UPDATE to add the T&G coverage is here
Concise review of the presentation from last week, assuming that most have seen or heard it
tonight "marks the beginning" of the preferred schematic design process
Options again were:
- nothing
- update the current building
- build here
- build at Chandler Mag
- build at Foley Stadium
"was determined" is how the building size is presented
meeting all wishes would required "26 flat acres, which is extremely difficult to find here in the city"
multi-phase process is what would be required for renovation
"looked at numerous new construction options"
Beginning (on site) of a three phase process: new building on existing fields
summer of 2021 for start of construction: pave around entire school
hope is to get 200+ spaces on the site so school can continue to function
barrier to separate existing school from construction; ring road for access to building as well
South "going along seamlessly" and this would be like that
then moving parking; 2024 for school occupancy
then redoing fields; 2025 for fields
Foley: built on fill in a dense neighborhood
Beaver Brook a heavily used park
option of purchase of sideland to get secondary access of Pleasant Street
building would be amassed toward front
"a nice compact plan" but the drawback is losing the stadium
heavily used by both district and public
"to relocate the fields would be a substantial cost" (he doesn't say it but the plan says $35M-$50M)
Beaver Brook essentially is built and intended to flood during storms
Chandler Mag was built as a middle school, now has 500 elementary students
relatively flat site
does require taking land from Worcester State foundation next to the President's House and side and back land from houses on May Street
"nice compact and good program for the school"
"after investigation, they found there is no facility that can be found" within the system to support the programs there
Doherty rose to be the highest ranked option due to impacts and neighborhoods
steering committee have concurred that this is the preferred solution for the building
looked beyond site to other city-owned properties "value added" that "would improve the long-term picture for the program"
-Duffy Field right around the corner, presently has a softball field
would be looking to add a flat field of turf
Duffy also floods every time it rains
about a $4.5M to fill and do turf
-parcels to the east of the stadium so Doherty could come in from the other side
that would be about $1.5M including land purchase
-updating Foley making synthetic fields for field hockey and softball field
between $5-7M including new drainage
-Beaver Brook drainage and fields
Don't have a solution for how much Chandler "solution" would be for 500 students in full cost to district
Petty: Duffy Field and backland in Foley
"we're committed to funding those fields: that will be done"
Bergman: to the athletic director David Shea; what would it do?
Shea: "where are we putting all the teams and over 1000 students" if we did the project there?
not opposed if that is cared for
"not hearing anything like that, my job...is to take into account my student athletes and all of the coaches"
"I know that the vote is coming from Doherty...but other schools have commented to me, 'We use Foley, too'"
"there's just not enough places to go in the city to maintain these" programs
colleges? "maintain their programs first"
"if there were a $50-60M upgrade" for all of our sports, that would be one thing; "but we're not"
"we're talking about a decision for Doherty that will obviously impact all of the other Worcester Public Schools"
Brendan Melican (on the building committee): being asked to pick one of not-so-ideal sites
asks about St. Peter Marian site "should it become available"
A: talks about diocese taking months to decide which site they'll be using
"very tied to the Mass School Building's schedule; we'd sacrifice that schedule"
Melican: "we're building a fifty year project when we build a new school"
"ultimately, the decision is ours"
Q: commitment to turf and light back fields of Foley and Duffy and what is the timetable?
A: not the same project; has to be done as city projects
"would have had to talk about this much much earlier as part of the MSBA project"
mayor and manager committed; "trust we'll find a funding source"
Tom Zidelis: actual loan authorization for this project can only contain work within the four corners of this project
can it be done simultaneously? Yes
Q: doesn't this need to happen now?
Augustus: would need to identify $14-15M that we weren't planning on
planning on January
contiguous with the state budget and FY21 budget planning and outside of the additional increase needed for operating budgets for FY21
traffic for students who walk and drive during construction (note that this question comes from a student, Sohol Hoxha)
A: good point
note that 50% of students walk here
"will be an important part of how we refine schematic design"
Q: what about impacts?
Chandler Mag has a school already
Doherty is already here
"they all have a big potential"
"not just about the building; it's about the program"
Q: can something be done about Chandler Mag fields?
A: not at this time
Chandler Mag student "I want my school to stay"
and that will be the last comment of the evening, as the committee goes to vote
vote is to build on current site
Brendan Melican abstains
Rick Miller (Friends of Newton Hill) votes no
all other votes in favor
motion carries
No comments:
Post a Comment