Town Planning Building Committee for Salem School Renovation February

Reviews
Shared by: Jessie Spano
Stats
views:
0
rating:
not rated
reviews:
0
posted:
4/10/2009
language:
English
pages:
0
Town Planning/Building Committee for Salem School Renovation February 10, 2009 Salem School Media Center 7:00 P.M. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 10, 2009 REGULAR MEETING PRESENT: Jim Choquette, Stuart Gadbois, Monica McIntyre, Jenifer Lee, Richard Asafaylo (arrived at 7:04 P.M.), Horace Lindo, Kevin Lyden, Bill Weinschenker, Chris LaRose (arrived at 7:05 P.M.) GUESTS: Charles Boos, KBA ABSENT: Dinis Pimentel, Donna Leake, Donald Bourdeau, Mike Siebert CALL TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 7:01 P.M. by Jim Choquette, Vice Chairman. M/S/C (K. Lyden, B. Weinschenker) to approve as amended the January 27, 2009 minutes. Vote: Yes-7 No-0 Abstain-1 (C. LaRose). J. Choquette recapped the meeting held the week before with C. Boos. C. Boos researched and found previous projects that were granted waivers without project numbers. It’s also possible to try for a waiver on the 1994 addition. C. Boos listed three important projects for the committee to pursue: 1. Get an area waiver. 2. Pursue renovate as new for all but the 1994 addition. Try to get legislature to work on just the older building. 3. Apply before June 30, 2009 so the Town may not have to wait a full year for reimbursement. C. Boos answered some of the five questions the committee asked from the January 27, 2009 meeting. The minimum cost for renovate as new project could be about $14M (not including the 1994 building). The ad hoc cost approach for the top five recommended repairs could not be immediately answered. C. Boos would have a range of numbers at the next meeting, but did mention that the State would want to meet all handicap access codes. For the question of what could be done with a total project cost of $10M, C. Boos wants to prioritize, which includes sprinklers (entire building) roofs, windows, and mechanical. B. Weinschenker asked if added footprint is required for renovate as new and C. Boos answered no. C. Boos commented that the school has to work as a school for the next twenty years. The people who use the building (teachers) have to be in support of the program. If the committee, Board of Education, Board of Finance, and Board of Selectmen don’t all agree then it may not pass. R. Asafaylo commented that the committee began with the problem of leaky windows, etc. As others became involved the price tag went and changes went up. Does the committee want to go back to renovate as new? He questioned “where are we as a committee?” B. Weinschenker did not understand renovate as new. The additional stage and parking lot plan was more than he thought it would be. C. Boos answered that renovate as new brings the school up to today’s standards. C. Boos discussed the school’s heating system. The older section’s heating needs repairs. The center of building is where a mechanical system should be. The mechanical room should not be an appendage in a different part of the building. J. Lee was concerned with the additional administration space that the public will see and may not like it, and therefore vote against it. She asked if the administrative space is removed, what will that save. C. Boos answered that administration space is not being added, it’s being combined. R. Asafaylo commented that it’s rearranging space to improve efficiency. K. Lyden thought the Town will pay for what needs to be done. Is it possible to whittle it down to what’s necessary? J. Choquette commented on pushing forward renovate as new project while narrowing down the latest plan. K. Lyden asked if the administration and Board of Education could look to narrow the plan down while keeping it renovate as new. C. Boos commented that if the building is not repaired with renovate as new now, then the school will be stuck for twenty years. He suggested the committee or a subcommittee have a workshop with the administration to streamline the project (before the next meeting). The committee wanted to add on the next meeting’s agenda for D. Leake and M. Siebert to be present for a Board of Education input for the minimum project requirements for renovate as new. Next meeting will be February 24, 2009 at 7:00 P.M. at Salem School. M/S/C (B. Weinschenker, R. Asafaylo) to adjourn meeting. Vote: All in favor. Meeting adjourned at 8:44 P.M. Respectfully submitted by: Lindsay K. Chester Recording Secretary

Related docs
Salem High School Renovation
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Natick High School Renovation Committee
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
GROENKLOOF TOWN PLANNING UPDATE
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Salem__Massachusetts
Views: 29  |  Downloads: 0
Planning Committee
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Summary of Renovation Issues
Views: 16  |  Downloads: 0
Town Newsletter
Views: 15  |  Downloads: 0
Other docs by Jessie Spano
Fielding_apachecon2000
Views: 63  |  Downloads: 0
Legislation urges investing in early stage
Views: 79  |  Downloads: 0
FORM 1118 FOREIGN TAX CREDIT CORPORATIONS
Views: 146  |  Downloads: 0
Survey of Angel Investors in South East Asia
Views: 261  |  Downloads: 1
Planting Seed Capital in Your Economic Garden
Views: 142  |  Downloads: 5
Form 8908 Energy Efficient Home Credit
Views: 243  |  Downloads: 0
INstrucciones para la Forma 944 PR
Views: 89  |  Downloads: 0
Missouri Compromise _1820_ -- 1[2]
Views: 38  |  Downloads: 0
ECONOMICS OF SECURITY PATCH MANAGEMENT
Views: 171  |  Downloads: 5
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo _1848_ - 2[1]
Views: 52  |  Downloads: 0
Sample Private Placment Memorandum
Views: 2539  |  Downloads: 431