Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-06-02-SBC-min (draft) Project: Lexington High School Meeting:School Building Committee Meeting No. 30-06/02/2025 Page: 1 O Ilf iii: .iVVI°°ll i 11I11Il E P Project: Lexington High School ,,,, Project No: Subject: School Building Committee Meeting Meeting Date: 06/02/2025 Location: Hybrid(146 Maple Street&Zoom) Time: 12:00 PM Distribution Attendees, Project File Prepared By: J.Greco Present Name Affiliation Present Name Affiliation Kathleen Lenihan* SBC Chair&SC Member ✓ Mike Burton DWMP Michael Cronin* SBC Vice-Chair&LPS Facilities ✓ Christina Dell DWMP Angelo ✓ Julie Hackett* Jacob Greco DWMP Superintendent Steve Bartha* Town Manager Chris Schaffner Green Engineer Joe Pato* Select Board Chair ✓ Lorraine Finnegan SMMA J . Mark Barrett* Public Facilities Manager Rosemary Park SMMA Charles Favazzo PBC Co-Chair ✓ Thomas Faust SMMA Jr.* Jonathan Himmel PBC Chair* it ✓ . Brian Black SMMA Andrew Baker* Lexington High School Principal ✓ Erin Prestileo SMMA Carolyn Kosnoff* Finance Assistant Town Anthony Jimenez SMMA Manager Hsing Min Sha* Community Representative J Martine Dion JSMMA Kseniya Slaysky* Community Representative ✓ Anoush Krafian SMMA Charles Lamb Capital Expenditures ✓ Michael Dowhan SMMA Committee Alan Levine Appropriation Commit tee � Andy Oldeman �SMMA Dan Voss* Sustainable Lexington Rick DeAngelis Recreation Committee Department Maureen Director of Planning and Cindy Arens Recreation Kavanaugh Assessment Department Veirirrrncairnt Ma:assa:aa.ihUsett �rr�rnr.rlr irearudW�rlhliu::tlie .coin Project: Lexington High School Meeting:School Building Committee Meeting No. 30-06/02/2025 Page:2 Claire Sheth Recreation Committee Melissa Battite Recreation Department Item........ No Action Item Re Ball in Court Requested by q - Please click IFi.e ire'for the presentation o This will be referenced in the meeting minutes with slide numbers called out to refer to. ® Below is a summation of key points® please view the recording for full transcript. Item No Descriptio Action n 30.1 Call to Order&Intro: Called to order by Kathleen Lenihan at 11:02 pm Record 30.2 Approval of May 12-2025, Meeting Minutes: Record Meeting Minutes were not approved during this meeting 30.3 Public Comment Record Please click here to view the recording for public comment 30.4 Confirm Exterior Design Record • B.Black reviewed the exterior design options that have been proposed and reviewed in previous meetings as well as with the public(Slides 6-11) • B.Black noted the details of Option 1 have been the most popular throughout the committee and public with 43%of the votes in the survey that was conducted • B.Black also noted that the PBC recommended Option 1 after they reviewed the options for a final time last Thursday • M.Burton noted that this is not about choosing colors but about materiality and percentages there is still two years of design left • C.Favazzo shared that the PBC recommends Option 1 and the four story central office but they would like to see a way to ease the four story massing with materials or color.They also wanted the massing of the courtyard to be reduced through design Page 2 of 7 Project: Lexington High School Meeting:School Building Committee Meeting No. 30-06/02/2025 Page:3 K.Slaysky noted that she did not like the lighter color wall along the staircase on Option 1 and thinks that there could be a better pattern and use of that space o K.Lenihan agrees and thinks more can go in that location o B.Black noted he also agrees and they discussed some potential options at the PBC meeting and will introduce some new designs for that section J.Hackett mentioned that she heard the PBC members talk about the contrast between the base of the building and the brick and she agreed o B.Black noted they will work to reduce the contrast K.Slaysky encouraged anything that the design team can do to help the palette appear more warm in essence J.Pato observed that he is happy with the direction everything is moving and wants to keep choosing materials that keep the cost under control C.Favazzo added in that the one important element was the angle of the staircase and it brings an element of great design to the building J.Hackett also noted that the front entrance overhang shouldn't be too narrow or short o B.Black noted that it is 20ft and does not want to have something that is under scaled either and also added that it may be reviewed in value engineering o K.Lenihan shared how it is visually appealing but noted that it also has a large practical purpose that is important M.Cronin noted that it seems like there is enough agreement on Option 1 to move forward with it so they can tackle the other topics H.Min Sha asked what the difference is for choosing as they are both brickjust different colors? o B.Black noted that functionally choosing a color and a set of images to include in the Schematic Design and for the fall to have one image H.Min Sha noted that he prefers Option 2 o K.Slaysky agreed K.Lenihan noted that no one else was in favor of Option 2 and noted that the SBC confirms Option 1 to be moved forward K.Lenihan asked for the cost of the central office fit-out be added to the FAQs 30.5 Confirm Interior Design Record • S.Sopelak reviewed the interior design finish materials for each space in the new school (Slides 13-22) • C.Kosnoff was surprised to see the metal tile in the common area and thinks that may be loud for a space like that?She also noted that she is in favor of the tile walls o S.Sopelak noted there is an acoustic backer behind the panels that will absorb the sounds Page 3 of 7 Project: Lexington High School Meeting:School Building Committee Meeting No. 30-06/02/2025 Page:4 • J.Pato noted the only concern he has is the materials being red list free and would prefer new options than anything that is on the red list o D.Voss agrees and at the PBC meeting they talked about identifying some of the materials are DECLARED not red list free • C.Favazzo noted that the recommendation from the PBC was to continue with the materials shown but with a cautionary note on the budget and the team should be prepared for value management • K.Slaysky discourages the use of anything with grouted for areas like the kitchen and bathrooms. She also asked if there will be any use of color to separate the different wings. o M.Cronin noted that the kitchen floors are Quarry Tiles which is the industry standard for those areas • H.Min Sha asked if there is a balcony in the auditorium o B.Black noted no but there is stadium seating in the back • H.Min Sha asked about the social and emotional impacts of the materials chosen o S.Sopelak noted they always take that into account and try to bring wood feel and warmth into the building but colors have not be chosen yet but they will still take that into account • H.Min Sha noted that they loved the tile in Waltham but not Arlington however they should not do a lot of tile if it is more expensive • J.Hackett noted that she loves what has been proposed so far • K.Lenihan asked about the tack surface and hoped for a large use of color when they do get to that topic o S.Sopelak noted it is a self-healing tack board and is not cork, she also noted that it comes in a variety of color • K.Lenihan noted that there was no objections to the proposed interior design 30.6 Confirm Site Design Record • M.Dowhan reviewed the proposed site design (Slides 24-32) • J.Pato asked on the roof terrace what the winter use will be and the full year value? o M.Dowhan noted it will be used as much as the students want to use it and thinks that DPF will only be shoveling the pathways. He noted that the center green space will be synthetic lawn and could be used if there is no snow o A.Baker noted that from the SSBC replacing a space like the current quad is vastly important to the students and this route also provides safety and security. Baker shared that the extended school year use would now have a space to be located at • J.Pato thinks there will be more students biking in the future as they work to change the culture and wants that to be on everyone's radar • K.Lenihan asked if students will have the ability to just go into the roof terrace as they are able to now in the quad? Page 4 of 7 Project: Lexington High School Meeting:School Building Committee Meeting No. 30-06/02/2025 Page: 5 o A.Baker noted that the benefit of the classrooms surrounding it is to provide passive supervision • C.Favazzo noted he would like to see how they can soften the two story massing from the roof terrace without impacting the classrooms. He also noted that the PBC has concern with the entrance off of Waltham St but this has been softened by the notion that there will be live pick up and drop off on Worthen Rd D.Voss asked about snow management on the terrace for some of the larger edge scenario storms that they could have o M.Cronin noted they plan on shoveling the pathways but in the case of a historic storm they can use a crane to get snow out of locations and in his 26 year career that has only happened one time and it was just a precaution D.Voss asked where the storm water management vaults would be located o M.Dowhan noted they are developing all the storm water management now so he does not have exact locations but they will also be using porous pavement K.Slaysky asked if the town is okay with porous pavement as it is a larger maintenance requirement o M.Cronin noted yes they deal with it in multiple locations currently K.Slaysky asked how they will manage the parent drop off/pick up o M.Dowhan noted that they based the queue lengths on the information from the traffic report and it should manage itself K.Slaysky asked if they plan on using any rain recapture devices o M.Cronin noted he is strongly against it as he has had nothing but poor experiences with them o L.Finnegan noted this topic was reviewed during PDP/PSR and was found not to be recommended H.Min Sha clarified if the footpath through the wetland by the football field will remain? He also asked if in the current budget do they plan to restore the wetlands in the northeast portion of the site as those are not as diverse o M.Dowhan noted yes it will remain and no they will just be doing a cursory clean up and not a restoration K.Lenihan noted the site design was confirmed as proposed by the SBC 30.7 Confirm Final PV Size Record • A.jimenez reviewed the Solar PV slides and the proposed option for the site(34-49) • C.Favazzo noted that they had a very in depth conversation about this at the last PBC meeting and noted that they recommend providing solar for 43%above net zero but providing it without visually impacting the parking lot D location Page 5 of 7 Project: Lexington High School Meeting:School Building Committee Meeting No. 30-06/02/2025 Page: 6 D.Voss noted that SLC is aligned with the outcome that C.Favazzo shared from thejoint PBC/SLC meeting and the total output proposed takes into account that the baseline numbers for energy consumption have scenarios that will actually have higher usage J.Pato noted his goal here is to maximize the solar usage on site and finding locations to do it on site aside from Lot D is okay with him but it should be made aware the in the future they may want to include a canopy in Lot D. C.Kosnoff shared that because the project is being funded with tax bonds there should be considerations on the limits that are in place on how much energy revenue can be generated because they cannot generate revenue more than they are using due to the tax exempt bonds H.Min Sha asked if the bleacher canopy is equal to others in cost effectiveness o L.Finnegan noted that the bleacher PV is a standard solar canopy and is not integrated into the bleacher systems H.Min Sha asked how much revenue the town will make from the proposed system? o M.Sandeen noted it is relatively small maybe around 10% K.Slaysky is a big supporter for as much solar as possible and wants to make sure future solar additions are prepared for today.She noted she is weary of increasing the cost of this already expensive project and thinks all this extra solar could be a separate question for the town just like how the field house would have been J.Himmel shared that at the last PBC/SLC meeting one of the achievements made was how every time SMMA met the goal proposed it was changed and SMMA continued to meet the next goal but it was proving an issue for the project and that is why the statement was produced K.Slaysky supports recognizing a net-zero site over just the building K.Lenihan asked how much the new recommendations are adding to the project from the PSR cost? o C.Favazzo noted since the PSR estimating$5.1 million has been added to the project due to increase in PV and the other$2.1 million is the most recent add o L.Finnegan noted that the$5.1 million represented 17%over net zero and the other$2.1 million is to the 43%over o C.Favazzo shared that even though there is an increase here there are savings such as the HVAC system which will be$8 million less than the PSR cost J.Pato shared how if they cut back on the amount of PV Panels it will actually cost the town more every year K.Lenihan clarified that the geothermal is under the Lot D? o L.Finnegan noted yes along with an underdrain system and wetlands off to the side o K.Lenihan asked if it will be possible to include a solar canopy in Lot D in the future? Page 6 of 7 Project: Lexington High School Meeting:School Building Committee Meeting No. 30-06/02/2025 Page:7 o L.Finnegan noted that the reccomendation did not include foundations but they will work to try and make sure there is space for the future K.Slaysky asked if the proposed option includes increasing battery storage o L.Finnegan noted no o M.Sandeen shared that a smaller energy storage system can be achieved when there is a larger solar system because it can account for more usage. o A.Jimenez noted that they will be carrying a battery about double the size of the one carried in PSR and they are actually meeting with Eversource later today to keep reviewing K.Lenihan asked if there was any objections to carrying Long Span Solar on Lots A, B&C along with all rooftop solar and the bleacher canopies with the goal of finding the extra 253 kW hours somewhere else on site. o There was no objections 30.8 Reflections and Action Items Record J.Hackett noted it is amazing that the building will be 43%above net-zero and it should be celebrated 30.9 Adjourn: Motion to adjourn at 1:01 was made byJ.Hackett and seconded by Record M.Cronin Roll Call Vote:A. Baker-Yes, M.Cronin-Yes,C. Favazzo-Yes,J. Hackett- Yes,J. Himmel-Yes, C. Kosnoff-Yes,J. Pato-Yes, K.Slaysky-Yes, H.Sha- Yes, K. Lenihan -Yes, D.Voss-Yes,S.Bartha-Yes, M.Barrett-Yes 12-0-0. ff f Sincerely, [DOIRll::: .,I WIHF11lI1:::1R Jacob Greco Assistant Project Manager Cc:Attendees, File The above is my summation of our meeting. If you have any additions and/or corrections, please contact me for incorporation into these minutes. Page 7 of 7