HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-12-11 ad Hoc School Building Committee MinutesReading School Building Committee
Minutes of RSBC Meeting Held on December 11, 2002, 7.30 p.m.
(In the RMHS Guidance Career Center)
Committee Members Attending:
Russ Graham, Chair (RG)
Dennis LaCroix (DL)
Paula Perry (PP)
Alex McRae (AM)
Rich Radville (RR)
CD
Jeff Struble (JS)
r s
Tim Twomey (TT)
Bill Carroll (BC)
= €~,r
CD
Michael Scarpitto (MS), p/t
C
Featured Guests:
0-
Frank Orlando (Staff)
Sid Bowen (Flansburgh Associates, Inc.)
Robert Peirce (Flansburgh Associates, Inc.)
Tom Meuller (Flansburgh Associates, Inc.)
RG passed out revised copies of the proposed warrant for the Special Town Meeting in
which the article for completion of the high school design and construction has been
placed (copy attached). The only substantive change from previous version of the article
was to revise the time period in which the passage of a debt exclusion for the funds was
required (90 days from the close of the Sp. Town Meeting).
AM suggested that FAI present and explain the specific steps needed to be taken in a
June 1St submission to the SBA for the benefit of the BOS in their deliberations over
calling a special debt exclusion election. Sid Bowen answered that they could certainly
itemize the list of requirements and explain them briefly, but he cautioned that producing
a complete understanding of each step in the process would take more time than was
available, owing to the complexity of the subject. This led to a general discussion on
how completion of all the steps took significant amounts of time and how that affected
the different scenarios for an architect's handling of the task after an early special
election or a later regular election to produce a June 1St SBA submission. The
disadvantages placed on the architect and the town by waiting for later elections were
reitierated.
RG went over the various pieces of information that will be placed in the information
packet that will accompany the Sp. Town Meeting warrant, including costs, financial
impacts, plans and descriptions (due Dec. 20t"). TT asked if the cost estimate that was
due on Jan 8th was different, how would that be handled at Town Meeting. RG said that
the motion made on the floor of Town Meeting was the proper place for the final amount
that Town Meeting must act on, not the amount contained in the pre-published article.
Reading School ,Building Connnittee
.iVfeeting.illnitites front .Deceinher 11, 2002
AM asked for copies of the education specifications prior to Town Meeting. FAI said
they could finalize those ed. specs before the next scheduled SBC meeting (Dec. 23`d)
FAI then presented an update of the Option 3 plans and other drawings (copies
attached).
- Sid Bowen explained that the updates were generated by comments from the
SBC and from the public input sessions about how this option would look, by
further consideration of the phasing, better arrangement of spaces for lighting
and adjacencies and by deeper review of the topography of the site.
Regarding the topography, it was concluded that the main entrance elevation
should be at what is now the elevation of the Lecture Hall, designated as the
Ground Floor in the new plans. This would "feed" people into a main
thoroughfare that becomes a two-story sky-lit "street" around which the main
activities of the school were accessed. As this street fed into the field house
at the level above the main one, a "collector" would be added to house stairs
and elevators and a lobby on its south end. The outside area to the south of
the field house would contain a play area for RISE students and could
accommodate occasional vehicle traffic, but was not intended to be a vehicle
thruway for daily use.
Regarding day-lighting, the new education wing was turned on an east-west
axis to admit more southern light, which also produced a more controllable
heating and cooling environment.
Regarding phasing, it was felt that when the new space is finished and the
students were moved into it, the existing space to be renovated would still
contain the science labs. This would entail either temporary lab space being
built (and dismantled later) or a curtailment of the science program during
renovations. This was thought to be undesirable, so the new addition had
been reorganized to contain permanent science labs. This meant that the
present science areas would be renovated as English and social studies
classrooms (in effect, switching the previous outlay of final classrooms).
Hence, the science program would not require alteration during construction.
Regarding adjacencies, the switch between the math/science departments
and the social sciences allowed the music, art and drama spaces to be
congregated on one floor (Ground). This achieved the desirable arrangement
that was present in Options One and Two. It also allowed the Drama
department to open up an area directly onto the main "street" for non-
auditorium performances.
- The auditorium had become wider than it was long, allowing shorter
distances between the rear seats and the stage. This created a more
workable environment acoustically and visually. Administrative offices were
present at each of the primary entrances.
- TT expressed satisfaction with the revisions, saying that they enlivened the
scheme. BC said that the drawings showed a school rather than just a
building. RR thought the shift of the main entrance one level up and towards
the center of the building was an improvement over the previous scheme.
Reading School Building Committee
;t!leeting, Nlifautes front.Deeetnher ll, 2002
- A general discussion ensued with Committ a and Administration members
questioning the effects of the new scheme n phasing, security, drama
storage, handicap issues, circulation, servi a/delivery areas, etc.
A revised site plan was presented (copy at ached). Parking had been
adjusted around the field house, deleting it between the athletic field and the
field house and adding a separate small lot for the superintendent that had its
only access from the southern corner of the property (off Bancroft Street).
Various members noted that the lack of a continuous vehicular loop around
the field house would be a problem during ~lections, which are periodically
held there. Mr. Bowen acknowledged this and said that it would be studied
further and the plan would be adjusted. More discussion concerning parking
and driving around the field house took place, with various ideas being
suggested for FAI to consider.
- Materials for the exterior were envisioned to be brick to match the brick of the
remaining portions of the present building with breaks between the main
areas being covered with glazing materials. Skylights and clerestory window
areas would be used to improve the penetration of natural light into the
interiors.
RG recognized TT who put forward the following motion: "Move that the School Building
Committee request the Board of Selectmen in the strongest and most urgent terms
possible to have a Special Election on February 25th, 2003 on Article 4 of the current
draft of the Town Meeting warrant." PP seconded the motion. Calling for discussion, JS
asked TT if he felt the words "strongest and most urgent terms possible" were
necessary. TT said he did, referring to the lack of action by the BOS concerning the
calling of a Special Election at their meeting the previous night (12-10-02). With no
further discussion, a vote was taken and it was unanimous in the affirmative (9-0-0).
RG then called for a motion accepting the subject matter of Article 4 of the current draft
of the Special Town Meeting warrant. DL so moved and was seconded by TT. With no
further discussion appearing, a vote was taken and it was unanimous in the affirmative
(9-0-0).
RG called for a motion to accept the minutes of the October 30, 2002 RSBC meeting.
DL so moved and was seconded by PP. He called for any additions, deletions or
corrections desired by the Committee. AM asked that the words "a capacity of 1,100
students" in the next to last paragraph on page 3 be changed to read "it was reported
that the scheduling of classes was already challenging for 1,100 students," correcting a
factual error. The amendment was acceptable to the motioner and the seconder. With
no further discussion appearing, a vote was taken and the result was 8 in favor, none
opposed and one abstention (8-0-1); hence the motion passed.
With no other business appearing, RG called for a motion to adjourn. DL so moved and
was seconded by PP. A vote was taken and it was unanimous in the affirmative (time
unrecorded).
Minutes prepared and submitted by:
Jeffrey W. Struble, Secretary
Reading School Building Committee
-o m -a
X w
CL
O ~
O + N
1 1
~3 Ell
a ! ~
d
M r /
c~
.d9`~ Vii) G) --44
9 11 ~ c r m
m
"fit ~C
cn
= m / - T m
f
\
,
ra,
e s o~ O ~ o
~ ~ ' D E
a
y
7
CA)
eo
1
4ty
o =
^ g U ~~'~L
u~ Imo' C 1C C ✓
71
a
C~
N
lD
n
rt
O
m
O
C
Oq
s
7
(D
a
N
rt.
1M
a
3
w
m
I
117 ai7
I
I
Q N
„
a
3 N ~
I , Z o m
o Q,
w
K
III
T1
_i
i
m
m
O
ai
O
OA
w
a
1
n
c'
~ w
m
~.r
I
I
1
{
j ~
~ W
Qq
d ~
c O
3