SMMA is in the process of working on the site analysis now, and while some possibilities have been identified as potential sites, NO option has been prioritized. In fact, the Building Committee has not yet had any formal discussions to date regarding the specific site location.
Going forward, it is very important that we hear your thoughts on where the building should be sited. No one knows the land and the neighborhood better than those who live nearby, so your input is critical. We are holding a meeting for neighbors and abutters this Saturday, November 14th, at 9:00 am at the Bancroft cafetorium, at which time we will walk the site and gather your feedback on what does and doesn't make sense. The architects from SMMA will also be there to listen, to give an update on where we are in the process, and to answer any questions you may have. Please feel free to come! Back when the High Plain/Wood Hill Schools were built, neighbors were able to identify reasons why the originally-planned entrance was problematic, and as a result it was moved--so again, we can't emphasize enough that we need to hear your input on the site.
There are certain to be pros and cons to any site option we consider. As these are formally identified through the Feasibility Study process and through information we collect from neighbors, I will post them here.
Posts
I appreciate the clarification that the decision on enrollment and site placement are two separate processes which will be made by separate committees, however it seems they are intimately related and must, in part, be considered together. Any school with significant increases in student population will have notable impacts on the neighborhood, indepedent of ultimate site choosen.
ReplyDeleteAll access to the Bancroft School site is from residential side roads - this is unqiuely distinct from other elementary schools in Andover. Significant increases in the student population will without a doubt, increase traffic patterns in the neighborhood - this is an area without side walks, with mostly winding roads, where cars already tend to speed.
There is no readily apparent main road option to readily absorb increases in traffic which would be related to increased in student body. So, again, although these are separate issues, there are representatives which are on both committees, and these issues must in part, be considered together. It would be great to understand that potential impacts on the neighborhood are being considered in the context of both the composition of the student body and site placement.
In the minutes posted of SMMA's presentation to the Board on October 19, SMMA expressly notes the link between population size and traffic impacts. SMMA states that "Larger Schools = More Traffic Management (concern for local roads and queing)." More broadly speaking, the larger the population, the more environmental impacts the new school will have on the surrounding habitat and community. Notably, the Bancroft School parcel is among the smallest existing school sites, it is serviced by narrow residential streets, and it is surrounded by residential properties. These are not merely siting issues to be considered by the School Building Committee. They are issues that militate against expansion of the school population from 475 to 700. Failure to consider these issues may pose problems for the School Committee later, when it presents its analysis of feasible alternatives to the MSBA and, potentially, to the Secretary of Environmental Affairs.
ReplyDeleteHas there been any analysis and review of who chooses to go to Shawsheen and why as part of this review process? Moreover, is there an understanding of how, if at all, siting this K-3 program on the Bancroft site would impact Shawsheen enrollment? Specifically it seems as though the majority of Shawsheen students travel on to West. Perhaps there are investments to be made at West to make it a more more attractive option to those families. Additionally it is important to understand whether in the minds of those families, the merits of the Shawsheen program would be outweighed by a much longer bus ride for those students if it were sited with Bancroft. It would be a shame to go through the upset in planning and the additional construction expense to integrate these two populations without these two key questions thought through.
ReplyDeleteAre there any plans to post minutes or feedback received during the meeting of 11/14? I was not able to attend but would very much like to hear the input that was received.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, I was unable to attend Saturday's abutter mtg. Will you be posting minutes? From the several emails I was forwarded recently, I am troubled that the "nimby" effect is causing misinformation to be distributed. Far as I now there hasn't been any conclusions to site location and population. Regarding site location - one great advantage to being in the fields behind the schools is the minimal disruption it will cause to the children. They can utilize the current play areas for outdoor recess. Children need a space to round around and release their boundless energy. In terms of road location, maybe access thru Holt rd. can be temporary during construction and then moved back to Bancroft road once the project is complete. Just thoughts - I think we need to keep thinking of the childrens best interest and minimize their impact during the 2 - year construction period.
ReplyDeleteToday I posted a recap of the feedback from the November 14th Abutters' Meeting on the front page of this blog. Also, the SMMA presentation made at that meeting can be accessed by clicking on "SMMA Presentations" under the "Useful Links" section of this blog.
ReplyDeleteInformation shared by the community, neighbors, parents, and liaisons are valid opinions and concerns based on observations and comments of those involved in the process. I find the different perspectives very helpful in seeing the overall picture. Thus far, the School Building Committee has recognized all issues and concerns raised.
ReplyDeleteMy concern relates to short term goals of minimizing the disruption to the children and existing building during construction. While this concern should not be lost, it would also be irresponsible to ignore any long term and permanent implications of this project. Any effects that impact infrastructural challenges, environmental loss, and safety concerns are serious issues that could endanger this entire effort. These are important considerations when planning a sustainable project that needs to uphold State regulations and town jurisdictions within a tight budget. Addressing short term goals creatively (e.g., use the fields for the children to play in) is important without losing sight of these longer term issues.
I agree with the anonymous poster above that is concerned about misinformation being distributed.
ReplyDeleteI think that the access point from Holt Rd. in particular needs to be clarified, because there has been significant anxiety expressed about it in recent meetings. The issue of a new access road from Holt was raised by a group of neighbors--not by SMMA (the design firm). While all potential access points to the new school will need to be explored as part of the feasibility study, to date, no one has said that there will be permanent access from Holt Rd. (or that it would require traffic signals). This is simply a potential issue being raised by concerned neighbors.
One of the things that has been so great about this process is that the School Building Committee and the School Committee have really gone out of their way to ask the community to share input and concerns like the one above. In the end, open discussions and collaboration will result in a better outcome for everyone involved.
At the Shawsheen PTO and Bancroft PTO building committee meetings on November 4 and November 5, both the project managers and SMMA (the design firm) described the possibility of introducing a new access road leading to the field site option. No final result has been decided to date, however, the neighbors are simply raising concerns with this ongoing possibility. The community did not introduce the idea - they simply verified that it is, in fact, an option being considered.
ReplyDeleteWhile I understand the School Building Committee has not yet deliberated on the cost/benefit of introducing a new road or any option, the new access road has been presented as a possible option amongst others by SMMA. If any option that has been presented to date is no longer an option, it would be good to have that communicated to the public by the School Building Committee. Otherwise, we need to assume that all options are still being discussed and considered.