Q&A

Following the 9/9 and 9/14 meetings, the School Committee and Dr. Hackett welcomed written questions on the Central Office Relocation Study. Questions received by noon on September 20 are posted below with responses by the design team of the Carriage House and/or the management team of the Lynch project:

1. Does building space for the central office in a new Lynch elementary or future Muraco elementary save the cost of having to remediate any environmental or structural issues that may exist at the Carriage House?

No. Costs may be “postponed”, but not “saved”. If no improvements are made to the Carriage House, the liability for abatement of hazardous materials still exists-- even if the land were to be surplused to the Town and the structure razed. Any work at the Carriage House, whether renovation or demolition will necessarily include abatement. The project cost of this work is currently estimated at between $85,000 to $90,000 (associated with a Fall 2023 Central Office completion). As with all elements of construction, postponed remediation will become more expensive with escalation in trade costs.

Please note that it is likely that any demolition that occurs at either the Lynch School (or Muraco) would have considerably larger abatement costs than this as they are larger buildings. The Vinson-Owen project’s hazardous materials abatement line item budget was exceeded during demolition as more ACM materials were discovered than the team had anticipated. Given the extent of interior renovation at the Carriage House over the years and the design team’s investigation, the scope of environmental remediation is well understood.

2. Has anyone from the school finance office done a calculation of the cost to operate a stand alone structure (heat, cool, light, clean & maintain, etc.) vs. running systems off of a larger infrastructure?

It is difficult at this time for a comparative life cycle cost comparison, as the “larger infrastructure” or project (replacement Lynch, for example) has not yet been designed. Life cycle costing (heating, cooling, lighting) is a design team/engineering task outside the scope of schematic design, however this could be evaluated in the next step of Carriage House design. Life cycle cost modeling is also expected to be included in the Lynch project design phase and will help shape design/systems decision-making.

It should be noted that the engineering approach recommended for the Carriage House is in compliance with the decarbonization goals of the Massachusetts Clean Energy and Climate Plan for 2030 (2030 CECP), with no need for fuel oil or natural gas. It is expected that the 2030 CECP will drive the design and building systems selection for the Lynch project, as well. Both the Carriage House and Lynch projects could be LEED certified.

3. I assume the cost to furnish the offices are the same regardless of the location.

Yes, the architect/interiors team believes this is true.

4. Does one location provide a better parking arrangement for staff?

The only location with an established design (existing footprint) is the Carriage House which has an effective schematic parking plan proposed with spaces near the building. The Carriage House parking concept includes an area specifically identified in the lease (between Town and Winchester Historical Society) for expanded parking and which minimizes any impact on historic landscapes. The School Committee and WPS administration will welcome input from the Society and Ambrose community in further developing the plan.

A future design for the Lynch school or another location would indicate whether a similar arrangement would be possible elsewhere. Early indications from architects interested in the Lynch project are that expanded parking (and building footprint) will be very challenging on the existing Lynch Elementary School site.

5. Is the useful life of the Carriage House the same as a wing at a new Lynch ?

Yes. Although a new Lynch design/building doesn't yet exist, in theory the useful life would be similar in terms of systems, finishes, building enclosure, etc.

6. Would a renovated space yield as energy efficient an office as a new build?

Similar to question 2, this is difficult to answer without another project for comparison to the Carriage House. In theory the systems could be similar. We would assume that a new building could develop a more efficient envelope if it is new construction. Renovation however has some merit from a sustainability point of view as the Town would be taking advantage of an existing asset and using less resources in reconstruction than new construction. Renovation is a credible sustainability approach. As noted in the response to question 2 and discussed at the September 9 presentation, a renovated Carriage House could achieve LEED certification.

7. Would the town save some money, via economies of scale, on costs for site prep, irrigation, landscaping, etc, on a larger new build site (understanding that MSBA isn't participating in the cost of a new admin wing, some of the site work needed for an admin wing would need to be done for the entire school and thus would be part of the overall Lynch budget)?

While there might be some economy-of-scale savings in an apples-to-apples comparison, there is comparatively little in the way of landscaping at the Carriage House location (beyond grass and open historic views) and we anticipate that there will be very little in the way of landscape irrigation at either site. The costs for parking (paving, curbing, etc.) might be lower per sf at Lynch (being the larger project) if the projects were on the same bid schedule, however an additional two years of escalation make the comparison difficult. We expect the MSBA would separate any site costs associated with a Central Office at Lynch for no reimbursement. It should be noted that the MSBA has changed its reimbursement model over time. Today the agency reimburses only 8% for eligible (limited) site costs, with the remaining 92% or more being Town-funded.

Excavation and foundation costs are a significant portion of project cost (can be 10% or greater) but in the case of the Carriage House, this is largely an existing condition with new foundations required for only the reconstructed pavilion. With respect to proportionality of MSBA reimbursement, the state manages each non-reimbursable expenses in great detail. This was discussed in some detail with the EFPBC Chair at the 9/14 School Committee meeting (see video link, this page).