Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-09-04 ad Hoc School Building Committee Minutes40- Reading School Building Committee Minutes of RSBC Meeting Held on September 4, 2002, 7:30 p.m. (In the Town Hall Conference Room) Committee Members Attending: Russ Graham, Chair (RG) Ray Porter (RP) Bill Carroll (BC) Tim Twomey (TT) Jeff Struble (JS) C 70 Alex McRae (AM) r-.> C) ---i Warren Cochrane (WC) C-1) rD Michael Scarpitto (MS) Dennis LaCroix (DL) ' Rich Radville (RR) 3 MM Paula Perry (PP) p/t > Featured Guests: w Peter Hechenbleikner (Town Manager) p/t Ted McIntire (Public Works Director) p/t _ Harry Harutuinian (Superintendent) p/t , Frank Orlando (Staff) Sid Bowen (Flansburgh Associates, Inc.) Robert Peirce (Flansburgh Associates, Inc.) RG began by introducing Town Manager Peter Hechenbleikner, who had come to present ideas and suggestions for the RMHS project that would benefit the Town's Public Works division and other Town departments. Their input had been solicited by the SBC. Mr. Hechenbleikner passed out copies of a memo outlining the input garnered from brainstorming sessions within the Town departments (copy attached). He then went over the outline in detail and said he would answer any questions regarding its content (the Town Manager's recitation of the outline is not transcribed here; refer to the attached copy). - RG asked Sid Bowen (FAI) if any of the items listed in the memo were seen as being unworkable or impossible. Mr. Bowen replied that he heard nothing that shouldn't be on the table for discussion and said that while not everything mentioned could be dealt with, at least they would be addressed. JS asked Mr. Hechenbleikner if the Town Departments had prioritized the items on his memo, cautioning against adding too many to the project that would incrementally increase the overall costs (i.e., cost "creep"). He replied that he hadn't, but mentioned that many of the items would be done as a matter of course, such as fire protection upgrades. As a generalization, he thought that improving existing site facilities would have priority over adding new ones. RG asked FAI to provide the Town Manager with a copy of the Rear hi q School Building Committee Afeeting Alinutes front September 4, 002 draft of the existing conditions report for his review and information regarding current facilities assessments. AM made the comments that the Town Manager's memo was quite constructive and was a good example of the kind of participation from non- school agencies and personnel that was desired by the Committee. He asked if the Town Manager would endorse transferring ownership of the Field House land from the Board of Selectmen to the School Committee. Mr. Hechenbleikner replied that while not endorsing such a transfer, should such a transfer be required to make the RMHS project acceptable and fundable by the SBA, he assumed that such a transfer would be done. He recommended that the Committee should make that assumption as well. Dr. Harutunian echoed this recommendation, saying that the steps necessary to affect the transfer were being researched in order to have a clear idea of how to go about it when and if it is needed. - Mr. Hechenbleikner then passed out copies of three schedules that summarized all the major proposed debt and capital exclusion projects and their costs for the Town for the next ten years (copy attached). He prepared the schedules as background information for the Town's Ten-Year Capital Improvement Program. Schedule 1 listed the actual capital or debt exclusions themselves and when they would be needed. Schedule 2 tabulated the annual costs to the Town of financing these exclusions and Schedule 3 estimated how those annual costs would be paid by property tax increases on the average Reading property (assessed at a value of $320K). The schedules assume passage of all the capital and debt exclusion votes in order to predict the maximum effect to the average taxpayer and the Town. Other specific assumptions were described in the notes at the bottoms of the schedules. Mr. Hechenbleikner stressed that the data used for the schedules was based on the costs presently listed in the Ten Year Capital Improvement plan (the current version of that plan carried the RMHS project at a cost of $59.5M). The Town Manager then went over the schedules in detail (the Town Manager's recitation of the schedules is not transcribed here; refer to the attached copy). Observer Linda Phillips pointed out that some of the assumptions made regarding the financing of the project in the schedules use old information, such as the SBA reimbursement rate of 66% (now a base rate of around 54% plus incentive points) and the wait of five years for commencement of reimbursements (the State recently approved waits of up to seven years, with longer waits being considered). RP echoed her comments, saying he thought the projections should use as up-to-date information as possible. The Town manager said the effect of waiting longer for reimbursements was to prolong the interest-only payments (from BANS) and push the maximum yearly payments out for as long as the additional waiting period. As far as changing the assumptions, he said the schedules (like the Capital Improvement Plan) would be updated regularly. - After receiving thanks from the Committee for coming, the Town Manager and Public Works Director departed. Readh gSchool Building (.7onunittee Meeting Minutes front September 4, 2002 RG reminded Committee members to finish their comments on the Existing Conditions J report. He then asked Robert Peirce and Sid Bowen of FAI to begin their report to the Committee on their progress. - Mr. Bowen began by saying that they were going to begin showing strategies for solving some of the programmatic problems that they have discovered at the high school. These would not be actual options per se, but would reflect directions FAI felt the project could go in and they were presenting them to get initial reactions from the Committee. Mr. Pierce then spoke about the methodologies that were used to shape the programmatic solutions. He said that initial enrollment projection work indicated that the maximum number of students would be in the 1300 - 1400 range, which was in line with recent projections by NESDEC and MISER. While this work had not yet been completed, the range was sufficient to allow preliminary planning. - He listed a number of broad primary issues that FAI felt should be addressed in configuring the educational program: - Providing adequate space for the performing arts was one. Music (band), chorus, art and drama presently share inadequate space. - Consolidating academic programs together in well-organized areas was another. Some programs, such as art, social studies, field ecology and physical education are currently too spread out. The media center now relies on a mezzanine level that is difficult to access and monitor. - The need to foster adjacencies for programs with similar needs was identified, pairing such programs as performing arts and visual arts, social studies and English, health and Phys. Ed., administrative offices and Special Education offices. - Title IX and handicap accessibility issues needed to be addressed as well. - TT asked if relocating the assistant principals' offices and somehow including use of the Lecture Hall in more of the academic programs were seen to be other issues needing attention. Mr. Peirce said that the offices were generally located where they should be in the school's layout. The Lecture Hall was noted to be poorly used and in a difficult location. Mr. Bowen said that a need for a small lecture hall was becoming evident in the organization of the educational program, but it remained to be seen if the present Lecture Hall would fill this need or would be better used in some other capacity. - Sid Bowen then introduced preliminary ideas for solutions. He noted that the big spaces drive the initial reconfigurations of schools like RMHS, with the smaller spaces being somewhat subordinate in their layouts. He said also that the present building had more space than was needed to house the educational programs envisioned for the future. Ct'uadirag .School Building (.7ontnittee 4 inutes front S'epletnher° 4, 2002 9ectin H - The first option (Option 1) made no changes at all to the present footprint of the building but reorganized the space within the footprints to best satisfy the needs of the various educational programs. He started with arts and music, pointing out that the areas around the present auditorium (including the cafeteria, kitchen, Sp. Ed. office, etc.) would lend themselves to being an arts wing. Consolidating the spaces for those programs achieved the desire for fostering adjacencies and allowed the addition of a cable TV studio and a new location for the RISE program (in the current Commons area). The RISE area would have a separate entrance and the current link between the Commons and the main building corridor would be removed, opening up the courtyard there for access by the arts program and maintenance personnel/equipment. Also included in the Option 1 would be the relocation of the administrative office across the hall from its present location and the creation of health offices in its old location, near the current Gym (possibly for some use as a community health office). The Media Center would expand at the first floor into the space now occupied by the "Orange" lockers, transferring its present mezzanine-level operations there (the mezz. level would be sealed off from the Media Center and used for mechanical and storage areas). Mr. Bowen acknowledged, however, that such a move would complicate the circulation patterns on the first floor and that in retrospect, this aspect of Option 1 had to be revised (these were only preliminary - ideas, he emphasized). Other hallmarks of Option 1 would be the relocation of the cafeteria and kitchen to the northern wing now housing the Arts and Industrial Arts programs, taking advantage of the space available and the separate delivery area now in place there. Also, the Phys. Ed. program would be wholly located in the 1952 building in this option, reworking the present girls locker room into both girls and boys lockers and upgrading the existing gym for PE use (excluding any athletic team usage of these updated facilities). The Field House would be revised to include both girls' and boys' team locker and training facilities, as well as a weight room, aerobics and wresting rooms on the second floor. Mr. Bowen mentioned that he had contacted the SBA about these Field House revisions and was told that they would indeed be considered reimbursable. - The second option (Option 2) presented was similar to Option 1 in that it made no change to the footprint of the building, it coalesced the performing and visual arts departments around the present auditorium, and it revamped the Media Center to a first floor operation. What was different was the transfer of all girls' and boys' Phys. Ed. programs and facilities out of the main building and into the Field House (combined with team facilities). This left the Field House with less space for enhanced health/fitness programs than Option 1, but allowed the transfer of the cafeteria into the existing gym in the main building. It also left the current ' girls' locker room available for transfer of the kitchen and boiler room functions. This meant having to deliver food service to the cafeteria by vertical lift (i.e., dumbwaiter). Reading School Building t"onnnittee Afeeting ?Minutes fi°om September 4, 2002 Also in Option 2 was the giving over of the present Art and Industrial Arts wing to non-high school uses. The RISE program would be housed on the Ground Floor (with a separate entrance) and the lower floor would be used for facility management and mechanical purposes. The RISE area thus created was acknowledged to be much larger than currently required. The third option (Option 3) would demolish the Art and Industrial Arts wing altogether. The performing and visual arts would be grouped around the auditorium as in the other two options and RISE would be located in the same vicinity, as it was in Option 1. Also in replication of an Option 1 idea, the P.E. facilities would be segregated from the team athletic facilities by housing them in the main building, away from the Field House. Also, the Media Center revisions contained in Options 1 and 2 would be utilized in Option 3. - Option 3 would seek to enclose the Ground Floor area between the existing Lecture Hall (Building B) and the main building (Building A) for use as the cafeteria while revising the Lecture Hall area to cafeteria and kitchen (with delivery access from the road separating Bldg. B from Bldg. C). Mr. Bowen said that this option essentially "tightened up" the building footprint to remove the space (approximately 25K sq. ft.) that was not needed by the reorganized educational program. Upon questioning form WC, he said the facilities plant now contained in the wing proposed for demolition would be re-housed in the currently unused tower at the from ` of the building (although this aspect of the option had not been fully explored as yet). TT asked about funding possibilities from the SBA for the renovation of the Art and Industrial Arts wing in Option 2 and for the demolition of it in Option 3. Mr. Bowen replied that the State would require justification for reimbursing a non-high school use area in any renovation, but he thought that the district requirement of having RISE at the school would bolster the argument for reimbursement. As to any perceived benefit to removing space (in the form of incentive points), he said that he believed SBA would agree to pay for the demolition, but he foresaw no "reward" for decreasing the overall footprint of the building. RG asked Frank Orlando (Principal, RMHS) if he and his staff had gone over the three options with FAI. Mr. Orlando replied that they had and had identified only one major problem, which was the circulation complication caused by expanding the Media Center on the first floor (which FAI acknowledged needed more study). Other minor problems were identified and discussed with FAI, but on the whole, he felt that each option as presented addressed the educational program adequately. - TT remarked that Option 1's location of a new cafeteria in a large space well removed from the auditorium allowed the opportunity of using it as a second public access / community assembly room. - JS asked if during the process of reconfiguring the large spaces to create an option was any thought given to locating the music department in the old gym or girls' locker areas in order to have closer access for the high Readhi g.SchoolBuildingf.'onnnittee Meeting 41 . inutes fi onz September 4, 2002 school band to the athletic fields (as was at one time mentioned by the head of the music department). Mr. Bowen said that such a scheme was considered early on, but that proximity to the indoor performing area (i.e., the auditorium) was seen to be of greater programmatic benefit overall. He said that it might be possible to capture some space nearer to the athletic fields for band storage. PP said that she thought Option 3 would possibly have some advantages over the others due to the use of the scheduled-to-be-demolished wing as swing space for phasing. Mr. Bowen said that in a building like RMHS, the desire to create swing space (from the Field House, for example) was certainly desirable in order to lessen the number of moves needed to renovate the spaces that would remain. - RG asked if the high school staff was going to be appraised of the different options for their feedback. Frank Orlando said they would be. - RG asked if any Committee members saw any ideas in the options presented that appeared to be unacceptable. JS expressed reservations about demolishing 25K-sq. ft. of space that might be conceivably needed sometime in the future. Mr. Bowen acknowledged those reservations, saying that most towns are reticent to give up built space. He felt the idea was novel enough to consider, however, in an effort to create the most efficient amount of space to fit the program. On a positive note, JS commented that he felt the idea of concentrating the PE program in the existing school solved many problems and he thought the concentration of the performing and visual arts around the auditorium was a good idea. Messrs. Bowen and Orlando noted that creating a non-PE field house opened up several possibilities for expanded community uses and parking re-design. Observer Pete Dahl asked if the reduction of space and reorganizations contained in Option 3 might make the high school more secure. Mr. Bowen said that the Option 3 revisions in and of themselves did not create a more secure environment. Heightened security was a function of heightened management of the facility and management issues had not been addressed as yet. RR expressed reservations for Option 2's combination of both the PE and athletic team programs in the field house. He praised the concentration of the arts programs by the auditorium and relocating the cafeteria and kitchen, noting that such a scheme facilitated kitchen reconstruction. He asked if the cafeteria layout as envisioned in Option 1 (in the present Art and Industrial Arts wing) was overly large and might be able to divert space for community room purposes. Mr. Bowen replied that the cafeteria could probably not be downsized from what was presented. He offered, however, that if community space was desired, the kitchen could be located on the lower level (with vertical food service) in order to accommodate that space and provide a separate entrance for it. - RP asked if any phasing plans for the three options had been investigated yet. Mr. Bowen replied that they would be developing phasing schemes Reading .Sehool Budding Committee 7 Wee tin} ~t~inutes fi one .Ser~tc tnher° 4, ?t)OZ as the options evolved, but none had been considered with any conviction yet. - WC expressed his appreciation of Option 1's (wide) separation of the cafeteria and auditorium areas, saying that under such a scheme, two large public events could occur simultaneously without encumbering each other. He said that the technical problems associated with Option 3 had him wondering about its viability (boilers in the tower). Observer Linda Phillips asked if the design of the cafeteria around serving two lunches per day was normal for a high school the size of RMHS, noting that she has heard complaints about the long waits for food service. Mr. Bowen replied that it was not unusual to schedule two lunches for a student body the size of RMHS and to design accordingly. He mentioned that one concept now being incorporated into such designs was to have multiple server locations offering varieties of food to disperse the long lines. Mr. Orlando added that structuring the school day around three lunch servings could lengthen the school day and restructure department schedules, which would be a major undertaking. JS asked if FAI had given any thought to improving circulation patterns on the upper floors between Bldg. A, B and C. Mr. Bowen replied that they did not feel a new corridor on the roof connecting the separate areas was advisable. They would be studying the matter and thought that if any additional links were needed, they would be located at the southwest portion of Bldg. A connecting to the south of Bldg. C. RG called for a motion to accept the minutes of the June 26, 2002 RSBC meeting. DL so moved and was seconded by TT. He called for any additions, deletions or corrections desired by the Committee. With none appearing, a vote was taken and the results were 10 in favor, none opposed and one abstention (10-0-1), and so the motion passed. RG called for a motion to accept the minutes of the July 10, 2002 RSBC meeting. DL so moved and was seconded by RR. He called for any additions, deletions or corrections desired by the Committee. With none appearing, a vote was taken and the results were unanimous in the affirmative. With no other business appearing, RG called for a motion to adjourn. DL so moved and was seconded by BC. A vote was taken and it was unanimous in the affirmative (time unrecorded). ^ / - ~-'Z 6~ Minutes prepared and submitted by: Jeffrey W. Struble, Secretary Reading School Building Committee MEMO To: School Building Committee From: Peter I. Hechenbleikner Date: 09/04/02 Re: Reading Memorial High School - Schematic Design INTRODUCTION When the approval was granted by the voters to move forward with the schematic design process for the Reading Memorial High . School renovation, I asked the Chairman of the School Building Committee for the opportunity for Town staff to provide comment to the SBC on the project. As the committee is aware, the Town is very involved in all of the school sites on things like grounds maintenance, pavement management, and as a major user for programs, elections, and the like. We very much appreciate having the opportunity early in this process to give you our input into this project. Our comments are intended to be constructive, and as complete as we can make them at this time. The comments reflect the input of: - Police - Fire - Water - Sewer - Technology - Library - Public Health - Recreation - Elections - Grounds Maintenance - Conservation - Planning - Town Manager - Engineering We have separated our comments into broad categories for ease of presentation: Site Issues; Building Issues; Community issues; and staging. ASSUMPTIUONS AND UNDERSTANDINGS Based on discussion by the SBC with other bodies, and our general understanding of the needs and process we have assumed for our comments that: ♦ The project will not include any additions or expansions to the current footprint of the building 0 Page 1 ♦ That arrangements will be made, if required by the SBA, to transfer or lease certain portions of the site that are owned by the Town to the School Department as such transfer may be needed to effectuate the proposed improvements to the site and buildings of the RMHS. ♦ If a transfer or lease is required, all existing use, operating, maintenance, field use and assignment, and other elements of the site will remain as current. SITE ISSUES The following comments are made about site issues: ♦ Two means of vehicular access should be provided to the Field House area for major events like athletic events, elections, and major recreational events like Summerfest; ♦ We understand that some amount of surveying is provided in your agreement with the architect. We would like to have those efforts coordinated by our Engineering Division because there may be additional surveying work that needs to be done to determine precise locations of things in the area, and to create some proper lines between the major uses nit the area; ♦ All paving on the site needs to be redone, with proper attention to curbing and improved drainage; New or reset curbing (the Town standard io vertical granite curbing) and sidewalks are needed throughout the site; ♦ It appears that some additional parking may.be needed, and the parking layout can be greatly improved in some areas with modest expansion of the pavement areas - such as in the area between the school and the Field House; ♦ For pedestrian safety and for security, there should be.no parking or driving underneath the buildings, except for access as needed by emergency vehicles. Parking right next to any building should. also be limited for the same reason; ♦ Pedestrian and vehicular pathways should be kept separate. ♦ The slope at the south side of the building next to the "upper" parking lot is very difficult to maintain; ♦ The use of dumpsters should be eliminated, and one or 2 compactors should be substituted; The current dumpsters are abused by some in the community, and are not kept closed and locked as required; (note - there will be an additional operating cost for compactors) • Page 2 ♦ Consideration should be given to those in the community (school children) who walk from adjacent neighborhoods through the site to the elementary and middle school - can walkways be developed for that purpose; ♦ The Aberjona River runs through Town property adjacent to the School property. It is piped in part via corrugated pipe that may have reached the end of its useful life, and should be replaced with Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP); ♦ The architect should check with the Engineering Division as to the location of all water lines, sewer lines, and drainage lines that run through the property and the entire site; ♦ There are some overhead power lines that should be removed or relocated - like the ones that used to serve the pool; ♦ Site lighting needs to be replaced, preferably with an underground wired system that is compatible with units stocked by the RMLD so that it can be maintained by them. We have a decorative fixture that we are using in the. downtown area of Reading; ♦ Speed bumps on the driveways should be replaced with speed tables or some other mechanism that slows traffic but is easier to maintain and easier on vehicles; ♦ The Athletic Director has reviewed some turf options for certain fields, and their use is desirable to allow for more continuous use of the fields and lower cost of maintenance. Locations could be the football field, the "practice" football field, and perhaps additional locations; ♦ The Recreation Division requests that we look at the upgrading of Castine Field as part of this project; ♦ Resurfacing of the Tennis Courts and re-vamping of the lighting would be desirable; ♦ The plans should include the relocation of the "tennis court" baseball field, and the supplementation of that with another facing softball/little league field utilizing the location of the former pool; The Town staff and the Recreation Committee should be consulted before any specific plans are made with respect to any of the fields in this area; ♦ The football field bleachers should be evaluated - there was an issue several years ago about the underlying support - the wood slats that they stand on, and their useful life; If replacement is done the new bleachers will have to meet ADA standards; ♦ Fencing should generally be replaced - much of it is old, bent, and rusty. We would like to see particular attention paid to the area that is the entrance to the 0 Page 3 football field area - with some better quality (perhaps a wrought iron or substitute) - and perhaps a plaza with better quality plantings and pavement or walk surface. This is also a safety issue - the use of concrete bumpers there and elsewhere on the site has generated more than one injury and law suit; ♦ The preference of the maintenance staff is to have the entire active portions of the site developed with low maintenance surfaces, and to avoid planter islands in the parking lots. This can be offset by good attention to plantings around the lots, and in other open areas of the site that are not used for active recreation; The preference would to be to avoid all internal courtyards. If there have to be courtyards, they should be developed to be as maintenance free as possible. ♦ Accommodation should be made for utility access underneath all roadways for future use - although it doesn't appear to be feasible at this time, lighting of various athletic facilities at a later date may be desirable; ♦ We assume that the oil tank will be removed as part of the construction. There may be some funding available for removal; TECHNOLOGY ♦ The Town has built a WAN access to the Superintendents office area of the RMHS. From a Town Government standpoint we are interested in having hard wired connections for business use to the Superintendents Office, Facilities Department, and the Principals office. We are not interested in having access from/to the student population, for security reasons; ♦ When wiring the building for technology, the use of category 5 cable is desirable for maximum flexibility; ♦ Extra conduits for the future use of technology will be less expensive to install now than later; We are assuming that all utilities will be installed underground on the site, and connections for electric, phone, internet access, and cable TV service to remote locations like the press box and the Field House are desirable; BUILDING ISSUES ♦ We have heard from more than one resident that the "tower" is ugly and should be removed. If it is retained, is there some practical us that can be made of it? ♦ The number of access points to the school needs to be reduced for security reasons, while maintaining the required spacing to fire and emergency exits; ♦ Elevators need to be updated and should be enlarged to handle a stretcher; 0 Page 4 ♦ A new fire alarm system is needed; ♦ The building needs to be sprinklered; ♦ The fire alarm box needs to be moved to the entrance area; ♦ Emergency lighting needs to be replaced and improved; ♦ The back-up power / generator needs to be replaced; ♦ Exit signs need to be replaced and improved;. ♦ Fire extinguishers need to be properly installed; ♦ Exit doors, panic hardware, and self-closing mechanisms need to be repaired or replaced - they stick; ♦ The home economics room needs to either be made functional or decommissioned; ♦ A separate fire alarm system needs to be installed at the Field House, with a separate master box; ♦ Hallway lighting needs to be improved; ♦ The School Department may want to install security monitoring cameras in hallways and the exterior areas and other key areas of the building and site. These could be tied into the central dispatch area at the Police Department for monitoring if the School Department wanted to ♦ With respect to the school library or media center, it would be desirable to have it on the main floor, easily accessible to the outside of the building and the main access to the school. It should have or be adjacent to a conference or meeting room; should consider wireless technology (we have wireless in the Reading Public Library - security could be a concern); and have lots of computer locations with virus protection; ♦ We assume energy efficiency through replacement of windows, additional insulation, etc will be part of the program. ♦ We have reason to believe that grants may be available to install photo-voltaic collectors on the large roof areas with the potential of generating some electricity to offset demands; ♦ With regard to your question to the Board of Selectmen about central air conditioning, it would seem to make sense to air condition the auditorium, library, central office, school office, lecture hall, and other such spaces. Depending on the 0 Page 5 cost, it may make sense to put duct work into the entire building for future air conditioning; ♦ We assume the bathrooms and showers will be renovated incorporating low flow units and additional bathrooms and locker rooms added as required; ♦ Al of the science labs need to be updated with proper ventilation and emergency facilities, as well as proper storage; ♦ Is the SBC considering a different type of floor in the Field House. Wood floors are becoming more standard; ♦ The Town's consultant on back-flow devices will be available to work with the architect; ♦ Water meters need to be properly sized, be updated for the Town's "radio read" system, and be easily accessible for installation/removal/maintenance; ♦ Sewer services should be TV inspected and evaluated by the architect. The Town has a consultant who can assist with this work; COMMUNITY USES ~There are a lot of community uses that could, might, or do take place on this site. The major ones that the Town is directly involved in and comments about them are as follows: ♦ Availability of outside accessible restrooms during non school hours would be very desirable; ♦ It is not clear whether pay phones are now a thing of the past, but some accommodation for inside and outside pay phones should be made; ♦ Is any part of the area around the RMHS a viable location for a skateboard park? ♦ Should accommodation be made to move the RCTV studio back to the RMHS? If so it should be in an area that is accessible to the Auditorium and library, and directly accessible to the exterior of the building; ♦ Meeting rooms that are used by the community and by School and/or Town groups and Boards/Committees/Commissions should be pre-wired for cable and necessary lighting if possible. Will the renovated RMHS have a lecture hall? If so it should be directly accessible to the public - the current one is hard to find.. The Town uses the Lecture Hall a fair amount for larger community meetings. Seating for about 200 seems optimal; * Page 6 ♦ It would be desirable to have a location in the building that could be used by the Public Health Division for clinics for the students and the community. It would be good to have a small office area that can be secured, and a classroom next to the clinic area; ♦ The RMHS should continue to be an emergency shelter, accessible to the Emergency Management Director. This means that an operable Emergency generator, and a small area for storage of supplies would be needed; ♦ The Field House has become our central voting location for the community. It works very well for that purpose, and allows elections staff to be on site and directly accessible to all voters. Needs in addition to a second means of access to the site, include better lighting, additional electric power supply (we will at some time be going to touch screen voting), and secure exclusive voting storage, ♦ The Recreation Division summer camps were moved out of the Coolidge Middle School 2 years ago into the RMHS. It is not very satisfactory for that purpose, but if the intent is to keep the summer camp there, we would like to talk to the architect and Administration about the specific needs. ♦ The Recreation Division also uses the Field House for many programs. Desirable changes would be - variable height basketball backstops, holes in the floor for volleyball stanchions, and dedicated storage for recreation programs. STAGING During whatever construction is to take place at this site, staging and alternate sites for school as well as community use will be important. The major issues that come to mind are: ♦ Town Meeting sessions and parking - in the fall, in the spring, and for any special meetings; ♦ Elections - the Field House is currently our sole voting place, and hopefully it would continue to be once the project is completed. We understand the Field House may be used for other purposes during renovation, and of course will need to be renovated itself; ♦ Recreation programs are operated to a large extent in the RMHS; and we will need to know what portions of the buildings and fields will be disrupted for what periods of time; ♦ Access for emergency purposes and maintenance during construction will be required to be maintained. 0 Page 7 Schedule 3 - DEBT & CAPITAL EXCLUSION PROJECTS - ESTIMATED COST TO HOMEOWNER for projects included in the FY 2003 - FY 2012 Capital Improvement Program Cost per project per year for average $320,000) assessed valued home CIP it PB4JECI FY 03 FY 04 EM EY U EL4Z E]CU EY 09 EYa FY11 EYJ2 TOTAL TAX SUPPORTED B-S-011 RMHS Schematic Design $19 $21 $20 B-S-011 RMHS Renovation $37 $193 $330 $367 $367 $394 $370 $346 B-S-018 Killam Renovation $59 $2,405 $2 $46 $46 $46 $46 $50 $48 $45 $328 BL-T-004 DPW Garage Expansion $16 $15 $14 $14 $13 BL-T-010 Library Expansion $72 $12 $21 $20 $19 $19 $18 $17 $126 PS-17-001 Replace Fire Pumper $32 $37 PS-F-003 Replace Fire Ladder Truck $69 PS-F-004 Replace Ambulance $16 $ $16 6 PW-D-006 Saugus River Drainage $12 $22 $38 $36 $44 $33 $14 PW-D-040 Abedona River Drainage $26 $201 $6 $32 PW-R Road Improvements' $68 $68 $87 $87 $87 $87 $87 $87 $87 $745 TOTAL $19 $127 $155 $401 $552 $570 $577 $583 $574 $496 $4,053 -UTILITY SUPPORTED PW-W- Water Main - Summer Avenue $5 $5 $17 $17 $16 $16 $15 $14 $14 PW-W-03 Water Treatment Plant Upgrade $17 $119 $17 $73 $70 $68 $67 $65 $63 $61 PW-W-03 Water- MWRA Buy-in $17 $17 $40 $40 $39 $38 $501 $37 $36 $35 PW-W-01 Water Storage $299 $7 $7 $21 $21 $20 $76 l TOTAL $0 $39 $39 $130 $127 $130 $128 $138 $134 $130 $995 Notes: - Projects in bold and italics are capital exclusions whose cost would be paid in one ear y - Projects with a cost of under $300,000 will be capital exclusions Projects between $300,000 and $ 1,000,000 will be debt exclusions financed up to 5 years Projects of $1,000,000 to $ 5,000,000 will be debt exclusions financed for 10 years Projects of more than $5,000,000, and all projects eligible for SBA will be debt exclusions financed for 20 years It is assumed that RMHS and Killam will generate SBA reimbursements of 66% five years after the BANS; New SBA regulations may change this Bond Anticipation Notes (BANS) are estimated to carry a borrowing rate of 5 % Cost of Utility Supported projects are for the average residential customer with an annual consumption of 9,000 cubic feet per year ' The Pavement Management Program assumes that $307,000 is available in FY 2004 and 2005 to offset debt that would otherwise be incurred but that in FY 2006 and beyond Chapter 90 funds would drop to the recent historical levels of approximately $155,000. , 09/04/2002 Schedule 1 - DEBT & CAPITAL EXCLUSION PROJECTS as included in the FY 2003 - FY 2012 Capital Improvement Program - ( in thousands of dolars) CIP ~1 PROJECT EM E X D A E Y 05 F Y O 6 EYM EY 08 F_Y_0`Z FY 10 EY11 EY12 TOTAL TAX SUPPORTED B-S-011 RMHS Renovation $59,500 $59,500 B-S-018 Killam Renovation $7,309 $7,309 BL-T-004 DPW Garage Expansion $500 $500 BL-T-010 Library Expansion $100 $1,080 $1,180 PS-17-001 Replace Fire Pumper $260 $294 $554 PS-F-003 Replace Fire Ladder Truck $700 $700 PS-F-004 Replace Ambulance $130 $130 PW-D-006 Saugus River Drainage $100 $700 $550 $75 $1,425 PW-D-040 Aberjona River Drainage $210 $50 $260 PW-R Road Improvements $3,500 $3,500 $7,000 TOTAL $63,000 $8,119 $800 $1,940 $130 $3,500 $75 $0 $294 $700 $78,558 UTILITY SUPPORTED PW-W- Water Main - Summer Avenue $1,000 $1,000 PW-W-03 Water Treatment Plant Upgrade $5,490 $5,490 PW-W-03 Water - MWRA Buy-in $3,432 $3,432 PW-W-01 Water Storage $1,150 $1,150 TOTAL $9,922 $0 $0 $0 $1,150 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,072 3 09/04/2002 r- 0 (D 0 0 z _ z jB C n D D S z O m ~ m ~ 8 D C ~ Dr D y ~ D m cn z m m 0 z 0 z z _ = m r 0 Q 0 0 ~z 0 0 i E 1 d r +i ua r `r w 0 O Q O O TI I L7 r I- I i r, C Cl) m ;Cl m D -i z D p z ~ D 8 Z m flL D Z D m ~ _ r p n m ? Z m O p m rri r `sa? Joo1j JaMol e, Joolj puno i9 'LuAgmopa, pajni5 Quo3aj aje swooi ia)pq s,Aog pup SAj99 4 N+n M •joog punoa6 •asnoH pja!j aq jjo i. uo dull Pasoi~u3 ~3AGJ 49JU aln UG pa3e301 -JE' s.€a)1301 cueal S'AGg pue S,jj€ , eee¢~y~ nx., a3PS3O IdnS ox ~;•u 3":e~. '2 pale3q-- sg IL3d has.€ s a Joolijamol •asnc)H p{a€A;o JooH puoaas uo paje3op € S€ ua00.1 J°,6daM J0013 4sili 6UIM s;.ld o; pa4p3olaJ •hJ;ua u'eua;e papupdxa si olpnjS aigp) We g;seaH / •UILUPV <1 i •uaniJo;ipny o; ;ua:)e(pe pa;eaoj - ' aJp suaeJ6oJd v~.2 _ b6 I 6J~'tw]H1 a ~lsnW pue s;Jd jlua UMo g;€M xf~ I~ { 1 i~ pa4e3olai si asEH Joo1j puo3as auluezzat a:)elda.! Leo Joolj JaMo-1 ,F~ We 4E1paN /'ulwpV W-j auj IQ laAal pUG:)aS auj uo r- pa~eso[ aae wooM Ju6saM pup s.€a)[301 wpag `ssa)Pol '3'd 5.1J!9 L_. 5zd •6uim slid o; pa;e:)olaa Jooij;sJl j 'Ailue ulew }e popuedxa sl o!pn45 alge3 Joolj puno.ig •a:)eds.ia)13ol'3'd sa:)eldaJ uaq:);l)l pup le:)luey:)aW l° asra J (aqua unno y111a 3si8 vnw •aooµ punoa6 uo ~ui~ pasopug •asnoH pla€A aul to [aroa[ JSJ; a[41 uo palp3ol aip \ s-€ay,:)C [ W2ai pue Td S.~a'9 paleaolaj S; ~J •wn1Jo;!PnV o; aua:)efpe pa;pool we swe16o.id 3isnIN pup s;ay kal auluezz+ 1 saapidaJ f NOIldO ~ "Olimm- - - - - Joo1j puo3as Joolj punoJg .LuAg mopaq pa €n6U~uo3ar are 1 stuoor ra)g:)ol s,Aos pup SjJ19.3.d •asnotq p@a€d at4~10 t° oaAa~ ~srp a€41 uo paje3q are s.lay'aq weal s,/,og pup s,jr€q sai~anll:_ f - 6ulm a,ual3s iapun pa;epowo»e are sal;ll!:)ej JOO1j 4sJl j Ailuo u'pw le papuedxa xuF aL ` e PG no'jaj are UPOH / •ulwpV~ s~ as€p •asnoH pga€d jo roeU puol,3s uo pa~23gar S€ uaoor JE461am o Joojj puo3as y auiuezzaw ;a:)eldar le:i •6u1M sary o; pa;e:)oiar si oipn;s algp:) •wniro;ipny o; ;uaaefpe paap:)ol ► arp swer6ord :)isn&N pup sary 'hrjua umo q !m palp:)o@ar sl asim