Published in the August 18, 2016 edition

By BOB TUROSZ

NORTH READING — With the High School construction project practically complete and very little, if any, discretionary money left in the budget, the Secondary Schools voted not to spend any additional funds to address concerns raised by an abutter about light emanating from the east stairwell of the high school academic building.

For over three years, Alison has complained to the SSBC that light from the stairwell at night which she says is intrusive and she has brought the matter to the SSBC’s attention with regularity. At the last SSBC meeting she cited an email from Jeff Wetton, a previous project manager, that said as a LEED project, the high school is required to maintain zero light trespassing off the school project.

“That’s not happening,” said Carlson. But SSBC member Jerry Venezia countered that she’s not defining light “trespassing off the site” appropriately.

“I don’t think the light from the stairwells is imposing itself off the site. I think you can see the light from off the site,” but that’s not the same thing, he said. But Carlson said she can see “shadow puppets” on her bedroom wall.

At past meetings, the SSBC discussed at length the possibility of retrofitting and hardwiring the lights in question so they can be turned off at night or put on timers. One estimate from a local electrician for the hardwiring was $20,000 to do the job. The high school also got an estimate for installing tinted film on the inside of the stairwell windows to darken the lights. This was put at about $6,500.

None of this is money the SSBC feels it can afford to spend. SSBC Chairman Chuck Carucci said the amount of light emanating from the project was measured as part of the engineering, just as it would be for any shopping center or office building. The amount of light shed from the project was justified, he said.

Mrs. Carlson said if she stands in her bedroom at night she can see the shadow of her figure against the far wall as a result of light from the project. Carucci said he finds that hard to believe. He suggested she get a certified light engineer to come into her house and measure the light levels, although he did not think that would change the SSBC’s position.

To bring closure to the matter, SSBC member Don Kelliher proposed a motion to consider spending $20,000 to hard wire the lights so they can be turned off. The motion failed, unanimously.

SSBC member Sean Delaney said he could not support the motion based on the latest estimate that there is no money left in the project’s Contingency Fund.

Kelliher agreed. He understood Carlson’s concerns but found it hard to believe the light emanates across such a great distance to her house. “I can see my neighbor’s lights, but that’s not coming into my house,” he commented. “The lighting is within the design of the building and the code requirements.”

Similarly, the committee unanimously defeated a motion for $6,500 to install tinted film on the stairwell windows. In response to a question, Superintendent of Schools Jon Bernard said none of the other abutters have complained about the light from the school’s stairwells.

Construction Update

Joanna Kripp from Gilbane and Construction said the company is pushing to close out the project, which should happen before school opens.

The company is committed to having most of the remaining work done before school starts. In Phase 4, the grass surrounding the new lower fields will be replanted, she said, for the fall growing season since the seed didn’t take during the spring and summer with this year’s drought. The company is also working on closing up paperwork and the air coils for the high school rooftop unit are scheduled to be replaced this week.

Stephen O’Leary asked for a clarification on the site’s drainage issues. Kripp said that’s continuing to be investigated for a corrective action plan will be provided to the architect for a proper solution in a timely manner.

One of the questions that has come up concerns the new high school discus area and whether it’s flat enough to meet regulations. She said the area was constructed in accordance with the contract documents. “Our current assessment is that it meets the requirement,” she said. But she will request the landscaping contractor to stake the bounds out on the field so there will be no doubt about the boundaries.

“We’ll stake it out and we’ll get Dore & Whittier to review it and if we need to make adjustments, we’ll make adjustments,” she said. Carucci said the measurements of the new softball field are also being authenticated.

Also underway: the project’s final punch list is being completed, so the school can be submitted for its LEED certification. And the walkway leading to the school track has been redesigned to meet ADA approval. And in the process the area between the track and memorial bricks will be covered with asphalt rather than the present gravel, which tends to get kicked up on the track.

An invoice in the sum of $2,581 was approved unanimously for Green Business Certification, the agency that will confirm the project’s LEED points. Verification of the project’s Gold standard can mean an extra 2 percentage points in reimbursement from the Mass. School Building Authority, which equates to several million dollars coming back to the taxpayers and gets the town to approximately 51 percent reimbursement.

There was considerable disagreement on whether to approve payment of Requisition 45, a progress payment to Gilbane for $1.55 million for the month of March. Project manager Kevin Nigro asked the committee to approve payment “not to exceed” the $1.55 million, saying the number will be reviewed by Dore and Whittier, and PMA, the owner’s project manager as well as an accountant from Gilbane.

Stephen O’Leary moved to pay the bill contingent upon review and approval Dore & Whittier and PMA and ultimate approval by Phil Dardeno, the SSBC’s finance review member.

Carucci said the money is in the budget and if payment is made it will leave about $3.5 million in the budget, all of which is pretty much spoken for in terms of what is owed to contractors. The Contingency Fund is “a moving target,” said Nigro with estimates from “zero”  to $100,000.

The $1.55 million payment, which was discussed for quite some time, had no relationship to contingency, it was for contractual work completed in March. The vote to approve the progress payment was approved with three dissenting votes, although member Sean Delaney felt it was a mistake.

“We just heard that our contingency is zero and we have work still to do on the project,” said Delaney. But Nigro said this is a progress payment while Contingency has hits against it that may or may not be actualized.

Dardeno agreed that this invoice came in outside the established process and Dardeno’s point was well taken. Nigro said the payment request was made as a courtesy to get the project done. “If you don’t want to do it, don’t do it.” But the payment was stood as approved.