HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-11-14-SMPC-min 4'7"°
aM°"1''G
TOWN OF LEXINGTON
Ad hoc School Master Planning Committee (AhSMPC)
APPo'L I4'
Minutes
Date December 11, 2014
Place and Time- School Administration Building,Upper Level Conference Room, 8 00 A.M.
Members Present Judy Crocker, School Committee Patrick Goddard, Director, Department of Public
Facilities (DPF) Jon Himmel, Permanent Building Committee (PBC) Bill Hurley, School Committee Carl
Oldenburg, PBC
Member Absent Paul Ash, Superintendent of Schools, Peter Kelley, Board of Selectmen (BoS)
Liaisons Present David Kanter for Rod Cole, Capital Expenditures Committee
Liaisons Absent Mollie Garberg, Appropriation Committee Alan Levine, Appropriation Committee
Semmes, Maini, and McKee Associates (SMMA) Phil Poinelli, Educational Planner Joel Seeley, Project
Manager Alex Pitkin
Others Present Jessie Steigerwald, School Committee Alessandro Alessandrini, School Committee Rob
Addelson, Assistant Town Manager for Finance Mark Barrett, DPF Kate Colburn, Lexington Parents
Advocacy Group (LPAG), Fiske Elementary School parent; Christina Lin, Bowman Parent Teacher
Association (PTA, Patricia Valda, Bowman PTA, Tom Diaz, resident
Recording Secretary Sara Arnold
Ms Crocker opened the meeting at 8 02 a.m. The School Committee opened its meeting immediately
following
1. SMMA Update on Phase III Master Plan Using a handout, Mr Poinelli discussed a chart that showed
conceptual costs for adding square footage to existing schools or for building a new school. He stressed
that these costs can only be used for comparative purposes, i e they should only be used to provide a
general understanding of the differences between costs of a variety of construction project scenarios He
illustrated the cost differentials by providing ball park figures for seven options that might be used to
address enrollment increases in the schools When the number of options is pared down, an estimator can
refine the estimates.
Mr Poinelli noted the following
• The $57,600,000 cost of re-building Estabrook Elementary School(Estabrook) is currently being
used as the conceptual cost for replacing Maria Hastings Elementary School(Hastings) This is the
cost without Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) financial assistance,which is
important to identify in the event the Town decides to move forward on this project without MSBA
approval of its Statement of Interest,which has been submitted to the MSBA
• Some school options identify construction projects that could be undertaken to eventually result in
"right sizing"Bridge and Bowman Elementary schools (Bridge and Bowman), and the Clarke
Middle School (Clarke) Right sizing system-wide means that there is adequate core space (e.g ,
auditorium, gymnasium, library) for the number of students attending the schools based on
classroom counts, the Town's class size policy and MSBA's recommended room sizes
• For these options,until construction is completed and re-districting takes place, some of the
schools will be under-sized. Bridge and Bowman Elementary Schools present such examples
• The middle school construction projects are the same in all the options They result in adding one
more teaching team at Clarke and two more teams at Diamond Middle School(Diamond)
The Clarke construction projects include a pre-fabricated addition,but they also involve
changing each pair of current small triangular shaped classrooms into single classrooms,which
minimizes the increase in classroom space A building addition is proposed to replace those
rooms lost when reshaping the triangular rooms
The Diamond Middle School projects include the addition of a teacher planning area
comparable that which already exists at Clarke
There was considerable discussion about the misperception people will get from looking at the costs
presented in the handout. It was stressed that caveats need to be added to provide the context and purpose
of the numbers Minimally, this should be done with footnotes Mr Himmel made a number of specific
suggestions for edits before this material is added to the Town's website
Mr Poinelli acknowledged that none of these options addresses the immediate issue of some under-sized
elementary schools He said that temporary modular units can be added at the schools for approximately
$2.5 million. He noted that this is a School Committee policy decision, without this funding, some schools
will be without designated art and music space if enrollment continues to increase as projected
Concerns about the use of school building space for storage of currently unused furniture were briefly
discussed. It was agreed that this Committee cannot address what is a townwide problem, although such
storage may impact available educational space
Using the "Conceptual Costs"handout,Mr Poinelli added the following
• Option 5 has the highest ball park costs
• Option 6 involves adding "bricks and mortar"to all of the elementary schools, these additions
require further evaluation to ensure they do not have any prohibiting site limitations
• Option 7,which moves the School Administration offices out of its current facility, does not
include a cost for leasing office space for these functions
• Redistricting is necessary for every option in order to right size the schools
• A replacement for Hastings can be built before demolishing the current building, there are several
options for addressing this process
There was discussion about the next steps SMMA is scheduled to have a draft report prepared by the week
of January 5,2015 It was generally agreed that they should start by preparing more refined cost estimates
for the common components included in the options,but the School Committee needs to provide some
additional direction on how many other components should be pursued. It was also generally agreed that
the report needs to identify all the options that were considered to this point and explain why certain ones
have been eliminated for further discussion, this is needed to provide the reader with an understanding of
the depth of this process.
It was noted that the final Enrollment Working Group's report is scheduled for release in another week, the
numbers have not changed significantly from those presented in the fall. It was also noted that the PBC is
meeting later tonight and will be looking at how these projects can be managed by existing staff
Using a PowerPoint presentation, Mr Pitkin reviewed four options for addressing deficiencies,based on
MSBA criteria and increasing enrollment, at Lexington High School(LHS) He noted that the recently
installed prefabricated buildings will handle the projected enrollment for at least five years, and this
Committee is not tasked with choosing an option for LHS If the Town pursues an MSBA approved
project, experience indicates that it takes about five years to build a facility from the time the project is
approved.
2. Next Meeting. It was agreed that this Committee should be advising the School Committee before it takes
a position on the options that have been presented,but this Committee was not prepared to take a position
immediately It was noted that although the School Committee is meeting on December 16"' to discuss its
positions on the options, this Committee can prepare its recommendations on December 18"', and the
School Committee can wait to vote on its positions until December 19`h when it meets again. This schedule
allows SMMA to continue moving forward on its assignment. It was noted that SMMA is working at the
master planning stage and is not preparing schematics
3 SMMA Phase 2—Elementary Schools Short and Long Term Options Study Report. A motion was
made and seconded to accept the final report. The motion passed. VOTE 5-0
4 Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 10 10 A.M.
These minutes were approved on January 8, 2015
Materials distributed/used at the meeting.
Public Meeting Agenda, October 30, 2014, AhSMPC
SMMA PowerPoint slides Lexington Public Schools, Ad hoc Schools Master Plan Committee, Middle and
Elementary Schools, December 11, 2014
Conceptual Costs charts prepared by SMMA for December 11, 2014 meeting
3