NOTES OF OCTOBER 10, 2013 RYE TOWN HALL COMMITTEE MEETING
Final Revision B – Provided by the Rye Civic League
Present (counterclockwise around table): Peter Kasnet, Victor Azzi, Paul Goldman, Mark Luz, Priscilla Jenness, Craig Musselman, Lucy Neiman, Beth Yeaton, Paula Merritt, Peter White
Also present: Cyndi Gillespie, Dyana Ledger
Present from SMP Associates: Eric Palson, Jason LaCombe
Initial matters (0:00 elapsed)
The meeting was called to order at 6:32 p.m. Chairman Azzi opened the meeting by noting that a letter had gone out to the chairmen of a number of committees. After some members noted that they had not seen a copy of the letter, Beth Yeaton indicated that she had not sent copies to the members. Mr. Azzi then read the letter and indicated that Danna Truslow had responded that several members of the Energy Committee would be attending on October 22 and Mae Bradshaw, Chairman of the Heritage Commission had indicated that the Heritage Commission members would be attending on November 7 in addition to attending their own meeting earlier that evening.
(7:41 elapsed)
The minutes of the September 26, 2013 meeting were unanimously approved with minor corrections.
SMP presentation (11:26 elapsed)
Mr. Palson started by displaying a number of 2 ft. by 3 ft. boards. He showed that he had superimposed the information from the tax map on an aerial or satellite photograph of the site. It seemed to fit nicely, lining up with the stone walls, he said. The parcel is 1.37 acres, or 73,337 sq. ft. The Church parking lot is a separate parcel, also town-owned.
Mr. Palson showed the set backs in orange: 40 feet from the street, 20 feet on the side and 30 feet at the rear.
(14:45 elapsed)
Mr. Palson stated that the allowable lot coverage permits a building with a footprint of 11,007 sq. ft. and the 35 foot height limit would permit a four story building. Editor’s note: Mr. Palson actually said 1107 sq. ft., and that figure also appears on the board. However, it appears that 11,007 was intended as the area indicated is much larger than 1107 sq. ft.. Also indicated on the display board were the locations of the wells for the geothermal system and a tank, both to the north of the building. The display board also showed the maximum 26 foot extension allowed by the warrant article.
The previous AG sample design made sense in terms of the constraints, Mr. Palson stated.
Selectman Musselman stated that the Town does not need to comply with the zoning ordinances, but wishes to comply.
Mr. Palson then said that they asked the question as to what could be done, if what AG had suggested was not followed. The only other plausible alternative would to build where the parking lot is now, but that was deemed a bad solution for a number of reasons. That leads to the conclusion that there is only one place left to put the building, which is where AG proposed to place it.
Mr. Palson stated that they had had another idea regarding the one building/two building decision. The desire to have a single building related to access and not needing to go outside to walk from one department to another. The desire to have a separate building relates to preserving the appearance. The goals are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
(23:26 elapsed)
Mr. Palson then described their idea. He proposed to bring the upper level of the hillside that is north of the Town Hall southward. The working parts of Town Hall could then be connected underground with a 15 foot heated corridor. Under this scenario, the existing building would remain intact. The upper porch of the existing Town hall would become an entry on the second floor. The elevator would go in the new building and would not be needed in the existing building because access would be provided between the buildings by crossing a courtyard at the second floor level.
Mr. Palson then explained wheelchair access from the two parking lots. If entering from the lower lot, one would go into the new building, up the elevator and across a courtyard to the old building. If coming from the upper parking lot, one could enter the second floor of either building from the courtyard. He assured the Committee that this would meet the ADA requirements, especially if the handicapped accessible parking was in the upper level.
Peter White asked about the drop from the upper parking lot. Jason LaCombe responded that it was 6-7 feet higher than the second floor level. However, there is enough room for a ramp with a moderate slope.
Mr. Goldman asked whether this would remove the fork in the road between the one building/two building decision. Mr. Palson replied that it could have that effect. Mr. LaCombe indicated that the fork could be merged tonight if this was accepted.
Lucy Neiman asked about a covered walkway on the second level as well. Mr. Palson stated that this could be done, but the issue might be argued by those with different views.
Mr. Palson also indicated that there would be stairs between the two buildings leading from the lower parking lot up to the courtyard between the buildings and, from there, to the Church parking lot.
With regard to the porch, it is historic, even though junky now. It could eventually be quite nice, he said.
There would be 13 risers or more, Mr. Palson said, in response to a question from Peter Kasnet. Mr. Kasnet asked whether that would look overwhelming. Mr. LaCombe responded no, not when it was done.
Mr. Palson indicated that the curvilinear stairs might not be the best entrance for large gatherings in the Great Hall.
In response to questions from Peter White about the porches, Mr. Palson stated that they felt that it had always been an open porch. Beth Yeaton stated that the underside of the porch was open until the 1990s when it was enclosed.
Mr. Palson stated that the front of the new building was set back (moving it towards the north somewhat) only to preserve parking spaces.
In response to a question from Beth Yeaton, Mr. Palson agreed that the building would be built into the hill, with it looking like one story from the north and two stories from the south.
As shown the building would be clearly reversible and detached, which would meet the Secretary of the Interior standards. With a breezeway on the second floor, there might an issue.
There was then discussion of a heated walkway to melt the snow. The geothermal system could be used to provide the heat for that, Mr. Palson said.
Reaction from the Committee (48:24 elapsed)
In response to a question from Priscilla Jenness regarding the elevator and the possibility that it might protrude through the roof, Mr. Palson responded that only 12 feet above the highest level was needed for the elevator. A roof with any sort of pitch should accommodate that, he said.
Selectman Musselman indicated that there is a 3-4 foot drop from the back entrance to the level of the Great Hall. Mr. Palson said that the level could be adjusted. His preference is to have only a single elevator, in the new building. He suggested cutting a “canyon” so that the back entrance is at the Great Hall level. Lucy Neiman suggested eliminating the porch to solve the issue of the mismatching levels.
Vitor Azzi asked about an equal opportunity for handicapped access to the stage. Mr. Palson suggested a small lift as a solution.
Selectman Musselman asked whether the question was whether this eliminates the fork in the road. Mr. Palson stated that he is not sure that they are there yet, but he would suggest that this concept be looked into further.
Victor Azzi indicated that he had more questions than answers. He stated that the concept seems to be driven by a desire to have all of the spaces connected, indoors and also outdoors. But, the need for connectivity has not yet been tested. Until the program has been looked at, and the space needs of the functions looked at, along with adjacencies and allocations he doesn’t know the degree to which this degree of connectivity is needed. Especially coming up Central Rd., the building might appear to be contrived with the stairs cascading in a daunting fashion. To say that the building is not connected is perhaps not convincing.
Mr. Palson summarized what Mr. Azzi said by saying that there might be a stand-alone portion of the program which might not need to be connected. Mr. Azzi agreed that that was a shorter way to say it.
Peter Kasnet indicated that, if the building is to go where indicated, it could be (1) standalone, (2) connected with an earthen structure, or (3) connected with a “stick” structure. Given this, the design of the building and how the offices interact could go ahead. The only thing left hanging would be whether and how the buildings are connected. There is no other spot to locate the building, although this is not a bad spot.
Cyndi Gillespie indicated that a problem with not connecting the buildings is access to the Great Hall and meeting ADA requirements for that.
The gap is about 18 feet as shown, but it could be less, Mr. Palson said. It’s a visual judgment as to whether it would be too small so that it might look like an alley. Selectman Musselman suggested a narrower stairway with trees might make the two buildings look more separate.
(59:16 elapsed)
Peter White indicated that if they move forward in this direction, they are eliminating the possibility of an extension to the existing building. It was done quite effectively in Temple, he said. Editor’s note: Peter Michaud, in a presentation to the Heritage Commission on September 21, 2013, displayed a photograph of the Temple, NH Town Hall, to which an addition had been made. The addition was similar in architecture, slightly smaller in width according to the photograph. It extended the building by about a third in length according to satellite photographs obtained from Google. Mr. White asked whether the addition option had been looked at. Mr. Palson responded that he had not yet looked at that. He had gotten a sense that that was a “third rail” which should be avoided if there was a way to do that. The goal was to provide a way to get back and forth between the buildings without inflaming the people that might be inflamed.
Selectman Musselman suggested that a sketch might show that option. Mr. Palson stated that he did not believe that the program could be physically accommodated in 26 feet. Selectman Musselman agreed. Perhaps a site plan showing what would need to be done, he said. Peter White indicated that it could be underground.
Selectman Musselman stated that he had been saying from the beginning that there was an arithmetic problem. They need to show that.
Selectman Musselman stated that a major benefit was avoiding needing to put an elevator in the existing building. Several on the Committee agreed. It is going to be harder than it looks he said, and very inefficient.
Mr. Palson stated that it’s an old wooden building with the potential for a lot of people in the Great Hall. It should be easy for people to get out, and the spiral staircases are dicey. The staircases could be the second means on exit as long as there is another one that is fully compliant.
(64:24 elapsed)
Lucy Neiman asked whether the 26 feet was a valid number for making decisions. Mr. Palson responded that he agreed that it is valid. When asked if there was a basis, he stated that it’s arbitrary, capricious and final. Mr. Kasnet stated that he disagreed, and argued that it was not final. Peter White stated that the goal was that the addition be subservient. It has some foundation. Mr. Palson stated that he respects the sentiment with which it was generated. Paul Goldman stated that what needed to be agreed on was the actual objectives, not constraints on a design.
Lucy Neiman asked about the cost of the tunnel and earth moving. Mr. Palson responded that a second building might actually be to the Town’s economic advantage as unraveling a sweater and knitting something back on might be costly. Doing the addition before breaking through to the old building would facilitate a phased construction. Mr. Kasnet stated that that could be done with an addition as well, with a wall.
Beth Yeaton stated that a basement was desperately needed in the new building. She asked about compromising the underpinnings of the existing building. If there is already push back about a limited size addition, she does not want to go down that road. She wants this to pass and does not want to inflame things.
Selectman Musselman asked about the distance to avoid undermining. Mr. Palson stated that it depends on soil conditions. Ten feet would be quite safe. They have done things as close as a couple of feet when soil conditions warrant.
Mr. Palson asked about the need for a basement. Beth Yeaton spoke about storage, with a secure vaulted area. Mr. LaCombe stated that a larger first floor might be more economical. Mr. Palson stated that fewer floors would limit the non-productive space allocated for stairwells. These would be 8 by 20 feet, times two. Then there is the question of accessibility. Another set of elevator doors for an additional level would be $10,000. A wall could be pushed back for a similar amount of money.
Selectman Jenness stated that the Space Needs Committee had been assuming that the porches would not be present.
Scheduling of future meetings (75:15 elapsed)
It was stated that there is a meeting with the public on November 5 and another work session on October 22, but the locations have not been determined.
Selectman Musselman stated that he liked the concept, but that factoid is irrelevant. Mr. Kasnet said that they could look on square footages and flow and leave the decision on the connector to later.
Mark Luz asked how the dismissal of the addition would be handled. Selectman Musselman said that a site plan was needed. It would show an addition 26 feet wide to the back of the property and this would still not provide enough square feet. Mr. Palson said that there could be 11,000 square feet of lot coverage. 6000 sq. ft. is the footprint of the new building, so 6000 divided by 26 is 200 something. It would have to be three stories, he said, and it would interfere with the geothermal wells. Selectman Musselman cautioned that members of the public would read the warrant article. It needs to be shown on a plan that it does not fit.
Mr. Palson said that they would earnestly try to make the single building option work.
(80:16 elapsed)
Cyndi Gillespie reported that she found an e-mail and all three public events had been booked downstairs at the Library. The Committee was pleased.
There was then discussion as to whether the next step would be an elevation or a floor plan. Mr. Kasnet stated that the public would want to see an elevation.
Lucy Neiman asked what they would have for Nov. 5. Mr. Palson responded that they would have department layouts and options for the connectors.
There was then discussion about the publication of the meetings. Mr. LaCombe spoke about newspapers and public groups. Victor Azzi noted that few in Rye tuned in to the “Patch.” Cyndi Gillespie indicated that Janice would do an e-mail blast and they would contact Joey Cresta to have publicity in the Herald. The deadline for the Town newsletter is November 4.
Peter White stated that the Rye Civic League would put this on their web site.
There was also discussion of e-mail lists. Cyndi Gillespie indicated that the Town’s list is good sized. Beth Yeaton indicated that Bob Eaton has a good list and does e-mail blasts.
Lucy Neiman asked again what was going to be shown to people on November 5. Mr. Palson responded that there would show an iteration showing the departments. However, it would not be packaged in a building, although that could be done. They will have floor plans, he said, in response to a question from Peter Kasnet.
Mr. LaCombe indicated that they have 300 pages and have not refined that information. Peter White asked for confirmation that they are working off of the 10,500 sq. ft., plus or minus ten percent rather than AG Architect’s 15,000 sq. ft. Mr. LaCombe confirmed, stating that there was already a pretty detailed space needs analysis.
Lucy Neiman asked why they were not meeting with the department heads prior to the 22nd. Mr. LaCombe stated that they have enough information to get started. Mr. Palson indicated that, even after a successful vote there would be time to conduct additional iterations of the department layouts.
Selectman Musselman stated that there had been a lot of focus on the 26 feet and 10,500 sq. ft. requirements. But, the Town should not paint itself into a box. The focus should be on broad concepts.
Mr. Azzi suggested a Tuesday meeting before the Thursday public event. Editor’s note: He was apparently referring to the meetings on Tuesday, November 5 and Thursday, November 7.
Mark Luz asked about the Great Hall. Mr. Palson indicated that they had sensed that everyone seemed in agreement that the Great Hall should be restored. Priscilla Jenness indicated that the staircases and foyer should be included in that statement as well.
Victor Azzi said that he agreed with the concept that there should be a building where indicated, with the degree of connectivity to be worked out. All buildings must be accessible. Mr. LaCombe stated that input from the public session would help determine the desired level of connectivity. Mr. Palson disagreed somewhat, indicating that means and methods should not be an issue for the public.
Mr. Kasnet indicated that, for many, the elevation might be key.
Lucy Neiman indicated that there should be two meetings before they meet with the public. People will have trouble with the concept without being able to view the elevation. Mr. Palson suggested that the interior layout and the exterior appearance should not be presented to the public at the same time.
Mr. Palson said that he had seen people agreeing to the need and the cost, but someone would stand up at the Town meeting and say that it was ugly.
Selectman Musselman asked about Recreation needs, and whether they had been discussed. Mark Luz indicated that Recreation’s consideration had been focused on providing information for the CIP plan. Selectman Musselman indicated that the question was programming. Mark Luz indicated that the information would be provided to the architects. Cyndi Gillespie indicated that the Recreation Master Plan had been provided to the architects. Selectman Musselman stated that this needed to be cranked in.
Selectman Musselman asked about how the Trolley Barn was being considered. Would it be used for storage? The architects indicated that they had not looked into that yet. Selectman Musselman indicated that the building has challenges, in that it is wet. Mr. Palson indicated that it is remote as well. Nothing needed on a day-to-day basis would be put there, he said.
Lucy Neiman indicated that the Energy Committee should be encouraged to create a model, given that the geothermal facility is oversized. She indicated that there had been energy cost reductions for many town buildings other than the Public Safety Building.
Public recognition (119:10 elapsed)
Peter Crawford asked a question about the dirt being piled up and the appearance of the buildings. Mr. Palson responded that, from the uphill side it would look like a one story building, but from the downhill side it would look like a two story building. Mr. Crawford asked whether dirt would be piled up on the side, but not the front. Mr. Palson confirmed, indicating that the building could be entered from the parking lot.
Mr. Crawford stated that the space for the addition appeared to be a 4000 sq. ft. footprint. Mr. Palson responded that it was not calculated, but this was to indicate the concept. He knows that 6000 sq. ft. can be fit on the grounds, but they will not make it bigger than it needs to be.
Mr. Crawford asked about the Old Trolley Barn, indicating that, though he was not of this school, there might be some people in Town that might consider whether the 2500 sq. ft. of the Old Trolley Barn might reduce the space need at the Town Hall site. Selectman Musselman interjected that the building would be used only for storage. Mr. Crawford continued, stating that the 26 feet, times the building width of 34 feet comes to 800 to 850 sq. ft. per floor. When multiplied by 3 floors with a basement, that would provide 2500 sq.ft., or a total of 8500 sq. with the 6000 sq. ft. of the existing building added in. That is not enough. However, with the 2500 sq. ft. of the Old Trolley Barn for Recreation and other needs there would be enough.
Mr. Azzi indicated that there would be issues with regard to location of the Town Hall, the quality of the space, the condition of the building, and the cost of renovation to a usable level. Someone added that there would the parking issues as well.
Priscilla Jenness added that there could be more space underground that would make the overall appearance smaller, so that the part above ground could be more in keeping with the width of the existing building. The architects agreed.
Adjournment
Whereupon the meeting adjourned at 8:38 p.m.
