High School Building Committee (HSBC) Meeting #24 Minutes

Thursday, September 9, 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, Steve Tise

Absent: Dianne Bladon

Ex Officio members: Gary Burton, Jane Ezbicki, Fred Knight, Allyson Mizoguchi, Charlie Ruopp

Turner team: Dick Amster, Julie Bezoetdebie, Bob Ho

HMFH team: Steve Friedlaender, Doug Sacra

Call to order - Chairman Lea Anderson called the 24th meeting of the HSBC to order at 7:45 p.m.

Forum Update ñ Lea reported on the community forum held on August 26.

HMFH/Turner Report ñ Dick Amster introduced the report by saying that the design team is looking for guidance from the HSBC on the number of buildings, number of construction phases, parking, and field house proposals.

Review of steps to current proposal ñ Doug Sacra reviewed the reasoning behind design iterations of Option 3. He reminded the group that the goals that were developed last spring are still driving the conceptual design. The following changes have been made:

August 5 ñ developed a scheme that leaves the track and field where it is now; updated siting to take directional facing into account for energy efficiency and day lighting.

August 19 ñ showed two separate classroom buildings that leave whole campus intact.

Sept. 9 - showed Commons with more access to light in courtyard; separated new building from field house to avoid complexity of tying into field house.

Doug showed possible grades that allow whole site to be handicap accessible. He talked about a higher parking lot that would allow better storm water drainage.

Doug answered a previously asked question about how much it costs to have multiple buildings, i.e. more of a campus. Replacing 10,400 sq. ft. of interior wall with exterior wall and providing underground piping add $275,000 net to the project.

Many suggestions were made:

- Join academic buildings to save stairwell and elevator

- Courtyard created by phasing plan is not optimum design

- Flip math/science building to other side of social studies/English/language building

- Quality of core outdoor space is important

- Drivers of placement are orientation to the sun and not interfering with existing buildings

- Is the Commons large enough? (yes, it is 10,800 feet and seats 500)

- Public access to gym might need to be improved

- Delivery access to kitchen should be considered

- Must be sensitive to crossover use for athletic and arts use at same time

- Small courtyard next to Field House might cause security issues

Steve Friedlaender offered that these sorts of details will be ironed out in future design phases. Instead of trying to solve them by committee, send Doug back to think about them.

Parking ñ Doug presented an updated parking analysis.

Current total parking spaces ñ 379

Projected actual design daytime use parking spaces ñ 432

Zoning code required parking for daytime use ñ 343

Parking spaces to provide for typical assembly use ñ 670

Zoning code required parking for assembly use - 623

The HSBC made the following suggestions:

- 670 spaces are too many

- Use 2.5 passengers per vehicle when calculating the number of spaces (results in 535 spaces)

- Reduce number by 18 bus spaces for special events; buses can be moved during events

- Monitor number of people at events this year

- Review logic with DEP and Land Use dept. heads on Sept. 21

Field House ñ Dick presented a response to Steve Breitís proposal to cut cost by eliminating the new 13,650 sq. ft. competition gym and adding new space outside the field house for wrestling, fitness, and dance. Dickís analysis showed a potential savings of only $25,405. Dick estimated that it would cost over $1M to upgrade the field house floor and structure to accommodate Steveís plan. Discussion ensued regarding the effect on the athletics program (WHS and Town) of deleting the gym. No changes were recommended regarding the gym.

Dick requested that the HSBC give its approval to spending no more time on an option that removes the field house. The analysis of that option resulted in a $58M project. The HSBC agreed to drop that idea.

One Phase or Two Phases - Dick presented the HSBC with two versions of Option 3. The original one-phase project depended on the new school being built on the football field. Given the decision to leave the football field where it is, Option 3 has evolved. It can be built in two phases without temporary housing of programs or in one phase with significant temporary (30 room) modular building. The two-phase project will take longer to complete. The one-phase project will cost more.

There was much discussion about the consequences of each approach. The consensus of the group was that a two-phased project makes the most sense because:

- it costs less than a single phase project.

- the current campus remains intact during construction of the academic building in first phase.

- the non-academic buildings remain intact while new common space is built in second phase.

- there is less disruption because students and staff move only once.

The design team was instructed to move forward with a two-phase project.

Julie Bezoetdebie reviewed the schedule of a two-phase project.

Design & Bid ñ 15 months (01Mar05 ñ 06Jun06)

Contract 1- Waste Water Treatment Plant ñ 6 months (03Apr06 ñ 04Oct06)

Contract 2- Phase 1 ñ Classroom Bldg. ñ 14 months (07Jun06 ñ 31Aug07)

Contract 2- Phase 2 ñ Commons Bldg./Site ñ 22 months (17Jul07 ñ 27Jul09)

(Commons bldg. ñ 14 months ñ 10Oct07-11Dec08)

In response to a previously asked question, Dick reported that eliminating 100 seats from the auditorium saves about $300,000.

Number of Buildings ñ The HSBC directed the design team to design two buildings rather than three. There was a lot of discussion about how the buildings land on the site, how well the campus/courtyards work, internal and external circulation and what is the most cost effective layout.

Schedule - Fred Knight reported that conversations are starting with other town boards on the possible schedule to a vote. He said that there is motivation to proceed quickly given the escalation impact of delaying the project. The MSBA (Massachusetts School Building Assistance) timetable corresponds very well to this project. One scenario might be to go for design funds in the late fall, then come back for construction funds once the MSBA regulations are known in early 2006.

There were many comments on this scenario:

- Lay out a primavera schedule leading to design start in March 2005.

- If we donít stick to the schedule, escalation will raise the project costs.

- We risk failing the second vote after spending the design funds.

- Voters will know what the design is before they vote on it.

- School projects are very calendar sensitive.

- We must show people the consequences of delaying.

Dick agreed to develop a design schedule, get budgets for design and testing, and help us understand the process for selecting an architect for the next meeting.

Next Steps ñ The group discussed how the design team should spend the remaining weeks. The time is fast approaching that changes to scope cannot be made. The HSBC previously instructed the designers to hold firm on the academic program. The consensus was that instead of chipping away at the program, the design team should spend its time on finding the answer to scheme 3.

Doug asked for $600 of contingency funds to be spent on test pits. The group had previously authorized Lea to approve this level of request. No vote was taken.

Minutes

Upon a motion duly made (Jim Howard) and seconded (Steve Tise) the Committee voted unanimously (10-0) to approve the minutes of HSBC meeting #23 on August 19, 2004.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:06 p.m.

Observers: Heather Pineault, Mark Santangelo, Linda Segal, Kathy Siracusa, Michael Short, Richard Turner

Comments and questions from observers:

There were no comments from the public.

The next regular meeting of the HSBC is scheduled for Thursday, Sept. 23 at 7:30 p.m. in the School Committee Conference Room in the Town Building.