Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facility HVAC topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Engineer Greg Hall outlines $580,000–$680,000 HVAC upgrade options for Pawnee City Public Schools
Summary
Engineer Greg Hall presented a facilities needs assessment to the Pawnee City Public Schools board, identifying failing VRF components, comparing contractor quotes for gym and high‑school HVAC work, and offering rebid and phasing options alongside cost and financing considerations.
Get email alerts on the Facility HVAC topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pawnee City Public Schools received a facilities needs assessment from engineer Greg Hall at its board meeting, where Hall described persistent failures in the district’s heating, ventilation and air‑conditioning systems and outlined options and cost estimates for repairs and replacement.
Hall told the board that one contractor’s quote to provide heating and cooling to the gym totaled about $382,000, which included roughly $60,000 for a new boiler; another bidder’s estimate focused on 10‑ton cooling units and repairs to large fan coil units, at about $457,000. “You could get by with 2, 15‑ton units,” Hall said, adding that the district could rebid to reduce initial tonnage and lower the upfront cost.
Hall described the district’s existing VRF (variable‑refrigerant‑flow) equipment as an early‑generation system that has required repeated repairs and is becoming harder to maintain because parts are scarce. He said common failure points include electronic expansion valves, inverter boards and compressors, and that the systems typically last about 7½–10 years when used for both heating and cooling. Hall recommended replacing corroded refrigerant piping with proper materials if the district installs a new system.
For a full replacement of the high‑school system, Hall estimated a cost “around $680,000,” noting a vendor price he had on file near $580,000; he said he added a roughly 15% allowance for price increases and supply uncertainty. As a cost‑reduction measure, he proposed rebidding the gym work for two rooftop units instead of four, which he estimated could cut initial expense by roughly $100,000–$150,000, depending on final specifications and mobilization costs.
Board members asked about phasing the work to reduce upfront costs; Hall said the work can be done in phases but cautioned that phasing increases mobilization and may lock the district into specific equipment for later phases. “You could work with them to install that over a 3‑year period,” he said, but added that phase work typically raises total program cost.
District staff reviewed financing options and cash balances. A staff member told the board the district had roughly $900,000 in reserves in the building fund and outlined projections for transfers into depreciation and building funds. He mentioned a financing option transcribed in the record as “QCPuff” (rules for qualifying have recently changed) as one mechanism the district could consider to spread costs over time; he did not recommend a specific financing plan during the meeting.
The board did not take a final vote on the HVAC work during the meeting. Members discussed procurement approaches (hard bid, design‑build, contractor‑at‑risk), timing and tradeoffs between immediate spending and continuing repairs. Hall offered to send a written recommendation to the board and to rebid the gym package if the board wanted to pursue lower initial tonnage.
Next steps: the board will consider Hall’s written recommendation and procurement options; no contract award or project approval was recorded at the meeting.

