[Matt Rice]: All right, I don't know how long we have to wait for the breakout to happen. I think we have a good critical mass. Hopefully we haven't drawn too many people and that the other groups have a good critical mass as well. But I think we can get going. It looks like we have one, two, three, four, five, six folks. So we have about 20 minutes. So I don't know if we can... Aim for somewhere around three minutes. I will be sort of a tacit, passive, yet active-ish facilitator and try to keep us on time as we go through. But this is really an open forum opportunity to talk about – through the topics of climate, energy, and atmosphere. I know some of the folks here in this breakout session have some thoughts and feelings on that, so I'm certainly happy to open it to whoever wants to jump in first.
[Martine Dion]: And I put the sort of the startup talking points that we had in that slide in the chat.
[Matt Rice]: Thank you, Martine. I'm also happy to call on people if that's easier, but if anyone wants to jump in and go, I'm happy to do that. Raising our hands. Oh, if you're raising your hands, that's great. Yeah, I did not see them and maybe I don't have the right window open. But Paul, if you want to go, if you are raising your hand somewhere, feel free.
[Paul Garrity]: They mentioned about the materials and a few other things, and I was just concerned about, I think it's a good process that we're looking at in terms of energy building. Let me stop there. As we look at these different materials, low carbon, I'm just concerned, are we looking at paying for those themselves? That's my first question. Second question gets into, they're talking about wood versus other types of materials. Lifespan, how does that feel? Concrete versus wood. Lifespan, again, total cost of ownership. system, does that include a battery backup scenario where we can capture the energy on, you know, off days? Other couple of things is, again, the stretch energy approach, again, is that going to create a premium? Will it be taken and installed? And finally, the two others is that, is there any reports you can give me shared with us relative to the status of the that field for geothermal and does a pipe qualify as a building? Or can you stick it under the sea? How does that help the end? The last thing to talk about a 3% cost escalation. Is that a one-time situation? Is it ongoing for the 50 years? I'm just curious. So basically I'm looking at X and X costing, which we finally get and not having the life costs and numbers with us. just having a general feel.
[Martine Dion]: So, Paul, is it just me or we lost a couple of things, Matt?
[Matt Rice]: Yeah, I think, Paul, what was happening is your audio was coming in and out. So we got a lot of the question, but not all of it. I didn't put a mic on tonight.
[Martine Dion]: OK, if you stay close to your computer, but I caught a couple. So this is climate, energy, and atmosphere. So the carbon question, I think you may want to go the second session. If you can go into the materials, you can get that answer there. For the 3% LCCA, that's through the 50 years. It's a full cost escalation through the 50 years. Yes.
[Paul Garrity]: So I say that's three times 50 to give me 150% over? No. Yes. It's a compounded 3% from
[Martine Dion]: the net present value also calculation. The solar PV, it includes, right now we're looking at both a solar photovoltaic system and battery storage to fully optimize the peak load. There's some very compelling energy savings, but also peak charge savings. There's really good financials with having the battery storage. And so that's part of it.
[Paul Garrity]: And is it the program that National Grid and the others have had relative to the buyback of the PV energy?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[Paul Garrity]: We know how long that may run for right now. It's been planning for 50 years. We know if National Grid's buying it for the next 50.
[Martine Dion]: We're not accounting for those incentives. in the 50 years. So what we do with the life cycle cost analysis is we look at the cost of the system as we explain, right? Initial replacement, maintenance, energy cost. We look at that 50-year, and then we apply the upfront incentives that are on the initial cost. That's the first look at it. Later on, once everything is honed down, we have separate line items to add what we're talking about here, what we call revenues, because incentives are applied to the incremental costs. Revenues will be these annual revenues, but those will be considered.
[Paul Garrity]: My last item that's important is the, is there anything that you can speak to relative to the geothermal in the Everly fields and that whole issue of deed restrictions? Is that, have a possibility of utilizing that land mass up there? Can you speak to that Alicia or somebody have any idea where that is at?
[Matt Rice]: So Paul, I can speak to that because we have had some good conversations with DCR and even EEA on sort of how that is treated. So we did ask the question and the response that we got back is that we can put geothermal wells under the deed restricted portion of the land. But if we do that, we have to go through what's called an Article 97 legislative process. in terms of getting approval to do that. The state is very supportive of that approach of putting geothermal wells under open space, essentially, but they do still require that we go through this Article 97 process, which requires a two-thirds vote of the state legislature for approval. And so while we're still considering it, and there was that good slide that was in the presentation that showed sort of how much is deep restricted land and how much is available. for geothermal wells. It's a much cleaner path if we can stay on the non-deed restricted lands, and then we have to figure out what portion of that is covered by the existing building and when can we install those geothermal wells. We do have all options open to us, but they have different implications in terms of permitting processes, depending on which way we go with the wells. Thank you. Somebody else want to hop in on another question or topic?
[Jessica Parks]: And Matt, when would you look to drill test wells?
[Matt Rice]: So the test well is actually being drilled hopefully in the next coming weeks. We really did try to get it done over the summer when nobody was around, but there was just some negotiations that had to happen between lawyers apparently. There is no cost to the city of Medford for the test well because there was a grant that we were able to take advantage of through MassCEC. They are paying for the test well. It will be happening in the corner of the parking lot to the southeast corner of the site, hopefully, again, within the next couple of weeks. We will have a drill rig out there, and the school is helping to manage that to the process. It's a good question also because that will allow our geotechnical engineer who's actually consulting on the design of the geothermal system to help tune the thermal conductivity coefficients that we work into the overall equation. That may help. It may also adversely affect the quantity of geothermal wells. that are required in terms of the heating and cooling of the building. But it'll be a good piece of information that'll help all of our calculations be a little bit more accurate.
[Jessica Parks]: You're working with Healy and Aldrich, right?
[Matt Rice]: That's correct. Yeah.
[Martine Dion]: Don't be shy.
[Matt Rice]: Or we can go back to Paul. Paul had some other questions too, so we can make sure that we hit all of those, Paul.
[Paul Garrity]: I think they were in another venue.
[Martine Dion]: You were questioning embodied carbon? Is that?
[Paul Garrity]: Well, I was looking at the area that we're under the heading of the stretch energy and the cost savings there, or the potential advantages there. The premiums to implement that over regular materials costs, you know, kind of down that kind of line of thinking.
[Martine Dion]: So the, for the stretch code, the majority of the systems are, you know, enclosure and energy systems. And those are the stretch code. There's no additional cost because it's the code, right? So they're required. Was your question more about MSBA's additional one?
[Paul Garrity]: No, just the basic approach. We talk about the final determination, labor and materials. And I'm saying if we move in a certain direction, become energy efficient, pushing sustainability. does the cost, the initial cost of materials, the low-carbon, the low-emission materials, do they come with a premium cost?
[Martine Dion]: Okay, okay, I can answer that. So the majority of the low-emitting material that we're going for do not, they're basically, we've achieved those points and those additional points with materials that are available, that are you know, a lot of these, a lot of that criteria has been addressed industry-wide by the major manufacturers of products that we use in commercial buildings. So there's no real additional cost. For the red list, there is a good chunk of materials that can be red list free or red list approved with three equals. So you got the competition and you do not incur additional costs.
[Paul Garrity]: There's a question, excuse me. You're using the term red list.
[Martine Dion]: Your red list, good point. The red list is a set of chemicals that we try to avoid in materials. It's out of a separate certification system that's called Living Building Challenge. And that specific criteria has been sort of included in many projects, many school projects. It's not an MSBA requirement. It's something that the school committee basically took interest in and asked to be included in the project.
[Paul Garrity]: Thank you.
[Matt Rice]: All right, we have some other folks here too, I know, that definitely want to ask some questions.
[Martine Dion]: How are we doing in terms of time?
[Alicia Hunt]: I'd like to let other members in. Crystal, I see you came off, you turned on your video. Do you have questions or comments, opinions?
[SPEAKER_01]: Oh, yes. Okay. I think, can you hear me?
[Matt Rice]: We can, yeah.
[SPEAKER_01]: Okay, perfect. My computer's glitching out a little bit. Just to start, I'm Crystal. I'm here as a reporter from Gotta Know Medford, so kind of from the community stance. And I was just wondering if some of these, if one of the options that we do choose to go with ends up being on the more expensive side, are there parts of the project that would then be altered accordingly, or what is kind of the process based on if we go with one of these options and it exceeds the current expectations for cost?
[Martine Dion]: So that's a great question. I'll start answering, Matt, and you can complement. When we look at the cost of the systems, we look at the initial cost, right? And right now, in the budget, We own the geothermal system. So we own what really the full geothermal system, what is probably the higher cost, the system with the higher cost. So now we're looking at systems that would probably be either same cost or a bit less. The other two options may actually be less expensive than what we already own in the budget right now. And then on that, we don't look just at the first cost, because you may have a cheaper system, but it may cost you millions more over 50 years. So we look at the cost of the system over 50 years, and the decision will be taken over the cost of the system over 50 years. And that system, in that cost over 50 years, we look at the replacement of the different, because they don't last 50 years, you know, replace them 20, 25 years. So, in some cases, every 15 years. And we also look at the energy efficiency, so the energy savings. which for a more efficient system, you're going to have less energy costs. So that all fall in the final 50 year cost. And the decision will be based on that 50 year and not on the initial cost.
[Matt Rice]: You know, that's a great, oh, go ahead. Go ahead, Crystal.
[SPEAKER_01]: I was just gonna, just from what I know about geothermal systems, do you expect that that will most likely be the option that you end up going with then, just because it tends to be a little less long-term?
[Martine Dion]: Yeah, we do not know. These three systems that we're looking at are three efficient systems. They slightly differ, and the decision will be made by you know, the school committee, the Medford school committee, it is not our decision to make. So we'll present them with all of the information for them to make an educational, an educated, I'm sorry, an educated decision, you know, and a cost of ownership decision, and not just for first cost.
[Jessica Parks]: And isn't it, I mean, I think we've talked about the case that it may not be only one system. There is a possibility that it may be geothermal plus air to water. Yeah, that's one of the options. It could be two of the options together, which would be a cost savings from all geothermal, but still capitalizing on some of the significant energy savings of geothermal and kind of finding that happy balance between the different systems. So you're basically finding the, you're optimizing the point both efficiency and cost.
[Martine Dion]: Exactly that's one of the options we're looking at. Yeah that'll be presented.
[Matt Rice]: I see that Paul, I see that you have your hand up but let me just clarify also for Crystal the decision-making process because I think you did a nice job Martine of outlining it. I just want to sort of clarify on the path that we're moving forward. So next week on the 23rd of September We're going to be presenting, really this team, our team, the sustainability group at SMMA, will be presenting to the MEP and sustainability advisory team a more detailed version of the life cycle cost analysis. And it will really be through the discussion that happens next week, which reviews both the life cycle cost, and then we're also looking, obviously, at that first cost of the system. to figure out what is going to be the recommendation that's going to be forwarded back to the building committee. The Medford High School Comprehensive Building Committee would then accept that recommendation from the advisory team. The advisory team, though, between when the building committee is reviewing and presumably accepting the recommendation, will meet again on October 1st to again review and clarify what those recommendations are coming out of the meeting next week on the 23rd. And then we are forwarding that recommendation to the full building committee at their October 6th meeting. So there's a series of discussions that are going to be happening in the near future. And certainly we welcome folks joining and listening into those discussions. The advisory team is really comprised of Medford residents that really have a lot of expertise in this particular area. And we have had some really good discussions with that group in the past, and we expect that that will continue moving forward. Again, looking at sort of that primary trade-off and balance between the first cost implications and the life cycle cost implications, just thinking about what the cost of Medford will be over the course of time. And the other thing that's really important to highlight that Martine mentioned is the mechanical system that we have accounted for currently in the project budget is really the most costly system that we have options. So we have a lot of good options of potentially reducing first cost by looking at alternative systems, whether it's a hybrid geothermal system, whether it's an air to water source heat pump system that doesn't have any geothermal There's a lot of good options on the first cost standpoint, but again, we want to make that really educated decision so that we're thinking both about sort of present cost as well as sort of long-term implications. Um, all right. There was something else, Jessica, that you mentioned just before I jumped to Paul. I also wanted to clarify. I'm just forgetting what it is. So we might go to you, Paul. Um, and you can start and maybe it'll come back in my memory or Martine.
[Paul Garrity]: You answered my question. I was concerned that we would, the committees would be evaluating it from a total cost perspective, as opposed to least cost perspective. Right. Right. Thank you.
[Martine Dion]: I just want to say that we may be getting close to the 20 minute. And I don't know, Matt, if Ken and Will are managing that and they're going to get us all back in time.
[Matt Rice]: They probably will. Usually what happens is there's like this little scary thing that pops up on everyone's screen saying you will be put back in a few minutes. But I think the only thing that we need to do is make sure that we have a speaker that would like to recount some of these topics to the full group when we get back together.
[Alicia Hunt]: put in a comment. So, since I have not I've been on, I'm on that one advisory committee, one of the advisory committees but I'm one. I have not been very active and I've not been very, we have not been sort of rallying people to come push for green because this building is already planning to be so green. And I feel like there are fewer people here because people aren't saying we have to go fight for this. We're already talking about net zero and solar and battery storage and geothermal. And that's amazing because it really meets the values that we've heard in Medford in the last 15 years. And I just wanted to say that I was not aware we were looking at carport solar. And I just have been trying to get that somewhere in the city because people love to park under it. keeps the snow off their cars and the rain. It's not raining on you when you're getting out of your car. Your car isn't as hot when you go to get into it. And I wish people didn't always drive all the time, but we are. And I just love the fact that we might actually get carport solar over the cars here. I think it would be lovely. And it's been difficult to find appropriate parking lots in Medford to do that for.
[Martine Dion]: Oh, that's good to know. That's good to know. Thanks.
[Jessica Parks]: I will second that one. I keep saying, but what about the PV over the cars when people keep talking about the field there? And I'm like, but car PV, car PV, I like that option. So yeah, I agree. I am 100% in favor of the PV over the cars. And that would be instead, we would not do multi-layer parking if we had the PV over cars or would we still have some, a parking garage below there? How does that work?
[Matt Rice]: There's a couple of different options that are still under consideration for a field over a parking area or a garage. One of them takes up the majority of the site area to the south of the building and would preclude the opportunity to do ground-mounted canopies over. the parking. But there is an option if it's not maybe a full track and then we just recreate the edge of the field complex, say two multi-purpose fields. That does leave some amount of area for canopy PV over the top. Whether it lets us get to that net zero energy goal, I think that's something that we're still going to be sorting out as we work with our photovoltaic consultant. But it does offer some amount of area. So I think there's sort of a hybrid approach there as well in terms of which sort of parts and pieces we're choosing from a site program. But you're absolutely right that there is sort of that interesting trade-off in terms of sort of benefiting the city and the site in one way and potentially creating a challenge in another way of not having as much area that we could put cover over parking spots because they're covered by something else, presumably.
[Alicia Hunt]: And I will just say, with my parent hat on, that it's frustrating that we have to have triad offs. It feels like this area is so big, but it's not as big as it feels like it is. I actually have two sons who have run track, and my youngest is graduating from the high school this year. And he was so thrilled by the idea that they would put a track up at the high school for the future students who run track. It's been such a large track team over the years that it really benefits a lot of kids. So I hope that that works out to have the track just because he as a student is saying how wonderful it would have been. And so he was very, but I want the solar over the cars. He doesn't drive yet. So he doesn't understand how lovely that is. Yes.
[Martine Dion]: No, duly noted, Alicia.
[Matt Rice]: Do we have any takers for wanting to give a little bit of a summary when we get back together?
[Alicia Hunt]: Well, I'm assuming you guys took notes. I didn't take notes.
[Martine Dion]: We're all taking notes. Don't worry about that.
[Alicia Hunt]: Yeah, I couldn't remember what people said, so.
[Matt Rice]: So we might tap you then, Emily, if that's, I think you have probably the best collection of notes through it.
[Martine Dion]: Yep, that's fine. Yep, I took notes.
[Matt Rice]: Okay.
[SPEAKER_01]: If no one else has any questions on the energy specifically, I have more of a general question. I know you said in the initial meeting before that we did the breakout rooms that students were are invited to this forum tonight. Is there any other ways that you're engaging students throughout this process so that they can have some input aside from inviting them to the community meetings?
[Martine Dion]: Absolutely. Matt, you want to jump in with that? At many points throughout the project, we are
[Matt Rice]: Yes, to date, what we have engaged students through is primarily dedicated programming meetings. So we have a series of meetings that occur, I think, at three discrete points. We're in the midst of our sort of second set of meetings, where there's a little bit more than 50 different groups that we're all meeting with to solicit input and feedback in terms of the school design. And we do have dedicated discussions with the students to understand where their priorities are and things that are important to them in the overall design process. We have had student participation in all of our community forums prior to this one as well. So one through five in terms of just having either participants remotely or in person, or in some cases, they were helping to facilitate some of the activities. We have given a tour of the building as well that were student led to sort of let the public walk through the building and really hear the experiences of students as we've gone through. They've been involved in some of our visioning activities as well, and both in terms of like group discussions where we all get together, both with the educators as well as students, parents, community members, and members of the design team. But we did this really wonderful activity where it was called a student shadow day, where different members of that visioning group, the adults actually got to tag along with some of the students just to understand sort of how they're, we didn't do the entire day, I think we did the majority of the morning like right up into lunch, but I got to sit in like a Spanish II class and then I went to the cosmetology exploratory class and really got to both talk with them to hear about the experiences but also understand the challenges of moving to the building and getting from class to class in a not enough time that was allotted. So I think for me that was the most impactful sort of powerful experience and exposure to the students, but we'll be continuing those opportunities as we go forward. We really do have a robust set of CTE programs at the school. And so those students, once we get closer towards some construction, and we have some construction facing shops, there's going to be opportunities for them to engage with us. And then I think there's other, whether it's visual arts, whether it is environmental science, like the students that were joining this evening, there's really all sorts of opportunities. We really do value their perspective as we go through. It's great to hear, Alicia, that your son is sort of thinking about those future generations as well. It's not just sort of a single focus, but really thinking about the larger community.
[Martine Dion]: And for other projects, we've also done specific sustainability sessions with, you know, science or specific city programs. We've done that talking about the project directly in the project and the the, you know, sort of the, when the project, when the school is done, right, what happens. We've done that on other projects, and we've let, you know, the Medford team know that we're interested in doing that as well. The, Brenda mentioned the, the environmental literacy, the the project will have a full educational program that can be used. There's sort of the visuals throughout the signs that we talked about, but we also create a case study and a tour, a specific tour that the student can use, you know, to give to school visitors or as part of their studies.
[Alicia Hunt]: It's interesting.
[Matt Rice]: We probably over-answered there for you, Crystal, but hopefully that gives you some good content. I don't know if Ken forgot about us and just left us in our breakout room. Maybe we're ad-libbing here, but this is fine. This is great conversations. I appreciate it.
[Martine Dion]: I don't know how to get out back into the other thing.
[Alicia Hunt]: You click the leave room button, and there's a leave meeting or leave breakout room. If you click leave meeting, you've exited the whole thing.
[Matt Rice]: OK. Yeah, don't do that accidentally. You can always come back, though, I suppose.
[Martine Dion]: So I'll go and make sure, because I think we've gone more than 20 minutes, right?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yeah, we have.
[Martine Dion]: Yeah. Leave breakout room.
[SPEAKER_01]: Alicia, Matt, while I still have you here, what have you heard from students in terms of feedback? What have they been most concerned or talking about the most?
[Matt Rice]: That's a good question. And just give me a second to sort of scan my sometimes dodgy memory without having something written in front of me.
[Alicia Hunt]: Matt talks to a wider range. My son's a senior in the robotic shop, actually. And so at the very, very, very beginning, they were concerned about not having enough space for their shop. And then they saw the space, how the MSBA with the state thought they needed for space. And it was the same amount or bigger than what they currently have. And they were really happy about that, because they have a lot of big equipment in there.
[Matt Rice]: I think some of the other challenges with the site are something that like the larger community experiences in terms of getting to the school in the morning and just the accessibility of like getting in. So that is a challenge. It's a difficult one for us to deal with in terms of like the larger Medford traffic concerns. That's certainly something that is tricky for everybody, but also just navigating the building. I think the hallways, sort of the, labyrinth kind of nature of the building and the remoteness of the CTE shops. from the classrooms when students are doing exploratory in their freshman year and they have to move back and forth. So we are happy to answer any questions that either didn't get asked or answered in the last session. We had a larger group during the last breakout session and so I think folks wandered a little bit in terms of questions and we just ended up responding to everyone. So the nice thing is it's just the two of you so we're happy to field any questions or if you want to make some general statements about anything on the topics of climate, energy and atmosphere, we're happy to walk through that with you.
[SPEAKER_05]: I guess one of the, just more, it's more of a general, but I guess what's the biggest challenge you guys are seeing right now with sort of meeting some of these items or kind of working within the lines of the design and budget as you're looking at some of the main requirements that are also helping kind of the budget on the back end of meeting that.
[Matt Rice]: Do you want to take that Martine or do you want me to?
[Martine Dion]: I'll start. I think as I mentioned the current budget includes all the requirements for the MSBA and the LEED certification. And the stretch code, the stretch energy code also includes, you know, sort of the majority of the requirements to get to a low energy demand for the building. What we're looking at right now are the different options for the HVAC system with the understanding that the current budget includes the ground source heat pump, which is the most expensive system out of the three options. So right now we're looking at other options that can bring some savings, but at the same time achieve the energy goal. Um, so that's sort of where we are here. Um, the, the one challenge I will say, I will mention is, uh, you know, there's, we don't want to really talk about costs here, but as I mentioned, we're capturing most of everything in a cost. Um, the one challenge is, is, you know, um, the site capacity to hold, um, enough solar photovoltaic to make the net zero energy. It's something that we're going to track throughout. It's a goal, and I think we're close. But that's one of the challenges, I would say, Matt, right? That we're keeping an eye on this very closely.
[Matt Rice]: Sure. Yeah. I mean, the overall cost of the project is something that we're acutely aware of. We understand the need from a community perspective to find ways of reducing that and mitigating the impact on the citizens of Medford. What we want to make sure of, I think as Martine was explaining, is that we want to pay attention to that first cost, but we also don't want to ignore the ongoing impact from a cost perspective, operational cost perspective to the city as well. And so we're trying to find that sweet spot of initial first cost and then life cycle cost. And that's really what the whole life cycle cost process is intended to help sort out and plan through as we go through the process. I will say that one of the other unique and specific challenges with the site is the deed restriction that was placed on the land in 1970 and forces us to think about the area of the site in really two different ways. Again, that deed-restricted area and non-deed-restricted area. I can't remember if we were saying it in the large group or if it was in our last breakout group. We're allowed to put the geothermal wells underneath the deed-restricted land, but we have to go through an Article 97 permitting process. It's a state permitting process that requires a two-thirds vote, positive vote of the state legislature in order to pass it. It's actually something that we're fairly optimistic would pass because the state of Energy and Environmental Affairs as well as DCR has other examples at other schools within the state recently that have passed a similar type of permitting hurdle. And they really are encouraging geothermal wells to be located below open space. But there is still that mechanism in place. It's not something that we can just do offhand. So there's additional time, there's additional cost to permit. and run through and legal fees and all that type of thing. Whereas if we stick to the non deed restricted land, we can install the geothermal wells without any of those permitting hurdles. But some of that non deed restricted land has a building on top of it right now. And even though that we will be demolishing that building and eventually goes away, We may not have access to that land until later on in the process. We have to find a way to temporarily heat and cool the building before we have the geodermal wells in place. There's a temporary conditions cost that's associated there. It's a complicated set of puzzle pieces that we don't necessarily have on maybe other projects. Every project has its own challenges, but I think one of the specific ones at the Medford High School site is really tied to that deed restriction limitation.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yeah, very helpful in my end to kind of understand some of that as well. And I know you also have the logistical challenges of the site being the opposite of being flat and just in a full hill with, you know, so you would have to incorporate blasting and sort of that other component of, you know, And any changes or working on the different areas at the top. So that's helpful to Exactly.
[Matt Rice]: Yeah, the fact that teaching and learning is going to be happening on the site where we're going to be building and renovating a very large building and you need to do all that safely. And really at the end of the day, we don't want to have any of those temporary conditions drive our final thinking, right? We still want an ideal building at the end of the day. So it's finding a way through and optimizing sort of the opportunities that we have from a an energy performance perspective for the purposes of this particular discussion. But that same concept, I think, applies to a lot of other aspects of the projects, certainly educationally, site circulation, a lot of different parts and pieces.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yeah, that makes sense. That's very helpful.
[SPEAKER_09]: Yeah, you nailed what I was going to ask is about the concern about not having the geothermal fields till basically what's that phase three essentially, right? And then that's basically almost four years or three years of phase one being done and then a couple of years of phase two being done off, quote unquote, temporary systems, right? That's, I can imagine there's some challenges trying to figure that out.
[Matt Rice]: Yes. Yeah. And Emily has been doing a lot of research right now to figure out sort of what those temporary conditions might be and sort of what those costs. And I'm not sure if we're going to be able to wrap that into the life cycle cost analysis piece, but it may be a consideration off to the side of the LCCA that we want to just make sure people are thinking about in addition to sort of the more traditional life cycle cost pieces of it. There's some interesting opportunities as well from the geothermal wells if we're trying to look at just the non-deed-restricted portions of the land, in that if we need the full well field for 100%, then we're pushed out beyond that, and so we really have to go into deed-restricted land. But if we're looking at a hybrid system, the area that we need for the wells gets greatly reduced. So there may be opportunities to think about sort of phasing the installation of the geothermal wells if we can stay out from the footprint of the existing building and just put it in maybe over an initial summer before we actually get into the process of construction. We target different summers to put in different amounts of the wells and maybe even get it online before we get to later phases. Some of those ideas are not fully cooked in terms of working through the process. This is really sort of active discussion on the part of the design team trying to figure out the different variables and uh, the different loads and how that all comes together. But a lot of that's going to get worked out through discussions, um, with the advisory team, um, in these upcoming meetings and then eventually through the building committee.
[SPEAKER_09]: 10-4. All right. I'll also stay tuned in a couple of weeks when we interview. I have a couple ideas as well, but I'll wait for that timeframe.
[Unidentified]: All right.
[Matt Rice]: Can't share too much right now.
[Martine Dion]: If we don't have any other questions, I think we have about five minutes left. Matt, when it's time, I'm going to have to leave to go tell Will to bring everybody back. Ken's doing it.
[Matt Rice]: He was just hanging out there waiting for you to pop back in and say time's up.
[Martine Dion]: Yeah, it's a good thing. It's a good thing I did it. But it's okay. We got, you know, we went just about five minutes over early in that session, you know, and now we're getting close to 20 minutes. So we'll do a full, we'll do a 20 and this ends at 8.30, right?
[Matt Rice]: It is scheduled to end at 8.30, yeah.
[Martine Dion]: Yeah. Yeah, and I mean, we know what to do. You just said leave room and. You know, if I go back into the main room, go back, leave, leave, not leave the meeting, but leave, leave room, break out room, right? So I'll go in there to make sure he does it in. Two or three minutes.
[Matt Rice]: Okay. Yeah. So generally we have about five more minutes in case, um, I mean, Pierre, um, But Tony, if you guys have any other questions, we're happy to field those. It's a much different vibe when you have two people as opposed to seven or more.
[SPEAKER_05]: We were laughing because it was just the two of us and the other one for some reason. We just keep clicking the same one and everyone else. So we should hit the lottery or something. I know.
[SPEAKER_09]: It's a nice intimate room.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yeah.
[Matt Rice]: I do feel bad for the one room because I think there was one room that just has not gotten anybody hopping into it. And we didn't mention that at the last sort of switch over. So I'm not sure.
[Martine Dion]: There may be a different spread out this time with the other ones. All right, let me go back. OK, sounds good. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_09]: Thank you.
[SPEAKER_05]: were discussing in the other smaller breakout that you know it'll be a huge change just seeing I went to some of the early on kind of community meetings we had and just sort of working with everyone else's like where would you want the fields and me personally I play tennis so I was like where are we putting those and don't only put pickleball because I will But it'll be an interesting kind of cool thing to see as the current building is much more of like a concrete block.
[Matt Rice]: Yeah, change that perception, the appearance of that building is something that We heard the students talk about a lot as well in terms of being in there and how that makes them feel. Yeah, just on a day to day basis. Yeah. Sort of the focus on having natural light within classroom spaces and a heating system that works and the whole concept of cooling so that it's not oppressive in there on those first days of the year, last days of the year, it can be really unbearable. You've experienced that, right, being in there?
[SPEAKER_05]: Yes, I was like, get me out of here. Let's get this new one going.
[SPEAKER_09]: Yeah, it's never good when you see that many wallies.
|
total time: 1.47 minutes total words: 193 |
|||