SBC Meeting Notes – 3/10/2021

TSKP presented the attached presentation, containing Options One and Two, below are some details about both options;

Option One is rotated to the Old Street grid. A lot of green space. Has a pedestrian connector from the parking lot to the front of the building. Buffer space in the back of the building that contains a play and nature area. Service area comes in from the back connecting from Reed and Mitchell Street. Ample parking, additional parking adjacent to multipurpose field. A lot of area for buses and cars to queue. The plan of the building is smaller buildings that create a community green in the center. The community space is considered to be the gym, cafeteria, lobby and stage. You
enter the building at what the architect considers to be the community front porch. Second floor contains an outdoor terrace that is adjacent to the Science Room off the main corridor where kids can go and have access to nature, potentially grow things, etc. The Pre-K area is one story with the opportunity for a green space where you can also grow things. Contains a lot of glass for transparency and natural sunlight to come into the building.

Option Two is shaped differently from Option One. Organized around a pedestrian path with a series of trees from Old Street. Contains outdoor learning and natural play space. Parking is pushed from Old Street to allow for green space. Roof canopies over the other buildings. Has a multipurpose field. Columns at the entrance designate the pedestrian path. There is a small garden next to the Pre-K entrance. Canopy provides shade for sitting steps located underneath. Has a roof garden. Two columns from the old Devine School will be used at the pedestrian path. The gym has glass views to the play field and the cafeteria has views to the outdoor classroom. Planters for educational gardening with picnics tables are located outside.

Q: Is option one’s design unique to the Randolph project, or has this design been incorporated into other buildings. There is a lot of windows with natural light, how will heat efficiency be achieved?
A: The building is unique to Randolph. TSKP has done buildings with a fair amount of glass. TSKP did an analysis on how much glass is being used and 40% is being used in both options and is typical in most schools. TSKP is being cognoscente on where and how glazing is used to make sure the sustainability/energy performance goals are achieved. Will be a high- efficient envelope and high-performance building in terms of sustainability and energy performance.

Q: Concern about cost
A: TSKP looked at some options such as the cost of the glass and there is a 5% cost difference. Will continue to look at ways to reduce cost.

Q: Why are the roofs flat?
A: Flat roofs have a pitch and drain. You can get a 30-year warranty on a flat roof that is similar to other roof types. Under the roof is a space that is the size of a gym with a lot of volume underneath that will not be able to be used with another type of roof.

Q: Is the parking lots on options one and two coming out to the same location?
A: Both parking lots come in and out to Old Street. There is also one-way access coming in from the north of the building. TSKP needs to further discuss with their traffic engineer.

Q: Is there any difference between segregating off the public spaces between the two options?
A: No.

Q: On the classroom wings is there direct outdoor access?
A: No

Q: The general scale of both options seems overwhelming for elementary school students.
A: Option two has a smaller scale as you approach. Appearance will change as the design is more developed.

Q: Where is the storage space located?
A: There are upcoming meetings with staff where storage will be discussed. Storage spaces are listed on the room list located in the PSR.

Q: How will green certification be obtained with all the glass?
A: TSKP will continue to review.

Q: With all the open spaces, where is the open exposed ductwork located?
A: TSKP will continue to review.

Q: Are we at a point for community response with regards to the options presented?
A: if the Committee comes to a consensus at this meeting on the chosen option, the option will be presented to the community at the March 17th meeting for comment.

Q: Is the presentation posted on the project website?
A: They will be posted after the meeting once the meeting minutes are approved.

Q: How secure is the rooftop to prevent access?
A: The roof is at least 14 feet high and would be a challenge to access. There are no ladders, etc. to allow access from the exterior.

Q: Concern about acoustics
A: TSKP will be working with their acoustic consultant to address any possible issues.

Q: Can option one be revised to incorporate things from option two?
A: Yes, TSKP will look into tweaking option one.

General Comments:

Would like green space for community gardening.

Option One shows access to Dow Street that is a street that can only be accessed through Old Farm Road. The Street is very narrow, and undeveloped private neighborhood.

Option Two shows service access from Velma Road which is a little short dead end. The neighborhood would not be happy with trucks accessing.

Option Two’s scale feels like a cape that is dormered in the back. Looks small from the front and grows as you go in. Warm façade.

The parking lot near the apartment buildings will require people to walk the length of a soccer field to get too the building, not convenient.

Christina wasn’t available to provide website updates. Two public meetings are scheduled for March 17th at 1:30 PM and 7:00 PM. Andrea will ask RCTV if they can air the meetings for a couple of days.

Ron Lum made a motion to approve the meeting minutes from February 10, 2021, Pam seconded.
Andrea called for a roll call and voting was as follows;

1. Carlos Colley-Yes
2. Andrea Nixon- Yes
3. Thea Stovell- Yes
4. Ron Lum- Yes
5. Pam Davis-Yes
6. Adam Smith- Yes
7. Keith Wortzman- Yes

Carlos made a motion to approve the Daedalus Invoice in the amount of by $ 9,000 seconded by
Keith. Andrea called for a roll call and voting was as follows;

1. Carlos Colley-Yes
2. Andrea Nixon- Yes
3. Thea Stovell- Yes
4. Ron Lum- Yes
5. Pam Davis-Yes
6. Adam Smith- Yes
7. Keith Wortzman- Yes

Keith made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Carlos. Andrea called for a roll call and voting was as follows;

1. Carlos Colley-Yes
2. Brian Howard-Yes
3. Andrea Nixon- Yes
4. Thea Stovell- Yes
5. Ron Lum- Yes
6. Pam Davis-Yes
7. Adam Smith- Yes
8. Keith Wortzman- Yes