• The charge of this committee is to work within the budget, and to affirm to the users and the community that good planning and design does not necessarily mean more cost.  Good design simply involves more thought during the design process.
• To work with FT to establish qualitative design criteria that will influence the planning and schematic design process for each project.
• To encourage FT to communicate their ideas in 3D study model form, real or virtual as much as possible during the design process for both building massing and interior studies.  This would assist the committee, the users, and the community in better understanding the design concepts they are proposing.
• To encourage the creative use of materials and designs that are environmentally friendly and incorporate principles of energy efficiency and sustainability in the day-to-day academic experience.

  ---

Fletcher-Thompson representatives reviewed the distilling of option #3 and #4.  To see drawing of #4, please click HERE.

Without the full, official representation of the Board of Education present, the "design workshop" discussed asking the architects to re-draw plans including relocating School Road next to the property line;  some members voiced the concern that things were progressing too rapidly toward decision about the footprint of the new 3-4-5 school--more alternatives need to be explored, in the opinion of some.  At the same time, the architect's contract was presented to all members of the Building Committee present, and also the responses to the RFP sent to O&G and Turner.  Copies of these responses, without any information about price or fees, is to be available to the public in the Town Administrator's Office.  F-T cautioned about budget constraints.  There may not be space for more than 4 tennis courts in the latest proposed site for that activity on School Road.

To avoid "spinning their wheels" it was proposed by the Chair. of the Building Committee that, in order to facilitate getting projects completed on time and on budget ("About Town's" choice of words) the Board of Education, Parks and Recreation and the School Building Committee meet on January 29, 2002 (Tuesday) at time and place to be posted to go over who gives which orders to the architects--who's in charge.  The meeting was attended by the Town Administrator;  it ended @10:30pm.

DESIGN SUBCOMMITTEE
Tuesday, December 4th, 7:35pm, Town Hall Meeting Room
Present: Richard Wolf, Michael Greenberg, Allen Swerdlowe (not a member of either the Building Committee or the School Building Committee), Frank Lupo (Chair. of Design Subcommittee), David Coprio;  from Fletcher-Thompson, Jim Beaudin, Joe Costa, Jeff, Barry Blades (landscape design).

A number of documents were exchanged (see files in Town Clerk's Office) regarding schedule and scope;  discussion concentrating around how this sub-committee could help get the various design challenges resolved took place.  A motion was made by Michael Greenberg, seconded by Frank Lupo, to recommend to the full School Building Committee at the next meeting that, in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission that all zoning regulations be met, an effort by the Town of Weston to facilitate rearrangement of building location and massing for the new 3-4-5 school go forward (i.e. expand area).

Fast track efforts for any part of this whole project depend to some degree, on the new fields being constructed promptly.  The latest word on the septic/tertiary treatment part of the school-town plan will come at the next School Building Committee meeting (Dec. 5).

A second motion was made and seconded (Lupo, Swerdlowe) regarding asking the Building Committee to review the possibility of a new site for the school bus garage.  There was also discussed the possibility that a major fund-raising effort within the community to build a football stadium and other extras (without losing all the tennis courts?) was underway.  Images of the future campus will be discussed next.  Motion to adjourn at 9:55pm (Greenberg, Swerdlowe).  First draft of mission statement as ported in the Town Clerk's Office (below):

• To purely and simply deal with the issues of architectural design in each of the three projects.
• To affirm that the charge of this committee is to work with FT to stay within the budget, and to affirm to the users and the community that good planning and design does not cost extra. It just takes more thought.
• To encourage FT to communicate with us in 3D study model form, real or virtual as much as possible (as they promised they would), so that lay people in the group can better understand design concepts they are proposing.
• To work with FT to establish qualitative design criteria that will influence the planning and schematic design process for each project.
• To provide FT with constructive critiques of planning and design options, for each project.
• To encourage FT to lend their "A" team design talent to the project.
• To provide FT with examples of architectural projects which exemplify the best creative solutions for how students, faculty and the community use these facilities.
• To provide FT with ideas for the creative use of materials and design, which reinforce the day to day academic experience.
• Insist that FT push their creativity well beyond that of their current portforlio of work.

• Additions and Alterations to High School.
• New 3-4-5 School.
• Middle School Auditorium.

Design issues including placement of roads, pedestrian connections, parking lots and facilities, and playing fields.

---

Neighbors of "Sports Complex" spoke at the end of the meeting, asking that there be no lights for night sports.

Timing is everything--full share of expected State of Connecticut reimbursement (20% for septic, 10% for fields) depends on when or whether projects get OK from "S.F.U." (school facilities/funding unit????) of State Department of Education.

Design Workshop
Review of site plan on School Road reveals that reports of what the Fletcher-Thompson landscape designer-consultant proposes for big multipurpose football etc. field plus impervious track does not entirely jibe with "Weston Fields" group's ideas.  Especially for Booster Barn location and shape.  School Building Committee assumed they will be able to redesign and relocate that feature if the private fundraising group is successful in reaching their $1.4 million goal.  It seems that Morehouse Farm Park is to be for soccer and low intensity development--not for baseball or softball with presumably lighted playingfields.  (This is just my assumption--"About Town" has not attended Parks and Recreation Commission meetings.)

Lots of ballfields on School Road.  Six tennis courts.  Ballfields also at Bisceglie.

Presentation of latest design for 3-4-5 school.  Neighbors from Parade Ground Court present.  Next to be discussed in 2 weeks.  Model of building will be brought for review.

In three weeks, discussion with O&G of costs on preliminary High School renovations and Middle School Auditorium and renovations.  After this, in mid-June, O&G prepares budget on other aspect (couldn't read my own notes!!!)...

With the recent announcement by the Selectmen of contract for purchase of 16 Parade Ground Court, some questions arise--for example, when, on May 6, the Planning and Zoning Commission, on their own initiative, holds a Public Hearing on the 8-24 from the Town of Weston for the purchase of the property, will a precedent be set for incursion into residential areas?  Or do the advances in techology for lighting, muffling noise (by introducing sound deadening devices, such as "berms") of bus and car traffic, etc. made the regulations OK for the purpose of shielding residential neighborhoods from intrusion?

NOTE:  the way "About Town" reads the Zoning Regulations, although the Town of Weston is exempt, there is mention in SPECIAL PERMIT ZONING regs, 341.2 ("Recreational, Social, or Municipal Structures, or Land Uses or Facilities")--subsection 'D' of specific "buffer area" required..."A buffer area shall be required along all lot lines of at least 50 feet in depth and contain evergreen planting of such type, height, spacing and arrangement as will screen the activity on the lot from neighboring areas..." as well as 'C'--"Setbacks and Parking:  Minimum setback of all principal facilities and structures shall be 100 feet from the front line, sidelines, and back lot line.  Minimum setback of land use shall be 50 feet from the frontline, sideline and back lot line.  Minimum parking setback from structures, land uses or facilities shall be 100 feet from the frontline, and 50 feet from the side lines and back lot line."

Still nothing new on the 3-4-5 school (something going on not-ready-for-prime-time, or in the open, as public knowledge?)...some talk, but we know there has not been official action yet selecting a Construction Management firm; quonset hut look for Weston High School additions?  Middle School Auditorium outside wall to be painted green (my idea--just between us, because the public is not allowed to speak--and a good thing, because there is enough "partie" talk already to make a person gag).  "Faux Fenway"--like the "green monster" at Red Sox field in Boston--a famous short left field?  More to come--perhaps under the watchful eye of the Construction Manager--hopefully keeping to the budget Town Meeting approved?

What if the 3-4-5 lower elementary school got built in a flash (if the Town purchased more space for the construction site)?  Would classes at the various other schools be able to shuttle in and out of this "swing space" during the remainder of work at Weston High School, as O,R&L (the previous architect-planners) envisioned?  Tune in for more "partie" non-participation...

Is the building too large to enlarge further (without expensive retrofitting for fire protection)--based upon "Life Safety Code" 64,000 square feet is the limit for a single floor--Weston Middle School already has 160,000!  As a type 1C structure, there must be limits to unprotected non-combustible space...is this applicable to Weston?  "About Town" is aware of a bill that Rep. Paul Tymniak got through the legislature, we thought, that exempted schools from having to meet new codes when building were expanded in the part that was old...but perhaps that does not exempt Weston Middle School's new auditorium because improvements to the older part are directly related to the new project.

For example, is it wise to say "let us just bypass 'Life Safety Code' because we don't want to spend the money to protect users of the new Auditorium?"  Much talk about proximity of pool (and chemical smell) to auditorium and areas of access to the new space.  Also, ever-shorter left field line of "Field Inbetween" looks more and more like Green Monster at Fenway Park!!!  Lots of buzzwords (i.e. "partie" and "cranking" and "reading").

No mention of new lower middle school ("3-4-5") at this meeting.  Why is this project falling by the wayside if we need to construct "swing space" FIRST and pronto?

Weston High School plans set for location of interior spaces--much review of elevations to make building additions either look similar or not to TAC design from 1960's (Le Corbusier "brutal" influence).  Fletcher-Thompson now has their own laser pointer, but they need practice with it--or, perhaps they don't!

Best suggestion of the evening:  a tie between Town Administrator for his comment re: circulation around auditorium and orientation of main space of auditorium, and Chair.--for summarizing at least some of the time--to keep "dueling architects" at bay...

NEXT DESIGN WORKSHOP March 13, details later.

• a conceptual approval for design of the high school renovations (now more "heavy" work than before--won't know the cost impact until later in schematic design phase)
• lower middle school design changed (see below) and conceptual approval on hold (perhaps awaiting changes to the site)
• middle school auditorium scheme with reshuffling science and music rooms to consolidate shown for the first time to this group (has been approved by school staff)

1. the concept shown below (modified from scheme#4) was the right one for a 3-4-5 building;
2. that a plan showing the additions to the High School acting as a "glove" over the cold and inward directed design concept of the original TAC building was OK with Building Committee and others--and as a result,
3. additions to make H.S. light and airy...
4. floor plan divides building into school uses in the rear, school/town uses up front (closing off spaces not open to the public and making access to parking easy for evening events).
5. Architects would come back with comparison of the two options (including modified #4 plus a proposal by a member of the School Building Committee) for access and circulation plus a traffic expert's report on each.