Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the School Construction topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Pamlico County boards hear design, geothermal plan and bid timeline for consolidated school; site‑prep quotes accepted

Pamlico County Board of Education and County Commissioners · July 31, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Architects and Metcon presented renderings, a geothermal/water‑source heating system, the project's funding package (state needs‑based grant plus supplemental awards and a tax rebate) and a tight bidding schedule with a target notice‑to‑proceed; the boards accepted ~$42,000 in site‑prep quotes for a baseball field.

Miyuki Keller, project architect with SFLA Architects, and Mike Kaneshka, Metcon’s construction manager, presented final designs and a procurement schedule for Pamlico County’s consolidated school project at a joint meeting of the county commissioners and the board of education.

Keller led a design review of the two‑story facility that will house middle‑ and high‑school programs with distinct wings, a shared learning commons and dedicated CTE spaces. “One of the major systems that we are working with is a geothermal and water source heat pump system,” Keller said, describing zoned well fields, buried HDPE piping in a closed loop and classroom‑level heat pump closets that the team expects will lower lifecycle energy and maintenance costs compared with a conventional boiler‑chiller layout.

The architects showed exterior and interior renderings of a glass‑front lobby, separate entrances for middle and high school populations, and flexible community spaces designed to be closed off after hours. Keller described routine maintenance needs—filter changes and coil cleaning—and said building automation will aid local staff in detecting faults. She told the boards that the buried wells typically require a major recharge or servicing about every 30 years.

Metcon detailed the bid and cost structure. “We anticipate that it is gonna be very tight, but we're very confident that we'll have enough contingencies in the project,” Kaneshka said, while walking the boards through about 47 bid packages, prequalification requirements, bonding and insurance expectations and a breakdown the team presented as roughly $47 million in construction bids with additional soft costs and contingencies leading to a project total in the high‑sixty‑million range. He explained the construction‑manager‑at‑risk (CMAR) model, the firm’s contingency and how a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) will be developed for board review.

The team reviewed the schedule milestones the boards will use to authorize work: several bid opening dates in August, an initial GMP submission for board review in late September and a target for a final GMP and board letter of intent on Oct. 1 to enable a notice to proceed and site mobilization. Kaneshka said Metcon aims to sequence site work and keep the existing auditorium and cafeteria in service during construction, then complete demolition in a concentrated summer window; the team plans asbestos abatement of identified non‑friable materials in summer 2025 ahead of later demolition.

On funding, Keller said the design and budget are built around state needs‑based grant awards. She told the boards that the project’s grant package includes a roughly $50 million needs‑based award, a supplemental grant of about $12 million and an expected $1.3 million in state sales‑tax rebates, with additional county contributions filling the plan that the team presented to bidders.

Board members asked about alternates and sustainability features. Keller confirmed solar panels remain an alternate rather than part of the base work and said the team will select alternates after bids, depending on available funding. The team also described site logistics—an 8‑foot construction fence, designated subcontractor parking areas, crane zones and plans to protect student drop‑off and pick‑up circulation during construction.

Separately, the board accepted vendor quotes for a smaller, related site‑preparation project behind the elementary school: the maintenance director procured quotes for grading and tree clearing for a replacement baseball field, and the board reported an estimated cost of about $42,000 under the board’s procurement policy for smaller projects.

The joint session concluded with a motion and roll‑call to adjourn. The boards will receive monthly updates as bidding and GMP work proceed; the construction team said it will return with the initial GMP for board review as scheduled.