High School Building Committee (HSBC) Meeting #41 Minutes

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Wayland Town Building

School Committee Conference Room

 

Attendees

HSBC members:  Lea Anderson, Dianne Bladon, Steve Breit, Brian Chase, Jim Howard, Fred Knight, David Lash, Mary Lentz, Joe Lewin, Eric Sheffels, Jennifer Steel, Karen Talentino

Absent: Josh Bekenstein, Cindy Lombardo, Steve Tise

Ex Officio members: Gary Burton, Bob Gordon, Allyson Mizoguchi, Charlie Ruopp

 

Call to order – HSBC Chairman, Lea Anderson, called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.

 

Review of Educational Program – Charlie Ruopp gave a short review of the educational specifications process conducted by HMFH is the spring of 2004.  The HMFH team met many times with administrators and department heads to quantify the existing program.  He explained that the educational specifications reflect many compromises made regarding the size of classrooms (reduced from 900 s.f. to 780 s.f ) and number of classrooms as shown in the design report.  HMFH had noted that the utilization of classrooms at WHS was the highest they had seen at any school.

 

Allyson Mizoguchi gave an update of current room utilization.  She reported an 83.2% utilization rate on average for the 39 classrooms, but a very lopsided utilization depending on the type of classroom.   The ten non-lab classrooms in the Math/English building are used every period of every day.  She reported that the two new modular science labs (approx. 1000 s.f. each) and the new classrooms afforded by abandoning the reference center in the Language Building and TLVC (TEC program) have provided some relief in scheduling room use.

 

Charlie said there is a tipping point at which space defines pedagogy and pedagogy can no longer define space.  WHS is very close to that point.

 

The group had a long discussion on utilization:

            - It might be okay to use some classrooms at a higher than 85% rate.

            - Science labs must have a lower utilization rate so that labs can be set up and taken down.

            -  85% is the recommended standard on average according to HMFH

            - The state will take the decision out of our hands by giving us a square footage/student

- Utilization is only part of the issue; classrooms at WHS are woefully undersized with 8 classrooms over 40% smaller than the 850 s.f. minimum standard, 7 classrooms 30% smaller and 13 classrooms 12 % smaller.  Science labs are over 20% smaller than the minimum standard and 35% smaller than the mid-range which is what was proposed.

- Let’s update the chart to show utilization by classroom type, targeted utilization, and relation to new standard.

- Can rotating schedule be changed to save space?  Ans. yes, but rotating schedule allows many more students to take electives of their choice.  School culture defines space needs.  Changing that is a much larger conversation.

 

Review of Designer Selection – Lea reviewed the Designer Selection Process.  In Nov. 2003, the Wayland School Committee released a Request for Project Management Services and a Request for Qualifications for Design Services for the Revitalization of Wayland High School.  A briefing was held for interested design and project management firms.  The School Dept. received 17 proposals from architectural firms and nine proposals from project management firms.  The newly formed HSBC reviewed all proposals and invited two project management firms and four architectural firms to make presentations.  The HSBC selected the Educational Division of Turner Construction to provide project management services and HMFH to provide design services for the preliminary design.  HMFH and Turner were chosen for their extensive experience in school design and project management in Massachusetts, a record of being on time and on budget, positive recommendations from many other communities, and experience with energy efficient design.

 

Lea reported that it was the stated intention of the WSC at the beginning of the process to continue with the selected firms, if all went well, through completion of the project. Many HSBC members expressed their confidence in a committed, capable design team who gave us a lot more than was expected or budgeted and who will continue to work with us towards a solution at WHS.

           

Review of Existing Conditions – Lea reviewed the Existing Condition Report by summarizing the findings spelled out in the Preliminary Design Report.  HMFH and their consultants spent the spring of 2004 inspecting every aspect of the WHS facility.  They met with maintenance, custodial, administration, teaching, and town department staff.  They inspected site and buildings, tested materials, reviewed local, state, and federal regulations.  The summary of their findings 2 1/2 years ago states that “though the facility has been well maintained, many portions of systems are near or beyond their expected life and need replacement or significant upgrades, including HVAC, plumbing, fire protection, electrical and sewage disposal.  The site may present some permitting issues due to its proximity to protected areas.  The roofs need immediate attention.  There are no structural impediments to renovation, but the facility should be brought up to current lateral-load safety standards.  Handicapped accessibility and ADA compliance are absent and will require extensive modifications.  There is significant asbestos containing material on site.....”

 

Lea , referring to the 200 page Existing Conditions Report, then went into a detailed list of conditions relative to site, buildings, roofs, windows, structure, utility and mechanical systems, ventilation systems, indoor environmental quality (air, acoustics light), accessibility, Title 9 and hazardous materials.

 

Reports confirming the conditions have since been produced including the NEASC Report in 2005,

the Turner Report regarding WHS repairs in the summer of 2006, and the letter from the Division of Occupational Safety in the fall of 2007.

 

Discussion ensued:

- Once we start working, we will have to continue on all buildings.  This has not been communicated well.  Work will trigger all sorts of code compliance issues.

- Should we be requesting waivers to get around some of these requirements?

- Building inspector will not let us compromise on code requirements.

- We should quantify what code compliance costs.

- Are there potential ADA suits?

- Concrete overhang pieces falling is a serious situation.

- From a legal standard, expectation is full compliance in post-ADA construction.  Stop gap will trip it.

- Regarding NEASC, we have about 3-5 years to address the recommendations before losing accreditation.

 

MSBA Process – Dianne, Fred, and Brian presented a flow chart and time line of the process described in the final MSBA regulations.  They expressed the difficulty in coming up with a schedule when the regulations do not provide any sense of timing.  The process is dependent on the MSBA developing templates.  Except for the Statement of Interest, there are no forms available.

 

Comments were:

            - The MSBA has described a level of design review that is going to require a huge staff.

- The regulations provide some definitions of reports required for the pre-study.  We should look at what is defined and assure ourselves that the information exists in the standard information that the administration produces.

- We need a to-do list.

- Let’s look back at our enrollment assumptions and see how they have changed two years later.

- Can the HSBC see any circumstance in which we would not ask for some funds at the next Annual Town Meeting to do the updated feasibility study as defined by the MSBA?  Ans. Only if the MSBA tells Wayland that we are not in the first round of applicants invited to continue the process.

- If we know nothing more than we do now, the request should be made contingent on being invited to continue the application process.

 

Update – Cindy, Dianne and Lea met WPSF president Anna Sommers to begin discussion about private fundraising.  Anna agreed to discuss with the WPSF the MSBA regulations relative to private funding and to begin to develop a strategy.

 

Dr. Burton has written a letter to Katherine Craven, Executive Director of MSBA, offering Wayland as a test site for the new regulations.  It was suggested that the HSBC committee bios be attached along with the flow chart and time line.

 

The Wayland School Committee will hold a forum on Monday, Nov. 20 at 7:00 pm in the large hearing room of the town building.  HSBC members are welcome to attend.

 

Next Steps – The HSBC will continue its review of the Preliminary Design Study.  The group agreed to try to cover the three preliminary options, the selected option, the stop gap and benchmarking all in one meeting.  Eric suggested engaging George Metzger to lead us through this review.  It was also suggested that Doug Sacra should be contacted and asked to help with the review.

 

Action items for the next meeting on Nov. 30

- Read Chapters 6, 7, 8 and 13 (appendix on Stop Gap) of the Preliminary Design Report for the next meeting.

-  Dr. Burton will ask administrators to look at the definitions in the MSBA Regulations of the Design and Educational Program, Budget Statement for Educational Objectives, and the Educational Facilities Master Plan to assess our preparedness for providing this information.

-  Lea will contact George Metzger to ask for help with the Nov. 30th meeting.

 

           

Motion – A motion was made by Mary Lentz and seconded by Steve Breit to approve the minutes of HSBC meeting #40 held on Thursday, Oct. 26, 2006.

 

Vote – The motion was approved unanimously - 12 in favor, 0 opposed.

 

Comments and questions from observers:  There were no comments.

 

Adjournment – The HSBC adjourned at 9:58 p.m.

 

Observers:  Pat Abramson, Janet Correia, Brian O’Donnell, Lisa Valone