West Valley School District #2082019 Capital Bond Program

Monthly Report

November 2019 2019 2019

Executive SummaryThe purpose of this Monthly Report is to provide the West Valley School Board and Community Bond Oversight Advisory Committee with a progress update associated with the Capital Construction bond.

This report looks at the status of each individual project in relation to work in progress, schedule and budget.

Design of both projects are currently in the CD Phase (Construction Documents) and finished the month at 50% completion.

DWA is tracking to complete 95% Construction Documents (Drawings) Milestone as scheduled – 2/10/20

SEPA application (Type 3) Review Application is in final review and City of Yakima to issue approval 12/12/19-12/17/19

The GC/CM Contractor – Chervenell has mobilized on both sites. Site Office Trailers, Fencing and Signage have been completed and officially control each site. Chervenell has assembled a Site Visit Protocol that is attached in this report.

Abatement is underway. Summitview has begun first due to the amount of HM scope and removal procedures, with a completion date of 12/20/19. Apple Valley is scheduled to start on Monday 12/9/19 and is expected to complete 12/20/19 – see attached schedule for estimated timelines.

Demolition will begin at both sites 12/23/19 and estimated to complete on 1/10/20.

Summitview and Apple Valley completed a required Hazardous Material Pre-Construction Meeting with Fulcrum and related Governing Agencies.

Chervenell and the Design team will begin the assembly of CD Estimate with a tentative completion date in early January 2020. Site Prep to both Apple Valley and Summitview starts 1/13/20 with a scheduled finish date of 1/24/20 – 1/31/20.

Chervenell - Early Bid Package # 1 contract has been Board Approved and is attached in this report.

CBRE|Heery to complete D-5 form after SEPA application approval. Remaining (D-Forms) are underway and are in line with the current schedule for completion.

November was a very productive month and puts the projects in good position heading into winter. The Project Team (Chervenell – Design West – CBRE|Heery) continue to work with local and statewide sub-contractors to define the scope to capture aggressive and competitive pricing. The Projects are on the radar of the top Sub Contractor’s due to the team’s prior relationships and the timing of the bidding cycle, which has direct results to the overall project budget.

Program Cost Summary

Original Budget

Budget Transfer

CurrentBudget

Financial Database Manager

Original Commitment

Charged to Date

Forecast at Completion

Projected Budget Balance

Approved Modifications

Current Commitment

West Valley School District 2019 Capital Bond Program

% BudgetCharged

Apple Valley Elementary $34,484,119 $0 $34,484,119 $2,914,732 $196,228 $3,110,960 $1,176,768 3.41% $34,484,119 $0

Summitview Elementary $34,243,034 $0 $34,243,034 $2,549,499 $188,755 $2,738,255 $822,070 2.40% $34,243,034 $0

$68,727,153 $0 $68,727,153 $5,464,231 $384,983 $5,849,214 $1,998,837 2.91% $68,727,153 $0Total

Bond Costs $500,000 $500,000 $0 $31,950 6.39% $500,000 $0

Program Reserve $1,372,847 $1,372,847 $0 $0 0.00% $1,372,847 $0

$1,872,847 $1,872,847 $0 $31,950 1.71% $1,872,847 $0Total

$70,600,000 $0 $70,600,000 $5,464,231 $384,983 $5,849,214 $2,030,787 2.88% $70,600,000 $0Program Total

JST 130012/10/2019 5:37:42 PM Page 1

ID Task Mode

Task Na e Duratio Start Fi ish Prede essors Resour e Na es

Ge eral  days Mo   / / Tue  / /

Set MACC  da s Thu  / / Tue  / / Cher e ell

Apple Valley Ele e tary  days Tue  / / Fri  / /

Co stru tio  Do u e ts  days Thu  / / Wed  / / Desig  West

%  da s Thu  / / Fri  / / Desig  West

%  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / Desig  West

%  da s Mo   / / Wed  / / Desig  West

AHJ Re ie /Per it  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / AHJ

Co stru ti ilit  Re ie ‐ Fi al  da s Thu  / / Fri  / / Cher e ell,Heer

Biddi g  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / FF Cher e ell

Co stru tio  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / Cher e ell

Apple Valley Early Site  days Tue  / / Fri  / /

A ate e t a d De o  days Mo   / / Fri  / / , Cher e ell

A ate e t     da s Mo   / / Fri  / / Safeguard

De o  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / Safeguard

Site Prep  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / Safeguard

Su it ie  Ele e tary  days Tue  / / Fri  / /

Co stru tio  Do u e ts  days Thu  / / Wed  / / Desig  West

%  da s Thu  / / Fri  / / Desig  West

%  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / Desig  West

%  da s Mo   / / Wed  / / Desig  West

AHJ Re ie /Per it  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / AHJ

Co stru ti ilit  Re ie ‐ Fi al  da s Thu  / / Fri  / / Cher e ell,Heer

Biddi g  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / FF Cher e ell

Co stru tio  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / FS+   ks Cher e ell

Su it ie  Early Site  days Tue  / / Fri  / /

A ate e t a d De o  days Mo   / / Fri  / / , Cher e ell

A ate e t   da s Mo   / / Fri  / / Russel Cra e

De o  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / Russel Cra e

Site Prep  da s Mo   / / Fri  / / Russel Cra e

Cher e ell

Desig  West

Desig  West

Desig  West

AHJ

Cher e ell,Heery

Cher e ell

Cher e e

Safeguard

Safeguard

Safeguard

Desig  West

Desig  West

Desig  West

AHJ

Cher e ell,Heery

Cher e ell

Che

Russel Cra e

Russel Cra e

Russel Cra e

B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M E B M ESepte O to erNo e De e Ja uar Fe rua Mar h April Ma Ju e Jul August Septe O to erNo e De e Ja uar Fe ruaMar h April Ma Ju e Jul

Task

Split

Milesto e

Su ar

Proje t Su ar

E ter al Tasks

E ter al Milesto e

I a ti e Task

I a ti e Milesto e

I a ti e Su ar

Ma ual Task

Duratio ‐o l

Ma ual Su ar  Rollup

Ma ual Su ar

Start‐o l

Fi ish‐o l

Deadli e

Criti al

Criti al Split

Progress

Page 

Proje t: WV Pre‐Co stru tio  S hDate: Mo   / /

West Valley School District #208 Capital Program Monthly Project Report

Project: Summitview Elementary November 20196305 W. ChestnutYakima, WA 98908 Project Phase: Construction Dev. Architect: Design West Architects

Contractor: Chervenell Construction CompanyMilestone Start Date End Date Comments

Programming/Pre-Design 4/1/19 6/30/19 Complete

Schematic Design 5/15/19 7/31/19 100% Complete GCCM Selection 6/11/19 8/12/19 100% CompleteDesign Development 8/1/19 10/31/19 100% Complete Construction Documents 12/1/19 3/14/20 50% Completed Permitting 1/15/20 3/31/19 Demo 100%Early Bid Package 9/23/19 3/31/19 Abatement 20%Construction 5/1/20 7/30/20Occupancy 8/1/21 8/30/211. Project Description

Replacement of Summit Elementary School on the existing site. Procurement method - General Contractor Construction Manager (GCCM). Chervenell Construction Company of Tri-Cities was awarded the contract.

2. Activities in Progress Construction Documents – CD’s currently 50% SEPA Application Approval Abatement of Hazard Materials

3. Schedule Status Demolition schedule start date 12/23/19.

4. Budget Status Current Estimates are in Budget. Sub-Contractor pricing received are in line with projected Overall Program Budget.

5. Issues

Plan Review – DWA is planning to complete Permit Set early to offset the potential length of the City of Yakima review process.

Project Cost SummaryProject = Summitview Elementary

Original Budget

Budget Transfer

CurrentBudget

Financial Database Manager

Original Commitment

Charged to Date

Forecast at Completion

Projected Budget Balance

Approved Modifications

Current Commitment

West Valley School District 2019 Capital Bond Program

% BudgetCharged

Summitview Elementary $34,243,034 $0 $34,243,034 $2,549,499 $188,755 $2,738,255 $822,070 2.40% $34,243,034 $0

Construction Costs $28,275,652 $28,275,652 $605,472 $45,212 $650,684 $6,476 0.02% $28,275,652 $0

$28,275,652 $28,275,652 $605,472 $45,212 $650,684 $6,476 0.02% $28,275,652 $0

9710 Off-Site Improvements $700,000 $700,000 $0 $0 0.00% $700,000 $0

9712 Site Development $600,000 $600,000 $0 $0 0.00% $600,000 $0

9720 New Construction $22,134,149 $22,134,149 $0 $0 0.00% $22,134,149 $0

9721 Preconstruction Servic $75,000 $75,000 $50,000 $50,000 $5,985 7.98% $75,000 $0

9722 HazMat Abatement $310,000 $310,000 $286,097 $286,097 $0 0.00% $310,000 $0

9723 Demolition $320,560 $320,560 $265,275 $265,275 $0 0.00% $320,560 $0

9724 Sales Tax $2,142,887 $2,142,887 $4,100 $45,212 $49,312 $491 0.02% $2,142,887 $0

9729 Change Order Conting $1,993,056 $1,993,056 $0 $0 0.00% $1,993,056 $0

Professional Services $2,506,625 $11,100 $2,517,725 $1,944,028 $143,543 $2,087,571 $657,935 26.13% $2,517,725 $0

Architectural & Engineering $1,246,125 $1,246,125 $1,071,125 $91,793 $1,162,918 $453,103 36.36% $1,246,125 $0

7344 Basic Services $876,525 $876,525 $876,525 $876,525 $294,985 33.65% $876,525 $0

7345 Additional Services $299,600 $299,600 $174,600 $91,793 $266,393 $137,825 46.00% $299,600 $0

7346 Reimbursables $50,000 $50,000 $0 $293 0.59% $50,000 $0

7347 Ed Specs & Planning $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 100.00% $20,000 $0

Other Professional Services $842,000 $842,000 $801,590 $801,590 $142,424 16.91% $842,000 $0

7340 Other Professional Ser $7,000 $7,000 $0 $0 0.00% $7,000 $0

7348 Project Management $725,000 $725,000 $707,000 $707,000 $103,700 14.30% $725,000 $0

7349 Constructability Revie $50,000 $50,000 $52,173 $52,173 $0 0.00% $50,000 $0

7349 Value Engineering $60,000 $60,000 $42,417 $42,417 $38,724 64.54% $60,000 $0

Technical Services $418,500 $11,100 $429,600 $71,313 $51,750 $123,063 $62,408 14.53% $429,600 $0

7353 Topo & Boundary Surv $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0

7354 Geotechnical Investiga $40,000 $40,000 $4,793 $1,050 $5,843 $5,843 14.61% $40,000 $0

7355 HazMat Investigation $70,000 $11,100 $81,100 $30,400 $50,700 $81,100 $30,386 37.47% $81,100 $0

7356 SEPA / Environmental $23,000 $23,000 $16,820 $16,820 $9,880 42.96% $23,000 $0

7357 Traffic Study $20,000 $20,000 $19,300 $19,300 $16,300 81.50% $20,000 $0

7358 Commissioning $75,000 $75,000 $0 $0 0.00% $75,000 $0

7359 Materials Testing / Sp $190,500 $190,500 $0 $0 0.00% $190,500 $0

Owner Costs $3,460,757 ($11,100) $3,449,657 $0 $157,659 4.57% $3,449,657 $0

$3,460,757 ($11,100) $3,449,657 $0 $157,659 4.57% $3,449,657 $0

4000 Indirect Costs $150,000 $150,000 $0 $0 0.00% $150,000 $0

5612 Miscellaneous $0 $3,269 $3,269 $0 $3,269 100.00% $3,269 $0

7343 Legal Fees $50,000 $50,000 $0 $40,197 80.39% $50,000 $0

7520 Insurance $30,000 $30,000 $0 $0 0.00% $30,000 $0

7530 Communications $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0

JST 130012/10/2019 5:36:39 PM Page 1

Project Cost SummaryProject = Summitview Elementary

Original Budget

Budget Transfer

CurrentBudget

Financial Database Manager

Original Commitment

Charged to Date

Forecast at Completion

Projected Budget Balance

Approved Modifications

Current Commitment

West Valley School District 2019 Capital Bond Program

% BudgetCharged

7540 Advertising $15,000 $15,000 $0 $1,016 6.77% $15,000 $0

7550 Printing $25,000 $25,000 $0 $0 0.00% $25,000 $0

7833 Bond Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0

7100 Moving/Relocation Co $150,000 $150,000 $0 $0 0.00% $150,000 $0

7410 Utility Fees $100,000 $100,000 $0 $0 0.00% $100,000 $0

7490 Permits/Plan Review F $180,000 $180,000 $0 $5,942 3.30% $180,000 $0

7450 Temp Housing/Portabl $250,000 $250,000 $0 $92,607 37.04% $250,000 $0

9733 FF&E $1,014,800 $1,014,800 $0 $0 0.00% $1,014,800 $0

9734 Technology $500,000 $500,000 $0 $14,628 2.93% $500,000 $0

9739 Other Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0

9991 Project Contingency $995,957 ($14,369) $981,588 $0 $0 0.00% $981,588 $0

9992 Program Reserve Cont $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0

JST 130012/10/2019 5:36:40 PM Page 2

West Valley School District #208 Capital ProgramMonthly Project Report

Project: Apple Valley Elementary November 20197 North 88th AvenueYakima, WA 98908 Project Phase: Construction Dev.

Architect: Design West ArchitectsContractor: Chervenell Construction Company

Milestone Start Date End Date CommentsProgramming/Pre-Design 4/1/19 6/30/19 CompleteSchematic Design 5/15/19 7/31/19 100% CompleteGCCM Selection 6/11/19 8/12/19 100% CompleteDesign Development 8/1/19 10/31/19 100% CompleteConstruction Documents 11/1/19 2/14/20 2%Permitting 1/15/20 3/31/19 Demo 100%Early Bid Package 11/18/19 3/31/19 Abatement 20%Construction 4/1/20 6/20/21Occupancy 7/1/21 7/31/21

1. Project Description Replace Apple Valley Elementary on the existing site. Procurement method – General Contractor Construction Manager (GCCM). Chervenell Construction Company of Tri-Cities was a awarded the contract.

2. Activities in Progress Abatement of Hazard Materials SEPA Application Approval Construction Documents – CD’s currently 50%

3. Schedule Status Demolition scheduled start date 12/23/19

4. Budget Status Current Estimates are in budget. Sub-Contractor pricing received are in line with projected Overall Program Budget.

5. Issues Plan Review – DWA is planning to complete Permit Set early to offset the potential length of

the City of Yakima review process.

Project Cost SummaryProject = Apple Valley Elementary

Original Budget

Budget Transfer

CurrentBudget

Financial Database Manager

Original Commitment

Charged to Date

Forecast at Completion

Projected Budget Balance

Approved Modifications

Current Commitment

West Valley School District 2019 Capital Bond Program

% BudgetCharged

Apple Valley Elementary $34,484,119 $0 $34,484,119 $2,914,732 $196,228 $3,110,960 $1,176,768 3.41% $34,484,119 $0

Construction Costs $27,952,366 $27,952,366 $442,634 $31,860 $474,494 $7,331 0.03% $27,952,366 $0

$27,952,366 $27,952,366 $442,634 $31,860 $474,494 $7,331 0.03% $27,952,366 $0

9710 Off-Site Improvements $700,000 $700,000 $0 $0 0.00% $700,000 $0

9712 Site Development $600,000 $600,000 $0 $0 0.00% $600,000 $0

9720 New Construction $22,103,060 $22,103,060 $0 $0 0.00% $22,103,060 $0

9721 Preconstruction Servic $75,000 $75,000 $50,000 $50,000 $6,776 9.03% $75,000 $0

9722 HazMat Abatement $70,000 $70,000 $97,463 $97,463 $0 0.00% $70,000 $0

9723 Demolition $317,200 $317,200 $291,071 $291,071 $0 0.00% $317,200 $0

9724 Sales Tax $2,118,386 $2,118,386 $4,100 $31,860 $35,960 $556 0.03% $2,118,386 $0

9729 Change Order Conting $1,968,720 $1,968,720 $0 $0 0.00% $1,968,720 $0

Professional Services $3,065,700 $3,065,700 $2,472,098 $164,368 $2,636,466 $1,011,449 32.99% $3,065,700 $0

Architectural & Engineering $1,803,200 $1,803,200 $1,595,595 $128,318 $1,723,913 $807,090 44.76% $1,803,200 $0

7344 Basic Services $1,348,500 $1,348,500 $1,348,500 $1,348,500 $629,910 46.71% $1,348,500 $0

7345 Additional Services $370,700 $370,700 $213,200 $128,318 $341,518 $135,462 36.54% $370,700 $0

7346 Reimbursables $50,000 $50,000 $0 $7,820 15.64% $50,000 $0

7347 Ed Specs & Planning $34,000 $34,000 $33,895 $33,895 $33,900 99.71% $34,000 $0

Other Professional Services $842,000 $842,000 $801,590 $801,590 $142,424 16.91% $842,000 $0

7340 Other Professional Ser $7,000 $7,000 $0 $0 0.00% $7,000 $0

7348 Project Management $725,000 $725,000 $707,000 $707,000 $103,700 14.30% $725,000 $0

7349 Constructability Revie $50,000 $50,000 $52,173 $52,173 $0 0.00% $50,000 $0

7349 Value Engineering $60,000 $60,000 $42,417 $42,417 $38,724 64.54% $60,000 $0

Technical Services $420,500 $420,500 $74,913 $36,050 $110,963 $61,934 14.73% $420,500 $0

7353 Topo & Boundary Surv $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0

7354 Geotechnical Investiga $40,000 $40,000 $4,793 $2,850 $7,643 $7,643 19.11% $40,000 $0

7355 HazMat Investigation $70,000 $70,000 $34,000 $33,200 $67,200 $29,172 41.67% $70,000 $0

7356 SEPA / Environmental $25,000 $25,000 $16,820 $16,820 $9,620 38.48% $25,000 $0

7357 Traffic Study $20,000 $20,000 $19,300 $19,300 $15,500 77.50% $20,000 $0

7358 Commissioning $75,000 $75,000 $0 $0 0.00% $75,000 $0

7359 Materials Testing / Sp $190,500 $190,500 $0 $0 0.00% $190,500 $0

Owner Costs $3,466,053 $0 $3,466,053 $0 $157,988 4.56% $3,466,053 $0

$3,466,053 $0 $3,466,053 $0 $157,988 4.56% $3,466,053 $0

4000 Indirect Costs $150,000 $150,000 $0 $0 0.00% $150,000 $0

5612 Miscellaneous $0 $3,039 $3,039 $0 $3,348 110.17% $3,039 $0

7343 Legal Fees $50,000 $50,000 $0 $40,197 80.39% $50,000 $0

7520 Insurance $30,000 $30,000 $0 $0 0.00% $30,000 $0

7530 Communications $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0

JST 130012/10/2019 5:35:17 PM Page 1

Project Cost SummaryProject = Apple Valley Elementary

Original Budget

Budget Transfer

CurrentBudget

Financial Database Manager

Original Commitment

Charged to Date

Forecast at Completion

Projected Budget Balance

Approved Modifications

Current Commitment

West Valley School District 2019 Capital Bond Program

% BudgetCharged

7540 Advertising $15,000 $15,000 $0 $1,016 6.77% $15,000 $0

7550 Printing $25,000 $25,000 $0 $0 0.00% $25,000 $0

7833 Bond Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0

7100 Moving/Relocation Co $150,000 $150,000 $0 $0 0.00% $150,000 $0

7410 Utility Fees $100,000 $100,000 $0 $0 0.00% $100,000 $0

7490 Permits/Plan Review F $180,000 $180,000 $0 $6,192 3.44% $180,000 $0

7450 Temp Housing/Portabl $250,000 $250,000 $0 $92,607 37.04% $250,000 $0

9733 FF&E $1,014,800 $1,014,800 $0 $0 0.00% $1,014,800 $0

9734 Technology $500,000 $500,000 $0 $14,628 2.93% $500,000 $0

9739 Other Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0

9991 Project Contingency $1,001,253 ($3,039) $998,214 $0 $0 0.00% $998,214 $0

9992 Program Reserve Cont $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% $0

JST 130012/10/2019 5:35:18 PM Page 2

- 1 -

8 3 0 N C O L U M B I A C E N T E R B L V D , S U I T E E

K E N N E W I C K , W A 9 9 3 3 6

T E L : 5 0 9 / 7 8 3 - 2 2 4 4

Meeting Memorandum: Meeting Attendees: West Valley School District Matt Whitish – DWA June 25, 2019 Jim Moore – MW Engineers

Brandon Enevold – MW EngineersTim Critchlow – WVSD(3) WVSD Facilities Staff

West Valley School District Matt Whitish - DWANovember 14, 2019 Andres Rojo – DWA

Jim Moore – MW EngineersTom Rohwer – MW EngineersTim Critchlow – WVSD(2) WVSD Facilities Staff

Prepared by:Jim Moore – MW EngineersMatt Whitish – Design West Architects

Distribution: Issued Date:Tim Critchlow – WVSD November 26, 2019Angela Von Essen – WVSDRob Gross – CBRE HEERYJim Moore – MW EngineersTom Rohwer – MW Engineers

DWA Project File: 19031 / 6.0

The following represents the understanding of discussions held in this meeting. The minutes are organized in subject order and do not necessarily follow the chronological order of the meeting. Revisions should be communicated to Design West Architects.

The following are our notes from two meetings with the WVSD facility maintenance personnel (“The District”) concerning

mechanical (HVAC) systems for their two new elementary schools. It should be noted that The District has been very helpful

in providing feedback on their preferences for HVAC system types as well as the basis for these preferences. MW really

appreciates their participation and assistance. Our goal has been to listen to and respect their desires while providing

appropriate feedback based on MW’s experience and knowledge.

June 25th, 2019 meeting at WVSD Facility Maintenance Office

The District expressed a strong desire to utilize single zone, “packaged” rooftop units (RTU’s) for the basic HVAC system for

the new elementary schools. Each unit would have a natural gas fired heater and DX (compressor) cooling. There would be

one RTU for each classroom. It appeared this preference came from the use of this HVAC approach on some of the District’s

existing schools. MW indicated the following:

1. It was unusual in MW’s experience to have so many pieces of HVAC equipment on the roof with corresponding

maintenance concerns etc.

2. The District expressed the desire for system simplicity and flexibility as well as not being dependent on a central

system that could potentially impact the entire building should there be a malfunction. MW indicated their

appreciation and understanding of these concerns.

3. MW brought up the possibility of using central hot and chilled water to serve these units to greatly reduce the

quantity of compressors and gas heaters. The District expressed reservations about using water based systems due to

the difficulty of isolating portions of the building upon system failure.

4. MW indicated that the current energy code would require a dedicated outside air system (DOAS) to parallel the Single

Zone RTU system. The purpose of this system was to provide building outside ventilation air independent the RTU’s.

The District was not excited about more HVAC system complexity associated with this requirement.

- 2 -

5. The District indicated a very strong desire to have Automated Logic Controls on these projects and that this system

should control most if not all the functions of the RTUs. (i.e. the use of factory packaged HVAC controls was to be

minimized.)

6. The District offered their opinion as to acceptable RTU manufacturers:

a. No Aaon (previous unfortunate experience)

b. No Carrier

c. Trane OK

d. Daikin (brought up by MW) …District had no opinion.

7. In consideration of the “packaged” rooftop HVAC unit approach, MW expressed a strong recommendation to provide

high quality RTU’s (if available and within budget) as opposed to “supermarket” type units. The District agreed and

encouraged this approach.

November 14th, 2019 meeting at WVSD Facility Maintenance Office

A follow-up meeting was held with WVSD facility Maintenance personnel (“The District”) to review HVAC design progress to

date and to check in with them to provide additional design input as well as obtain their feedback.

1. MW indicated that for the most part, the District’s desires indicated in the aforementioned June meeting were

being incorporated into the current HVAC design. The following items were also discussed:

a. MW has been researching various RTU manufacturers as to features, quality etc. MW’s opinion was to use

Daikin manufacturer as the basis of design since this unit incorporates double wall construction, hinged

access doors, high quality direct drive BI plenum fans, variable speed compressors, high turndown gas

heaters and in general a more robust piece of equipment. Also, if at all possible, at least one additional

manufacturer of comparable quality should be considered. MW indicated the Johnson Controls (York)

manufacturer may be an option and that they would research this further. MW did not feel the Trane RTU

was of comparable quality. The District agreed with this approach. MW also indicated they would provide

the District locations where the Daikin RTU’s are currently installed for a possible inspection.

b. MW indicated a concern that having high capacity gas heaters standard in each RTU could be excessive

given the low classroom heating requirements (a result of the DOAS system heating the outside ventilation

air). In addition, due to high concentration of RTUs in close proximity, there could be a possibility of flue

gas entrainment into outside intake air depending on wind conditions. It was indicated the possibility of

flue gas entrainment could be minimized for the DOAS (the primary source of outside ventilation air) by

controlling the location of outside air intakes. This could be more problematic if outside air economizers

(free cooling with outside air) were incorporated on each RTU. Possible solutions could be not using

economizers or limiting economizer use.

c. The use of hot water for RTU heating was discussed at length. This would eliminate the concerns in item b.

above as well as providing a higher degree of control. It was also indicated that redundant boilers and hot

water pumps as well as numerous isolation valves could potentially minimize the District’s original concerns

expressed in the June meeting concerning the use of water based system. The District indicated they would

consider the possibility of utilizing hot water.

d. The large quantity of refrigeration compressors associated with numerous RTU’s was also discussed and

how a central chilled water system could minimize this.

e. The role of current technology and the ever-increasing use of ECM direct drive motors currently being used

by many HVAC equipment manufacturers (including Daikin) was discussed. It was indicated data for these

motors indicates long life combined with lower maintenance and energy use when compared to

conventional belt drive motors and drives but comes with a $ 2000 price tag for replacement.

f. The current design for roof access for maintenance was discussed at length. The District indicated their

approval.

- 3 -

g. The District expressed their desire and need for sufficient wall hydrants around the perimeter of the

schools.

Subsequent input from the District

Following the November 14th meeting, the District expressed their desire to continue with the gas heat and DX cooling

(compressors) in each RTU. They also indicated their approval of Aaon RTU manufacturer as a potential candidate to bid the

project.