Amesbury Elementary School Building Committee

Amesbury Elementary School Building Committee (AESBC) Meeting Minutes Date: January 28, 2021 Location: Virtual Meeting Time: 6:00 PM Next Meeting: February 25, 2021 at 6:00PM Attendees: Name Present Name Present SBC – Voting Members SBC – Non Voting Members Kassandra Gove, Mayor/Chair  Christine Chabot Paul Fahey, Chief of Staff  Lauri McAllister Peter Hoyt, School Committee  Bruce McBrien  Matt Bennett, Facilities Director  Angel Wills, CFO  NV5 (OPM) Shannon Nolan, AES Principal  Tim Dorman  Lynn Catarius, Director, Student Services  Tom Murphy Nick Wheeler, City Council  DiNisco Design (Architect) Joseph Spencer  Donna DiNisco Joan Liporto, Director of Finance & Ops  Vivian Low  Elizabeth McAndrews, Superintendent  Caulen Finch Jim Shuttleworth  1. Call to Order o Kassandra Gove, Mayor of Amesbury, called the Amesbury Elementary School Building Committee (AESBC) Meeting to order at 6:07 PM. o Mayor Gove provided a statement regarding the ‘Executive Order Suspending Certain Provisions of the Open Meeting Law G.L. c.30A, §20’ signed on March 12, 2020 which allows for the meeting to be held online and broadcast by ACTV Channel 18. Public comments can be made by email to Mayor Gove or through the ACTV Facebook live stream. o NV5 took roll call for attendance. 2. Public Comments o No comments were submitted in advance of the meeting or via the Facebook live stream. 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes o NV5 distributed the AESBC Meeting Minutes from the prior meeting held on December 17, 2020 as part of the meeting packet. 70 FARGO STREET, SUITE 800 | BOSTON, MA 02210 | WWW.NV5.COM | OFFICE 617.345.9885 | FAX 617.345.4226 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT - CONSTRUCTION QUALITY ASSURANCE - INFRASTRUCTURE - ENERGY - ENVIRONMENTAL  Page 2 of 5 o Vote: Motion by Peter Hoyt to approve the December 17, 2020 AESBC Meeting Minutes. The motion was seconded by Matt Bennett and following a roll call vote, passed unanimously. 4. Approval of Commitments/Invoices o The following invoices were submitted for approval:  DiNisco Design Invoice #9402 - $2,717.00 (Geotech Consulting Services)  DiNisco Design Invoice #9406 - $165.00 (LSP Consulting)  DiNisco Design Invoice #9405 - $2,640.00 (Environmental Consulting)  DiNisco Design Invoice #9403 – $13,712.71 (ConsCom and PB Review and Add Docs)  Wetland Consulting Services Invoice #20408 - $1,341.86 (Permitting for the Lion’s Mouth Road Sidewalk Project by DPW) o Vote: Motion made by Peter Hoyt to approve the warrant totaling $20,576.57. The motion was seconded by Joe Spencer and following a roll call vote, passed unanimously. o The following commitments were submitted for approval:  DiNisco Design Amendment No. 5 - $55,180.00 (Planning Board Workshop Meeting preparation, attendance and resulting design revisions)  Robert E. Puff, PE Additional Peer Review Services - $990.00 (Planning Board Engineering Peer Review Consultant) o Prior to voting on approval of the commitments, it was agreed that the Update on Design, Permitting and Schedule would be provided to help clarify the background for these additional commitments. o It was clarified that the 90% CD estimate is the final cost estimate, but that there was still a design and pricing contingency carried at that time to address minor design changes or clarifications that might occur as the bid set is finalized. o Vote: Motion made by Nick Wheeler to approve the commitments as submitted, totaling $56,170. The motion was seconded by Peter Hoyt and following a roll call vote, passed unanimously. 5. Update on Design, Permitting and Schedule o An update on the design and permitting process was provided, which is summarized as follows:  Permitting  The project was before the Conservation Commission again on January 4th. The review is generally complete and is just awaiting final submission of updates that result from design revisions requested by the Planning Board. It is expected that the Order of Conditions will be drafted and reviewed at the regularly scheduled meeting on March 1, 2021, provided the Planning Board completes the Site Plan review process on February 8th and the design team submits the revised documents to the peer reviewers on February 22 nd.  Page 3 of 5  The project was before the Planning Board again on January 11th. Updates on design changes and reduced waiver requests were provided. There was some input from the Planning Board and it was requested that a series of workshops be scheduled to have focused discussions with select board members focusing on traffic, landscape and stormwater. The workshops were held on January 20th and additional detailed comments/requests were made at the meetings. The project was before the Planning Board again on January 25th to update the entire board on what was discussed at the workshops and how the comments are being addressed. The hearing was closed at this meeting with the intent of drafting a decision to vote on at the February 8th meeting.  The design revisions that resulted from the Planning Board workshops include the following: o Eastern Driveway: A grass strip was added to provide separation between the eastern curb line and sidewalk. This required also narrowing the median and overall driveway width, but maintains two entering lanes that expand to 3 lanes further into the site and a single 20’ wide exit lane. Deputy Nolan participated in the traffic workshop and updated concepts were provided to him. Queuing accommodations and pavement markings were reviewed to confirm the changes will not negatively impact circulation. o Western Site Drive: It was requested that a grass strip be added to provide a landscape separation between the western curb line and sidewalk. In order to accomplish this, the roadway width was narrowed to a 20’ single exit lane until the last 150’ approach to Lion’s Mouth Road, where two lanes with an overall 24’ width are retained. o Approximately 29 additional trees were added, primarily along the Woodsom Farm side to provide more landscape buffer. o Changes to some of the plant materials were made to provide for trees with a wider canopy where possible and switch out sugar maples, sweet gums and sumac (due to concerns about potential confusion with poison ivy) for alternatives. It was noted that the revised plant materials would be selected from ConCom approved list, but generally aren’t within the 100’ wetland buffer.  Signage update  Updated signage options were provided, which incorporate the approved name for the new facility of Sargent Jordan Shay Memorial Lower Elementary School. Given the increase in text, it changes some of the thinking on the signage approach.  The proposed sign at the eastern site drive was discussed. o The approach has been to keep the new sign consistent in size with the existing sign to avoid permitting issues. However, the new sign is  Page 4 of 5 proposed to be burgundy with gold leaf and granite posts to be consistent with other Amesbury welcome signage. o Various alterative text formats and levels of abbreviation were reviewed. o Some members expressed a preference for Cashman to be listed first, since that’s the first building visitors would see when entering the site, although this is more challenging for fitting all of the text. o The idea of using this sign location to identity the “campus” rather than each school individually was discussed. It was noted that Cashman has building signage and the new building will have either signage over the canopy or on the landscape wall. o Peter Hoyt noted that a lot of time and effort went into installing the existing Cashman sign and request consideration of relocating it to act as a wayfinding sign at the approach to Cashman. o The size of the proposed sign was questioned in terms of how it compares to Mass DOT standards. The design team will review and advise. o It was noted that a decision isn’t needed tonight and feedback can be provided at the next meeting. The bid documents will be completed with the existing sign size so the scope is owned and if it is changed and permitted later then it can be revised prior to installation.  Canopy Sign o A canopy Sign has been carried in the design, but with the longer name, the lettering would need to be smaller. o Several options were reviewed for the canopy as well as an alternative of using the stone wall as the sign instead of the canopy signage. o The stone wall sign alternative was generally preferred by the Committee, however it was noted that lighting should be provided.  Schedule:  NV5 provided an overview of the current permitting timeline and bid dates. It was noted that the permitting schedule is the critical path holding up releasing the otherwise completed final bid documents. Based on the currently anticipated scenario of completing the Planning Board Site Plan Review February 8th and Conservation Commission Order of Conditions March 1st, the expectation is that the project goes out for bid March 10, 2021, which is pushing occupancy into late March 2023.  The AES Project Website will be updated with the latest schedule.  Page 5 of 5  As schedule has shifted, the overall phasing approach is being updated as the majority of the Cashman site work will need to happen during the second summer (Summer 2022). A working group meeting will be scheduled to revisit the overall phasing approach, which also includes looking at accommodating the Little League field use this spring. 6. Proposed Next Meeting Date o The next meeting of the AESBC will be on February 25, 2021. 7. Other Business o Nick Wheeler asked whether there is any information regarding bussing or the 5th grade move. o Elizabeth McAndrews and Lynn Catarius are AESBC members who are both on the Implementation Committee. o Mayor Gove noted that the first Implementation Committee meeting was focused on brainstorming to make a list of issues to review and address. Some of these include FFE, move in schedule, bussing, bell schedules, rental for public space in building, started with 5th grade because many ramifications o Elizabeth McAndrews noted that there will be a walkthrough of Cashman in February to look at space configurations with respect to teaming. Different teaming configurations are being reviewed at the 3rd, 4th and 5th grade levels. Is was also noted that licensing requirements are being reviewed and 5th grade requires generalist license. 8. Adjournment o Vote: Motion made by Paul Fahey to adjourn the meeting at 7:15 PM. The motion was seconded by Nick Wheeler. Following a role call vote, the motion passed unanimously by all present (Angel Wills was not present for the vote). -End of Minutes- These meeting minutes were prepared by NV5. Please notify NV5 within 48 hours of receipt of this document regarding any required corrections or clarifications.