August 15, 2011 TO: FROM: Montgomery County Public Schools Dennis Cross, AIA, Project Manager Samaha Associates, PC PROJECT: Bethesda - Chevy Chase Middle School #2 RE: Feasibility Study Meeting #5 August 10, 2011 PRESENT: Mr. Dennis Cross, AIA MCPS DOC Ms. Deborah Szyfer MCPS Div. of Long-range Planning Dr. Jim Pekar Mr. Paul Beck RCH Ms. Sarah Beck RCH Mr. John Holbrooke RCHCA Ms. Cathy Fink RCH Ms. Diana Holmes Westland MS Ms. Sarah Gantz The Gazette Mr. John Saber Neighborhood Mr. Ben Costa Westland MS Ms. Stacey Kopnitsky Westland MS Mr. Tom Sisti RCHCA/neighbor Ms. Maren Laughlin Neighborhood Mr. Michael Shpur MCPS Mr. Damian Garde Patch Mr. John Thompson TOK Ms. Emily Mazzella Ms. Meredith Valmon RCF ES Ms. Jessica Hughes Rosemary Hills Mr. Ron Mancan Mr. Paul Falkenbury Samaha Associates Ms. Amy McCarty Samaha Associates The meeting took place in the choral room of Bethesda Chevy Chase High School. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the Feasibility Study. The location for the proposed new school is 3701 Saul Road, Kensington, Maryland. The purpose of the feasibility study is to develop options, constructability, phasing, cost, and a construction schedule for the proposed new school. The following was discussed:
Paul Falkenbury presented revisions to options 4, 5, and 6 based on the comments received at the last feasibility study meeting: FS5-1 FS5-2 The initial capacity of the school has been reduced from 944 to 836 students, but the core capacity will remain at 1,200 students. In an effort to reduce the footprint of the revised options the height of the building has been increased in all options. In addition, the reduced building footprint reduces the amount of pervious surface that will help with the storm water management on the site. FS5-3 Option 4 The building is a three and four story building, with a three story classroom block. The classroom block will house one grade level per floor (sixth, seventh, and eighth). The bus loading, which accommodates 20 buses, is at the second level of the building with two levels above and one level below where the main entry and staff parking/parent drop off is located. The parking lot has 105 parking spaces. There is a three story future addition to the east of the building. There are 2 basketball and 4 tennis courts, with a track overlaid on the tennis courts. The future relocatable classrooms would be located adjacent to the tennis courts above the bus loop. The retaining walls are shown in red. There is an 8 retaining wall between the tennis courts and fields. There is a staggered retaining wall at the parent drop off that would be approx. two 5 retaining walls. Site sections of the option were shown in two directions North-South and East-West (the sections are cut in the same location for all three options). The ghosted yellow area on the 3-D views is the future addition. The following items were raised concerning Option 4: FS5-4 FS5-5 FS5-6 The basketball courts could be moved to the north of the bus loop adjacent to the tennis courts to allow more green space and provide more of a buffer between the building and the street. The proposed grade of the bus loading area is approximately three feet lower than the existing parking lot grade. There was a concern raised with the school having four stories with only one elevator planned. It was mentioned that if there is only one elevator and it fails there is not back up for handicapped people to get out of the building. In addition, because all teachers do not have their own classrooms, the teachers use carts to move from class to class and need to access the elevators daily. MCPS will evaluate how many elevators will be required. FS5-7 Option 5 The building is a four story building arranged around a courtyard. There is an entry off of the upper level from the bus loading area, and the staff parking and parent drop off area are two levels down, which is the main entry into the school. The administration suite is on the lowest level at the main entry. The three grade levels are arranged around the courtyard with the activity spaces on the lowest level. The relocatable classrooms, track and long jump are located above the buses. There is a 10 retaining wall at the tennis courts, to be used as a bank wall, and a 4 retaining wall at the bus loop. The classrooms are all south facing, or south facing the courtyard. In the site survey process it was discovered that there is a WSSC water main that runs below the proposed staff 2
parking area. The water main would need to be relocated adding additional costs to this option. The following items were raised concerning Option 5: FS5-8 The main entry was left at the corner of the site, so it is visible when you enter the site. It is preferable to have the main entry in a location where it is easily identifiable as the main entry so visitors to the school know where to go in. The proposed main entry does not reduce the cueing line as there is also a secondary entry around the west side of the building that can be used in the morning and afternoons for drop off and pick up. FS5-9 Option 6 The building is a three story courtyard scheme. The main entrance is at the corner of the building, visible from the site entry. The main entry is a split level entry with the lower entry off of the parent drop off and the upper entry off of the bus area. Both the buses (20) and cars (90) are at the south side of the building. The gyms and locker rooms are on the upper level and have an entry out at the level of the fields on the north side of the site. There is a 10 retaining wall at the tennis courts, a 5 retaining wall between the tennis and basketball courts, and two 4 staggered retaining walls along the staff parking. The portables would be located north of the tennis courts. FS5-10 It is common for structures to be built on top of water mains. There are MCPS properties that have water mains below structures. The following items were raised concerning Option 6: FS5-11 The sprint track in middle schools is typically asphalt. The following items were raised concerning the proposed options: FS5-12 FS5-13 FS5-14 FS5-15 FS5-16 FS5-17 The bus routes for the school have not been determined at this time. The question was asked if buses currently are allowed on Beach Drive. MCPS will follow up with MCPS transportation manager. Getting an easement to connect to the retirement community parking lot is not desirable due to the large number of emergency vehicles that access the property. It was asked how the community feels about a four story building versus a three story building. A community member expressed a favorable view of a four story building because even though the building is taller there is more open space and more of an opportunity to plant trees to shield the building from the street. The fields are currently shown at a grade level approximately four feet below the existing grade to balance the site, and not require dirt to be brought on to the site or removed from the site. The traffic study concluded that the existing streets can handle the added traffic on the roads if the school is built. 3
FS5-18 FS5-19 FS5-20 None of the options have the 125 recommended parking spaces, however it has not determined at this time where the additional cars would park. For all options the administration suite is located at the main entry. After school starts all doors to the school are locked except the main entry. To enter the school during school hour s visitors must go through the main office before entering the school. The school sign would most likely go along Saul Road. Electronic signs are not a standard for MCPS. The following is a list of pros and cons for each options presented: FS5-21 All Options Bus entry located at triangle intersection at Saul and Haverhill, so the bus entry is not located directly in front of anyone s house. Grade levels are organized by floor, one grade per floor (sixth, seventh, and eighth). Not enough staff/visitors parking. Safety of walkers and how they enter the site with the flow of traffic. No sidewalks on the streets. Administration on the lowest level. FS5-22 Option 4 More green space between building and street. The most staff/visitor parking spaces. Portables are located north of the bus area, where students have to cross or go around the bus loop to get to the portables. Entry on the second floor has not administration. No courtyard. FS5-23 Option 5 Courtyard provides donut circulation. There is a WSSC water main that runs through the staff parking area that would need to be relocated. Relocatable classrooms are located north of the bus area, where students have to cross or go around the bus loop to get to the portables. Entry on the second floor has not administration. Main entry at the beginning of the parent drop off area. Lockers on level below the fields. 4
Tennis and basketball courts not adjacent to the fields. FS5-24 Option6 All students enter into the building at one location. Courtyard provides donut circulation. School is only three stories. Portables are close to the building. Parking is further away from the fields for weekend use. Sharp turns and steep grades for the buses leaving the bus area. Bus loop runs parallel to Saul Road, not much buffers space. Building has the largest footprint. The following items were raised concerning the feasibility study: FS5-25 FS5-26 FS5-27 FS5-28 FS5-29 FS5-30 FS5-31 FS5-32 FS5-33 At meeting four, a request was made for a working website to be created so community members could post a list of pros and cons for each option on the website. MCPS does not have such a website but MCPS staff will continue to explore the possibility with their IT department to try and set something up, and it may be a possibility down the road. At the last meeting it was asked if the courtyard could be an edible garden. It was stated that MCPS does not allow edible gardens however this policy has changed and edible gardens are allowed at the schools. The NRI/FSD survey covers 100 feet beyond the property line to get a comprehensive survey that captures the property and surroundings. The project has been filed with the Maryland Historic Trust for research. A letter will be provided to us with the finding of their report. There will be a lot of grading on site for all options, however that does not mean all existing trees will need to be removed. There may be possibilities to add additional retaining walls in order to save more trees. A concern was raised on the significance of the sawtooth oak trees on site. The landscape architect for the project said that sawtooth oaks are actually becoming a problem invasive species in some areas. Appropriate tree protection and environmental planning will be handled for this project. The weight of the construction trucks will comply with any weight restrictions on the existing bridge over the stream on Saul Road. Emergency vehicles will have the right of way and the construction traffic will have to yield to the emergency vehicles as in other types of projects such as hospitals. The feasibility process will continue to move forward and the meeting minutes will include items applicable for the architecture team to develop the options. Any comments to the minutes should be directed to Dennis Cross and will be reviewed by MCPS to determine if they should be added to the minutes. 5
FS5-34 After the community meeting on Sept. 8 th the final feasibility study report will be prepared and presented to the superintendant and the Board of Education. The superintendent will determine whether the project is feasible and decide whether or not to recommend the project for funding. A recommendation for funding would be included in the Superintendent s Recommended FY 2013 2018 Capital Improvements Program (CIP), scheduled to be released on October 28, 2011. The Board of Education will hold public hearings on the CIP on November 10 and 14, 2011. The public will have an opportunity to testify to the Board of Education at the public hearings. FS5-35 A preferred option for the project will be selected by the committee and will be included in the feasibility study presented to the superintendant. These are the minutes as recorded. Any omissions or corrections should be brought to the immediate attention of Dennis Cross. Thank you. Sincerely, Samaha Associates, PC Paul H. Falkenbury, AIA, REFP Principal 6
7