Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Peaslee project update: PDP due April 2, four HVAC paths presented; renovation would need swing space, new build avoids it
Summary
OPM and the design team told the Peaslee Building Committee that the Preliminary Design Program will be submitted to the MSBA by April 2, presented four mechanical systems (geothermal, air‑source heat pumps, VRF, hybrid), and said a life‑cycle cost analysis and community input (forum planned in March) will guide the committee’s preferred design; the committee approved an invoice packet by roll call.
Corina, the owner’s project manager, told the Peaslee Building Committee on Feb. 24 that the team expects to submit the Preliminary Design Program (PDP) to the Massachusetts School Building Authority by the April 2 deadline and has been assembling the PDP binder with materials from PMA and other consultants.
Design leads Jennifer and Vince reviewed planning work to date. Jennifer summarized educational‑visioning activities — a shadow day and a larger visioning workshop — and said further sessions and a program workshop are planned in March to refine space needs. Vince reviewed site visits and consultant investigations (structural, wetlands, traffic, mechanical and plumbing reports) that are informing test fits and cost comparisons.
On mechanical strategy, the team presented four options: (A) ground‑source heat pump (geothermal), highest first cost but lowest operating cost and potentially eligible for incentives; (B) air‑source heat pump (a VAV displacement/air‑source heat pump approach) with lower installation cost; (C) variable‑refrigerant‑flow (VRF) with the lowest install cost but higher operating expense; and (D) a hybrid of heat pumps and natural‑gas boilers that would require on‑site solar to meet current code. The presenters recommended conducting a life‑cycle cost analysis to compare long‑term operating costs, maintenance and available incentives — including potential Inflation Reduction Act tax credits and utility rebates — before selecting a path.
The team reported that roughly 36% of the existing Peaslee building appears salvageable or adequate for reuse in some components but that substantial work would be required to bring the building to current codes (fire protection, elevator, envelope, windows, HVAC, plumbing and electrical). They said renovation‑plus‑additions would likely require swing space (temporary relocation or modulars) during construction, while a fully new building could be sited so that no swing space is needed.
Vince said the MSBA requires a minimum LEED Silver rating (LEED v4) and that projects opting into the stretch code or more stringent pathways can earn additional reimbursement points (roughly 2–4% more depending on pathway), which affects the reimbursement equation. Corina noted the project team has submitted a budget revision request and a reimbursement application to the MSBA and is tracking the MSBA’s schedule and comments.
The committee discussed enrollment models (K–5 neighborhood schools versus a centralized 3–5 model), potential consolidation impacts and community criteria such as cost and tax effect. The committee agreed to schedule a community forum in March and assigned the communications subcommittee to lead outreach.
Before adjourning, the committee reviewed and approved an invoice packet (motion carried by roll call). The meeting closed after a motion to adjourn carried unanimously; the committee will reconvene next month.
