Thursday,
July 1, 2004
Wayland Town
Building
School
Committee Conference Room
Attendees
HSBC members:
Lea Anderson, Josh Bekenstein, Steve Breit, Brian Chase, Jim Howard,
Mary Lentz, Joe Lewin, Cindy Lombardo, Eric Sheffels
Absent:
Dianne Bladon, Steve Tise
Ex Officio
members: Joy Buhler, Jay Chandler, Jane Ezbicki,
Fred Knight, Allyson Mizoguchi, Charlie Ruopp
Turner team:
Dick Amster, Julie Bezoetdebie, Bob Ho
HMFH team:
Steve Friedlaender, George Metzger, Doug Sacra
Chairman Lea
Anderson called the eighteenth meeting of the HSBC to order at 6:45 p.m.
-
Presentation of 3 Options
George Metzger
set the stage by reviewing the process leading to tonight’s presentation. He summarized the process of studying
the existing conditions and developing the educational specification leading to
development of 3 options. He
reminded the group of the goals established in April: the work is educationally
driven, benchmarked to comparable high schools, accommodates 1100 students in
classrooms, with core facilities sized to accommodate an enrollment of 1200
students. The direction to HMFH
and Turner from the HSBC was to determine the cost of satisfying the program in
three different design approaches, not to start with how much or how little to
spend. He said that the whole
program is satisfied in each of the 3 options. This is the beginning of conceptual planning to select a
direction, not the final design.
The direction selected might be one of the 3 options presented or it
might be combination of options.
The numbers that will be presented later this evening are based on real
life experience and should be considered as a total budget for which each
option could be developed within the stated parameters. Last, he remarked on the hard work
Turner and HMFH have done over the past few months and in recent weeks meeting
every other day to get to this point.
Doug Sacra
presented 3 options.
Option 1
renovates all existing buildings and adds a new Science/ Math building,
auditorium, and gym. It uses the
existing buildings for different purposes from their current use. For example the Math/English building
is used for Language/Health in the new scheme. Rooms are resized to SBA recommended size and match
Wayland’s educators’ requests for room size. Doug talked about some Wayland unique program space such as
reference centers where students gather for collaboration with other students
or meeting with teachers. All 3
options include a renovated Field House with bleachers removed and an infield
used for sports. The Boys Locker
Room is used for athletics storage space, while the Girls Locker Room is used
for weight training and aerobic spaces.
Option 2 is in
its fifth iteration as HMFH has made changes based on input from the HSBC. Four buildings (Math/English, Arts,
Admin/Media, and Field House) are renovated. A new Science/Social Studies/English building and new space
for commons, auditorium, gym, guidance, and administration are built. Math classrooms are located in the
renovated Admin building on the lower level.
Option 3 is a
brand new building with a renovated Field House. The goal of this option is to build a new facility while the
existing school remains in operation.
Doug mentioned wetlands limitations in the siting of the building. It has the same public areas (commons,
gym, auditorium, admin, guidance) as Option 2 with new classroom wings on two
levels on the current football field.
This scheme requires a new football field and track to be built after
demolition of the current buildings.
New zoning
regulations adopted by Town Meeting requiring additional parking spaces are
being examined. The cost for 800
parking spaces (nearly twice the current number due to the addition of large
assembly spaces that may be used simultaneously) is included in all three
schemes, but shown only on the site plan for Scheme 3. A new wastewater treatment plant is
included in each option.
-Phasing and
Scheduling Presentation
Julie Bezoetdebie
presented the phasing plan and schedule for each option using detailed
charts. She explained that
renovations take different times for different options. All three options show 15 months for
design and bid. Construction time
varies for each option with total length of project including site work as
follows:
Option
1 30
months (21 months plus Field House and site work)
Option 2
29 months (27 months plus site work)
Option
3 28
months (18 months plus Field House, demolition, site work, new field/track)
The dates on
Julie’s charts assume the earliest possible start, without regard to the timing
of a town vote which has not been determined.
-Options
Comparison
George showed
the group a matrix of HMFH’s interpretation of the relative rating of the
options for various parameters of a completed project, construction, and
cost. Option 1 was relatively
negative in 12 of 14 parameters.
Dick said that Option 1 has a high level of complexity that will result
in more planned as well as unplanned moves. In response to questions, George said that Options 2 and 3
have little difference in educational quality of finished project and all three
provide the same level of technology.
-Cost
Estimates Presentation
Dick Amster
introduced the discussion on cost estimates by saying that the educational
program is satisfied in all three options. He has coordinated and reconciled estimates with Hanscom,
challenged the size of the building, and shown reduction targets. The estimates do not include air
conditioning except for library, computer rooms, auditorium, administration,
and interior spaces. A turf field
is not yet included. Dick is
working on an analysis of the cost implication if the Field House were
removed. Schedules are not coordinated
with school schedule. He explained
that price escalation is to mid-point of construction and that FFE (furniture
and equipment) assumes reuse of some furniture.
Option 1 total
cost estimate is $56,109,116. Dick
expressed his surprise at this being the most expensive option. It has a bigger escalation cost because
it is a longer project.
Option 2 total
cost estimate is $53,981,609. It
has more new space and fewer moves than option 1.
Option 3 total
cost estimate is $55,493,557.
There is
detailed information on each building backing up these estimates.
Dick explained
that opportunity exists for lowering cost in three areas by reducing square
footage reducing unit cost, and reducing quality of materials.
In response to
questions on quality of materials, Dick said that new construction includes
block walls and brick. Doug said
that the HVAC system included is one of relatively good quality. A request for any operating costs, such
as transportation to use other schools’ athletic facilities was made. Questions on operating and maintenance
costs per year, and gross to net costs will be answered later. Doug explained that the square footage
in Option 1 is so high because there is extra space in multiple small buildings
that can be more efficiently designed in larger buildings.
In answer to a
question on contingencies, George reiterated that the numbers are more like a
budget than an estimate. There is
a very high probability that the project will come in under this number.
An HSBC member
expressed the opinion that people will be looking for big moves and small moves
to lower the cost. Many questions
ensued. Should we look at
alternative scopes or a change in the level of equity of the options? If this project is unpalatable to take
on all at once, are there ways to phase Scheme 2 over years? How much will the taxpayer be willing
to spend? Are there costs coming
along to absorb the increased enrollment before construction is completed? One member said that this is a project
without a budget until the voters decide.
The design team gave us exactly what we asked them for – three options
that satisfy the educational program.
The opinion was expressed that a project of this magnitude must have SBA
funding or it will not have voter support.
-Benchmarks
Doug reviewed
benchmark information on 11 new or renovated and expanded high schools in the
area. He provided information on
escalated costs to 2007 so that the comparison to the Wayland options could be
made. Concern that the square
footage per student for the Wayland options is too high was expressed. There was a lengthy discussion on the
skewing that the Field House causes.
Doug will recast the data to show the statistic with and without field
house square footage for all schools that have one. Additional discussion on minimizing or delaying work on the
Field House followed.
Doug then led
the group through a comparison of Groton/Dunstable High School, a $36M project
completed in 2003, to Wayland’s options.
Cost escalation, enrollment numbers, and differences in the library,
reference centers, music, and athletic programs were quantified to a project
that would cost $56.5M.
Lea reviewed the
forum agenda for July 8.
Upon a motion
duly made (Mary Lentz) and seconded (Josh Bekenstein), the Committee voted
unanimously (9-0) to approve the minutes of HSBC meeting #17 on June 24, 2004.
The meeting was
adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
Observers:
Pat Abramson, Barbara Carter, Kathy Gast, Bob Hatton, Ian Hecker, Carol
Hermsdorf, John Hilliard, Tom Largy, Julia Leney, Anette Lewis, Matt McDonald,
Margo Melnicove, Charles Raskin, Chris Riley, Tom Sciacca, Linda Segal, Michael
Short, Jeff Sklar, Richard Turner, Diana Warren
Comments and
questions from observers:
Question on how
the HSBC will respond to the community.
Comment that
draft minutes should be available under the Open Meeting Law.
Question on
wetlands boundaries.
Suggestion that
HSBC ask someone to learn how to tape the meetings.
Question on
budget spent so far.
Question on
wiring in proposed gym to accommodate Town Meeting broadcast.
Comment that
data is available on tax impact based on previous studies.
Question on how
much SBAB is driving up costs.
Comment that SBA
standards are driving up costs.
Comment that SBA
funding is going to be essential.
Question on what
are basic things that need to be done.
Question on
project without a budget comment made earlier.
Request for
priority setting of program needs.
Questions about
site work and phasing.
Questions about
cost of gym and auditorium; maintenance facility, and do we need indoor parking
for
maintenance
vehicles.
Comment that
total dollar amount is not going to fly.
Question on what
are essential needs.
Question on
timing of high school debt exclusion vote and comment that January or February
would not be a good time for many people in town to vote.
Comment that
assumptions must be reexamined; private sector is much more efficient.
Comment that
Town Meeting was told $30 - $40M.
Question on age
of Field House roof.
Comment that
participation rate in sports and music makes Wayland different; need to make
value judgment on their worth.
Comment that
everyone wants to invest in WHS; Fincom has done debt schedule; we need to look
at bigger financial picture in town.
The next regular meeting of the HSBC is scheduled for Thursday, July 15 at 7:30 p.m. in L1 at Wayland High School.
A community forum will be held on Thursday, July 8, 2004 at Wayland High School. A tour will be conducted at 6:30 p.m. The forum will take place from 7:30 – 9:30 in L1 in the Language Building.