The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About20141209 - Elementary School Building Committee - Meeting MinutesTown of Hopkinton, MA Elementary School Building Committee - Site Alternatives Task Group Meeting #1 Meeting Notes Hopkinton Elementary School Building Committee - Site Alternatives Task Group Meeting #1 December 9, 2014 at 2:30PM – 5:00PM Location: Superintendent’s Conference Room, 89 Hayden Rowe Street Attendees: Town of Hopkinton  John Mosher (JoM) – Board of Selectman  Joe Markey (JM) - HESBC  John Weaver (JW) - HESBC  Jon Graziano (JG) – HSC, HESBC  Mike Shepard (MS) - HESBC  Pam Waxlax (PM) - HESBC  Ralph Dumas (RD) – HESBC, HPS Director of Finance  Al Rogers (AR) – HPS Facilities Director Compass Project Management (CPM)  Tim Bonfatti (TB) – Project Executive  Jeff D’Amico (JD) – Project Manager  Laureen Westman (LW) – Asst Project Manager Drummey Rosane Anderson Inc. (DRA)  James Barrett (JB) Principal  Sarah Carda (SC) Project Manager  Judd Christopher (JC) Warner Larson, Inc (WL)  David Warner (DW) Nitsch Engineering (NE)  Gary Pease (GP)  Chelsea Christenson (CC) Item Topic/Discussion Action For: Due Date: 1.1 Evaluation Criteria An Evaluation Matrix was proposed by CPM. A criteria column is listed in random order down the left side with 4 potential properties (called Concept Option) for the school to be located, listed along the top row. Each Concept Option will potentially be broken down into sub-categories. A column for Considerations related to the Criteria is listed in the right hand column. CPM to revise Evaluation Matrix to include new criteria, additional considerations and descriptions of potential subcategories. CPM 12/18 1.2 RATING SYSTEM: A color coded, 5 tier rating system will be applied from most advantageous (green = 5) to least advantageous (red = 1). Eventually the most advantageous Concept Town of Hopkinton, MA Elementary School Building Committee - Site Alternatives Task Group Meeting #1 Options will become evident by the abundant level of green ratings. The Criteria column can be adjusted to be listed in priority, but is not at this time. Feasibility SF building estimates along with Conceptual site estimates will be provided for each Concept Option. 1.3 PROCESS: DRA will refine the concept options to be presented to the ESBC on 12/22/14. CPM will distribute the updated evaluation matrix. This task force will take the options presented at that meeting then individually fill out their opinions of the option against the criteria. At the next meeting of this task force the group will get together to discuss their evaluations and draft a consolidated matrix from the group. ALL 1/8/15 1.4 TEST SITE PLANS: DRA with Warner Larson are using a 79,000 sf test fit building on the sites, final building size is to be determined. The conceptual school includes 5 pre-k classrooms and 12 kindergarten classrooms primarily on the ground floor, 12 first grade classrooms to be located on the 2nd floor, the administration would serve as the nucleus separating the parent and bus drop-offs and the cafeteria and gymnasium would be located with parking close by to support afterschool programs. DRA presented initial test fits for new buildings at the existing center School site, Elmwood and Irvine. INFO 1.5 CENTER SCHOOL SITE - CONCEPT OPTION 1: HESBC to introduce project to the Historical Commission in February. No matter what Concept Option is finally selected, the historical front building of the Center School will have to be addressed. DRA presented a test fit renovation scheme at the existing Center School site and will update sub-option plans for HESBC meeting. Discussion Comments: Is this site viable without the purchase of the Hehn property? The Hehn property is 8.5 acres located at 25 Ash Street and is currently on the market. The purchase price includes the house and the rear property large enough for a street, cul-de-sac and 2 house lots. If the property should sell, the town would converse with the new owner/developer. HESBC DRA 12/22 1.6 ELMWOOD SCHOOL SITE - CONCEPT OPTION 2: DRA presented a test fit new school in the wooded side. DRA to test fit another scheme with the building located where the ball fields are currently located. Discussion Comments: Can an additional access drive from Wood Street be used to mitigate additional traffic? Is the site large enough to accommodate 2 schools, separate traffic loops, parking, play fields/grounds and allow future expansion? DRA 12/22 1.7 IRVINE SITE (Hayden Rowe) - CONCEPT OPTION 3: DRA to test fit two building options taking into consideration the wetlands. DRA will update sub-option plans for HESBC meeting. Discussion Comments: Ms. Irvine has been made aware of this projects timeframe and is understanding of the approval process. MS will follow up with Irvine on the asking price. JD to sent MS the geotechnical plans to forward to the Irvines’. DRA MS JD 12/22 12/10 12/10 1.8 TODARO SITE - CONCEPT OPTION 4: DRA to develop two test fit building options for HESBC meeting. DRA NOTE 12/22 Town of Hopkinton, MA Elementary School Building Committee - Site Alternatives Task Group Meeting #1 Discussion Comments There are 3 parcels, (approx. 23 acres) available for sale which includes the residential property at 147 Hayden Rowe providing street access to the property. There is a 40B plan but the owner is open to selling to the town. Mr. Todaro has been made aware of this project’s timeframe and is comfortable with waiting and open to further discussions. MS to confirm the total acreage and parcels of land available from Mr. Todaro. MS 1.9 OTHER SITES: Group discussed if the Fields 12 & 13 (on Hopkins/Middle School/High School campus) was an options. It was noted it is surrounded by wetlands, vernal pools, accessed by small road over a stream, many conservation restrictions. WL & NE have historical information on these areas and will provide a viewpoint of build ability for sites 12 and 13. Legacy Farms: Site is not large enough. HESBC had previous discussions with Town Planner regarding the availability of other town owned property for this project, no other options fit criteria. WL/ NE 1/8/15 1.10 TRAFFIC: CPM to contact Norman or John Westerling to see if past traffic studies are available for review as well to determine if new studies are in the planning stage. Team discussed scope of traffic studies needed for the Feasibility phase. JD, RD, JC, & GP to confirm traffic scope. NE to schedule observation of current conditions at all sites soon and provide an analysis report by 1/20 for review with the HESBC. CPM NE 1/8/15 1/20/1 5 1.11 NEXT STEPS: Report and presentation to the HESBC on December 22nd. CPM/ DRA 12/22 Next Meeting: SITE ALTERNATIVES TASK FORCE Meeting – 3:00-5:00 pm on January 8th, 2015 in the Superintendent’s Conference Room. These minutes are considered the record of the meeting and all decisions and actions reflected herein are deemed agreed by the participants.