CORE Team Notes 12.31.14

Present: John Connell, Bill Reed, Elizabeth Courtney, Kate Stephenson, Ben Cheney

Thanks everyone for an entertaining day on New Year’s Eve talking about our master plan and process.

I wanted to send around my notes just to track the important “to do” action items:

JC: Ask Ben Weiss to help with the SketchUp model of the site (done)

EC: Ask Zach about Autodesk doing 3d printing of site model

KS/BR: Refine timeline in Excel (see first draft attached)

KS: Cliff notes of Principles/2 page overview of master planning process for general consumption (see attached first drafts of 2 documents for feedback)

KS: call Peter Lazorchak to check in and invite to next meeting to present schematic design (scheduled for 1/6)

KS: call Andres to check in

KS/EC: meet to go through Act 250 administrative amendment application questions

Next meeting: Monday, January 19^th at 11:00am.

Agenda:

1. Presentation from Peter Lazorchak (he is confirmed to attend) on schematic design for wastewater.
2. Discussion of design process for 1^st phase buildings- to inform grant applications in process.

Core Team Notes: 12-1-14

12-1-14 Core Team

Agenda:

• Overall timeline on permitting and design for infrastructure
• Scope of civil engineering beyond wastewater and stormwater- - power, water, driveways etc
• Budget for all of the above
• Plans for cabins and other demolition
• Scope for 35^th anniversary “unveiling”- Sketchup, wood model, pretty drawings, display for lobby
• How do we batten down our overarching estimates for Phase 1 in terms of capital campaign- Dave T. and I will be working on grant proposals in Dec/Jan and need to make sure we are on the right page
• Scheduling January date for half day/all day Core team pow wow- get all members of the team up to speed and on the same page. Need to define agenda for that day and deliverables/goals

In attendance: Kate, Kinny, Elizabeth and John (by phone)

Act 250: We discussed the scope of work for the Act 250 permit process. Kate spoke with Peter Lazorchak last week (who was recently injured in an accident and sustained a concussion so couldn’t be in attendance) and he recommended that we initiate the Act 250 permitting process even while the stormwater and wastewater were still in design development; there was no reason to hold off and the three permits could be worked on in parallel. Kate reviewed the application requirements for a “minor” or administrative amendment to an existing Act 250 permit. Key is defining the scope of what we’re asking for in this round of permitting- we decided that we would go for infrastructure plus the first two buildings (one shop and one dormitory) as that seemed reasonable for what we plan to tackle in the next 2-3 years. We need to get basic estimates for the following: site preparation, buildings (# of square feet and $ per square foot), roads and parking, utilities, landscaping. The total of these items will determine the fee (total cost x $.00540). Therefore on a million dollar project the fee would be $5400. Elizabeth confirmed that unless we have an abutter who thinks a hearing is necessary, we should be able to do this with a simpler administrative amendment.

Timeline: We discussed how much of the work to be done at this point unfortunately hinges on Peter Lazorchak, our civil engineer. Kate will check in with Peter later this week to see if he’s feeling better and to try to get a sense of the timeline and what is on his plate and how much attention he is able to give to this project. Kate will also ask him who the contractors are that we might want to approach for bidding on the earthwork- we couldn’t come up with any names other than Kingsbury Construction.  Another question for Peter is how much time it will take to do the civil engineering design- driveways, water, power etc. once the stormwater and wastewater details are more complete. JC made some amendments to the draft timeline that I had sent around (see attached- JC can you send me the Excel version so we can continue to edit and refine this?).

35^th Anniversary: Date is set for the weekend of July 18^th. We would like to use this as an opportunity to unveil the master plan and talk about the future of Yestermorrow. The plan is to have a SketchUp model of the site created by April 1^st as well as a physical wood/cardboard/3d printed model on hand (Elizabeth said she would check with her son who works at AutoDesk to see if he might be able to help with that), and then invite members of the YM community to submit either a digital model and/or a handmade model of one of the buildings defined in the master plan as a way for them to contribute their ideas to the process. Files must be submitted by July 5^th so that we have time to get everything combined together into the master model, and design the “fly-through” to be projected as part of the presentation. Kate will send out an initial Save the Date for the 35^th in January, and then we will send out more details and invitation to design in May. Kate will take a first crack at a one-pager defining the program, guidelines, principles for public distribution as part of the design exercise. We reiterated the importance of defining expectations for this exercise- it is NOT a competition, it is considered a fun way to get input from a variety of people and get them excited about the process. We need to come up with a plan for how to manage the designs that are submitted and provide feedback on them. However, we do plan to engage a professional architect/designer to do the actual design of the buildings, potentially using some of the “best of” ideas as inspiration/guidance (after vetting by the Core Team).

Next Meeting: we are hoping to find a day in January when we could get the whole Core Team together for a day-long meeting and really have a chance to walk around the site, dive into some of the nitty gritty details, review the draft program package, and design work to date. John will connect with Bill to try to find a couple of potential days that would work for them, then we will check with the rest of the team.

Other items: Kate is really hoping to get some clarity on the timeline for summer 2015 since it affects planning now for cabin lodging, and we need to reach resolution about the future of Pine and Strawbale cabins, whether they are to be deconstructed, moved etc. so she can figure out a logistics plan for making that happen. Since we are taking bookings now for summer classes we need to know what lodging will be available and when. Kate is also looking for feedback on the Our Transformation draft document she sent out last week (also attached).

Core Team notes 11/3/14

11/3/14 CORE Team Notes

Attending: Kinny Perot, Kate Stephenson, Elizabeth Courtney, Peter Lazorchak

By Phone: John Connell

Peter Lazorchak gave us an update on what he’s been working on in terms of the wastewater design process. He touched base with Pete Munoz about system size and construction cost. The basic parameters they use to calculate cost are $15-20/s.f. for constructed wetlands. The size of the wetland is roughly approximate to the number of gallons per day being processed- i.e. if we have 5,000 gallons per day of wastewater, we would design a 5,000 s.f. wetland (or combination of wetlands). Peter talked to folks at the State about whether we could get a variance for reduced flow rates based on our historical data, which has shown an average of approximately 25 gallons per day per ‘weighted user’ vs. the standard engineer’s estimate of 100 gpd for a “boarding school” which is the closest equivalent on the books to YM. Peter thinks the next step is to go to the state with a more formal proposal for an adjusted flow rate of 65-70 gpd. Kate will also send Peter the original data sheets so he can look at peaks of flows. Unfortunately this is old data from 2008-2009 and we are not currently tracking daily or weekly flows.

If the adjusted flow rate is accepted by the State, we would be looking at a 3500-4000 s.f. area of constructed wetlands. This is a large amount of space, and Peter feels it would be likely spread out into a few separate cells, some up the hill and some lower. The need is to balance cost (fewer units is less expensive) with the need to make it fit on the landscape around everything else we have planned. We discussed how treating human waste with water is really dumb. John recommended reading The Toilet Papers by Sim van der Ryn and Kinny was interested in looking into regulatory paths to promoting alternative waste treatment.

Kate gave a brief update on her correspondences with Andres, who is helping to draft a grant proposal to the state ERP which is due November 10^th. Once we get a draft on Tuesday from Andres, Kate will work to finalize the whole application. We are unclear at this point of the amount to request and whether it is just for design and planning or whether we are going for construction costs as well. (See grant details pasted below).

We talked about how to make our meetings more productive by having specific homework and task assignments in between meetings. Kate expressed concern that given where we are in the wastewater and stormwater design that it seems unlikely to be able to start construction in the spring since we also have to complete our Act 250 amendment. Elizabeth questioned whether this project would be considered a ‘minor’ application or whether it would require a hearing.

Tasks:

-          Kate to send original water data to Peter L.

-          Kinny to get name of abutter to the north from the Waitsfield Town Office

-          Kate to send letter to abutter re: what happens with existing culvert when the stream is restored

-          Kate will circulate the document from Tony Stout/Watershed Consulting that shows various permitting and process (attached)

-          Elizabeth will look into the Act 250 timeline

Next Meeting date: Monday, December 1^st at 9AM

Next Meeting Agenda: Peter L. will check back in on design progress, Kate will present options for what to do with the solar tracker installation.

Suggestion: In order to help bring our new Core Team members on board (Ben, Eric, Elizabeth) and make sure we are all on the same page as a group, we recommend scheduling a half day gathering of the whole committee onsite in January. We nominate JOHN, as the Chair, to circulate a Doodle poll with some potential dates (maybe after checking first with Bill’s schedule?).

Grant Details from website:

2015 Ecosystem Restoration Grant - Round 2 - Request for Proposals (dotx, 854 KB) As part of the Ecosystem Restoration Program's (ERP) on-going efforts to reduce surface water pollution from phosphorus and sediment, the fiscal 2015 state budget includes capital funds to support ecosystem restoration projects. The deadline for proposal submittal is 4:30 on November 10, 2014. 

• Frequently Asked Questions (pdf, 335 KB)
• ERP Performance Standards (pdf, 306 KB)
• Act 110 ERP Municipal List (pdf, 27 KB)
• Standard State Provisions (Attachment C) (pdf, 325 KB)
• Model Procurement Procedures (pdf, 391 KB)

Core Team notes 10-3-14

CORE 10-1-14

Friday, October 03, 2014

9:00 AM

9:10    Discuss the Lazorchak Dilemma

o    Moving to Wilcox & Barton in Moretown.  Several offices throughout New England.

Maybe there will be a small invoice from McCain to close out that arrangement and possibly a new contract with the same format from Moretown.
 

9:25   Draft schedule Peter’s deliverables (best guess)

o    Peter Monroz thinks the wetlands will be cost prohibitive unless we can get relief from the state's design flows for a school.  Trying to submit historical data to state as a justification.  There is only very sketchy data from Dave Warren but the school has started recording again.

o    In our favor is the fact that the wetlands are above and beyond the state requirements.  So perhaps there will be some leniency.

o    We should have a handle on the design flows that will be used within a few weeks.  Bill Reed wants them to rough scope the size and cost of the project.

o    Kin inquired about the use of this project for teaching and wondered what size was appropriate for that.

o    Big Question: If the soils are so good that we don't even need the wetland treatment, what is the appropriate resource use ($$) to meet Yestermorrow goals...which are educational and  "doing the right thing".  Andres was reluctant to "throw out numbers" as to square footage but the leach field will be designed for boarding school flows so that's pretty large (100gal/day).  Bill Reed offered 1-2sqft/gallon/day as a rule of thumb.

9:35   Discuss Andreas’ deliverables and how they are contingent on the WW design

o    Stormwater design and daylighting the stream is his focus.  Kin was wondering about the ownership of document part of the contract.  She wants access to the design documents for educational purposes and Andres gave verbal assurances that this would be fine.

o    Because the WW is so integral to the site development, they are waiting for direction from that area before moving the stormwater mitigation.

o    Stream daylighting is where he has been focused.  He wants to get his recent work before the ANR and arrange a site visit from Dept. of Wetlands.  He also wants to engage in a discussion with river management.  Kin endorses this enthusiastically.  Shannon Morrison from wetlands has been out previously as part of the Tracker Project but she might not have looked at the stream.

o    There are two culverts.  They are proposing the removal of the larger uphill pipe but keeping the lower pipe in place as an overflow.  Alternatively, we could discuss removing the lower pipe but first we would want to reach out to the neighbor.  Kate will contact the property owners about removing the lower pipe.

We closed out by talking about how this could work with fund raising.

Current Documents

This is intended as a resource for Yestermorrow students and instructors using the Yestermorrow campus as a site for design projects. It includes links to current site plans, maps, and supplemental material relevant to the development of the campus and will be continually updated as new versions become available.

Plans currently approved by the Waitsfield Development Review Board:
Master Plan Executive Summary (06.29.13)
Master Plan Site Plan 50' scale (06.29.13)
Master Plan Site Plan 100' scale (06.29.13)
Master Plan Site Plan 100' scale open space (06.29.13)

Main Building: *note= not totally accurate as-builts
Ground Floor Plan
First Floor Plan
Building Section

Site Information:
Campus Map with Building Descriptions (not to scale) (2014)
Campus Base Map 80' scale (2008)
Campus Base Map 40' scale (2008)
Orthophoto

Base Maps for Area:
Mad River Topo (North)
Mad River Topo (South)
Waitsfield Natural Resources
Waitsfield Prime Ag Soils
Waitsfield Fluvial Erosion Zones
Waitsfield Zoning
Area Topo

Supplemental Reports:
Forest Management Plan (2013)
Stormwater Feasibility Study (2012)
Stormwater Concept Design (2012)
Watershed Analysis (2012)
Wastewater Basis of Design (2013)
Regenesis Grounding and Process Report (2011)
Regenesis Story of Place Presentation (2011)
Yestermorrow Environmental Assessment (2011)