materials or similar) would be required before accepting or pricing the change.

Schedule, visuals and next steps

Staff confirmed a tentative construction start of May 19 and said they would circulate contractor notice-to-proceed materials. Carson and Rusty were asked to provide canopy visuals for the front entrance to aid decision-making. The team also noted a masonry bid alternate where the second bidder effectively offered a $48,000 credit; that alternate remains pending because it may change the net value.

Final administrative action

A motion was made and met with the committee's assent; the transcript records a direction to "get those contracts out" and to try to have them signed by Friday. The transcript does not record a formal roll-call vote or a recorded tally. Staff were also asked to continue vetting outstanding trade packages (notably roofing) and to bring final numbers back to the committee prior to any GMP commitment.

The meeting also discussed non-contract items: a planned ceremonial groundbreaking with invited legislative representatives and a May 19 start, and a follow-up Google doc for education-related discussion items. The committee asked the district's technical reviewers to re-check key mechanical items before the next decision point.

Attribution: quotes and attributions in this article are to functional speakers identified in the transcript (e.g., a presenter, staff member, committee member). The transcript contains no self-identifying speaker names for many turns; where names were mentioned as responsible for tasks (Carson, Rusty, Eric, Chris, Laurel, Cindy), the article reports those mentions but does not attribute direct quotations to them unless the transcript shows the person speaking.