A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Building committee votes to advance cost estimates for all design alternatives

January 15, 2026 | Medford Public Schools, School Boards, Massachusetts


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Building committee votes to advance cost estimates for all design alternatives
The Medford Hubbard High School Building Committee voted to advance initial cost estimating for the full slate of design alternatives presented at its meeting, directing consultants to deliver cost estimates the district will use for its Preferred Schematic Report (PDP) submission.

The motion to move the options forward passed on a roll-call vote (14 in the affirmative, 0 negative, 1 absent). Committee member Ken Lord moved the motion and Nicole Morell seconded. Jenny Graham, who led the meeting, told the room the goal was to “get an understanding of what is possible on this site” and to filter out any options the committee finds clearly unworkable before the next phase of scrutiny.

SMMA, the district’s design consultant, presented a consolidated set of cost alternatives drawn from dozens of concepts. The firm said it condensed roughly 57 concept studies into about 29 variations for pricing and stressed the cost estimates will focus on square footage and phasing rather than detailed design. “The important thing for us at this stage in the process is to really understand how big the building is, how much of the building we want to build new or make as an addition, and how much we want to renovate,” an SMMA representative said during the presentation.

Committee discussion before the vote centered on schedule, construction impacts to athletic fields and students, and which options are feasible to phase while school remains in operation. Several members urged the committee to weigh short‑term disruption against long‑term benefits and to include schedule and field‑use disruptions in the scoring rubric that will be used to evaluate options.

SMMA said cost estimators will incorporate feasibility considerations such as phasing complexity and likely non‑reimbursable temporary classroom costs; the consultants will return to the committee if an option appears infeasible after further review. The committee asked the consultants to proceed with the initial cost estimates and to report back at future meetings.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Massachusetts articles free in 2026

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI