TSBC Meeting Minutes – 8/17/2020

---

8/17/2020
Tisbury School Building Committee
Meeting Minutes

2020-08-17_TSBC_MeetingMinutes

---

Tisbury School Building Committee 2019-2020
7:00PM, Monday, August 17, 2020
by Zoom Cloud Conference due to Covid-19 Restrictions

TSBC Members Present:
Chair Harold Chapdelaine, John Custer, Sean DeBettencourt, Peter Gearhart, Rita Jeffers, Reade Milne, Rachel Orr, Jim Rogers, Michael Watts

Others:
Angie Francis, Jackie Hokanson, Jerry Hokanson, Marie, Tegan Myers, Janet Packer, Alice Robinson, Susie White, Caller from 508-360-7205
Recorder –Marni Lipke
Daedalus Projects: Richard Marks, Christina Opper, Amanda Sawyer
Tappé Architects: Chris Blessen
Schools: Principal John Custer, Assistant Principal Melissa Ogden, Sean DeBettencourt, Rita Jeffers, Meredith Goldthwait, Natalie Krauthammer
PTO: Nevette Previd
Tisbury School Committee: Michael Watts
Town: Selectman – Jeff Kristal, Selectman – Jim Rogers, Town Administrator
FinCom: Mary Ellen Larsen, Jynell Kristal
Planning Board: Ben Robinson
Press: Louisa Hufstader – Vineyard Gazette, Rich Saltzberg – MV Times

* TSBC members late arrivals or early departures.

1. Call To Order
The Tisbury School Building Committee 2019-2020 (TSBC) meeting was called to order at 7:04PM.
– (Recorder’s note: Discussions are summarized and grouped for clarity and brevity.)

2. Virtual Meeting Reminders (Mute, Video, Chat, Raising Hands)
Chair Harold Chapdelaine reviewed the protocol for remote meetings occasioned by the Covid-19 pandemic. The meeting was being recorded and would be posted with all background documents on the Project website http://www.tisbury-school-project.com. All participants were welcome. In order to facilitate Zoom technology he asked that everyone mute their microphones to reduce background noise and explained the raise hand feature.

3. Tisbury School Building Committee (TSBC) Attendance
Attendance was called in alphabetical order.

4. Review and Possible Approval of Minutes, August 10, 2020 Meeting
• ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY MS. RACHEL ORR AND SECONDED BY MR. JIM ROGERS THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 10, 2020 MEETING WERE APPROVED AS AMENDED: MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY: 7 AYES, 0 NAYS, 2 ABSTENTIONS due to absence: MR. CHAPDELAINE—AYE, PRIN. JOHN CUSTER—ABSTAIN, MR. SEAN DEBETTENCOURT—AYE, MR. PETER GEARHART—AYE, MS. RITA JEFFERS—AYE, MS. READE MILNE—AYE, MS. ORR—AYE, MR. ROGERS—AYE, MR. MICHAEL WATTS
—ABSTAIN.

5. Acknowledgment of Receipt of Public Correspondence
None.

6. Review of Concept Option 3: Floor Plans  (see documents on file.)

a. Review changes to the Gym and Adjacent Spaces
Mr. Chris Blessen of Tappé Architect explained how the team considered options for gym angles parallel to the building rather than to Spring St. and how this shift effected music and other ancillary spaces, parking, etc. The team returned to the Spring St. parallel for the next draft sliding the addition northwards and adding about 2,000 more sq. ft. to the building.
– The stage faced the 285 seat bleachers (same capacity as current bleachers).
– Stage versus platform was determined by use and regulated by code.
– The elevations were complicated by a 30” rise.
– An initial story impinged on the Spring St. setback by 8-10 ft. but the full three-story gym was recessed to the setback line.
– The lobby was starting to be reduced to more modest proportions.
• This would make various changes in the first floor.
– The stage and music spaces were open to the first floor due to only 5 ft. of clearance.
– The centrally located cafeteria could accommodate an entire floor of classes at a time (with normal non-Covid seating) and was open to above floors.
• On the second floor art and foreign language were over music/band with proper acoustic floors. This allowed a central space that included glass walls to increase natural light.
• The third floor was essentially unchanged except for the addition of a skylight and the still un-decided glass tower/stair placement
• A site survey showed on overlay of the existing campus.
• Section elevations showed how the addition cascaded towards Spring St. and the increased spaciousness of the cafeteria, as well as a detail of the Spring St. sidewalk and setback.

b. Building Committee Discussion
• Skylights, exterior windows and indirect north natural daylight was more carefully examined.
• The Dover Amendment might allow the setback non-conformity but it was politically unpredictable—although there was a previous case on the Island. Permitting was at a much later design stage so that if the non-conformity was denied a substantial re-design would be expensive. Last week’s draft showed an
overhang within the setback, which was not critical to the building and was less of a non-conformity.
• Both concepts had an emergency access door that required either interior or exterior stairs to grade, but all other exits came out at grade.
• The music room showed both view and daylight windows.
• There was no stage or emergency services storage—but space might be traded off with smaller changing rooms. This triggered a long conversation on the key component of the gym/stage configuration. Principal John Custer confirmed that that changing rooms were used for stage, sports and other activities. It was determined that they should be able to accommodate about 15 students at a time.
– The proposed changing space could be divided into 3 changing rooms and a storage space. Another possibility was to expand the bathrooms into changing rooms, however as these were also primarily public restrooms for non-school activities, there might be concurrent public and student encroachment.
– The stage was not large enough to allow any significant storage and stage storage was a safety problem. Under-stage storage was possible but not ideal. Costume storage was also needed. Under-stair storage was against code; Mechanical space was already very tight, but hallway space could be repurposed.
– Portable stages were discussed, but there was some feeling that the Town would want a permanent stage/platform. Portable bleachers were a simple solution, that could be used instead of or in addition to stationary bleachers (see below: Actions).
– There was a question on loss of additional mature trees with new design.

c. Public Comment   (throughout the meeting.)
• Ms. Alice Robinson was very impressed with this design. She expressed serious concern over lack of storage space for the stage and suggested possible use of the lobby.
• Mr. Rich Salzberg of the Martha’s Vineyard Times:
– clarified the setback issue;
– asked about Town Meeting capacity (this gym was larger and more accessible than the current space); and
– asked confirmation on historic battlefield—which was determined to be west of this site.

b. Building Committee Discussion
• A more holistic discussion of the design centered on the additional 2,000 sq. ft. and additional cost. Mr. Richard Marks of Daedalus and Mr. Blessen noted some trade-off in terms of less expensive sq. footage but agreed it would have to be repriced and was likely to be ~$5-600,000 more. The design team could work on possible savings to return the estimated price but could not guarantee anything.
– The TSBC was split regarding preference for the previous and current drafts. This one seemed more awkward, too close to the street, and bulkier. Others felt it improved traffic flow, fulfilled more objectives and was a better residential design fit.
– It was agreed that this draft was done to shift the stage opposite the bleachers, but some asked if it was worth the extra $500,000, especially as it did not include a backstage. Taxpayers were already dismayed at the published estimate and a TSBC goal in was to reduce costs.
– Additional excavation could provide flexibility on the previous draft.
– Cutting the shelter space was an important loss for the community.
– A suggestion to pull the addition off Spring St. slightly would compress the “pinch point” between the addition and the existing building. Mr. Blessen felt this would not result in any substantial gains and highlighted his attempt to minimize space, corridors, elevators, stairs, etc. Every change had repercussions on the entire design.
• The TSBC discussed how to proceed and whether take a week to consider before requesting this draft be priced. Mr. Blessen explained this would involve additional delay. It was noted that there was extensive discussion of the gym placement at the last two meetings. Nonetheless, members felt they needed time to consider the two different drafts in terms of a building to last for the next 75-100 years and it was decided to put the decision on the next agenda for limited discussion/decision time.
• ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY MR. ROGERS AND SECONDED BY MR. WATTS THE TISBURY SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE ENDORSED THE PREVIOUS DRAFT: MOTION WITHDRAWN UNDER DURESS.

7. Acknowledgement of Upcoming TSBC Meetings and Sustainability Meeting(s) Schedule

8. Other Topics Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair Within 48 Hours of the Meeting

Adjournment
• ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY MR. ROGERS AND SECONDED BY MS. MILNE THE TISBURY SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING UNANIMOUSLY ADJOURNED AT 9:02PM: 9 AYES, 0 NAYS, 0 ABSTENTIONS: PRIN. CUSTER—AYE, MR. DEBETTENCOURT—AYE, MR. GEARHART—AYE, MS. JEFFERS—AYE, MS. MILNE—AYE, MS. ORR—AYE,
MR. ROGERS—AYE, MR. WATTS—AYE, MR. CHAPDELAINE—AYE.

Appendix A: Meetings/Events:
• TSBC – 5:00PM, Mondays, August 24, 31 , 2020 – Zoom

Appendix B: Actions
Mr. Marks – price out portable bleachers.
Mr. Marks – verify historic battlefield location
Tappé /Mr. Marks – contact tree warden re: mature trees on project site.
Tappé /Mr. Marks/Ms. Opper – send out complete drawing packet;
All – the UPS store prints 11×17 pages.

Appendix C: Documents on File: Available at :
http://www.tisbury.mvyps.org/ click on Tisbury School Project
(Official archive hard copies on file at Tisbury Town Hall & Tisbury School):
• Agenda 8/17/20
• Draft Print 8/17/20 3:27:54PM gym option
– Draft Print 8/17/20 3:28:22PM gym option (4 p.)
– Draft Print 8/17/20 3:28:22PM Ground Floor
– Draft Print 8/17/20 3:28:22PM First Floor
– Draft Print 8/17/20 3:28:22PM Second Floor
– Draft Print 8/17/20 3:28:22PM Third Floor
– Draft Print 8/17/20 3:28:22PM Site Plan
– Draft Print 8/17/20 3:28:23PM Building Section (2)

---