School officials outline Runlet Middle School design timeline, staff secure materials after permitting delays

Staff told the Concord Board of Education on Aug. 4 that design and testing work for the Runlet Middle School project is advancing and that the district is securing materials now after state permitting delays. Assistant Superintendent Kim Murlett and facilities staff said geotechnical reporting, hazardous‑material identification and the next phase of design development will be reviewed in a building committee meeting and in a design-cost review due shortly after the fifteenth of the month.

The assistant superintendent, Kim Murlett, said district staff met with architects and consultants on July 10 and will review design updates, geotechnical findings and value‑engineering options at a forthcoming building committee meeting. Facilities staff said hazardous material areas identified in recent surveys will need abatement and that those findings will factor into the cost review.

Facilities staff member Mister Cashman said the district has had trouble obtaining a DES permit for a culvert replacement at the site commonly called the “trap pond.” He said the permit process involved multiple back-and-forth reviews and that the permitting delay pushed the planned delivery and installation of culvert materials into the fall school term. To avoid further schedule disruption, Cashman said the district has placed an order for the materials and will hold them in the contractor’s yard until the work can be done. “I think it is in our best interest to secure the material, have it on hand, plan for it to happen next summer,” Cashman said; he added that materials will be on hand for an emergency if required.

Cashman said the district’s engineers and contractor believe a prior temporary plating repair has held through two heavy summers of rain and recommended scheduling invasive culvert work after the school year, estimating a construction cycle of about three to three-and-a-half weeks. He said the work would be invasive, would require excavation and dewatering, and would affect the bus lane and adjacent pedestrian routes. When asked about timing, Cashman said he would like to plan for work “immediately after school that’s out in June 2027,” while another speaker later referenced the repair buying time until June 2026; the transcript contains both references.

Public comment at the meeting focused on Runlet’s long-term design and district building‑aid decisions. Charles Russell of Ward 5 questioned why the proposed new middle school is three stories when the previous building was two and asked for utilization studies of athletic fields before building additional outdoor facilities. Russell said, “Before we start going out and building all these other facilities, we ought to see what we already have out there.”

Jeff Wells of Ward 5 asked the board to explain large cost increases tied to the district’s school building aid application, citing the application figures included in the district’s materials. Wells asked what changes, additions or inflation adjustments drove the jump he cited from an early $85,000,000 estimate to a $176,000,000 figure in later documents and whether the expanded scope affected the project’s competitiveness for state building aid.

Board members and staff responded with procedural notes that the building committee and city processes would continue to evaluate design, costs and use of existing fields, and that final budget decisions tied to design funding are expected in October as the district reviews its budget. No formal action on the middle school design was taken at the Aug. 4 meeting; staff presented updates and recommended further review by the building committee and the full board.

The discussion identified next steps: continued design-development work, further value‑engineering to control cost, and a follow‑up with the building committee to review the geotechnical and hazardous‑material reports and the finalized cost review.

Background: staff said the district held a July 10 design-and-review meeting with architecture/consulting teams and expects a design-development cost review shortly after the fifteenth of the month; the culvert replacement requires a multiweek invasive construction effort and was delayed by permitting steps with DES.

For now, the district plans to secure materials to avoid months‑long lead times if a later emergency requires immediate work.