How Can We Help?

Categories

TSBC Meeting Minutes – 3/21/2022

< All Categories

March 21, 2022
Tisbury School Building Committee
Meeting Minutes

2022-03-21_TSBC_MeetingMinutes

Tisbury School Building Committee – Design/Construction Phase
3:30PM, Monday, March 21, 2022
by Zoom Cloud Conference due to Covid-19 Restrictions

TSBC Members Present:

 Chair – Mike Watts, John Custer, Sean DeBettencourt, Rita Jeffers, Reade Milne, Jim Rogers*,
Absent: Connie Alexander, Sarah York,
Others:

 Recorder – Marni Lipke,
CHA Projects – Aditya Modi, Christina Opper, Michael Owen,
Amanda Sawyer,
Tappé Architects – Chris Blessen, Toby Zaltsman,
WT Rich – Harvey Eskenas, Evan Moore,
Town: Climate Com. -Melinda Loberg,
School: Prin. John Custer, Asst. Prin. Melissa Ogden, Sean DeBettencourt, Rita Jeffers,
  * TSBC members late arrivals or early departures.

1. Call To Order & Virtual Meeting Reminders

  • The Tisbury School Building Committee Design/Construction Phase (TSBC) meeting was called to order at 3:35PM. Chair Michael Watts reviewed the protocol for remote meetings occasioned by the pandemic.
    (Recorder’s note: Discussions are summarized and grouped for clarity and brevity.)

2 . Tisbury School Building Committee (TSBC) Attendance – was called.

3. Review and Approval of Minutes

  • ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY PRINCIPAL JOHN CUSTER AND SECONDED BY MR. SEAN DEBETTENCOURT THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 22, 2022 MEETING WERE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED: 5 AYES, 0 NAYS, 0 ABSTENTIONS: PRIN. CUSTER—AYE, MR. DEBETTENCOURT—AYE, MS. READE MILNE—AYE, MR. WATTS —AYE, MS. RITA JEFFERS—AYE.

4. TSBC Chairperson, Vice Chairperson Update

  • Mr. Watts thanked everyone who attended the joint Tisbury School Committee (TSC) Tisbury Select Board (TSB) meeting last week. The presentation was well received and he would convey all notes from other committees, e.g. about bettering the student drop-off.
  • The Town would train Mr. Watts and Vice Chair Rita Jeffers on posting agendas and presentations on the website.
  • Ms. Jeffers would be able to attend the weekly Owners Project Managers (OPM)/Architects/Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) meetings (called OAC meetings) where tasks and ideas were coordinated and discussed.

5. Architect’s Update (See documents on file.)
* During this conversation Mr. Jim Rogers entered the meeting.

  • Mr. Chris Blessen of Tappé Architects reviewed the familiar floor plans now showing more details and system coordination. There were now hundreds of pages of drawings with details on, dimensions, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, etc. The media commons layout was confirmed with School Administrators. Interior materials were still in process.
    • As noted last week it was found the stage ceiling could be less than 2 stories. He confirmed the stage could be accessed from a ramp on one side and stairs on the other. Design Features Tappé requested final decisions on several architectural features.

a. Administration Wing Roof Line (See 1/6/21 TSBC Minutes p.3)

  • Mr. Blessen presented 3 options.
    • A half butterfly roof would grab as much south facing solar surface as possible but involved a complex system of trusts.
    • South half flat (seen from W. Williams St.), north half gabled roof (seen from the ball field0 would support the least solar.
    • A standard flat roof remedied the community comments on the original design, and would produce more solar than the half flat/half gabled option.
  • TSBC comments included:
    • flat roof as highlighting the original building;
    • additional expense due to the complexity of the half butterfly roof;
    • municipal versus residential Island building traditional styles;
    • wasted space in the gabled option;
    • relative solar gain on all three options.
  • Climate Committee member Ms. Melinda Loberg asked about capturing the heat under the solar panels and invited members of the team to attend Climate Committee meetings.
  • ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY MR. ROGERS AND SECONDED BY MS. MILNE THE TISBURY SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE FLAT ROOF DESIGN FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE/PROJECT HEADWAY WING: 6 AYES, 0 NAYS, 0 ABSTENTIONS: PRIN. CUSTER—AYE, MR. DEBETTENCOURT—AYE, MS. JEFFERS—AYE, MR. ROGERS—AYE, MS. MILNE—AYE, MR. WATTS—AYE.

b. Administration Wing Exterior Finishes

e. Gymnasium and Arts Exterior Finishes
The TSBC explored 2 man-made exterior material options. The TSBC considered all the addition exteriors for consistency and the larger view.

    • Modular, lapped fiber cement clapboards were very sturdy and would not rot over time. This was a painted finish and included a calcium citrate masonry base and detailing would protect the finish from ground/weather rot.
    • The more expensive (~$30,000) calcium silicate masonry was long linear narrow bricks in a variety of colors (sand/beige was not popular) that mimicked limestone, with base and detailing in darker separate tones.
    • Tappé suggested a front entry sign of teak – a dense hardy wood used on boat decks.
  • TSBC debated several issues.
    • No material was entirely maintenance free but painting maintenance costs of the cement clapboard would exceed the masonry cost differential every 5-10 years. There was a color infused fiber cement product that would not need painting for ~ 20 years—but presented some procurement regulation difficulties that were explored at some length. It was noted that he current window failures were partially due to lack of sufficient paint upkeep and the Town history of building maintenance was noted.
    • There was a general sense that materials should show a restrained pallet, unifying the additions and ‘hugging’ the existing school. THE TSBC UNANIMOUSLY ENDORSED A CONSISTENT DARK MASONRY BASE AROUND ALL THE ADDITIONS AS WELL AS BEING ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT THE TEAK ENTRIES (see below: #d). – The gym exterior would be a different material based on cost so the Arts wing should blend with it.
    • The non-chemically based masonry was highly compressed for long hours. The fiber cement/phenolic panels had some petroleum basis.
    • Clapboard had a warmer feel and was felt to be more in keeping with Vineyard architecture and with the neighborhood and there was parent feedback on the institutional nature of masonry.
  • ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY MR. ROGERS AND SECONDED BY PRIN. CUSTER THE TISBURY SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING APPROVED TWO TONE CALCIUM CITRATE MASONRY FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE/PROJECT HEADWAY AND UNIFIED ARTS WINGS: 5 AYES, 0 NAYS, 1 ABSTENTION: PRIN. CUSTER—AYE, MR. DEBETTENCOURT—AYE, MS. JEFFERS—(reluctantly) AYE, MR. ROGERS—AYE, MS. MILNE—ABSTAIN (not enough information), MR. WATTS—AYE.

c. Administration Wing Window Features
The choice was between divided or large pane windows. Both choices were one piece double glass, (the dividing mullions as internal aesthetics). The historic look was preferred.

  • ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY MR. ROGERS AND SECONDED BY PRIN. CUSTER THE TISBURY SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED DIVIDED LIGHT ON DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE WING: 6 AYES, 0 NAYS, 0 ABSTENTIONS: PRIN. CUSTER—AYE, MR. DEBETTENCOURT—AYE, MS. JEFFERS—AYE, MR. ROGERS—AYE, MS. MILNE—AYE, MR. WATTS—AYE.
  • It was agreed that the pre-school wing would include ganged windows.

d. Gymnasium Entrance
There were three options for the gym entrance.

    • a dark masonry consistent base and glass panels walls with a flat roof,
    • complete glass panel walls to the ground (with 6” curb for protection) with an arched roof,
    • and complete glass panel walls to the ground (with 6” curb for protection) with a flat roof.
  • TSBC comments were:
    • the current school had endless problems with arched roof entries;
    • they did not like the raised letters and questioned the need to label the entrance but suggested instead a continuation of the teak entry motif; and
    • the entry would have outside doors, a heated vestibule and inside doors.
  • ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY MS. MILNE AND SECONDED BY MR. ROGERS THE TISBURY SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE FLAT ROOF WITH WRAPPED BASE GYMNASIUM ENTRY WITH A TEAK ACCENT: 6 AYES, 0 NAYS, 0 ABSTENTIONS: PRIN. CUSTER—AYE, MR. DEBETTENCOURT—AYE, MS. JEFFERS—AYE, MR. ROGERS—AYE, MS. MILNE—AYE, MR. WATTS—AYE.

9 . Other Topics Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair Within 48 Hours of the Meeting
The current kindergarten classroom had massive window area, which would be increased in the new design. The number of windows limited wall and teaching space, interfered with computer screen visibility and gave the room a fishbowl quality.

  • ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY PRIN. CUSTER AND SECONDED BY MS. MILNE THE TISBURY SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE REMOVAL OF A CURENT WINDOW IN A KINDERGARTEN ROOM: 6 AYES, 0 NAYS, 0 ABSTENTIONS: PRIN. CUSTER—AYE, MR. DEBETTENCOURT—AYE, MS. JEFFERS —AYE, MR. ROGERS—AYE, MS. MILNE—AYE, MR. WATTS—AYE.

6. Owner’s Project Manager (OPM) Update

  • CHA Consultant staff joined Tappé and School Administrators in a School walk-thru to manage, inventory and strategize the move to the temporary school. The current “White House” could be used for a school library and Information Technology (IT).
  • Tappé, CHA and WT Rich were in the middle of reconciling the 60% Construction Document (CD) cost estimates with a target of April 4th and were working diligently for 100% CD completion by the end of April to establish the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) (the gross hard and soft costs of the project) in June.

7. Construction Manager’s Update
WT Rich reported trailers were on the 55 W. Williams site and they were waiting for power and water hookups. A perimeter fence would be installed.

    • They would coordinate with Prin. Custer for more existing building exploratory work.
    • The demolition and abatement solicitation was in process, and they were pushing forward with procurement of fabrication of the temporary school modulars.
  • Modular delivery was expected in late May. The drawings would be delivered to Prin. Custer and the TSBC. Each of the four buildings would have a bank of multi-stall bathrooms.
    • In general all activity in the temporary school should wait for a Certificate of Occupancy although there might be some flexibility for moving in furnishings/supplies, depending on Building Inspector permission.

9. Public Comments – None

11 . Adjournment
Chair Michael Watts thanked everyone for their attendance and attention.

  • ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY MR. ROGERS AND SECONDED BY PRIN. CUSTER THE TISBURY SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING UNANIMOUSLY ADJOURNED AT 5:24PM: 6 AYES, 0 NAYS, 0 ABSTENTIONS: PRIN. CUSTER—AYE, MR. DEBETTENCOURT—AYE, MS. JEFFERS—AYE, MR. ROGERS—AYE, MS. MILNE—AYE, MR. WATTS—AYE.

Appendix A: Meetings/Events:
• Climate Com . – 4:55PM, Monday, March 28, 2022 – TBD
• TSC – 3:30PM, Tuesday, April 5, 2022 – TBD
• STM/ATM – 7:00PM, April 12, 2022 – Tisbury School Gym
• TSBC – 3:30PM, Monday, April 25, 2022
• TSBC – Monday, May 16, 2022
• TSBC -Monday, June 20, 2022

Appendix B: Actions:
• Staff – give feedback on temporary school plans (including bathrooms).
• Mr. Blessen – contact Climate Com re; capturing heat under solar panels.
• Mr. Blessen/Mr. Watts – check with Project Headway re: window treatments/privacy.
• Prin. Custer – TSC agenda: Commissioning Agent, Construction and Testing Services. Appendix B: Actions (cont.):
• Mr. Watts/Ms. Jeffers: send comments from joint meeting, including TSB Chair comment.
• Mr. Watts – Committee protocol
– vote to approve minutes and close CMR Selection Committee.
– complete training in Town website postings.
• April Agenda
– Minutes: TSBC: 11/15/21, 11/22/21, 12/13/21, 1/18/22, 3/16/22, 3/21/22
TSBC/CMR: 11/19/21 Exec. Sess.
• Mr. Modi/Ms. Sawyer – send Marni all background documents.

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 Schoo l)
• Agenda 3/21/22
• Tappé, Tisbury School LED Lighting Fixture Schedule (8 p.)
• Tappé, Tisbury School Energy Recovery Unit Schedule (18 p.)
• Tisbury School, Tisbury, MA, School Building Committee Meeting, March 21, 2022 (15 p.)

Minutes respectfully submitted by Office On Call/Marni Lipke.

 

Table of Contents