Mountview School Building Committee
Community Meeting Minutes
November 27, 2012
7PM Mountview School
Present: Chairman Paul Challenger, David White, Gary Kaczmarek, Margaret Watson,
Erik Githmark, Chris Lucchesi, Anthony Gasbarro
Absent: Jacquie Kelly, Mike Sherman, Tom Pandiscio, Nancy Galkowski
Others Present: Bill Senecal, LPA, Elizabeth Helder, Recording Secretary
Others Absent: Mike Pagano, LPA
1. School Presentation
Paul Challenger presented an overview of the new school building plan in 3D. The proposed design plan, approved by the Massachusetts School Building Authority, is to build a new middle school directly behind the old school. The old school will continue to be used during the construction process in order to eliminate the need for temporary housing/modulars.
Several residents inquired why the building was not being renovated since it appears to be in good condition. Mr. Challenger explained that rehabilitation of the building would be very costly; the entire building does not meet code and due to the density of its construction would make it difficult to renovate. The Committee chose to build new on the existing site because it was the best value for the Town and the best educational choice for the students. One abutter asked why the Committee did not consider just building a third building on site. Mr. Senecal with LPA said that option would not have satisfied the State and would not have been eligible for any reimbursement.
Committee member Chris Lucchesi commented that the community meeting was being held to reach out to the neighbors and the abutters. It is important to hear the comments and concerns from the neighborhood. The current space requirements in the old school do not meeting the educational requirements set by the State. Aside from the facts that the entire building does not meet safety code and is mechanically broken, there are approximately 164 more students enrolled in the school than the building is programmed to educate. The Committee weighed the value of the education of the students. The new building will not educate the children differently but rather provide a space where they can be educated in a proper learning environment.
Committee member Dave White said that the option of renovating the building proved to be too costly; renovating the building would have built a building 12% larger than building new. That meant 12% more school to heat and maintain. Building new will mean a 12% operating/energy cost savings over a 50-year period. Renovating the building was going to be a longer construction process and would only save the project about 2M. Natural gas will be brought to the building to make it more efficient and solar panels will be installed on the roof to help generate energy for the building.
The meeting ended at 8PM.
| 
