The Lincoln Squirrel – News, features and photos from Lincoln, Mass.

community center*

Community center planners mull input including a Smith site

A group of Lincoln design professionals wrote a memo to campus planners urging that they consider locating the community center on the current Smith school site rather than on the Hartwell side of campus, but the reaction among community center planners was lukewarm last week.

At its February 14 meeting, the Community Center Preliminary Planning and Design Committee reviewed feedback collected on the initial set of six concepts for a community center. Most popular with residents at the community workshops on January 30 were Schemes 2, 3A, and 3B. The latter two options call for retaining and renovating all three Hartwell pods, but 3B put some of the parking between the main Hartwell building and Lincoln Road where the Strat’s Place playground used to be. Residents and the CCPPDC liked the building shape and location of Scheme 3B and the parking in Scheme 3A, so architect Maryann Thompson will include an illustration with that combination in the next round of designs she’ll present at the March 13 CCPPDC meeting.

The CCPPDC also decided that, regardless of which option is selected, there will not be parking on the Strat’s Place site, and any pods not folded into the community center will be renovated (work that would have to include new windows and bathrooms as well as fire code and handicapped accessibility upgrades). However, that renovation work could be done separately from the community center construction.

“We’re waiting to see what the school [which owns the pods] is going to do with these buildings,” CCPPDC Vice Chair Margit Griffith said. “The community is not necessarily aware of who owns them and who has the right and the budget” to demolish or renovate them.

The Smith idea

The February 12 memo addressed to both the CCPPDC and the School Building Committee addressed several issues with the school and community center proposals. Among its recommendations: putting the community center on the space currently occupied by the old Smith building. That space would be freed up if the town chooses for school option B6, which concentrates the building on the north side of the ballfield. The authors note that there is community interest in preserving the 1953 Smith gym, which has historically appealing wooden rafters and floors as well as a stage.

Sketches of two concepts for a community center on the Smith side of the campus (click to enlarge).

In response to the memo, Thompson presented two options for a west-wide community center, one with 35,400 square feet and the other with 28,600 square feet. A 19,000-square-foot building would be sufficient to meet the needs of the Council on Aging and the Parks and Recreation Department, according to 2014 estimates.

Both plans would be more expensive than any of the east-side proposals due to higher construction and renovation costs associated with the larger footprints, though Thompson did not have exact cost estimates as of last week. Reusing some of the Smith building is also less than ideal for seniors because of the long hallway they would have to traverse. The gym’s acoustical properties also make it problematic for use by seniors, Council on Aging Director Carolyn Bottum noted. Furthermore, despite the larger total footprint, the rest of the community center might actually be a bit squeezed since the gym takes up so much of the space, Thompson added.

“Programmatically this doesn’t work well, according to the earlier community center study committee,” resident Sara Mattes commented. “To spend more money on rehabbing something that doesn’t meet programs needs and requires additional parking, paving over what was going to be green space, seems to be a bit of an anathema.”

“If it was cheaper [than the Hartwell options], then maybe the town would say it’s worth suffering some of the challenges that go along with it, but learning that it’s at least as expensive and maybe more, as well as more expensive on the operating side—I don’t know how we could justify it to the town,” CCPPDC member Tim Christenfeld said.

Of the Smith building, resident Owen Beenhouwer (also an architect) said, “I think it’s a candidate for coming down. I think we need to be building for the future and not just keeping the past half alive.”

Thompson acknowledged that “you would never get a gym like that now” with its wooden rafters and natural light. “I don’t think it should get torn down, but I don’t know what to do with it.”

The memo authors urged the school and community center planners to hold a joint charrette as soon as possible to better coordinate campus planning and discuss possible ways to keep the Smith gym.

The memo was written by Doug Adams, Gary Anderson, Ken Bassett, Lucretia Giese, Ken Hurd, Judith Lawler, Brooks Mostue, David O’Neil, Steven Perlmutter, Dana Robbat, and Peter Sugar. Adams, Bassett, Perlmutter, and Sugar were members of the School Building Advisory Committee that was formed after the 2012 defeat of the school plan that had been accepted for funding by the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA). Giese and Robbat are among the founders of Friends of Modern Architecture/Lincoln.

Adams and Bassett were also members of the “Fireside Seven,” a group of Lincoln architects and designers who developed an L-shaped design alternative after the 2012 vote in hopes of retaining MSBA funding. That alternative was rejected by the agency as being too different from what it had approved originally.

Community center group looks at next set of ideas on Tuesday

The current layout of the Hartwell area and the available parking on the Ballfield Road campus (click to enlarge).

Residents can see the next round of design ideas for a community center at the regular meeting of the Community Center Preliminary Planning and Design Committee on Tuesday, Feb. 13 at 4:45 p.m. in Hartwell Pod A.

The CCPPDC and architects showed six options at workshops on January 30 with restimated price tages of $13 million to $16.5 million and have been going through comments left by residents on sticky notes. They also welcome feedback via email at CCPPDC@lincolntown.org.

The committee is also working to incorporate the work of the School Building Committee. Early results from the SBC workshops on January 23 indicated that 77 percent of attendees preferred a mostly new school building at an estimated cost of $89.8 million.

The SBC is taking the lead on campus planning because the school is a much larger project and also because the school owns the buildings on the east side of the campus, even those not being used by the Lincoln School. The four buildings on that side—the main Hartwell building and the three pods—collectively house the school district administration, the Lincoln Integrated Preschool, the Magic Garden Children’s Center, the Parks and Recreation office and program spaces, LEAP, storage spaces, and the school’s repair shop.

“There has to be a place for all of these things between the two projects. This is why we’re taking a whole-campus approach to the planning and why the CCPPDC is following the SBC; we’re not at the same design stage on purpose,” said CCPPDC Vice Chair Margit Griffith. “They refine, we refine; we share feedback, they share feedback. Much of what they do will inform our process.”

Letter to the editor: more coordination needed between building committees

To the editor:

Following the meetings of the Community Center and the School Building Committees during the past couple of weeks, it is clear for me that much work has been done. On the other hand, it is not so clear whether one or the other of these groups perceives it to be their responsibility to seek how to best coordinate or integrate the projects. During the recent meetings, while there was lip service paid to the goal of integration and efficiency, no specific proposals or comments were made. Perhaps such coordination is being left to later, as time does not appear to be anyone’s concern.

At one of the School Building Committee workshops, one of the discussion groups suggested using the part of Smith School that would be demolished under the B6 option for the community center. The SBC had no comment at this moment.

While there is a group seeking to ensure communication between the two groups, it does not appear to me there is any real effort seeking to think of both projects together as one effort. If left to the town to suggest such an approach at Town Meeting, my concern is it will be too late and very confusing.

Sincerely,

Robert deNormandie
45 Trapelo Rd.

Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Letters will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.

Community center schemes posted; workshops on Tuesday

The current layout of the Hartwell area and the available parking on the Ballfield Road campus (click to enlarge).

The Community Center Preliminary Planning and Design Committee unveiled a series of concepts on their website on Sunday in advance of two public forums on Tuesday, Jan. 30. The building will be a new home for the Parks and Recreation Department and the Council on Aging as well as other community groups.

Residents will have a chance to examine, discuss, and comment on the concepts from Maryann Thompson Architects and the CCPPDC on Tuesday from 8–10 a.m. or 7–9 p.m. in Hartwell B pod. The concepts call for demolishing at least one of the existing pods and building a community center north of the main Hartwell building, with various configuration options for 100-110 parking spaces, compared to the current 54 spots in the Hartwell lot. Early cost estimates range from $12 million to $16.5 million.

The CCPPDC is working in parallel with the School Building Committee, which unveiled three project concepts for the Lincoln School (as well as options for repair-only and repair-and-minimal-renovation) on January 24.

Based on earlier feedback from residents, the community center architects created some preliminary designs based on guiding principles including:

  • Sustainability
  • Natural light and views
  • A casual gathering space for the Council on Aging that is not shared with other organizations, as well as “nooks” for other small gathering spaces
  • A nexus or center of activity where paths cross
  • A plan that improves the overall condition of the wetlands within the Hartwell area

The plans are summarized below (click on the small images to see larger versions), with pros and cons of each concept as identified by the arhcitects. The full report can be seen here.

Scheme 1 – Central secondary green with peripheral parking ($13–15.5 million)

  [tcpaccordion id=”16159″]

Scheme 2 – Central main campus with green “L” ($13–15.5 million)

[tcpaccordion id=”16181″]

Scheme 3A – Infill with peripheral parking ($13–15.5 million)

  [tcpaccordion id=”16183″]

Scheme 3B – Solar infill alternate with peripheral parking ($12.5–15.5 million)

  [tcpaccordion id=”16184″]

Scheme 4A – Woodland path scheme with centralized parking ($13.5–16.5 million)

  [tcpaccordion id=”16185″]

Scheme 4B – Woodland path alternate with centralized parking ($12–14 million)​

  [tcpaccordion id=”16186″]

Officials at multi-board meeting mull campus project questions

Officials shared recent town financial data and outlined questions that will have to be answered about the two proposed campus projects at a joint meeting of four boards on January 9.

Some residents are feeling sticker shock after learning the projected costs for a school project, let alone a community center, but most agree that both are needed. “These projects are about key components of our community, and we need to navigate a complicated and nuanced cost-benefit analysis,” Selectman Jennifer Glass said.

There will be community forums on preliminary design options for the two projects later this month. The School Building Committee will host workshops on Tuesday, Jan. 23 from 8–10 a.m. and 7–9 p.m. in the Reed Gym, while the Community Center Planning and Preliminary Design Committee will host sessions on Tuesday, Jan. 30 from 8–10 a.m. and 7–9 p.m. in the Hartwell B pod.

The SBC learned late last year that a basic project to make repairs and bring the school building up to code would cost about $46 million, while a comprehensive project with more new construction could cost anywhere from $73 million to more than $90 million. A preliminary estimate in 2015 put the cost of a community center at about $13 million.

Selectmen this week presented a detailed list of questions and issues that officials and residents must tackle in advance of a special Town Meeting in June, when they will be asked to vote on a preferred design for the school. Among those questions:

  • How can the value of different project solutions be compared?
  • What are the implications of phasing the two projects vs. bonding and/or building both at the same time?
  • What are the short- and long-term cost implications of making the buildings as energy-efficient and sustainable as possible?
  • How well will the two project concepts “fit” the campus?
  • What are the data from other towns regarding finances?
  • How much can the town borrow and still keep its AAA bond rating, and what happens if it doesn’t?
Property tax impact

Finance Committee Chair Jim Hutchinson updated town property tax data and potential borrowing costs that the panel first presented last spring. A recent consultation with the town’s bond advisor revealed that the town could borrow up to $100 million without losing its AAA rating—up from an estimated $80 million last year, Hutchinson said.

The FinCom also learned that state law currently caps the town’s permissible debt at $106 million. The town currently has about $9 million in outstanding debt, leaving a $97 million new borrowing limit. However, the town can appeal for a higher amount and would probably have a strong case since the debt would fund a needed school project (as opposed to a sports stadium, for example) and MSBA funding is not in the mix.

The estimated median household tax increase—unchanged since last spring—is $275–$310 per $10 million borrowed, meaning a rise of about $3,100 if the town were to borrow $100 million and repay it over a 30-year period, Hutchinson said. The tax rate would rise from the current 13.7 mills (1 mill translates to $1 in tax for every $1,000 of a home’s assessed value) to somewhere between 16 and 17 mils—still lower than Carlisle, Sudbury and Wayland.

In fiscal 2017, the average assessed value of a single-family home in Lincoln was $1,108,423 and the average tax bill was $15,185. Depending on the amount borrowed ($60 million, $80 million or $100 million), the average tax bill would climb to roughly $17,733 to $18,900. However, the town would apply a chunk of its debt stabilization fund (currently at $4.7 million) to soften the impact of the first few years of repayment.

Right now, compared to seven surrounding towns, Lincoln has the second-highest average tax bill but the lowest debt-to-operating cost ratio, the second-lowest tax rate, and the lowest average annual growth rate in tax bills since 1999 (2.7 percent), Hutchinson said.

Borrowing costs

If the town’s bond rating were to drop from AAA to AA+ as a result of borrowing more than $100 million, future borrowing costs would rise, but “it wouldn’t make much of a dollar impact” on property tax bills, Hutchinson said. However, he added, “it takes years of hard work to raise your credit rating… it’s pretty easy to lose it and kind of hard to get it back.” Among the seven neighboring towns, all but Carlisle have a AAA rating.

The financial implications of borrowing one large sum all at once or in two segments a few years apart are fairly minor, Hutchinson said. Borrowing the whole amount at once could save about 0.15 percent in interest on the first $10–$15 million of the debt, but that affects only 10–15 percent of a $100 million bond, he noted.

When comparing construction costs to the lifetime costs of a project (including expected repairs and energy use), “I would put this in the no-brainer category,” Hutchinson said. The FinCom recommends making decisions based on the total lifetime cost of a project, meaning that (for example) it makes sense to spend more on energy-efficient features that will more than pay for themselves in future savings.

Future capital expenses

Looking ahead to future borrowing needs outside of the school and community center, the Hartwell building may need a new roof in 2020 at a cost of about $660,000, and as in past years, there will likely be multimillion-dollar land acquisitions that can’t be identified yet, said Audrey Kalmus, chair of the Capital Planning Committee.

Other possible expenses include a new roof for Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School in about 2021 (Lincoln’s share would be about $300,000), a new fire engine in 2023 ($575,000) and renovation of the Brooks athletic field at an undetermined date ($400,000).

The most recent big-ticket items for the town were $5.8 million in 2012 for the town office building renovation and $5.5 million for a road project in 2009. The next major road project won’t be needed until about 2035, Kalmus said.

Community center draft designs expected in January

Preliminary designs for a community center on the Hartwell campus will be presented at public forums on Tuesday, Jan. 30 from 8–10 a.m. and 7–9 p.m. in the Hartwell B pod.

At the November 4 State of the Town Meeting and afterwards, the Community Center Planning and Preliminary Design Committee (CCPPDC) asked residents for feedback on a “character study” (a series of photos of other community centers) and a “wish list” with in-depth questions about what the facility should include to meet the town’s needs.

Lots of natural light and views, a place that’s interesting to go to architecturally, and a desire for a strong connection to the site and for the creation of outdoor gathering space were among the themes in the responses to the surveys. The architectural team has since met with Council on Aging and Parks and Recreation staff to discuss the two group’s program needs, and they also toured several facilities to gather ideas for further discussion.

“These meetings primarily gave us a greater understanding of how each group operates today, the breadth of their programs, what works in their current spaces that they want to maintain, and what doesn’t work. This understanding will help us greatly as we start to lay out the program and develop the designs,” an MTA representative said via email last week.

One of the biggest take-aways from the tours of other community centers was about storage—”these buildings had an amazing amount of storage distributed throughout the buildings, but it was not enough,” MTA reported. However, “all the centers that we visited were very active, and they had all seen a huge increase in participation in programs with their new spaces.”

Architects ask for reactions to school and community center possibilities

The current school campus showing when various sections were built.

(Editor’s note: Check back tomorrow for more coverage of the State of the Town meeting.)

At Saturday’s State of the Town meeting, residents began offering feedback on six concept drawings for a reconfigured Lincoln School as well as some photos of community center ideas.

The school campus drawings by Ewing-Cole and SMMA Architects represented only ideas for where various parts of the school could be located relative to each other on campus, rather than actual building outlines and walls, explained SMMA’s Joel Seeley. The presentation also did not address parking, fields and roadways, and it intentionally looked at a mostly new or completely new buildings.

All six designs had some features in common:

  • Academic hubs organized by grade level in for PreK–4 and by team teaching mode for grades 5–8.
  • Separate entrances for PreK, K–4, and 5–8.
  • Classrooms as well as breakout spaces for students groups of varying sizes and abilities in each hub.
  • Facilities for “specials” (art, music, science, and maker spaces) located close to the hubs.
  • A single dining commons and kitchen for the entire school.

The concepts are categorized in three groups according to whether the school building is concentrated in the current “L” configuration (Group A), or on the north or west side of the ballfield (Groups B and C). Some distinguishing features:

  • A1 — Retains the two gyms and auditorium, and is closest in shape to the current school.
  • A2 — Follows the same basic shape but in a curved rather than L-shaped fashion, with two new gyms and the existing auditorium.
  • B1 — A northern focus with five two-story linear classroom hubs, retaining and enclosing the Reed Gym and auditorium.
  • B2 — An all-new building on the north side, with a gym and theater space next to each other but separated from the rest of the school by a commons area to demarcate school and public uses.
  • C1 — A western focus having the clearest plan for two separate schools in one. Includes a new gym and a glassed-in or covered walkway to the existing auditorium.
  • C2 — A western focus with a ring of angled hubs around a central piazza and a new gym between the classrooms and the auditorium.

The concepts and explanations can be seen on the School Building Committee website. See larger versions of the drawings by clicking on one of the images below:

[Best_Wordpress_Gallery id=”89″ gal_title=”School concepts – Nov 2017″]

At the State of the Town, residents offered written comments, but others may use the SBC’s online feedback form. The form asks what viewers saw or heard that they liked, what they wished would be developed further, and what they wonder about, or what questions should be answered.

The SBC and architects will continue to gather public input and refine the concepts in the coming months. Residents will be asked to vote on a design concept at a special town meeting in June 2018. By that point, officials hope to have a plan that has “overwhelming community support. We don’t want to get to a vote in June and wonder what we missed,” said Chris Fasciano, chair of the SBC.

Community center

The Community Center Preliminary Planning and Design Committee (CCPPDC) recently hired Maryann Thompson Architects to work alongside SMMA and design a proposal for a community center. Their first step at State of the Town was to post “character study” photos of various community center interiors, exteriors, and landscapes and asked residents to jot down “gut reactions” on sticky notes with comments on the easels.

The architects are hoping for more detailed feedback via a “wish list” questionnaire on the CCPPDC website, which also includes the images shown on Saturday and an accompanying comment form. Residents are invited to download the questionnaire, answer whichever parts they wish, and email it back by noon on Friday, Nov. 10. The firm expects to have a proposed basic design along with “firm cost estimates” before the special town meeting in June, which will also address the school.

There are various advantages and disadvantages to having the community center physically connected to the school rather than on the Hartwell side, noted Town Administrator Tim Higgins. He briefly touched on some of those pluses and minuses as outlined by a group including the two school principals, Parks and Recreation Department Director Dan Pereira, Council on Aging Director Carolyn Bottum, and Administrator for Business and Finance Buck Creel.

Factors mitigating against having the two facilities side by side, according to their report:

  • There would be less space for athletic fields on the school side and the topography of the Hartwell side would also make it difficult to put a field there.
  • Sharing space would be impractical since the hours of operation of the school and community center would largely overlap.
  • The parking on the north and west side of campus would have to be significantly increased and the roadway network would have to be rethought.
  • There would be public safety and security concerns associated with keeping the various building users separate and out of restricted spaces.
Finances

The town can afford to borrow up to $80 million for the projects and still retain its AAA bond rating, said Andrew Payne, vice chair of the Finance Committee. Each $10 million borrowed would increase the tax bill by about $275–300 per year, depending on the interest rate. The current median tax bill is $13,600.

The FinCom’s debt financing subcommittee also recommends that the town should make bond payments that are more or less equal throughout a 30-year term. Some of the town’s debt stabilization fund, currently at $4.7 million, can be used to even out some of the tax bill impact in the first few years, Payne added.

Updates on multitude of issues planned for State of the Town

An agenda chock-full of information and discussion about issues affecting Lincoln’s future will greet residents at the State of the Town meeting on Saturday, Nov. 4 from 9 a.m.–12:30 p.m. in the Lincoln School auditorium. The event offers informational updates on important issues in town and (in some cases) a preview of measures that will come up for votes at the Annual Town Meeting in spring 2018.

The first 90 minutes will consist of presentations the two proposed campus building projects: the Lincoln School building project and the Community Center project. Recent Lincoln Squirrel articles on these topics include:

Other agenda items are below, and are also discussed in the latest Selectmen’s Newsletter. There will then be an open forum from 11:40 a.m.–noon and an opportunity to talk to representatives of the groups who presented during the meeting at information/discussion tables from 12:30–1 p.m.

Lincoln Station

The South Lincoln Implementation Planning Committee is studying improvements to the Lincoln Station area as well as possible rezoning, though a proposed zoning bylaw change is not likely by spring. There are five teams working on different topics for SLPIC, which reports to the Planning Board.

Plastic bags and bottles

The Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School Environmental Club is revisiting its push to regulate the sale of disposable plastic grocery bags and single-use plastic water bottles in Lincoln. Warrant articles were tabled in Town Meeting in 2017 but passed in Sudbury. Town Meeting will feature either warrant articles or a general bylaw change proposal.

Recreational marijuana

The Board of Selectmen is forming a committee to help the town understand the 2016 statewide measure that legalized the cultivation, personal use and retail sale of recreational marijuana. The group will assess the law’s implications for Lincoln and make recommendations regarding potential policies, bylaws and regulations that may be desired and/or required to protect the town’s interests. Town Administrator Timothy Higgins said this week that a bylaw proposal may come up at a Special Town Meeting later in 2018 rather than the annual spring meeting.

To learn more about the committee, contact Higgins at 781-259-2604 or higginst@lincolntown.org. To apply, submit a letter of interest to Administrative Assistant Peggy Elder at elderp@lincolntown.org.

At Town Meeting in 2017, residents approved a moratorium on allowing use of land or structures for recreational marijuana establishments until November 30, 2018 pending new regulations from the Cannabis Control Commission and possible zoning amendments in Lincoln.

Historic District

The Historic District Commission and Friends of Modern Architecture are working with property owners interested in adding their Modern houses to the Lincoln Historic District. At Town Meeting, residents will vote on a proposal that would allow at least 17 owners of Modern homes to voluntarily join the Lincoln Historic District. The district currently consists of 73 properties in four different areas.

Sanctuary Town

A planned Town Meeting measure seeks to make Lincoln an official Sanctuary Town, which organizers hope will safeguard illegal immigrants in Lincoln from federal immigration enforcement and otherwise help immigrants feel protected

Mothers Out Front

This group has been working on local responses to climate change such as curbing greenhouse gas emissions by fixing gas leaks from underground pipes. Members are expected to propose a resolution at Town Meeting calling for the repair of utilities’ leaking gas pipes.

Community center group selects architect

The Community Center Preliminary Planning and Design Committee (CCPPDC) has selected the firm of Maryann Thompson Architects to help design a proposal for a community center for Lincoln.

Massachusetts work by the Cambridge-based firm includes designs for the Atrium School in Watertown, the Broad Institute in Cambridge, the Walden Pond visitors’ center, and Temple Ahavat Achim in Gloucester. The firm is already working closely with SMMA Architects, which was hired to design the Lincoln School project.

The CCPPDC and the School Building Committee will present updates at the State of the Town meeting on November 4. By that time, “we want the two architectural firms to have spoken quite a bit and start aligning their processes and procedures, and maybe put a couple of community forums on the calendar,” said CCPPDC Vice Chair Margit Griffith.

Maryann Thompson Architects should have a proposed basic design for a community center along with firm cost estimates ready before an anticipated Special Town Meeting in June, when residents will be asked to vote on a school design, Griffith said. If and when residents decide to pursue the community center project, the town will ask for bids from firms to do the detailed design. “They’re not producing a plan for a community center that people vote on [in June] and break ground on,” she said.

The CCPPDC is drafting a timeline in conjunction with the SBC with “key choice points for decisions and deliverables by the architect,” said committee Chair Ellen Meyer Shorb. Designing a school and a community center simultaneously is “a really difficult, complex process that no one has done before, but the bottom line is to include the town early and often.”

 

 

 

Two sessions on school, community center scheduled

Superintendent of Schools Becky McFall and educational planners from two architectural firms will lead two workshop sessions on Tuesday, Oct. 17 at 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. in the Brooks gym, focusing on how architecture and design can support educational goals. They will share the priorities expressed by educators during a September 28 all-day visioning session, show examples of other schools, and engage the community in discussion about specific concepts and educational spaces.

On Wednesday, Oct. 11 at 7 p.m. in the Hartwell Multipurpose Room, the School Building Committee (SBC) and members of the Community Center Preliminary Planning and Design Committee (PPDC) will learn more about community priorities through a series of short presentations from the Historical Commission, Public Safety, the Planning Board, the Green Energy Committee, the Conservation Commission, and the Commission on Disabilities. Added to previous presentations from Parks & Recreation and the Water Commission, these conversations will help the SBC, PPDC, and the community understand the complex series of opportunities and issues that must be balanced as work moves forward.

Dozens of residents came to two September 28 sessions to explore the future of the Ballfield Road campus. The sessions were facilitated by the architectural firm SMMA, which was hired by the SBC in partnership with EwingCole in August. In addition to the design team, members of the SBC and the PPDC were there to listen and learn from the professionals and the community.

Both the morning and evening sessions featured information-sharing and gathering as SMMA used five possible campus configurations to generate discussion and to more deeply understand Lincoln’s collective priorities for a revitalized campus, one that will cohesively accommodate a preK-8 school and possibly a community center on one site. Echoed continuously by both the community and the architects was a commitment to preserving the unique character of our campus, while at the same time defining a forward-looking vision that improves the campus experience for students and Lincolnites of all ages for years to come.

The September 28 evening workshop can be viewed online here.