HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-10-23-SBC-min (Communications Working Group) Ip Iii°`
MEETING NOTES
Meeting Date: October 23, 2024
Project Name: Lexington High School
Project Number: Click or tap here to enter text.
Subject: LHS Communications Working Group Meeting
Attendees:
Christina Dell Angelo DWMP - Project Manager
(CA)
Mike Burton (MB) DWMP- Partner
Jacob Greco (JG) DWMP -Assistant Project
Manager
Lorainne Finnegan (LF) SMMA - Principal in Charge
Anoush Krafian (AK)
SMMA - Assistant Project
Manager
Mark Barrett (M1132) LHS- Public Facilities Project
Manager
Mike Cronin (MC) SBC Vice Chair & LPS Facility
Director
Jo )�. e Pato P Select Board
Julie Hackett (JH)
S�up�er�in�t�ende�nt������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
Fel Jon Himmel (JH2) PBC Chair
Kathleen Lenihan (KL) SBC Chair
Kseniya Slaysky (KS)
SBC Community Representative
Hsing Min Sha (HMS) SBC Community Representative
• Jonas Miller (JM) Communications Director
Item Action Item Requested by Ball in Court
No.
2 Slide showing how the two options were selected J.Himmel SMMA/DWMP
2 Print flyers for K.Lenihan and].Miller C.Dell Angelo DWMP
Veriim..)irnt I MaSSadhUseUs �rr�rnr.d¢aire a��c aFnrlhliu::u::iier„r�rerrn
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................""I'l"""""""""""""""""""""'�"����������������������������������������������������������������������������������-�"����������������������������������������������������������������������������������.........
Agenda Item Description
1. Introduction: Refer to attendees list.
2. Review Community Forum
- Thought Exchange
o The team discussed the use of Thought Exchange, a tool for gathering
community feedback, in their project. They found it effective but raised
concerns about its representativeness, suggesting the need for demographic
information. The team agreed to continue using Thought Exchange but also
to consider ways to improve its representativeness. They decided to create a
clear and concise presentation explaining the reasoning behind their decision
to advance the C.5b and D2 options, and why the Add/Reno option was
deemed unfeasible. The team also agreed to close the presentation on
November 8th and provide the information to the SBC members on
November 11th.
o M.Burton highlighted the tool's effectiveness in understanding community
preferences, with new construction on fields being the top-ranked option.
However, concerns were raised about the representativeness of the feedback,
with K.Slaysky suggesting the need for demographic information to
contextualize the results. The team agreed on the value of the tool but also
acknowledged the need for more diverse input. They decided to continue
using Thought Exchange but also to consider ways to improve its
representativeness.
- Advancing C.5b and D2 Options
o The team discussed the need for a clear and concise presentation to explain
the reasoning behind the decision to advance the C.5b and D2 options. They
agreed that the presentation should include the key criteria and discussions
used to narrow down the options. J.Himmel emphasized the importance of
explaining why the Add/Reno option was deemed unfeasible, citing factors
such as disruption, duration, cost, and a disjointed final product. The team
agreed to distill the key points from their previous discussions and create a
slide for the presentation.
Page 2 of 4
o The team also discussed the cost implications of building a radius versus a
straight wall, with J.Himmel noting that while there is more engineering
involved, the cost difference is not significant. The team agreed to prepare
for the next meeting by drafting key criteria and reasons for eliminating
certain options. K.Slaysky highlighted the need to explain the increase in
renovation and addition costs, and J.Himmel suggested a breakdown of the
estimate by system to better understand the trade-offs. Mike agreed to try to
prepare a summary for the next meeting.
Refining Survey Questions for Community Meeting
o J.Pato proposed adding a third question to the survey to gauge discomfort
with the given options, suggesting a clear separation between the
multiple-choice questions and the open-ended comments. A.Krafiati
suggested adding 'neither' as a third option to the multiple-choice question,
while J.Miller proposed a separate question asking if the respondent is in
favor of the project overall and which design they prefer if it moves forward.
J.Greco clarified that only one open-ended question could be included in the
survey. The team agreed to further discuss and refine the survey questions.
3. Review Videos
Not discussed
4. Review Additional FAQ Topics/Adjustments
Not Discussed
5. Close
Page 3 of 4
Sincerely,
11)0111: III°III III F`Tlllllf;illl
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 4 of 4