Present: Committee Members: S. Heinrich, D. Miller, W. Morrison, B. Triolo and M. Morrison (arrived late), High School Administration: D. Gould and R. Walker, Superintendent J. O'Neil, Keyes Architects: E. Kerwin and D. Casselli
Excused: T. Koenig

S. Heinrich called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. He noted that the planned schedule of meetings had been altered to include Mr. O'Neil and architects from Keyes at this meeting and a meeting with Scott Isabelle at the start of the meeting on June 30, 1998 to discuss the Capital Improvement Plan and meet with Meridian to discuss parking and fields plans.

After introductions were made, the floor was opened for discussion on potential solutions to the high school space problems.

The architects displayed floor plans for the current high school and two potential plans for additions. One plan had 12 (10 standard and 2 science: 16,400 square feet) classrooms and the other had 14+ (12 standard, 2 science plus storage, seminar, teacher and office space: 23,500 square feet) classrooms. They indicated that the easiest way to expand was to make a clean addition. They noted firewall and sprinkler concerns. They included plans for parking spaces that would be lost and noted concerns about adding to the north side of the building due to sun/shade issues. It was noted that they had not seen the preliminary space report that the committee has written and were not aware of the parking lot work that would be done over the summer.

B. Triolo asked about renovating the Little Theater and building a new theater as part of any addition proposed. The architects noted that there was room for a theater (700-900 seats, 10,000 square feet) near the current main office suite. Construction costs to build a theater were higher than costs to build "regular" school space. They suggested $100 per square foot for auditoriums versus $80 per square foot for regular school space. It was noted that these were construction only costs. (M. Morrison arrived during this discussion.)

D. Miller asked about adding space to the side of the building near the gym.

There was discussion about the need for extensive water access in science classrooms. It was also noted that there are water and sewer lines under the suggested addition. These would have to be moved, but should not be a big issue and that there would be minimal site preparation.

J. O'Neil told the committee he would like to see something done about the back corridor, i.e. Technology/I.A. classroom area. There is a potential program, working with the town cable committee, that needs television studio lab space.

Additional questions that came up: Can building conversion costs be included in a building bond? (Yes). Can existing rooms be soundproofed? (Yes) Can something be done to insulate the exterior floor and walls of the guidance area to eliminate the cold problem? (Yes) Could insulated block be used on an addition? (Not recommended)

R. Walker asked what the goal of the committee was. He thought the committee decided what issues it's plan was trying to address. He mentioned itinerant teachers, Special Education, storage, classrooms. He asked for opinions about a central storage space for all departments as opposed to storage within department areas. He also mentioned a concern about physical education storage and class space.

J. O'Neil noted that the committee needs to decide what type of space(s) it would put in the addition and then could think about how to renovate the current space. He would like to see the committee come up with a plan to meet the program needs of 1700 students. He also discussed issues involved in trying to keep all classes in each department together: equipment/supply storage, communication and ease of transporting materials. He noted that classes can be moved around within the school if needed.

E. Kerwin indicated that any solution should be a team effort and what is presented first will probably not be what is eventually presented to the voters.

W. Morrison asked if moving teachers moving equipment/books from a central storage site through the halls would create additional traffic issues. R. Walker noted that this is something that would not be done during the school day/passing times.

D. Miller asked about the interior courtyards being used for storage areas. The architects felt that it was not cost effective to attempt to rehab these areas and filling them in may create ventilation issues. D. Miller asked the architects to look at proposing additional storage areas throughout the existing building.

R. Walker brought up the concerns about evacuating handicapped students from the second floor. D. Casselli noted that it is legal and within code to label one stairwell area as a safe refuge and students are taken to that area and then evacuated from there when possible.

D. Gould indicated that the curriculum needs to be looked at to see what and how courses would be affected by any changes in space.

S. Heinrich asked about the time table for building additions and doing renovations. How much could be done during summer months in order to lessen impact to students? The architects indicated that most renovation work would be done during the summer and probably not until the addition was finished. How long it would take would depend on the square footage to be renovated.

Portable classrooms were discussed. It was noted they are not portable, not covered by the building aid program, require a multi-year lease and would take up needed space in the parking lot.

J. O'Neil noted for the record that all additional space would be wired for computers, AV and telephone. In answer to a question about what size space the TV lab would require, he indicated that Room D-124 had been looked at and E-112 would suffice as well.

It was suggested that a new auditorium could be included in the proposed addition program and put as a separate warrant article as the larger size gymnasiums had been.

J. Flis asked about the possibility of a third floor. He suggested this might be accomplished in two ways. One was build an addition to accommodate a third floor later and the other was to build a smaller three story addition which would allow space for a future three story addition. The architects noted that most districts today are not building three story schools and the major cost difference would be the inclusion of an elevator to the third floor which ADA requires.

M. Morrison stated that there is a need for 6 classrooms just to break even today. Further, to break even tomorrow, 12 classrooms are needed.

J. O'Neil noted that there is a figure of 3.5 million dollars in the C.I.P. for this additional space. He said this would be adequate for renovation, construction and contingencies assuming the current boiler is adequate to heat the additional space. He noted that the capacity of the boiler needs to be researched. The architects noted that if an additional boiler was needed, it would ideally be located near the current service areas.

D. Casselli noted that in Hollis the contractor was brought in during the planning phase. The contractor was told what the district wanted and how much they had to spend and was made responsible for the budget.

S. Heinrich asked J. O'Neil what the School Board wanted in the final report from the committee. He suggested the committee could indicate the number and types of classrooms that should be included in an addition and suggest what areas of the current building should be renovated.

D. Miller noted that the plan suggesting 10 classrooms meets future needs but does nothing about current needs.

J. Flis agreed and reminded the committee to meet student needs. He was concerned about proposing a theater to meet community, rather than curriculum, needs.

J. O'Neil suggested that the committee could provide a direction that the district should take. Further, he suggested that a neutral party with expertise in this area, the New England School Development Council, could evaluate the high school at a cost of $3,500 and further validate the high school space needs. He said such a study could be completed in four to six weeks. By consensus, the committee agreed that this study should be pursued and J. O'Neil said he would look into the procedure.

S. Heinrich thanked all panel members for their input. He asked for public participation. There was none.

The committee took a five minute recess.

The committee discussed information and options. There is a concern that the construction and renovations may require that the entire school be sprinkled. The suggested 23,500 square foot plan would cost 1.9 million using $80 per square foot. (Construction only)

W. Morrison would like the committee to decide what it wants to accomplish. S. Heinrich wants the committee to make its best educated opinion on what should be included in the addition. M. Morrison wants the committee to plan to meet the needs of 250 - 300 additional students. S. Heinrich stated he feels the high school needs more art and science classrooms and more storage space. Both M. Morrison and W. Morrison want to quantify that need. It was suggested that the addition should include 2 new and 2 replacement Science classrooms at a minimum. There was some discussion about the need to enlarge the P.E. area somehow. There was a suggestion about trying to locate storage somewhere in the D corridor. There was discussion about expanding the band room by using a movable partition/wall at the back of the stage in the little theater. It was noted that the guidance and the nurse's office need to be remembered in any proposed renovation. There was some discussion about trying to locate all Special Education areas in one general area.

S. Heinrich suggested that the committee develop a list of potential changes and then prioritize them.

B. Triolo suggested that a number one priority be renovating or relocating the nurses office. He noted that this was a problem area during the last accreditation and nothing has been done to fix it since then.

S. Heinrich asked whether the committee had any opinions on two story versus three story additions. W. Morrison stated three floors adds more future options. M. Morrison stated this might change the configuration of departments. B. Triolo felt that it might create problems and was not aesthetically pleasing. D. Miller said he could not decide.

W. Morrison suggested that the committee continue working on numbers and types of classrooms and then fine tune a plan.

On a motion from B. Triolo, seconded by M. Morrison, the committee unanimously voted to adjourn at 10:02 P.M.

Last Updated: August 30, 1998 by Wayne Morrison