Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-08-15-SMPC-min 4'7"° aM°"1''G TOWN OF LEXINGTON Ad hoc School Master Planning Committee (AhSMPC) APPo'L I4' Minutes Date August 15,2014 Place and Time- School Administration Building,Upper Level Conference Room, 8 00 A.M. Members Present Paul Ash, Superintendent of Schools, Judy Crocker, School Committee Jon Himmel, Permanent Building Committee Peter Kelley, Board of Selectmen(BoS) Carl Oldenburg, Permanent Building Committee Patrick Goddard, Director, Department of Public Facilities (DPF) Members Absent Mary Ann Stewart, School Committee Liaisons Present Bill Hurley, Capital Expenditures Committee Mollie Garberg, Appropriation Committee Alan Levine, Appropriation Committee Liaisons Absent none Semmes, Maini, and McKee Associates (SMMA) Phil Poinelli, Educational Planner Joel Seeley, Executive Vice President, Director of Project Management Others Present Mark Barrett, DPF Recording Secretary Sara Arnold Dr Ash started the meeting at 8.05 A.M. 1 Announcements. Mr Poinelli introduced Joel Seeley,who will be serving as project manager 2. Phase 1 Project Update Mr Poinelli distributed a list of July and early August meeting dates when he and either Mr Goddard or Mr Barrett met with the principals and/or assistant principals of all the schools in Lexington. They also met with the directors of seven education programs that have specific space needs. Draft meeting notes will be reviewed by those who participated in the meetings to ensure accuracy Ms Crocker and Mr Hurley reported that the school personnel who participated in these meetings were impressed with SMMA's professionalism and depth of knowledge Using a PowerPoint presentation, Mr Poinelli reviewed Clarke Middle School(Clarke), Bridge Elementary School(Bndge), and Estabrook Elementary School (Estabrook) floor plans that identified the rooms that are 90% or smaller than Massachusetts School Building Authority(MSBA)guidelines Schools are not required to meet MSBA guidelines,but they provide one benchmark to consider The following observations were made • Most of Clarke's classrooms do not meet the guidelines • Bridge's classrooms are okay some of its support spaces are undersized but are functioning adequately • Estabrook meets the guidelines, and its extra classroom space is being used as a literacy room and for library and conferencing It was noted that this resulted from "backfilling", and did not reflect a new model for Lexington. Mr Poinelli also shared charts for Clarke, Bndge and Estabrook that identified current and anticipated enrollment, and the relationship between enrollment and available space He noted that the floor plans and charts are a work in progress, additional and updated data will be included and all schools will have comparable material. He also suggested that the Town determine the assumptions that he should use, particularly regarding the number of students per class There was discussion about identifying space used for special education(SPED)programs and the way this is handled by MSBA Comments included the following • The State mandates that by age three, SPED students have access to public education. • Some SPED students "occupy two seats"because they spend time in both a SPED program and in a regular classroom setting, severely autistic students,whose programs are at Fiske Elementary School(Fiske), are sub-separate and therefore are not assigned a"second seat" • If a school district does not have adequate facilities for a SPED student, the student may be sent to an out-of-district program, which is expensive for the community • Lexington High School(LHS)provides for SPED students who are in Grade 9 through age 22 • The need for SPED classrooms can take priority over dedicated art and music rooms, though currently that is not required. It was agreed that the number of classrooms,both with and without space used for SPED programs, needs to be identified. 3 Enrollment Projections Dr Ash reported that the Superintendent's Enrollment Working Group (Enrollment Working Group)met recently They have determined that the cohort survival method, a standard method used for projecting school enrollment, is adequate for one year projections,but beyond that it does not capture the increases being generated by apartments and condominiums in Lexington. Such housing increased significantly in 2007-2008, and one, two, and three bedroom units are now housing considerably more children than onginally expected. Dr Ash added that the student population per single family home is not expected to increase outside of the norm. It was also noted that Lexington is known for its high quality SPED programs, and families will move here to have access to them Dr Ash explained that Joseph Pato, BoS chair and a member of the Enrollment Working Group,has developed a methodology for making one to five year enrollment projections that factor in Lexington's recent experience with increases in students living in apartments and condominiums His methodology indicates that Lexington will see an increase of 550 students over the next five years, of which 250 will be attending elementary school and 225 will be attending middle school. Dr Ash explained that the town's Statement of Interest submitted to MSBA,which is the first step in requesting funding assistance to replace Hastings Elementary School, included enrollment projections based on the cohort survival method. It was agreed that the Town should submit an addendum explaining the enrollment projections generated by Mr Pato Dr Ash commented that MSBA has its own methodology for projecting enrollment,but he anticipates that they will be impressed with the level of detail included in Mr Pato's calculations. He also cautioned that MSBA has limited financial resources to assist the many worthwhile projects that are requesting financial assistance The Town expects to hear from the MSBA in the fall. There was discussion about the risk of over-building schools for the long term It was suggested that the Town be cautious and use modular units to fill in as needed. It was noted that • MSBA's capacity analyses do not factor in the use or potential use of modular units because they are considered a short term solution. • The new LHS modular buildings are designed to last longer than the standard modular buildings,which could help the high school withstand the anticipated influx of students and possibly allow a delay in replacing the high school. • The Diamond Middle School modular buildings have been in use longer than onginally planned. • Harrington Elementary School and Fiske, despite being relatively new buildings, do not respond to educational needs as well as Estabrook. This results from some design issues,but these schools are also impacted by the recent increase in student population. 4 Next Meeting. This Committee will meet with the Lexington School Committee in the near future The next meeting of this Committee will be on September 5, 2014 at 8.00 A.M. 5. Minutes A motion was made and seconded to accept the July 11, 2014 Minutes The motion passed. VOTE 4-0-2 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9 40 A.M. These minutes were approved on September 5, 2014 Materials distributed/used at the meeting. Public Meeting Agenda, August 15, 2014, AhSMPC SMMA list of meeting dates with principals/assistant principals and directors of special programs, presented by Phil Poinelli SMMA PowerPoint slides of Clarke, Bridge, and Estabrook floor plans and data regarding capacity 3