Present: W. Morrison, K. Powell, T. Koenig, C. Morrison and School Board liaison P. McGrath
Excused: S. Heinrich
Guests: Assistant Superintendent S. Tracy, Business Administrator M. Shevenell, Architects F. Marinace and P. Marinace.
W. Morrison called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM.
W. Morrison told the committee the purpose of the meeting was an informal review of a proposed new school plan. He noted that the School Board had mentioned that they wanted the committee to review new school options and report back on January 6th, but that the Board had not officially given the committee a charge. W. Morrison further indicated that, after discussion with Superintendent Chiafery, the deadline was extended to later in January.
M. Shevenell shared a plan for a new 5th/6th upper elementary school on the Buker site. He noted that the population projections show a significant decrease in current student population as well as projected populations. He said the School Board discussed this during budget hearings and suggested that alternatives be investigated. He also said that Keyes Associates has dissolved and the Administration hired architect F. Marinace. P. McGrath told the Committee that the School Board felt that F. Marinace was uniquely qualified as a school architect and the best choice to replace Keyes Associates. F Marinace noted that the proposed plan was conceptual only, 94,000 sq ft, and designed to accommodate 780 students. He indicated that no attempt had been made to design the school specifically for the Buker site.
Committee members had several questions:
K. Powell wanted to know if anyone knew why the student enrollments had decreased. M. Shevenell responded that many
students have gone to private schools or moved from Merrimack.
T. Koenig asked if Kindergarten was the reason for change in plans. P. McGrath responded that it may appear that way, but the School Board wants the plan to pass and felt that a less expensive plan might have a better chance of passing in April.
C. Morrison asked if there was any plan to address the curriculum needs for grades 7 and 8 at the current middle school if a new 5/6 school was built. F. Marinace responded that the only work planned for the middle school are mechanical and electrical upgrades to bring the whole school up to code.
W. Morrison asked how much more space a middle school for 750 students would need and what that might cost. F. Marinace noted that a middle school for 750 students would need approximately 108,000 sq ft. or 14,000 sq ft more. The construction cost per sq ft is $95 so the construction cost for a middle school instead of an upper elementary school would be 10.2 million as opposed to 8.9 million.
T. Koenig wanted to know how the capacity of 780 students was determined. F. Marinace explained that they used a figure of 22.9 students per classroom. T. Koenig explained that the PBC has used determined Merrimack school capacities using 25 students for recommended capacity and 30 students for maximum capacity. He further explained that for the middle and high school the committee used the capacity figures for specific subjects taught if those capacities were different and that all capacity figures were also contingent on actual square footage of the classrooms. He felt that any proposed school plan should follow those same guidelines.
P. McGrath stated that he felt a phased approach that was stated up-front might be the way to promote a new school. T. Koenig felt that a staged effort could be detrimental.
Discussion ensued regarding the need to keep the new school a 7/8 in order to maintain credibility. The Committee had discussed "New School: 5/6 or 7/8?" during their original work on middle school space needs and concluded a 7/8 was the correct choice. Their specific conclusions were part of the first report on the middle school. Most of the rationale for 7/8 was based on curriculum needs or space upgrades. Members felt the reasons had not changed, especially since the 5/6 proposal did not address these 7/8 needs at the current middle school. In addition they stated that a change in plan might indicate that the school district doesn't really know what it wants or didn't really need what the original plan. However, members felt that the plan for a 7/8 school could be revised while still maintaining credibility due to the current population projections and the need for a new architect.
By consensus, the committee agreed to ask F. Marinace to revise the current plans for a 7/8 middle school on Buker to a 7/8 middle school with a capacity of 750, designed to be expandable to 1,000 and 1,250, with either core facilities for 1,250 or core facilities that could be easily expanded. The committee agreed to meet at 6 PM on January 6th.
It was noted that a quorum might not be attainable for the meeting scheduled on January 13th due to Budget Committee meetings and that scheduling another meeting in January may be difficult. However, the committee will determine the need for, and the date of, any additional meetings in January on January 6th.
The committee requested that it be noted in the minutes that it had received the population projections during this meeting and that the committee had not been provided with the Michener projection information.
W. Morrison further noted that M. Chiafery had changed the formula when doing her projections as she felt the prior formula was insufficient. He told the committee he had no information on what she had changed. The committee discussed the need for more information about what was changed, the rationale behind the change, and the need to verify the accuracy of any new formula.
On a motion from T. Koenig, seconded by C. Morrison, the committee unanimously voted to adjourn at 10:10 PM.
Last Updated: April 10, 2003 by Wayne Morrison