Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-03-31-PBC-min 0°57S �77s TOWN OF LEXINGTON oma` �� D Permanent Building Committee aim oW � a^ Permanent Members <FAPRIL 9' Jon Himmel Co-Chairman Charles Favazzo Co-Chairman XINGSO Peter Johnson, Cells Brisbin, Elizabeth Giersbach, Frederick Merrill,Ian Adamson Associate Members:Wendy Krum,Henrietta Mei PBC Minutes for the meeting held on: 3-31-25 Meeting was held hybrid via Zoom Members Present: Jon Himmel, Wendy Krum, Henrietta Mei, Charles Favazzo, Peter Johnson, Fred Merrill Others Present: Mark Barrett, Michael Burton, Mark Sandeen, Brian Black (SMMA), Christina Dell Angelo, Lorraine Finnegan (SMMA), Cindy Arens, Jamie, Sean, Andrew The PBC meeting was called to order at 12:00 pm. LHS Design Team Meeting—Plan Review: An update on the site design was provided. There were many iterations of arrival and dismissal circulation, and the most current iteration showed the buses off of Worthen and parent drop off was on Park Drive and Waltham Street. The plan allowed room for 25 LABBB buses on the north, 37 school buses to the southwest, and space for 75 cars in total. There was also space for expansion to make room for cars and buses. It was clarified that it was triple- stacked in the middle. Lorraine Finnegan reported that the original parent pick-up and drop-off locations were maintained. Muzzey Street would be a pedestrian-only connection section. It was commented that Muzzey would be a great location for a landmark. Mike Burton reported that the parking was moved to the northeast of the site and would all be covered with PV canopies. It still allowed for great access to the buildings and fields. The large driver was the desire to have the fields adjacent to each other. It was noted that it would allow for the greatest flexibility moving forward. The removal of one of the entrances on Worthen Road was asked about. It was explained that the traffic consultant ran some numbers and decided that the traffic impact that was originally anticipated is no longer thought to be of concern. The removal led to improved traffic conditions. The entrance that was removed was originally designed to add flexibility, but it was determined that it added cue lengths. There was a single lane to accommodate emergency vehicles. If parents went in and off Worthen, it would worsen the conditions. Jon Himmel asked if a solar study was done due to the trees. Lorraine Finnegan confirmed that an analysis was done. The reasons for avoiding Park Drive were discussed. Henrietta Mei asked if the Muzzey path was pedestrian-only due to volume. It was explained that the pushback was on having more traffic on Park Drive. The bicycle network and facilities were discussed. There was a minimum of 10-feet wide shared-use paths. The proposed bike storage locations provided as much access as possible across the site. The minimum bike spaces needed was 145. There were requests to add more bike storage near the entrance. There were existing shared lanes on Lincoln Street and Mass Avenue, and there were future opportunities for the town to expand the path on Werthen Road to those paths. The different possibilities for bike rack types were presented. It was stated that doubling the proposed bike storage was requested by the Bicycle Advisory Committee, and the timeline was asked about. Lorraine Finnegan reported that the process included selecting the style, and they could get in touch with the Bicycle Advisory Committee.. The goal of the town was to have more students biking. Cindy Arens emphasized that 145 bike spaces were too few and encouraged a higher, stronger minimum number. She stated that 300 could be too many, and indoor bike parking was not necessary. It was commented that the covered bike storage was very expensive, but having bike storage under the solar canopies could be an option. A bicycle and pedestrian plan was done in 2024 and resulted in recommendations, including permitting e-bikes on all shared-use paths and bicycle parking facilities. However, there were no current accommodations for charging them. It was commented that the parking should be further from the building in case there were any electrical issues. The lighted fields were discussed. The proposed relocated fields were not proposed to be illuminated. The goal was to keep the geothermal wells off of the existing fields. The temp system would use gas, and the gas line to the building would only be temporary. Chuck Favazzo suggested overlaying the existing parking lot on the new field locations and seeing how many wells could be installed in the existing parking lots. Lorraine Finnegan confirmed that they would look at that. Jamie stated that it was part of their analysis, and it was a year's worth of work for the full field. Chuck Favazzo suggested doing the installation across three summers. Cindy Arens asked when the decision would need to be made and what would go into the decision. She stated that having that information be shared would be very useful. She asked what the temporary system would be for. Lorraine Finnegan stated that it would provide heating and cooling to the building. Cindy Arens asked if the current pricing included illumination. Lorraine Finnegan confirmed that it did not. Cindy Arens asked where C8 was currently. It was reported it was on Crumb. The differences between seed, sod, and synthetic turf were discussed. The intent was to proceed with sod, and there were many upsides. It would take two full seasons of growing for the seed to be ready. The comparative cost analysis for installation and maintenance was presented. There were existing sodded fields, so the maintenance crew understood what was required. A total amount for the three options was requested. Lorraine Finnegan stated that they could provide it. It was asked what the process of the decision was. Lorraine Finnegan reported that there were no advocates for synthetic. When the VE log was done, sod versus seed would be presented. On May 12, confirmation on the sod would be sought from SBC. It was clarified that synthetic would not appear on the VE log since it was not asked for by any Committee members, only community members. It was suggested to use the engineered option. Lorraine Finnegan confirmed that they would use that option for presenting the price of synthetic turf. The bleacher system options were presented. It was anticipated to replace it with another 1,000-seat bleacher system. Outdoor storage requirements were presented. Lexington Little League would have to be relocated to Lincoln Field, but the rest could remain on site in the northwest corner. The idea for the proposed storage was to have a multi-use building at the entrance of the Crumb football field. The goal was for everything to fit in one building. Other options to put storage closer would be enclosed dugouts. Fencing would be limited. A four-foot-high perimeter fence around the football field was proposed. The new diamond fields would require new fencing and backstops. There would also be safety netting around Worthen Road for the relocated diamonds and at C1. If JV wanted a temporary fence for home runs, there was nothing prohibiting it if ground treatments were allowed. Other ideas for the non-athletic field park program were discussed. The options included movable furniture, shaded structures, a parkour course, and fitness stations. Cindy Arens suggested adding solar generation to bike racks if possible. The best locations of the pathways were discussed. There would also be vegetative buffers included to block the view of parking from residences. There was a working session for the building design. The floor plans were presented and discussed, and it was noted that the goal was to think holistically about how the systems connected. It was also critical that the wayfinding was clear. There was one version in which there was a direct entrance to the gym, and the dining commons was the center of activity. Option A had challenges with the auditorium placement, had music space located on the quieter side of Wing A with an acoustic barrier wall, had music space that was a better-scaled volume, and the kitchen area could not be reduced. Option B would create better visibility to the auditorium, but the music suite would be in a more exposed position, as well as having a 50-foot windowless wall facing the north entry plaza. Option C was not recommended since it was not the best presentation to the main entrance, and it was within the 50-foot buffer. It was commented that the performing arts students would likely prefer Option A. Cindy Arens agreed with Option A and asked if there would be a separate balcony in the auditorium. It was confirmed that there was no balcony. Cindy Arens asked about getting large equipment in and out from outside. It was explained that there was the need to egress outside the side that could connect to a loading dock, or a truck could drop off at the plaza. Henrietta Mei asked if it was possible to push the double door further up to turn it into a large entry. It was reported that the vestibule was artificially big, but it was needed for sound buffering. They stated that they would look into the size and see if it could be decreased. Option A for Wings C and D allowed for the fieldhouse to be more accessible to the public outside of school hours, but the delineation was irregular, and the access along the corridor was compressed. Option B was recommended, and it distributed two entrances into the locker rooms and had a single-line delineation, but it did not prioritize the multipurpose activities. Option C had poor monitoring of the physical alternative spaces from the gym, but it brought some elements closer to the public entrance. Jon Himmel commented that having benefits for the community would be a bonus. Concerns were raised about the mix of events after hours. Lorraine Finnegan assured that there was already a mix of events, and it worked out well. Everyone discussed the options for Wings C and D, largely focusing on making the school open to the public during after school hours. Suggestions to alter the options were provided. There was a discussion about the stairs. It was asked if there was a way to see the stairs from the main entrance. It was explained that the main entrance would open up to the front of the stairs, and the student entrance would open to the back of the stairs. The access to the stairs would be on the dining common side. The intention for the stairs at the ends of the building was discussed. It was stated that the goal was for the stairs to be inviting, with lots of daylight and potential glazing. It was asked where the compactor would be placed. It was reported that the compactor and trash would be outside. Everyone reviewed the site plans, and there were further discussions about the trash and compactor, the loading dock, where firetrucks would go if needed, the entry and visibility, and the locations of the elevators. It was noted that they needed to have discussions with the janitorial staff to discuss the size of the recycling dumpster if needed. It was not yet determined how the food waste would be picked up. There would be discussions in the future about all-gender bathrooms. The plumbing code had changed, so multi- stall, all-gender bathrooms could be done. It was asked if there was a strategy to put in an area for charging devices for students. Lorraine Finnegan stated that they would need to think about how devices would change. She acknowledged it was a need and that they would look into it. Jon Himmel asked about having the loading dock move toward the fieldhouse. Lorraine Finnegan explained that it would not be possible due to the buffer around the wetlands. Jon Himmel discussed that he wanted the auditorium's experience to be closer to that of Arlington. Public Comment There was no public comment. Summary of any action items A slide of the existing conditions for the arrival and dismissal circulation would be added for future presentations. Total amounts in a cost analysis for the three field options would be provided. Lorraine Finnegan and Brian Black would discuss the layout of the back area with the loading dock to ensure that getting the trash to the loading dock was easy. SMMA would look into how to have charging areas for students' devices. Urgent Business There was no further business. Motion to adjourn PBC, all approved.