Building advisory committee approves design submissions and authorizes bids for North Kingstown High School roof

The Building Advisory Committee voted March 2 to approve the submission of the design development set and the 60% construction documents for stage 3 and authorized the issuance of bid documents for the North Kingstown High School roof replacement.

Chair (speaker 1) moved the authorization after presentations from the project team; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. The committee’s approval allows the owner’s team to submit documents through the design review portal and prepare to advertise the public bid package, subject to final district sign-off.

Barry Bridal, the owner’s project manager (introduced in the meeting packet), told the committee the team asked the design reviewer to fast-track review so the roof project can be built this summer. “We are projecting to be submitting the full schematic design package, likely by midweek at the latest,” Bridal said. He added the team submitted the roof design on Feb. 5, received comments Feb. 19 and replied Feb. 25.

Ed, who led the high school roof presentation for the design team, said design development and the 60% construction documents were advanced and sent for cost estimating. He described three alternates in the final bid documents: two tied to acoustic treatments around rooftop equipment and a third to replace exhaust fans in the work area. The final bid set includes allowances for unforeseen repairs — notably a $100,000 mechanical-equipment allowance — and site staging plans so the school can remain partially occupied during summer work.

Presenters said the team is proposing to collapse the design-development and construction-document submissions to accelerate procurement: “We’re looking for the acceptance of the 60% CD documents, which, again, we have the cost assessments for,” one presenter said, asking the committee to authorize going to bid so the package can hit the street before the end of the month.

Committee members questioned contract details and schedule protections. One member asked whether the contract includes predetermined weather days and what obligations the contractor has to leave the roof watertight at the end of each day; presenters replied the contract language on weather days still needs to be finalized and reiterated that the objective is to have rooftop units operational before students return.

On oversight, the team said they will provide construction administration services (weekly OAC meetings and regular reviews) but will not have a full-time clerk of the works on site; they also noted requirements that the roofing manufacturer’s technical representative make periodic visits and that commissioning/envelope services could be added if the ownership team elects to do so.

The committee also heard schedule-related contingencies, including the Department of Education review timing and whether an extra week of school (snow makeup) could affect start dates; presenters said addenda and sequencing adjustments can be handled in the procurement process if needed.

The chair said the same documents will be before the school committee the following night for review; the school committee will later approve the contract award once bids and award recommendations return.

The committee’s vote authorizes the team to proceed with submittals and to prepare bid documents, with final issuance contingent on district approvals and any remaining coordination on front-end contract documents.