The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1960 SSBC Proposed New Elementary School on Grove Street THE PROPOSED NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ON GROVE STREET . 1M <.» `.. i.. The Standing School Building Committee Lexington, Massachusetts March, 1960 Committee Committee Secretary 1 Alvin W. Davis Dorothy D. Seymour Jacqueline B. Davison Superintendent of Schools Frederick K. Johnson Medill Bair William G. Potter Architect Stephen T. Russian Clinch, Crimp, Brown and Fisher Robert B. Kent, Secretary-Treasurer Education Consultants Austin W. Fisher, Jr., Chairman Kargman Mitchell & Sargent with the best practical building at the lowest possible total The Committee cost — that is, the sum of initial investment plus operating and The Standing School Building Committee was established maintenance cost over a reasonable life-expectancy for the under Article 37 of the Warrant for the 1957 Annual Town building. Meeting to handle all phases of school building projects au- Since its formation, the Committee has been directed to carry thorized by the town. The Committee is composed of seven out four projects. The renovation of the so-called Barnes citizens appointed by the Moderator, the Chairmen of the Property for use as the School Administration Building was Board of Selectmen and the Chairmen of the Appropriation, completed in 1958 at a cost of $18,000. Renovation of the School and Standing School Building Committees. Members Muzzey Junior High was substantially completed in 1958 but serve staggered terms of three years to provide continuity. still has a few minor matters delaying final settlement. The The basis for the design of any school building is the educa- total appropriation was $497,000. The 850-pupil Diamond Junior High School, occupied in December 1959, will be corn- tion program established by the School Committee. This pro- gram determines the number and type of teaching stations, the pleted by next summer for something less than the authorized size of classes and the necessary general facilities. In addition, $2,155,000. there are state and local laws governing public buildings in Finally, under Article 40 of the 1959 Annual Town Meeting, general and schools in particular with regard to the factors the Committee was directed to prepare plans and specifications affecting health and safety. The State Building Assistance Corn- and obtain final bids for constructing and equipping an ele- mission, through which Lexington receives slightly over 40% mentary school on the available site on Grove Street in the of the cost of its schools via the State Aid Program, also has northwest section of the Town. An appropriation of $50,000 standards which must be met to obtain approval. Within the was provided. This assignment has been completed and final framework of these requirements, the Standing School Building bids will be opened on March 24. A request for appropriation Committee and its architects and consultants must work out a will be presented to the 1960 Annual Town Meeting on or after design which provides the Town and the School Department March 28 on the basis of the selected low bid. The Timing Appropriation of funds at the 1960 Annual Town Meeting will allow the Committee to award the general contract so that ground can be broken during April. This should assure sufficient progress on construction so that delays due to severe weather should not be a problem as was the case with the Diamond Junior High School, a larger building which was not started until July. Therefore, the Committee believes that this building can be fully ready for occupancy in September of 1961. The program on which the actual design was based was The Proposed Elementary School for the Grove Street Site developed by the Lexington School Department and the Build- The artist's conception on the front cover plus the site plan, ing Committee's Education Consultant with advice and sug- floor plan and descriptive material included in this report are gestions from the SUPRAD staff at Harvard University, which intended to give the citizens of Lexington the best possible idea has been directly concerned with the team-teaching project at of the proposed new school. The Committee realizes that the the Franklin School. The architect participated directly in most method of presentation is at best limited and hopes that in- of the meetings concerning formulation of the program. terested citizens will seek such additional information as they The education program developed for the new school pro- may need at Precinct Meetings or through the Committee or vides for instruction in groups of various sizes according to the School Department. subject matter and degree of pupil participation. This requires movement during the school day of both pupils and teachers. The Program Group sizes range from less than ten pupils to as many as 150 At the time the planning for this school was started, it was and occasionally even more. An important feature of the pro- gram is the functioning of teachers by teams to determine the evident to the School Committee that the results of the SUPRAD details of their program and to coordinate their activities. Each program at the Franklin School and of other studies and proj- ects in the field of elementary education were indicating a trend of the many aspects of the program had to be considered in terms toward increasing flexibility of pupil groupings and teacher- of both size and arrangement of spaces. pupil relationships. This approach appears to offer equal or While each aspect of the design was checked against this better education with increased effectiveness in the use of avail- program, it was also reviewed for adaptability to other possible able teacher skills. The Standing School Building Committee teaching methods including the conventional approach to en- was therefore requested to incorporate in the new building a sure a building with maximum effectiveness throughout its useful high degree of operating flexibility. life. ___moi`___ / - TuqNTNG ------------------------------------_ \ Olwry Q r ___ _ ao. ,�( Q� "ORT" -_/ . II C1 p r 0,..._ AM a F Z NE \ SCH • OL �� ,s,)„, E.„ la U1 , ,„ . ^d, 7,1� MAWT ILl! q• j:t . ,c.c. lip =4 0 4 /-41 4t. .:...,%.4, %, .,..„ -,zf 70 �0 3 �r pi • (16P J�V hQR.`y . . ifill:41P: 0J !�y 4.,, � p 'ARI( � 8��? „.. i t JusT'N / lag,/ `�•�• 4 /O CtiOO`Q �O R O II to 1. Vir I+�►zEl ° per+ '_ t 4.441. Y'�.f •: • • ° . 41 4. 41161111166- A . . .ibu. ' iii:o. , G'431'44.4, L 4,8k 4 li'llk A _ ff Iii 11�� •7 • , O� \ ( ek •�. � t ' • • pp _ }rE Q p0 a �. , i, .i i i i 4 V� MSN AVI C ta a W (14it3i N�� a 0 o e4<<, �. 3J MAYW .p 3T. \ J \ IA" 41 o* i 47 e. >h ! la i # 14.0 efrik * • • N via oli...% ! A 0 r Q1�7 \------Aftxf 4146 y •O►U�. /PARLEY'LI Z C �N >n goo IVO Imo3 -.,<VCR ... . .� � Y - - —�.eC -IctaExax ""- CC' The Site As shown on the map, the 13 acre site for the proposed school lies north of Route 128 between Grove Street and Robinson Road. Most of the site is essentially level and subsoil conditions are excellent, making grading and construction relatively easy. The location of the building on the site was established after careful study of play area and access and parking problems. The resulting arrangement gives three general areas which fit into the natural differences in play activities of the age and grade levels and thus provides for effective control of the outdoor program. ,----.-. \ 1"0.v .. . ----- 0 v. % . . ,. . ,• ', .. . ... ,.-- i • • . .- • • -) , K_"-‘,-_-.. ...- -,.. - - : :. : c_ „ \ _ ,...._,. . \- ..1.=. .... ,. . . „ .. _ . • • • .• l' \ . . 0 . . ... .. ',. !'"".`—'1'' • ' - D. :--- - -. . ... .•-)'' • -.-\: - • - 'It\l'• - • ---' '.1-,- - ,. - 6 \ ' . '. . " , • •k - ,-- •- .- .••• 0 :ilk . . . . . .. . . . . - . '\. 3' ‘, - - . ':''''• \--, .., ..: ..,.,iy•._,..fdki.,,, \ W4' .. , , .,/, -•,-). ,.7. 0 ct`'''' ,• . ...• . ., .,. . ., . \ \ .- . • .„' ...--- 20111," '., ..., . . , . . . ..... • ----\\-\--c\ ,L3'• . ' . Z % ...:(1 .:: • z • ‘--\; (.•,,,.-• '• . . . . . . .. .. ., igi 6.:-Q) - .:.,..:- ,-.,• -•-:</ ‘ • ••.c.---.--.-... G• - . . . . . al \- -: Q.'.. .. . .... . . ,-._f ' '* ' * ----4 7 s ... .., '• *NNW 7 '‘CD * :-F ' \ ' \ / 1::t) - „... -.--:./-:.,--i - . , z -. cp . . //*,....„ \ ' / / PLOT PLAN \ z \\- ... \.'--....• .i>/, / the kitchen and administrative area. Three rooms, with a Ca- The Building pacity of about 70 pupils each, will serve for both instruction In the final form of the building all instructional areas are and eating. The library is considered as a part of the instruc- on one level. The boiler room and a large storage room are tional space. The playroom is similar to those in our other located below as parts of the pipe space which extends under elementary schools and is so located that it can be used for the entire structure. At first glance, the exterior view and floor eating purposes if larger groups are to be accommodated. plan do not differ greatly from those of a typical modernele- Since teachers meet together frequently as teams and sub- mentary school and it could, in fact, be readily converted for a teams, and since they'do not have permanent classroom stations, conventional education program with 23 standard classrooms of this program requires a larger teacher's work area than a con- about 900 square feet each. Some spaces are fixed in size with ventional school. Should it ever be decided to convert the build- permanent walls, while others may be changed by the use of ing to a conventional program, the area can be readily converted moveable partitions. to instruction space. The floor plan shows three general groupings of rooms, cor- The capacity of the proposed school is at least 621 on the responding approximately to the three teams of teachers around basis of the area equivalent to 23 "standard" classrooms. How- which the education program has been developed. The focal ever, careful analysis discloses that under the team-teaching point is the large auditorium— actually a lecture hall —which program about 650 pupils could easily be accommodated. Only seats 150 in normal use and over 200 for special functions. The through actual operation can the ultimate capacity be deter- two wings adjacent to the auditorium have a number of rooms mined. The larger size of the building, as compared to our for small and medium sized groups. recent schools, was based primarily on the most efficient use of The third wing is based on larger group activities and includes common areas. \\ :„.......„,"\\<P7 v q . O O • -%\ r 1 „ '. ." • ' "-"■■■■■feiill■■■■ \ �\ /. ' , .-7IR , - -.. 4(1■■■■■N■■■■■■!\ \ / < 7tt EA HERS 4',■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■i l • � /r \'•. C L A S IS ROOM t. K I T C H E N 1 ,,ROum C L A SIS R 0 0 M .�■■■■■■■■N■■■■Irit l \ �. ^�■■■■■EL',.7■■ �� _ .11 it] 1 u■■■■r�m■I-- LOBBY Ulg "Ilk2,11mgyr-F'''".... 1-__ , ��rI i� ,\ ----\\\ ''1''' \\\\'\'... . . N ,._�■ 1 L " CLASSROOM T1A DM N I PL1 T I O N 1•■r�^ 1 �■�� P L A Y R 0 G M LIBRARY 61111111.1MM■INM■■■■ ■-_■,' ` .M■�■�■_�E■■■ICi■M�n ■ ■■ ■ �«a ! . 0.0 -- --'.:.-:.• :,.'.' ' . • •-•.• ,, ... ..:: ' . --1\e"\-.........-----7‘P N 9 • O . ,, . \ \\\:.,:ij: .•.\,s l' WA ' , . j).. ;. .' .� N \ ..-----. . `` . \ • . FLOOR PLA\ 0 10 20 30 40 50 I k DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING Floor Reinforced concrete Food Service Equipment Standard units Roof Folding Partitions Framing Structural steel Play Room Automatic coil type Decking Pre-cast slabs Classroom Fabric-covered, accordion Surface Four-ply composition and gravel Assembly Room Desks Exterior Walls Tables Fixed pedestal, plastic tops Facing Brick Chairs Fixed pedestal, swivel seats Backing Concrete block Heating Waterproofing Membrane built into walls System Low pressure steam Window Wall and Windows Aluminum Boilers Cast iron (two) Interior Partitions Concrete block with some surfaces Burners Oil plastered. Controls Pneumatic Structural glazed tile dados in Ventilation Mechanical supply and exhaust corridors and toilets. Plumbing Finish Floors Stone in lobby Toilet Room Fixtures China, chrome trim Ceramic tile in toilets Classroom Sinks Stainless steel Resilient flooring elsewhere Piping—Drainage Cast iron Ceilings —Water Supply Copper Assembly Room Plaster, hard and acoustical Electric Elsewhere Incombustible acoustical tile or Service Primary to transformer vault grid supporting system Conduit for Wiring Rigid iron Interior Door Frames Pressed steel Light Fixtures Fluorescent and Incandescent Exterior Doors Clocks Hourly corrective Lobby Aluminum Fire Alarm Closed circuit, Town connected Below Floor Copper-covered Sound System Console, speaker and telephones Others - Wood Television Closed circuit system Interior Doors Solid core, birch veneered, except Emergency Lighting Batteries, dry cell for Underwriters' label doors Finish Grading Hat and Coat Units Wood, open front type Curbing Granite Chalkboard Adjustable steel units with alumi- Road and Play Surfaces Bituminous num trim Grassed Areas Loamed and seeded Tackboard Adjustable cork-surfaced units Flag Pole 40 foot, aluminum with aluminum trim elementary schools should take into account the capacity of the The Cost proposed building (15-20% higher than the last two schools Estimating building costs at this particular time is difficult. built), that building and equipment costs are up about 10% Bids have been running 5 to 10% below estimates in many recent since our last major elementary school project, and that, in a projects. The Committee prefers to be conservative and present number of cases, the Committee has chosen higher first cost for the Town with the figure it feels to be the maximum which structure or materials where it believed that subsequent main- could be expected and point out the possibility of a lower total. tenance, repair and replacement expense would be reduced Based on this approach, the cost of this building is currently sufficiently to offset the difference. The fact that the Town re- estimated at $1,250,000 of which $50,000 has already been ap- ceives 43% of initial cost in the form of State Aid and no as- propriated for the preliminary work. Comparisons with previous sistance on subsequent expenditures influenced these decisions. Standing School Building Committee BULK MAIL School Administration Building U. S. POSTAGE 1557 Massachusetts Avenue PAID Lexington 73, Mass. Lexington, Mass. Permit No. 3011 1960 Annual Town Meeting March 21, 1960