image description — The School Committee sought expert building advice from town officials Thursday to figure out what steps need to be complete in order to break ground this spring.

Williamstown School, Youth Center Seeks Town Input

By Andy McKeeveriBerkshires Staff
11:50PM / Thursday, December 16, 2010Print Story | Email Story

The School Committee is still debating the new Youth Center's footprint as deadlines approach to enable construction to being in July.

WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — School and Youth Center officials have to agree on a vision for the new center soon.

With the location and design still up in the air, representatives from both boards meet with town officials on Thursday to clear some of the path to a July groundbreaking.

The School Committee peppered officials with questions regarding the permitting process, fire hazards, policing for two hours Tuesday and hoped to develop a clear path toward building the center.

Town Manager Peter Fohlin agreed to create a project schedule to guide the remaining steps in order for construction to begin on June 1 — a month early to pad the deadline.
The committee needs to officially approve the center's location and footprint and write a land lease agreement. However, it is still unsure of the center's footprint, which has been hotly debated since October.

The center originally presented a sketch of a two-story building when it was approved to use school land but later returned with designs for a one-story building with a larger footprint. The larger footprint has caused an uproar because it would force the playground to be moved; a subcommittee develop three options to keep it in place and the designer three. Two options were ruled out Thursday.

"We are giving them the land. We asked them to have a smaller footprint option and they didn't do it," School Committee member Jennifer Thompson said. "I don't think we should be pigeonholed into just these four options."

Thompson said the board should insist on either two stories or a smaller building. ~~The current Youth Center's basement is not used so the amount of useable space is essentially being doubled with the current 12,000 square-foot plan, she said.~~ The committee also questioned if the Youth Center needs to be 12,000 square feet since the basement in the current location is often flooded and unusable.

"I respectfully disagree. I think they've justified why they went with this building size," Chairman Adam Filson said.

The board approved a 12,000 square-foot building but never specified how that would be laid out, he said. School Committee member Huff Templeton said the use of the 12,000 number was like entering an agreement and the committee does not have much justification to go back on it.

The committee did rule out attaching the new building to the school. Fohlin told the committee that the only way to attach it to the school and still comply with building codes would be to essentially cut the school in half to create three separate buildings. The building is at maximum capacity and a fire wall would have to be created in order to grow in size, he said.

A location south of the school is the leading candidate after being supported by both Superintendent of Schools Rose Ellis and Timothy Kaiser, director of public works, said an expensive rerooting of the drainage system would be required if the building is in the northeast section.

The current drainage is a series of basins that connect and lead out to Church Street, Kaiser said. That system would be disrupted and would have to be reworked around the building's foundation.

"It's doable. It's money," Kaiser said.

After those issues are decided, the school also has to negotiate a lease with the center before breaking ground.

"I think the lease is going to be an interesting discussion. We need to have a plan," Fohlin said. "You guys need a prenup."

The School Committee also has to set endowment requirements for the Youth Center to cover any repairs. Fohlin suggested that funding can be agreed upon in a number of ways including a sinking fund that the center is required to add to each year or bonding. Board members stuck with an endowment saying they would rather see the money now in case the school gets stuck with the building.

"Part of the Youth Center's $3.5 million is for an endowment already," said David Backus, a liaison between the School Committee and the Youth Center.

Town officials have not studied the plans much and will meet with the School Committee again to offer input. The board can not expect much feedback from Michael Card, director of inspection services and zoning enforcement officer, who said ethically he is not allowed to help build or design it.

"I already learned that about Mike. I would ask him for his help and he'd tell me 'you make the decision and I'll punish you for it later,'" Fohlin joked.

Clarification on Dec. 22, 2010: A reference on the overall square-footage and usage of the center should not have been attributed to Jennifer Trainer Thompson but to another committee member; Thompson was involved in the conversation but her emphasis was on the size of the new building's footprint. Thompson sent a statement she wished to add to the story after reading the comments.

"I did not comment on the useability of the Youth Center's current space on Cole Ave. And I have no problem with the Youth Center's programming needs for 12,000 square feet for a new building, assuming the business plan they present to the School Committee supports that. What I did express concern about was the footprint — given that the RFP asked for as small a footprint as possible, given that school officials on the playground subcommittee expressed concern about it taking up too much green space (especially with an E-W axis) — which is a different issue. " — Jennifer Trainer Thompson.

Tags: youth center,

iBerkshires.com Text Ads

Peak Rate CD

Lock in your savings now with our 6-month CD. Click to learn more! Insured by NCUA.

www.greylock.org

RIBCO Supply

Check out our great lineup of Boss Plows, and spreaders. 2 Locations Clarksburg & Pittsfield!

ribcosupply.com

Community Pharmacy NARH

Berkshire Community Pharmacy at North Adams, located in the lobby of North Adams Regional Hospital

www.berkshirehealthsystems.org

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Your Comments

iBerkshires.com welcomes critical, respectful dialogue. Name-calling, personal attacks, libel, slander or foul language is not allowed. All comments are reviewed before posting and will be deleted or edited as necessary.

The options have been given. Take the vote and either build the center or send it back out for proposals. You have been overwhelmingly mandated to do so by the vote at Town Meeting. This is getting really silly simply because a handful of people want a different design.
from: Parent	on: 12-17-2010 02:33PM I Agree (42) - I Disagree (26)

Jennifer Thompson - Voice of the people - All 5 people that she listens to.
from: Future youth center parent	on: 12-18-2010 01:51PM I Agree (37) - I Disagree (28)

Jennifer Thompson needs to learn facts, the youth center does use the basement but not when it is flooded. She needs to get off her high horse and learn to compromise. comes off as HER way or the highway.
from: build	on: 12-19-2010 08:30AM I Agree (37) - I Disagree (25)

Jennifer Thompson is 100% right
from: Parent 2	on: 12-19-2010 09:46AM I Agree (24) - I Disagree (47)

I only know Ms. Trainer Thompson by reputation, but her reputation is definitely one of obstinance until others acquiesce. She is supposedly very tenacious when she wants something. I guess that's a great trait if you run your own business or have to sell yourself to donors. I am not sure its the most conducive attitude when you work on a committee of equals.
from: Patch	on: 12-19-2010 12:20PM I Agree (28) - I Disagree (18)

Ms.Thompson is obviously opposed to the current proposal. She should just vote no rather than obstructing the project. As I said before, this is getting silly.
from: Parent	on: 12-19-2010 04:59PM I Agree (31) - I Disagree (21)

The Youth Center has tried to push through a building without proper planning upfront. Why do they need a bigger building? It may be more efficient for them, but it is an eyesore for everyone else (and lose the porch!). Kudos for Ms. Thompson for having the guts to stand up and ask for answers. She represents the majority on this one folks.
from:	on: 12-19-2010 07:43PM I Agree (21) - I Disagree (41)

The Youth Center has asked for a building that has the same space it has now. The school committee laid out clear guidelines on the RFP. The vast majority of the community has expressed support for the current plan. Those who think the building would be an eyesore are very few in number. And not coincidently, a couple of them are very good friends with Jennifer and one of those friends doesn't want it on School St. and another doesn't want it on Church St. Thompson is trying to move the goalposts. Plain and simple. She is trying to derail the process because she knows if it comes to a vote she will likely lose. First she didn't like the design. Then it was about the playground. Now it's two stories and whether the Youth Center uses their current dank basement. I wonder what hurdles she will try to put up next.
from: future yc parent	on: 12-19-2010 11:22PM I Agree (36) - I Disagree (19)

The WYC CAN'T use the basement now. It used it for years....my children have taken art, dance, and movement classes in the basement prior to the flooding. An eyesore...I don't think so. Plenty of folks think the design looks great-- porches and all.
from: WES Parent	on: 12-20-2010 12:20PM I Agree (28) - I Disagree (7)

With all due respect to the anonymous poster who thinks that the majority of the community is against the current proposed building, you are either very insulated, or simply making things up. The few times that the public has been asked to comment, there were many more supporters of the design presented than opposed. At the last one, there were about 6 or 7 people out of 75 who were against it, and that includes Ms. Thompson. If anything, these comments makes it clear that there is a fair amount of bad blood being created over this. The next time Ms. Thompson is on the ballot, if she has a credible opponent, we'll see if she is in the majority or not. Controversy usually doesn't win school committee elections. I agree with the person who said this is getting silly. So are these comments.
from: Patch	on: 12-20-2010 03:07PM I Agree (23) - I Disagree (12)

Future Parent - To answer your question about the next hurdle, I can think of 3 or 4 ways that people might try to derail things - the lease, code issues on the construction plan, environmental impact studies, etc... I would hope that the people in question are more mature than that, but you never know.
from: Patch	on: 12-20-2010 03:21PM I Agree (8) - I Disagree (1)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3396/3196806411_7cf4a1e13b.jpg
from:	on: 12-20-2010 05:35PM I Agree (1) - I Disagree (0)

A youth center is a good idea. A building with a substantially larger footprint than that previously agreed to is not. It's the school's land, and the school cttee needs to behave like a client, and get a building consistent with the design and operation of the school, including the playground. Thomson should be congratulated for raising this issue, and seeing it through. This is the way the process should work--building the right building demands a thorough process. Those who use this forum, and others, to insult citizens who have raised objections to the revised design should feel ashamed.
from: parent	on: 12-21-2010 08:00PM I Agree (16) - I Disagree (25)

To the other parent - Who are you to decide on proper footprints? What background do you have in educational architecture? Recreational planning? Childcare legal supervision requirements? ADA accessibility? Civil engineering? What do you know about energy efficient building practices? Construction costs? Please, do tell. Have you asked the school what they think? So far none of the administrators have voiced so much as a peep of concern about the plan. And several teachers have publicly supported it. The "educational community" is not opposed to enlarging the footprint by the size of typical Williamstown front lawn. As a matter of fact several educators have said the facility will enhance the school's functionality. The school committee laid out its guidelines in a very proper and legal fashion after a well publicized PUBLIC hearing. It is now up to the school committee to vote - not try to stall the project through procedural mish-mash, but to VOTE on whether the current proposal meets its guidelines. THAT is what the citizens of Williamstown ordered the School Committee to do. Mrs. Thompson is free to vote against the plan as well as try to convince her fellow committee members to do the same. If she is, in fact, trying to force the plan onto the scrapheap without a public vote by the committee, or delay it to the point that there is another year to try a kill it, then her motives and tactics are certainly worthy of scrutiny. Personally I will reserve my judgement.
from: WES and WYC Parent	on: 12-21-2010 10:30PM I Agree (26) - I Disagree (3)

parent wrote "Those who use this forum, and others, to insult citizens who have raised objections to the revised design should feel ashamed. " Who is insulting people because they don't like the design? If any slight has been given, it has been by those who have belittled the work of the Youth Center, the previous school committee, town officials and "the taste" of the hundreds of people who have expressed support for the current proposal.
from: Oy	on: 12-22-2010 10:29AM I Agree (22) - I Disagree (2)

I'm appalled that the bullying continues. Can we not engage in a civilized discussion about what is the best way to proceed? I think everyone is in agreement that WYC should be built on the property...it's just a question of the best fit. Trying to intimidate school committee members -- at the meetings, at the hearings, and now here -- is not the way we should be conducting ourselves, or teaching our children how to resolve conflict.
from: Parent	on: 12-22-2010 01:16PM I Agree (11) - I Disagree (8)

Amen to the writer who contributed the following "can we not engage in a civilized discussion about what is the best way to proceed?" Anyone who speaks up, who sticks his or her neck out, who takes a chance-- as Jennifer Trainer Thompson has-- is to be thanked by everyone in this community... even when you disagree with them. Let's show a little more consideration, a little more appreciation for those who do their best-- as volunteers-- to make our town work.
from: A Supporter of WYC @ WES	on: 12-22-2010 02:14PM I Agree (9) - I Disagree (1)

Hello Everyone- I don't want to editorialize, because I have clear biases, and my priorities are what they are because I am so involved with what happens at the WYC. I would, however, like to clarify how the lower floor of the existing youth center is used, and how often (and to what extent) it's effected by flooding. First off, the basement is 5,000 sq. ft., the same as the main floor. It has 3 rooms used for programs (as compared with 4 on the main,) with the remaining space used for storage. Of these spaces, the 850 sq ft. "teen" room and hallway flood regularly (typically 2-3 times monthly.) The art room floods less frequently, while the dance/movement room never floods. This means that on a typical day we use 10,000 sq. ft. of space. No doubt, the basement is absolutely disgusting, and not worthy of our community. But then I'd say the same thing about the whole building! Finally, if anyone ever has any questions about our programs or spaces, please don't hesitate to ask.
from: mike williams	on: 12-22-2010 05:15PM I Agree (14) - I Disagree (0)

WYC - Please go back to the original, smaller footprint. You really need to make that work. And lose the porches! Adding those was a huge PR blunder.
from: Neighbor	on: 12-23-2010 08:59AM I Agree (6) - I Disagree (24)

I feel the need to address the charge of bullying, especially because it is a topic that has totem so much attention lately. Given that the only people with any actual power in this whole scenario are the school committee members, I don’t see actual bullying in these comments. I do see a fair amount of frustration and anger (that includes the charges of bullying and intimidation too). Also, those who are saying that they are simply looking for the best fit are, by default, implying that they are the arbiters of what is good and what is not. This public process exists for a reason. It provides transparency and a chance for all sides to be heard. But remember, the right to be heard is not the right to "get your way". That includes the commenters on this article, neighbors, Youth Center folks, individual school committee members, self-important people, etc... Thank you to all who participate in community decisions and give their time in the name of.community service. But just because someone is a volunteer does not automatically inoculate them or their opinions from criticism. And here is my criticism.... The process seems to be being dragged out. I will not speculate on motives but I have my suspicions. I agree whole heartedly with those who are calling for a vote. It is time to go on the record. Call it what you like, pigeonholing, accountability, proper procedure, whatever.... The community deserves some action. Up or down.
from: parent #493 or is 495?	on: 12-23-2010 10:39AM I Agree (14) - I Disagree (2)

I think this process is working as it should. I think its important to remember that if the youth center plan had not changed from 2 to 1 story, this would not be happening. However, if the building must change to meet the youth center's needs, the siting should be re-examined. (If a commercial developer tried to change their footprint, but claim it was immaterial because the gross square footage was the same, the town planning board would be very upset.) I am pleased with how the School Committee is proceeding and think that their efforts will help the youth center get to the best site and building possible. I think the youth center is being very helpful in providing an evaluation of the different sites. Voicing an objection to or concern about the youth center has been a very interesting experience. It's been like raising concerns about the placement of a church and then being accused of being anti-religion. I think valid concerns have been raised. I think questioning the motives of or vilifying the Committee members undermines the credibility of the project. Hopefully, we're past that now. I think each Committee member is to be commended. I think they will get the information they need and then vote. I will be happy with whatever their location choice is, now that they have all the correct information.
from: Hugh Daley	on: 01-07-2011 08:38AM I Agree (1) - I Disagree (2)

Williamstown Planning Board Hears Results of Sidewalk Analysis

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
05:14AM / Friday, December 20, 2024

WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — Two-thirds of the town-owned sidewalks got good grades in a recent analysis ordered by the Planning Board.

But, overall, the results were more mixed, with many of the town's less affluent neighborhoods being home to some of its more deficient sidewalks or going without sidewalks at all.

On Dec. 10, the Planning Board heard a report from Williams College students Ava Simunovic and Oscar Newman, who conducted the study as part of an environmental planning course. The Planning Board, as it often does, served as the client for the research project.

The students drove every street in town, assessing the availability and condition of its sidewalks, and consulted with town officials, including the director of the Department of Public Works.

"In northern Williamstown … there are not a lot of sidewalks despite there being a relatively dense population, and when there are sidewalks, they tend to be in poor condition — less than 5 feet wide and made out of asphalt," Simunovic told the board. "As we were doing our research, we began to wonder if there was a correlation between lower income neighborhoods and a lack of adequate sidewalk infrastructure.

"So we did a bit of digging and found that streets with lower property values on average lack adequate sidewalk infrastructure — notably on North Hoosac, White Oaks and the northern Cole Avenue area. In comparison, streets like Moorland, Southworth and Linden have higher property values and better sidewalk infrastructure."

Newman explained that the study included a detailed map of the town's sidewalk network with scores for networks in a given area based on six criteria: surface condition, sidewalk width, accessibility, connectivity (to the rest of the network), safety (including factors like proximity to the road) and surface material.

View Full Story