WOODROW WILSON BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES REGULAR MEETING MARCH 30, 2017

Transcription

1 WOODROW WILSON BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES REGULAR MEETING MARCH 30, 2017 Present: Chair Mary Bartolotta, Christopher Drake, Richard Pelletier, John Philips, John Giuliano, Gene Nocera, Christopher Bonsignore, Theodore Raczka, Kirsten Byrd, Sheila Daniels, Philip Pessina, and Staff John Cross Meeting Called to Order The meeting is called to order by Chair Bartolotta at 7:02 p.m. Public Comments Chair opens public comment; seeing no one wishing to address the committee, she closes public comment. Chair Bartolotta states approval of minutes; Ms Daniels did we get them; did anyone get them? She said she would send them. The Chair is checking to see if they are sent. The Chair states she went over them briefly with me. She states we don t have the copy of the minutes; Marie had some personal things to take care of with her husband and I know he had surgery. We will move on to the second Approval of payment of invoice of Minuteman Press for the bids that went out for Architects. Mr. Drake moves to approve in the amount $ The motion is seconded. Vote is unanimous to approve. The Chair asks Ryszard, TSKP to make their presentation. Ryszard, TSKP states at the conclusion of tonight s presentation I am going to ask the committee for direction. As a reminder our agreement is to look at two options. One is build new or two, renovate the existing building. At the last committee meeting we got into some discussion of different scenarios for new in different locations. We tried to show to you using the cardboard cut outs with the boards we brought to show you the options and tonight we got more accurate information on the size of the buildings and accurate locations. To bring you up to speed, this diagram and you have copies of them for your review, this is similar to one of the cardboard cutouts and is more accurate in scale. It tries to demonstrate the limited amount of room on the existing building site. Richard Pelletier enters the meeting. Ryszard, TSKP, states this diagram illustrates roughly 125,000 square feet of building, 3 stories for the classroom area and one story for the larger spaces like cafeteria, gymnasium and that is the size of the building to occupy that area. He is not sure if that is accurate because they don t have all the specs just yet or the target number of students as yet. It could be anywhere from 125,000 to 150,000 square feet which would make it more challenging. We need to create enough buffer area around the building to build such a building and we need to create staging area for contractors. When we first visited the site we had though it would make sense to remove the auditorium. We did hear from faculty that it is a desirable space and has features that need to be kept. That is a real hindrance in construction of a new building. At the last building committee meeting, we talked about options, locating it someplace else and we looked at three scenarios. One is place the building on the ball field; the second, to use the portion of the existing building footprint so you overlap the existing building footprint; and the third scenario was possible closing a portion of Hunting Hill Avenue to give us more wiggle room. The first scenario is building on the ball field, to place it and he shows the location and once finished, demolish the building, leave the pool and replace the ball fields on that site. We investigated it further. We have drawings of the proposed approvals and we have a copy of the drainage study and it is a very extensive study about the hydrology in the area and flooding conditions in Middletown. If we look at this diagram, it illustrates the Hunting Hill Avenue watershed area and it is fairly large area that is collected and brought down through this site and finds its way to Pamechea Pond. There are some issues there. The Pond silts over; there is a dam with a weir and it all belongs to the State of CT and causes backup and causes flooding in neighboring areas. He went last Tuesday, the second day of the storm and you can see the conditions. There is ponding on that field and geese were enjoying it. What Milone and MacBroom did to mitigate is create a fairly extensive storm system to be built

2 MARCH 30, 2017 WWMS BUILDING COMMITTEE PAGE 2 under the playfield area. He orients the committee regarding the site. The ball fields are in green; he shows the football field, tennis courts and basketball courts and parking along Newtown Road. The structures are underground retention areas; they are under the earth to retain water and slow the runoff to slow the flooding downstream. The water course on the site emerges through a pipe and he shows how that works through the site to Pamechea Pond. In severe storms the water comes out and floods this area which he shows. Milone and MacBroom put those structures under the ground and are raising the ball field by two feet and that will shorten the time for them to dry out. There will be storm water around the perimeter. Imagine placing a building here. The playfields are pervious surfaces; the building has a roof, pavement and runoff and that aggravates the storm situation and will you have a tremendous amount of storm water collection and potentially aggravate the flooding conditions downstream. By the time we finished the study, this really is not a viable scenario. We should eliminate it. In addition to making improvements offsite to improve the flooding, 100 percent of the costs will be borne by the City. Chair states the dam needs to be addressed because of the type of building we will be putting up. Ryszard, TSKP correct; it is not just the improvements on the site, but beyond the site to relieve the flooding problems and if there were flooding problems in the future and there would be this building would forever be blamed to continue to aggravate the current condition. So I think it is not a good scenario. This is also the lowest part of the site. Mr. Nocera states this was probably the most problematic piece that had to be resolved by the 21 st Century Parks Committee. The plan was passed through all the various agencies including Inland/Wetlands who looked carefully because of the additional problem with the Farm Hill Road and that section there is no separation of rain water and sewer water. Ryszard, TSKP, moves on to the second scenario and asks does it make sense to create more wiggle room on the site; they looked at the possibility of that. There is a courtyard surrounded by classrooms, but in one of the segments there are two teams of Middle schoolers; the notion is to vacate that place, use the space to build the new construction as well and where do we put them. We could add temporarily portable classrooms and we would need 8 to 10; maybe 10 today, but because of declining population, it might be less. What about Keigwin; can we put students there. I had a good working session with both Cheryl and Silvia and we struggled with this idea. Keigwin houses only the 6 th grade and is a peculiar building. On the Ground floor is all the common spaces; all the classrooms are on the second floor and the configuration is peculiar. Silvia color coded the teams and they struggled to get two teams of 7 th graders on the second floor. He came to the conclusion it was not possible. The only possible way to get two teams is in portables; it is portables at WWMS or Keigwin. Where would we put them is difficult. Keigwin is a nice site with trees, but we would lose trees to put them up. I am not so sure this scenario is effective. Committee Member suggests the current administration offices across the street and the BOE rent space in the office building and that wing is all classrooms. Ryszard, TSKP it is a good idea, but not contiguous to the building, but it is right up the street. Chair states it is safer than portable buildings. The committee discusses that option. Ryszard, TSKP states that is the discussion they should have if this is the correct scenario. There is another flaw and that is bus circulation. When we thought about it, we thought about bus circulation for the duration of the project. In this scenario this is not possible. It is a tight configuration. There is 30 feet between the new construction and the existing building. Getting busses around here is difficult so that is another flaw in this scenario and I can t endorse this scenario either. TSKP (another rep) states the 30 feet is driven by the construction need to get around with scaffolding, etc. You really need 20 to 30 feet around the building to physically build it. Any circulation for students and traffic has to be beyond that buffer. Right now we are showing generic blocks and we are working on what they should look like and we are working backwards by looking at what space is open to us and ending up with a footprint of something that you would not necessarily do if you have a clean site. When everything is taken down, then you would have an odd shaped building. There are other constraints to this option. Ryszard, TSKP, states let us consider this; he shows a drawing to scale and looking at the site and footprint of the building to achieve what we need to achieve. It is 150,000 square feet. But this footprint does take down the auditorium. The auditorium wing is the school administrative area, strings classroom, choral classroom and nurse. What we propose to do is to create 4 classrooms of portables to accommodate the people we are displacing. That would not replace the auditorium. That would somehow have to be accommodated in the existing footprint either in the auxiliary gym, cafeteria or other gym. That needs to be discussed; this strategy does give us one footprint all together at a safe distance from the existing building and allows bus circulation. Once the building is finished, then the other building comes down and you have parking and new bus circulation that needs to be determined. Mr. Drake asks about square footage and the numbers don t jive. The current WWMS is 180,000 square feet so in that building we are housing 700 kids and population projections are saying years out 6-8 will be 800+ kids.

3 MARCH 30, 2017 WWMS BUILDING COMMITTEE PAGE 3 We will have 100+ in a smaller building. What are we doing with the space. Richard doesn t have the answer to that. The existing layout is inefficient. As part of the next step if you give the go ahead is to compare new construction with renovation. We would determine if we can fit 900 kids in the new construction and if so, how would we divide it up. Gene Nocera in terms of the Ed specs you projected, did you include the in school health center. Ryszard, TSKP it is in the Ed specs and it is in the draft they have seen. TSKP Rep states the 150,000 drive comes from the current State Department numbers for students and what will be reimbursable for this grade range. The 125,000 is based on their proposed standards being discussed today. He sent them a note saying Middletown is an example of the enormous hit schools can take. Gene Nocera states the health center is included in the 1.5. TSKP rep states the number is driven by the State standards and the number will be in that range of Once that comes out, we can put the specs together. We are working in parallel. Drake asks on square footage, this is the one you are pushing, but the immediate reaction is what happened to the auditorium. One new construction, we still can get reimbursed for a new auditorium but you are saying that it would take out space from the auditorium; if you build a new one, it has to be in the orange square. TSKP Rep states until the new standards come in auditoriums are part of Middle Schools and the 150,000 sq. ft. or 120 sq. ft. per student, that number included an auditorium and is it hard to get program within that; I would say yes and some school districts go over that and some go below. You will be around that number. Question from a committee member is how many square feet is the pool in the blue block; is that just the pool? TSKP that is the pool and auxiliary gym. The member asks how many square feet is that. TSKP doesn t have the answer. Member states that square footage is part of the 180,000 square feet of the school. The response is yes. Member states then the 150,000 is less the pool which doesn t get used. TSKP states yes; you also have extensive locker rooms not used because it was a former high school. It is a building thrown up over time so the circulation is not good and he is comfortable you will be within that square footage and there is room to grow if needed. You can add to it. I think right now we are comfortable with the numbers. The chair states you are comfortable with this concept; the auditorium has to go because you need space for construction. He shows the auditorium and it would overlap with the new structure. Dr. Charles we would get an auditorium back. TSKP yes; there is enough of a footprint to build it. Chair asks if you can make the auditorium as part of the new footprint. Ryszard, TSKP states yes it is a possibility. There is another way to do it. You do it in phases. You build up to the auditorium and then once you are able to relocate people you finish the project. It saves space for the portables, but you would still lose the auditorium and build a new one. Drake you don t have a place for buses either. Mr. Phillips asks why you can t use the street to drop kids off. TSKP rep states you could ultimately. Mr. Phillips states they did a corridor for the students at one of the schools they redid in West Hartford. Ryszard, TSKP states he knows the project. Dr. Charles if you take the auditorium down are we without it for a year? Ryszard, TSKP states it would be 2 years basically. Chair states during the last conversation we talked about the meeting with parents and the Middle School cafeteria. Is that something you could utilize enough to offset the auditorium to have meetings of that kind. Ms Daniels states it will interfere with concerts, plays or if they bring someone in for a presentation. It would not be the same as they are doing. Dr. Charles states they could use the MHS auditorium and bus the kids over there. Chair states you would have enough rotation open to have that at the high school. Dr. Charles states they already use the MHS auditorium for their Winter concerts. Chair states this is workable. Committee Member asks how frequently is the auxiliary gym used. Could a temporary stage be there for rehearsals; they believe it could work. Ryszard, TSKP states rehearsal space could be in one of the other spaces. Chair if the high school can be used and have the children have the finished feel, that is a good thing. Ryszard, TSKP talks about the last scenario, closing the street. What the diagram illustrated is two potential cul de sacs. The segment we would be proposing, perhaps temporary is between the two cul de sacs so you can circulate during construction and the space could be staging area. At some point you will have 60 vehicles parking for the construction area; you can fence the area and then perhaps once finished, you might reconsider putting the street back. You might want to treat the surface differently; perhaps a walkway that would support emergency vehicles but makes the school feel part of the play field. Chair likes closing the street giving the school a campus feel for safety. Ryszard, TSKP had a discussion with Sergeant Godwin; he s the traffic officer in town and he shared this diagram and he wasn t sure what to make of it just yet. It was new information to him today. It was a good conversation; his concern is people want to travel because Hunting Hill Avenue is a long street and they like to use it to get to Randolph Road; a discussion ensured about traffic on Hunting Hill Avenue. Mr. Nocera states the parks committee is in favor of exploring road closure for the reasons stated. Ms Daniels states it is not closing the road; it is reconfiguring the road. Chair agrees with the wording. She is for it, the campus feel and the security. Ryszard, TSKP states there are a lot of utilities underground. They can stay. He has an as built drawing from them including the water main built in The way he left it with Sgt. Godwin and that he would continue to be part of the conversation; the Chair states she would like to be included in those discussions. Ryszard, TSKP part of the conversation was why not put the new building on the ball fields; we

4 MARCH 30, 2017 WWMS BUILDING COMMITTEE PAGE 4 have drainage problems there. Chair states that is why the exercise needs to be done. Ryszard, TSKP states this process is normal. We put in a lot of ideas and see their reaction. Sometimes we have more time and more background research. This was a quick way to get to the heart of the issue. When members of this committee are approached and they say to you why not put it in the ball field at least you have the information to tell them. Ryszard, TSKP shows slides relative to resurfacing and changing Hunting Hill Avenue. They ask the benefits of doing one thing or another. He is not sure they are at the point where you can give us direction or if you want to deliberate. Once we get direction on this, we can proceed to the new version. Chair goes back to the auditorium and with the suggestion from John from the possible picking up on the Main Road during construction because I can see push back about tearing the auditorium down. What is the thought process here. Do we want a completely new building or do we want to incorporate the auditorium from the discussion tonight. Ms Daniels asks if there is any financial information on this; that is important to know. Mr. Drake states he doesn t know if you can utilize the parking and oasis building area across from the central office. If central office wasn t occupying the current space, it is easier to move adults; could you put in a bus loop and utilize that parking area. Ryszard, TSKP asks which parking area. Mr. Drake some park there and use the walkway to the school. It will be a hassle for two years. Randall states that might be viable for the bus, but the real question is the auditorium and if we are willing to take it down on a temporary basis to free up the site to get the building foot print that is desirable and attractive. As an option we could try where we maintain and use the existing auditorium and connect to the new building; can that be done and what will it look like. We can look at that and it is a unique shape and it will be in a prominent spot as it is now and it is worth pursuing. The principal of the school states her initial thought is we will make due; if that area goes down, then we have to figure out where we need to go. We talked about portables and different spaces and if we can use the high school and Keigwin, then we can make due for two years. My only other thought is the kids going to central office and if we do that, we have to find a way to make it safe because they are crossing the street. We would have to do something with the street. Ms Daniels states she doesn t see it as viable because of its configuration now. Mr. Raczka states it was classrooms divided up. Ms Daniels states she doesn t see it having enough space. Chair states how do we address the questions; she doesn t like portable buildings. They are not safe. Mr. Raczka states that the hospital has employees parking at the Middlesex Mutual Assurance building and then shuttles them so construction workers and faculty could get a shuttle bus system. We could speak with Stop and Shop or Elk s Club and utilize their parking and shuttle bus in the workers. You then have parking taken away and makes it safer for kids to cross the street. Mr. Drake asks how much time do you give them to go from class to the cafeteria? Chair with the concerns raised, an option is going back to the portables; where can you put them for two teams during construction. Ryszard, TSKP, it would be school administration, nurse. Chair if we left the auditorium where would they go. Mr. Nocera states there is one issue that concerns him is the unsightly Vo-Ag building. The brand new building will be there with this run down building; currently it is used for maintenance vehicles and Youth Services which the City could find other sites for both of those. Richard Pelletier has the same question. Mr. Nocera asks if that can be demolished and it gives additional space for parking and possible portable location. Ms. Daniels states Youth Services put a lot of money into that and it would bother me if we get rid of it now. She starts the interior is beautiful. You would need to do something with the outside. We are looking ahead of ourselves; we did it with the parks and we didn t collaborate on them. Chair it is a suggestion. Ms Daniels we put money into it. Mr. Giuliano states the front of the building is Youth Services; we use it. The interior is all renovated and the rest of the building is from the 1950 s including the bathrooms. They are in good shape but they do not reflect youth services and as far as we have for tradesman area, it is not ideal for storage and organizational space or room for equipment. It is worn. The building itself needs a roof and windows and door repointing. The mechanicals are shot, except for Youth Services air and heating. He is not sure if they are a separate entity. Chair asks why it was done. Why sink money into a partial decayed building. Mr. Nocera states it is a place for initial parking. Chair states I understand Sheila s concern; she would like the percentage of the building done. Mr. Nocera states 40% for the interior. Chair asks where the money came from to do that. Mr. Nocera responds grant money and city money. Ms. Daniels states it is our money. Mr. Drake asks what is the plan for the space of the current WWMS. What will we do with the space in back or in front depending on which option. Ryszard, TSKP states a lot of parking and shared with the separate facility with the pool and gym which will also be a Park and Recreation facility. Whatever is not parking will be lawn. Chair states maybe we can talk to park committee to see if there is room for another field. Ryszard, TSKP responds room for tennis and basketball courts. Chair states she would like to see that. Her question is the pool. Is that going to count against the square footage for us. Ryszard, TSKP states they have seen the situation before and what they recommended and the district did is they separated the pool form the school completely, the utilities and they are a separate facility. They turned it over to the town. That convinced the state it is no longer school

5 MARCH 30, 2017 WWMS BUILDING COMMITTEE PAGE 5 property and operations and the square footage did not count. Randall, TSKP, did a similar thing in Guilford which is an outbuilding that was not part of the school and they did say that would be okay but they did count some parking against us. They will say that some of the parking is serving the pool and they will make a judgment that 20 spots and those are not eligible for reimbursement. They had to create a map that became a document for the state. Chair states we have two options; we can ask that the Board of Education to take it over as a separate entity. Or we can ask for partnership with the City and leave a partnership open for school use. John asks if they are saving the pool for the Parks Department, why aren t we saving the large gym, small gym, weight room and cafeteria that could be used as community spaces. The Parks department uses the Board facilities a lot and it gives another place for unified sports. Ryszard, TSKP shows the area in question. Chair that would count against us if we keep it. Ms Daniels not if we give it to the City. Dr. Charles states her question would be would there be enough parking. Randall is suggesting the auxiliary gym stay as part of the complex. Mr. Drake asks where the staff parks now. Ms. Daniels responds wherever they can. John asks why would we throw away the entire facility where the gym floor is 5-8 years old and there have been improvements. Yes it needs a new roof and mechanicals, but you will have to do that anyway. It could be a community facility or a boys and girls club. Chair states we would have to make sure there is funding to do that. Chair states we would need a cost estimate to save those buildings, to do the repairs and can it be part of the project. The response is all those costs would not be eligible with the State. Chair we need to present the cost to the city to present this to the Rec department and here is the cost to do that. John responds it is worth looking at before we decide. Chair asks if TSKP can look into it. Randall they can look at the cost to save the pool and auxiliary gym and or the gym. We can look at parking to see what is available for parking to ensure there is enough for both facilities. Ms. Daniels are you looking at taking from the City side or is that two separate things. What is the City willing to do. Chair they would do the cost analysis to present to the City and say are you interested in the costs to hold on to the facilities separate from the building project of the school. If they decide it is feasible and are willing to do that financially feasible to do then great then we do that and move forward. Question is asked if it includes on-going costs. Chair states it would include that. Mr. Loffredo asks as the community; to my knowledge that is the only public owned pool on this side of Middletown. The question he has currently the middle school doesn t use the pool but I understand Gene and Joe, the Seniors do. There is a significant demographic of votes when you look at funding for the school; if you end up taking it away you better be careful thinking about that. Chair we are not taking it away. Mr. Loffredo is talking about the community. It is important that this decision and all you are proposing and this is used frequently. Chair states with John s recommendation we are asking that they look at that. Mr. Loffredo is a facility that is used by the community. John states the natatorium is in really good shape; it is dated but in his opinion it is good and it is not hard to maintain. I don t know all the drainage, but it is clean and bright. It needs some new tile work and some updates in the locker rooms but the mechanicals are in good shape; it has a new filter and chlorinator. Chair states there is no question on the pool; it is the additional gyms and what it means to parking and costs for the city and if that is something they want to take on. That is a side question. We are asking them to take the responsibility, but if we can put it forth with the cost and touchups is it something the City wants to do. It is a separate question to what we are looking to do. Mr. Drake wants to talk about the orange thing. He asks if the orange rectangle is that still a three story building. Ryszard, TSKP, yes; the classroom space is. Mr. Drake asks Silvia if they talked about a 3 story building. Chair states from our discussion is that it was good to tell the parents that the 6 th would still be their own sixth grade and that has some buy-in. They will not cross hallways with the 7 th graders. It was a positive negative. Mr. Drake asks if that is true. He states we kind of messed up the launch of this and if you go back through the minutes of the Council it has vacillated between the WWMS/Keigwin and WWMS building committee and in reality it is a new middle school combining two middle schools; at the end of the process it is important to you. Chair states she would like to give direction to TSKP to look at this concept here and also the possibility to look at the auditorium to make sure we are covering all ground. That would be my suggestion. Mr. Pelletier states a multistory building, getting from place to place was the biggest difficulty he had in school and if I have a class it can t be too far away because I get in an elevator instead of walking 18 hallways. He is in favor of multistory because it is easier. Kris states this diagram here does not include an auditorium. Chair it does. We are asking about keeping the old one because the auditorium cost for all new will not be covered. Ryszard, TSKP states there is a risk that it won t; it is part of the new guidelines and it says it is not and they are getting a lot of kickback that the guidelines are not realistic for the cuts to middle schools and there is a lot of pushback. Mr. Drake states DAS told them to get the application in by June 30 because you would be under the old guidelines. Ryszard, TSKP, states he doesn t see that in writing; the new guidelines go into effective July 1, but every time we talk to staff they are saying come in and talk. They are taking the opportunity to tell us. Ryszard, TSKP states one of the questions he heard from staff is what is the rush and spend time to study this and you

6 MARCH 30, 2017 WWMS BUILDING COMMITTEE PAGE 6 might lose funding. Committee member states her concern is that we have enough space to accommodate what we have. Mr. Drake there is a second question; this design you lose an auditorium for two years so it is not just a cost. Chair states John made a recommendation about the pick-up in the front and possibly not having to do that. Mr. Phillips states you have an opportunity to have an auditorium between the June and September timeframe; you can build the auditorium within 12 months; I don t agree to two years. If you get into demolishing the auditorium after school is out, you can have it cleared in two weeks. He states they took down Charter Oak in 6 weeks with abatement so we could take down the auditorium. Randall states in his experience it will take a while. Ms Daniels would it behoove us to send a letter and get confirmation. You are still not saying that is the case. Can you get it in writing. Chair states they will not put anything in writing until we put our case in front of them. We have to be serious and have a true concept. That was very clear and they were willing to be partners to guide us and they gave us a direct route to take. Chair asks who is in favor of tearing the auditorium down. Raise your hands. She takes the count. It was unanimous. Ms. Daniels states you need the financials to drive that. The Chair asked TSKP to do the financial exercise. Ryszard, TSKP, states I did not hear a motion on the action, but my sense is that this is the direction you want to take. Mr. Nocera agrees with this. Mr. Raczka asks if they need a vote; the Chair states yes. Mr. Nocera states the Parks committee is for reconfiguration and to allow emergency vehicles to use that. Chair asks for a vote to... Ryszard, TSKP, states you will vote on authorizing us to proceed with this scenario of reconfiguring the road plus saving a portion of the building for the Rec department plus looking at parking lot implications plus looking at incorporating the existing auditorium. Chair with the differential in cost. Mr. Raczka makes that motion; Mr. Nocera seconds. Mr. Drake states I don t understand; we did have an informal vote on demo the auditorium and now you are giving us a cost estimate on demoing it and not. Ryszard, TSKP states I heard question from the Chair to provide that. Mr. Drake I am okay getting both. Chair states we will need it and to Sheila s point it will be part of the buy-in with the parents to see if it is cost effective. Chair asks further discussion. Hearing none, the vote is called and it is unanimous to have TSKP move forward in the direction noted above. Ryszard, TSKP asks for scheduling. Mr. Nocera and Mr. Pessina have to leave; Chair asks to get this on the next month s agenda. I spoke to the Director of Public Works if we could put this on this agenda. TSKP gives a copy of the updated schedule and the from Holly. He looked at it and realized that we don t have the parent meetings. They have been established but have not been incorporated into this schedule. Chair asks that they be put in and them. Ryszard, TSKP, states what is new here is he is suggesting another building committee on the 13 th of April; you only meet once a month and you should meet two weeks from now for a progress report. Chair states we just cancelled meetings on that date and participation would not be large. She states we can do the 12 th ; Member states there is a parks meeting that date. Chair asks about the 12 th. They ask 7 pm? Chair asks she has questions about 6 pm. Ms. Daniels is no. Committee keeps it at 7 pm. Chair we can call special meetings for 6 pm. Dr. Charles asks what time the other meeting starts; Chair at 5:45 p.m. Chair states we will do the 12 th. Ryszard, TSKP will make that adjustment as well. Ryszard, TSKP has two possible meeting dates for City Council workshop. Chair states the 25 th or the 30 th. Chair states it is the 25 th that is better at the responses Marie has received from the Council members. Ryszard, TSKP they will change to the 25. Chair thought the 25 would be okay because the BOE is voting on the 23 rd. Dr. Charles has it listed on the 25 th ; Ms Daniels states why Thursday. The BOE meeting is the 23 rd and the Council the 25 th of May. Randall, TSKP, states once the presentation with the Board, we can meet with the Council the same night. Ryszard, TSKP hopes at that Board meeting you will approve the option that the committee approves. The Council workshop will be a full blown presentation to bring the Council up to speed. We hope the Council can approve the option on the June regular meeting, June 5 th. Chair gives us some wiggle room. Everyone is good with the schedule. Cost estimates will be available for these meetings. Chair asks that the changes be incorporated and sent to Marie. Chair asks for other questions or discussion on scheduling. Dr. Charles talked with the shared use of the auditorium at the high school and we may have to condense concerts but she thinks it would be possible. Ms Daniels asks if the auditorium would be smaller or within that space shown, which is better for us, putting it outside or within the space. Ryszard, TSKP will figure out the configuration. Typically they would plan the auditorium based on population. He doesn t know the seating of the current one and he can t compare it. John states seating is about 450.

7 MARCH 30, 2017 WWMS BUILDING COMMITTEE PAGE 7 Mr. Drake moves to approve the amendments to the time line as discussed. Ms. Daniels second. The vote is called and it is unanimous. The chair declares the motion approved. Meeting Adjourns Mr. Drake moves to adjourn, seconded by Ms. Daniels. The vote is called and it is unanimous. The chair adjourns the meeting at 8:37 p.m.