The committee approved two contract amendments and associated budget revision requests to fund additional site‑characterization and geotechnical services for the project, and staff reported recent permitting milestones and bidding progress for building trades.

Committee members voted to approve a Sanborn Head proposal for $79,970 to perform soil pre‑characterization and DEP‑related planning; because an existing allowance in the OPM contract held $47,700, the committee approved a budget revision request to move $32,270 from the project soft‑cost contingency into the OPM contract to fully fund the proposal. The committee also approved a Perkins Eastman contract amendment (and associated budget revision request) to fund additional GZA geotechnical services in the amount of $151,250. Project staff said both measures passed on roll call votes.

Project status: Staff reported that the project has cleared several permitting steps: the project team received a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) associated with the state environmental review (MEPA) and said the ConCom (conservation commission) issued an Order of Conditions that will be registered at the registry of deeds next week. Staff said those steps allow the team to proceed in phased permitting toward final building permits; a Chapter 91 waterways license remains an outstanding permitting task but is not expected to stop phase‑2 construction. Staff also said completion of NEPA cleared the way for the city to execute the Mass. School Building Authority (MSBA) project funding agreement, which was signed “yesterday,” enabling the city to submit past invoices for MSBA reimbursement through the MSBA financial system (ProPay).

Bidding and budget notes: Staff told the committee that bidding for several trades is complete (concrete, steel and earlier site‑demo awards) and that those awards aggregate roughly $7.8 million under the project budget; site work, underground waterproofing and elevators remain in procurement and are expected to be the largest remaining cost unknowns. Because site work and ground improvements are complex on this site and some existing areas have DEP open files (“dirty dirt”), additional soil testing and characterization is needed to establish where soil can be reused on site and where it must be removed, staff said.

Contingency accounting: Staff provided numbers to the committee: the project originally carried a soft‑cost contingency of about $2,060,000. Staff said the Sanborn Head draw of $32,270 would reduce a particular allowance and leave roughly $1,900,000 in soft contingency; after the GZA amendment of $151,250 and the Sanborn Head draw, staff said the soft contingency would be approximately $1,754,000. Staff cautioned that one additional known draw likely remains: a broader Sanborn Head pre‑characterization across the full site, which the team expects to need before awarding major site work.

Committee concerns and next steps: Committee members pressed staff on why the licensed site professional (LSP) work was not fully budgeted originally; staff explained allowances set years ago eroded as code reviews and other necessary reviews were added. Members asked staff to schedule a short building‑committee meeting to consider contract amendments and site‑work awards next week if a quorum can be reached. Staff also said they will pursue value‑management exercise if 90% construction‑document estimates show the project trending over budget once remaining trade bids are in.

What this means: The amendments authorize necessary technical work to let contractors bid accurately and to let the team verify soil handling and foundation solutions during construction. Staff said MSBA signing of the project funding agreement will allow reimbursement of prior invoices once the MSBA opens its ProPay financial system to the project.