Download the Power Point presentation

What criteria should be incorporated into our City’s plans to improve the educational facilities for our 6th, 7th and 8th graders?

I. There was unanimity among the members of Group A that the following criteria should be taken into consideration when developing plans to improve the educational facilities for Portsmouth’s 6th, 7th and 8th graders:

A. PRESERVATION

B. COMMUNITY

C. ACCESSIBILITY

D. COST

E. LOGISTICS

II. Our group’s discussion included identifying points of agreement—stipulations—regarding the City’s plans. Group members believe that the final design for either site under consideration would meet the requirements set out in the Educational Narrative. Thus we assume that with no more than minor adjustments, each site can accommodate similar curricular and pedagogical needs. We also agree that the so called “Pierce Trust” is a non-issue. We believe that there is ample convincing evidence that Alumni Field was purchased at fair-market value from the Pierce Estate; it was not a gift. Furthermore the deed restrictions are adequately mitigated, at a zero net cost, by the City Attorney’s recommendations. As described below, the group is in agreement that the following factors warrant the City’s additional consideration and attention in reaching a decision on the Middle School.

(A) PRESERVATION: Throughout our discussions, the term PRESERVATION surfaced repeatedly. We are in agreement that, in accordance with the City’s master plan, the Middle School decision should take into consideration the importance of the preservation of buildings, the preservation of the environment, the preservation of wildlife corridors, and finally, the preservation of the identity of Portsmouth and its vital connection to its past. We further believe that preservation should be a central focus in the formation of student values. The group is deeply concerned that a decision to build on a previously undeveloped site is irreversible and final. On the other hand, if the site is preserved, it will offer many opportunities for environmental education for our students and community members.

Previous decisions in favor of preservation have had an important positive impact on the evolution of Portsmouth into the special place that it is for all of us. These include: (1) the 1960s decision to preserve the South Mill Pond over the Chamber of Commerce recommendation to fill it in for a parking lot; (2) the decision to preserve 40 homes in the South End and create Strawbery Banke rather than demolish the homes for low income housing as recommended by the federal government; (3) the decision to convert the former Portsmouth Hospital into an efficient, highly visible public safety and government center rather than adopt the Urban Land Institute’s recommendation to develop more high-end condos at the site; (4) the decision to be the first City in New Hampshire to adopt historic districting, adding to Portsmouth’s specialness, despite resistance from various realtors; and (5) the decision in the 1970s to preserve and beautify Market Square despite opposition by the Portsmouth Herald that the elimination of the 105’ wide stretch of pavement in front of the North Church would cause traffic problems.

(B) COMMUNITY: The group believes that in planning for the Middle School, the specialness of Portsmouth should be reflected in the school’s location and architecture. The historical value of Portsmouth is a significant asset to the community and its uniqueness. The school’s location should promote students’ development of values about themselves and their identity with their historical community. We need to keep our middle-school children in the center of our community in order to safely foster their independence alongside their developing sense of connection and belonging. Frequent contact with their wider world affords students opportunities to participate as young citizens and to enhance and reinforce their academic learning. As a community we need to promote the health of our middle school students by encouraging them to walk to their school, and by ensuring that they have the security to do so within a vibrant community—not in the woods or outskirts of town. The risks to our young people’s health should they be regularly exposed to the disturbed landfill area cannot be dismissed; it is the community’s responsibility to shepherd their well-being. As a community we also need to discourage sprawl.

(C) ACCESSIBILITY: The members of the group considered the role that a school building can play in our urban landscape, both from the standpoint of student use, and the public’s use. We agree that a well-located facility can accrue a variety of benefits. A centrally located, attractive, well-maintained school building can create a shared sense of belonging, and of pride, among students and the public. It can serve as a site for many community functions. Further, a school located in the heart of vibrant, densely populated neighborhoods also provides security for students, since the collective eyes of the neighbors can view their comings and goings daily. A school located close to the community’s cultural and commercial institutions—and adjacent to a wonderful new library—affords students ideal opportunity to participate in their wider civic world.

(D) COSTS: We recognize the obligation to balance all municipal costs in order to keep Portsmouth a livable and diverse community. Without attending to that concern, the texture of Portsmouth will increasingly transform into a community unrecognizable from its past. As such, all of the members are concerned about taxes. Yet none of the members find reason to be concerned that we are at risk of facing significant and unjustifiable financial difference between the two proposed sites. In any case, to mitigate against any such price-tag differences, the group supports the recommendation by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, that separate architects should be engaged for concept-design and for building. On the other hand, we believe that opportunity costs are an important factor to consider. If we build on a heretofore undeveloped site the opportunity costs is the irrevocable loss of one of the most significant wildlife corridors in the City. We believe that there is cost to losing a key public-school building in a prominent location. Having at least one highly visible urban educational facility is important in the life of students and in the life of the community.

(E) LOGISTICS: The members of Group A are all mindful of the logistics associated with siting the Middle School. Each location under consideration poses challenges that require careful planning to manage. We believe there is need for a fuller exploration of ways to provide temporary housing for students if the current school were renovated. We strongly believe that the inconvenience of two years must be weighed against the permanent impact of new construction on the environment and infrastructure. The lasting benefit of the best site and design should ultimately outweigh the concerns over temporary inconvenience. Students can certainly benefit from the opportunity to learn from, and participate in, making short-term sacrifices for the sake of long-term benefits. We furthermore believe that the location of playing fields should not be the driving force in the City’s plans to improve the educational facilities for 6th, 7th and 8th graders.

III. The following table summarizes how our top five criteria apply to the sites currently under consideration.

CURRENT LOCATION SAGAMORE CREEK

PRESERVATION Maximally meets this priority Does not accommodate this priority

COMMUNITY Maximally supports all identified elements May inspire pride in community as a ‘state of the art’ facility

ACCESSIBILITY Maximally meets this priority Does not afford school location in direct proximity to vital community infrastructure

COST Fewer opportunity costs Greater opportunity cost

LOGISTICS • Requires temporary relocation of students during renovation

• Requires some fields to be sited away from main campus • Does not displace students during construction

• May afford location of all fields adjacent to main campus

• Could require significant site preparation to reduce health risks

IV. We all wish to express our appreciation for this unique opportunity to exercise our right to participation in democracy within our special community. We believe that creative ways to address current and future needs for the education of our middle-school children can be devised through renovation of the current school. We further believe that imaginative thinking is called for. We are calling for the kind of thinking that will result in renewed investment in a school that retains its connection with our community and a continued commitment to the highly-valued concept of sustainability. We believe that such an investment will be of greater lasting value financially and culturally to the entire community now and into the future.

1. Our group’s five top criteria, in order of importance, are:

1) To achieve consistency with relevant adopted policies: the Master Plan, and the Educational Narrative;

2) To preserve City Conservation Land;

3) To Seek the Best Design for a Long Term Solution;

4) To maintain a connection with the Community and to encourage walkability;

5) To encourage sustainability and Long-Term Energy Conservation.

2. Our group believed these should be our top priorities because:

These five criteria are found or implied in two existing City documents, the Educational Narrative and the Master Plan, both of which should provide the basis for a decision regarding the future of the Middle School.

We accept the goals of the Educational Narrative, prepared by our own professional educators, and also feel that the school building, to the extent practical, should be adaptable over time to new or modified teaching methods. The State Department of Education has stated that either site has the capability of fulfilling the Narrative, as have the Joint Site Advisory Committee and consultants.

The Master Plan formally sets forth the future vision of the City. It incorporates the recommendations of hundreds of citizens who participated in study circles, neighborhood meetings, and municipal boards and agencies. The Master Plan also provides specific guidance with respect to our five top criteria:

Consistency with the Master Plan: “Portsmouth should be a livable, walkable city that preserves its history, lives in balance with its natural resources, protects its waterfront and views…Portsmouth should consciously… take steps to build community through citywide events, enhanced and beautified common living and recreating spaces and neighborhood connectedness.” (Master Plan Vision Statement); and, “[The Vision Statement] should also be used consistently to evaluate ongoing municipal practices, emerging private developments, and the development of future policies that may arise from issues beyond the extent of this plan.” (Master Plan, pg. 4)

Preservation of Conservation Land: “Preserve and restore identified critical habitats and enhance wildlife corridors.” (NR-1); “Explore opportunities to protect land adjacent to existing open space parcels to create a connected network of greenways.” (NR-1.1)

Best Design for a Long Term Solution “Citizens made clear their preference for investing in long term solutions that will provide sound stewardship of the community over short-term fixes and temporary remedies.” (pg. 8) A growing movement across the country suggests that rehabilitation of urban schools will increasingly be regarded as preferable to sprawling, outlying schools. Doing so in Portsmouth would serve to promote the long-term enhancement of the downtown area by keeping a unique land use (the Middle School) in the heart of downtown. While some contend that renovation of the existing school would allow only about 90% compliance with the Narrative, this belief rests on a hasty, $12,000 conceptual design. We believe a properly prepared design can achieve 100% compliance.

Connection to Community/Walkability: “Continue the integration of our schools with the greater community.” (FS-3): and, “Direct new growth to areas that are already developed and where adequate infrastructure for growth is in place.” (NR-1);

Sustainability: “Encourage development that supports the revitalization of community centers and neighborhoods; and that reuses and rehabilitates existing infrastructure where appropriate rather than requiring new infrastructure.” (LU-6); “Promote new development and redevelopment that provide positive fiscal benefits to the City and minimize demands for new infrastructure and services.” (LU-6)

3. We believe that the Parrott Avenue site favorably addresses our top five criteria, while the Sagamore Creek site comes up short in all respects:

Consistency with the Master Plan: As more fully discussed below, we do not believe that new construction in the more isolated Sagamore Creek location is at all in conformance with the Master Plan Vision Statement or its other goals and objectives.

Preservation of Conservation Land: Clearly the 33-acre Sagamore Creek parcel does not meet this criterion, while, redevelopment of Parrott Avenue meets it.

Sustainability: The rehabilitation of the existing Middle School best conforms to our concept of sustainability. We believe that reuse of existing structures should be a high priority for the City, as indicated in the Master Plan. If no other options existed, then the construction of a new school would be warranted. But a viable option does exist, as even the (arguably) biased Team Design has asserted.

Our group also believes that the renovation and reconstruction of the Parrot Avenue site should follow best national sustainable practices, specifically including Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), as managed by the US Green Building Council (USGBC), widely considered to represent the best national policies and practices on matters of energy and the environment.

The LEED criteria, as set forth by the U.S. Green Building Council, categorically exclude school sites on a former landfill from even applying for certification. Such sites are deemed inappropriate for school buildings. Thus the Sagamore Creek site cannot meet these criteria, while a good design Parrott Avenue site certainly can.

Connection to the Community: The Parrott Avenue site is in a highly visible location near the center of town. Adjacent to the new library, and close to the city offices on Junkins Avenue, its connection to the community is obvious. The Sagamore Creek site offers no such connection. The proposed access from Route 1 would make two ninety-degree turns, snaking around the high school baseball fields, climbing a steep, bedrocked slope, and then passing near the old landfill, effectively isolating the school and students from the community.

Best Design for a Long Term Solution: We believe the School Board has not achieved an adequate understanding of what can be accomplished through renovation of the existing Middle School. We believe that the Parrot Avenue site can be better-designed to more fully comport with its urban setting.

4. Some other criteria that we discussed but that did not make the “top five” were: parking; demographic projections; safety; playing fields; and eminent domain. We concluded that all of them are either readily solvable or are of low priority and therefore need not be given high consideration by the School Board.

5. We understand that the choice is difficult, but that the best choice, in light of all the above is clear: the Middle School on Parrott Avenue needs to be renovated. This is the viewpoint shared by an overwhelming majority of our group.

We also believe that the actual process of renovating the school at Parrott Avenue can, in itself, be an educational process for students, teachers, and members of the larger community. It can demonstrate that wise, imaginative reuse of existing infrastructure can effectively counter sprawl, that new is not always better, and that we are a community that, in a time of global warming, values protection of the natural environment.

We strongly feel that the redevelopment of the Parrott Avenue site should be directed by a firm or a group of firms knowledgeable about and specializing in the renovation of urban schools, and that this may be best accomplished by seeking proposals from three top-notch firms. We specifically feel that the current study of the Parrott Avenue site does not reflect this level of competence.

We also believe that the renovation of the Middle School should be completed in consideration of its urban setting and that adjacent and nearby City assets be taken into account and shared or allocated as appropriate to achieve the best overall results. These nearby assets include: the athletic fields; the alignments of Parrott Avenue and Rogers Street; the nature and location of on-street parking, the land around the South Mill Pond, and the nearby municipal parking areas.

Finally, we believe that the architects should be directed to design the renovated building to comply with the Educational Narrative; to reflect an urban site plan; to be adaptable to new teaching methodologies; and to recognize that the building should be a vibrant part of urban Portsmouth for many decades, continuing, though much-modified, as it has served us so well for 75 years.

The members of our group were given an important task which comes with a big responsibility. We have been asked to reach a consensus that would help formulate a clear recommendation to the School Board, City Council Members and the citizens of Portsmouth with regard to refurbishing the current middle school or building a new facility. A criterion was arrived at and based upon what we as a group considered being the 5 most important considerations. We felt this is what would be best for education of middle school children, while considering all the vital and practical recourses that form and constitute our community. (There were strong dissentions on many issues but, the overwhelming majority supports the following conclusion.)

I: Top 5 Criteria:

1) Environmental Impact - This refers to the impact of creating a new footprint for the middle school and its impact on the natural and urban environment.

2) Cost to Taxpayers - This is the price tag of the renovation versus a new facility and its total impact on Portsmouth taxes.

3) Location - This refers to how the location’s surrounding support the education of the middle school students.

4) Flexibility - This refers to the ability of the location and the structure to be adapted to the changing requirements of the educational narratives and/or size.

5) Educational Philosophy - This concerns the need for the location and the structure to support the current middle school narrative.

II: We believed these should be top priorities because:

1) Environmental Impact - We believe that evaluating and rating the Environmental impact of the middle school site was important and necessary to determine the impact of a change in land use.

2) Cost to Taxpayers - We placed this criteria high because the burden of this expenditure could have a significant impact on the “cost of living” to the citizens of Portsmouth.

3) Location - This criteria was very important to our group because of the unique characteristics of each site.

4) Flexibility - We felt the flexibility of the site – and the structure on the site is very important to help us meet the needs and costs effectively in the future.

5) Educational Philosophy - We support the middle school teacher and administration in their education narrative.

III: Apply the Criteria to the Sites

1) Environmental Impact
• development on conservation land/loss of open space, vernal pools, wet lands,
• compliance with LEED guidelines
• vital wildlife corridor ash landfill best left, untouched
• old landfill practices “open dumping”
• archeological resources?

2) Cost to Taxpayers
• future use of Parrott Avenue building? Who pays; what cost…..renovate?
• less expensive to renovate; fewer hidden costs, existing infra-structure
• Jones Avenue upgrades…..site work cost
• stage construction….8th grade to HS
• fire, police, and security
• road maintenance

3) Location
• sense of community/social connection, culture, social activities
• supports the Master Plan
• new Library
• close to municipal government, Police & Fire
• traffic impact (Jones Avenue & Lafayette Road)
• Jones Avenue is too isolated
• walkability
• neighborhoods

4) Flexibility
• demographics
• campus concept

5) Educational Philosophy
• Preserving history
• prevent “tear-down” thinking…newer is better

IV: Other criteria

• Sports Fields, other locations, multi-purpose fields
• Changes in configuration of grades
• Alternate sites
• Communication and cooperation between Educations,
• Department of Public Works, City Government, and
• Athletics

Summary: based upon the review of discussion, through the open dialogue of ideas, and concerns, we support the concept of renovation at the existing school on Parrott Avenue, as opposed to new construction. When comparing the two most viable options, and applying our criteria this option makes the most sense to our group. This will provide the best quality of education, while incorporating the best practices of modern and efficient construction design, and building practices and technology.

I. OUR GROUP’S TOP 5 CRITERIA ARE:

1. MAINTAIN THE CONNECTION TO OUR COMMUNITY by locating the school in the center of the community where it is walkable and bikable and provides easy interaction with as many of the City’s assets and community members as possible.

2. AVOID BUILDING THE SCHOOL OR SITING PLAYING FIELDS ON OR NEAR A LANDFILL in view of the potential and unknown health risks of exposure to the landfill.

3. HONOR THE MASTER PLAN by protecting limited open space, wildlife and other precious resources including waterfront. Preserve historic resources and utilize a sustainable building in the center of the community.

4. PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT while building or renovating. Consider the negative impact sprawl has on our city’s limited open space and rare or endangered species. Reconstruct the middle school as a LEED compliant school.

5. DESIGN AN EDUCATIONAL FACILITY WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE EDUCATIONAL NEEDS OF ALL STUDENTS in seeking opportunities for their physical, social and intellectual development.

II. NARRATIVE OF DISCUSSION

1. CONNECTION: We believe that the school should be walkable and bikable. It should be located in the heart /center of the community. In such a location there are resources for educational opportunities, historical and cultural activities, such as, the Library. Naturally there will be multiple groups of people who may use the building. We believe that the more interconnected the School and the community are with each other, the greater the benefit, psychological, personal, and physical. Moreover, early and frequent exposure to the many historic assets our city has to offer will serve to strengthen the students’ sense of ownership and accountability to their greater community.

2. LANDFILL: We believe that we should not expose our children to the potential and unknown health risks associated with building on or near a landfill. The information in our database (GEO Insight memo and GEO Insight Report to JSAC), the tour of the site, and the information derived by our discussions, did not convince us of the safety of building on or near a landfill.

The LEED Rating System categorically excludes sites where there exists a former landfill. LEED has determined that these sites are inappropriate for schools because children are more susceptible to toxins and environmental pollutants than adults and are thus at greater risk for health issues resulting from contaminants associated with a site previously used as a landfill.

The landfill area of the Sagamore Creek site is currently in its “highest and best use.” Leaving the land, as is, undeveloped, and beside preservation land, is a wise land use policy and good stewardship of our resources.

3. THE MASTER PLAN: The community completed the Master Plan after a long and interactive process. Many of the principles set out in the Master Plan are directly applicable to the decision regarding the future of the middle school. There appears to be no reason to contradict, evade or dismiss the Master Plan and its principles in deciding this issue. To exempt a building as important to the community as a school rips the fabric of the Plan. The following are just a few of the highlights from the Master Plan:

Environmental
-“Protection of important open spaces will serve to conserve wildlife habitat, improve water quality, conserve natural beauty, and provide recreational opportunities.”
-“Educate residents, landowners, and city officials about practices that protect and restore environmental quality.”
-“Work with the media to disseminate information on City policies and projects related to natural resource protection and environmental sustainability.”
-“Publicize and recognize private and public development projects in the City that incorporate exceptional best management practices for natural resource protection.” Stewardship
-“Citizens made clear their preference for investing in long-term solutions that will provide sound stewardship of the community over short-term fixes and temporary remedies.”
-“Promote new development and redevelopment that provide positive fiscal benefits to the city and minimize demands for new infrastructure and services.” Community connection
-“Encourage development that supports the revitalization of community centers and neighborhoods; and that reuses and rehabilitates existing infrastructure where appropriate rather than requiring new infrastructure [and] …to incorporate public transportation and pedestrian access and mobility.”
-“In sum, the people describe the future they would like …A Walkable Portsmouth.”

4. ENVIRONMENT: The environmental issues not only overlap with the Master Plan but they stand alone as a major issue in deciding on a middle school site. The use of the Sagamore Creek property would remove 30+ acres from open land status, which it enjoys now, to be paved over and built on. Wetlands and wooded areas would be eliminated. Wildlife populations would be affected.

Once this environmentally significant land is developed there will be no turning back. This decision to develop will clearly be a long- term loss/cost. The Sagamore Creek area would lose a conservation area that is complementary to land acquired by the city across the Creek, besides impacting one of the few parcels of open land owned by Portsmouth by exchanging urban center and urban forest for suburban sprawl.

The environment is better served by using – or reusing – existing buildings where possible, particularly if a new building would use un-built-upon space. “Sometimes the greenest building is the one not built.” Any building – built or rebuilt – should strive for sustainability in terms of maximizing energy efficiency and being eco-friendly – or “green.” Construction should follow the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) guidelines for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards. The standards for schools promote location in the community and recycling buildings/materials; precluding landfills; avoiding wetlands, open and recreational spaces; and being pedestrian accessible and bike-friendly. They encourage less parking and joint use of school and community facilities.

5. EDUCATIONAL FACILITY WHICH ALLOWS FOR EDUCATIONAL NEEDS OF ALL STUDENTS: If the students’ physical needs, social needs and intellectual needs are met, this will maximize their learning and ability to succeed. Middle school students are highly social and learn well in groups. Classroom space is necessary to allow groups to work together, for projects of different sizes to be created and explored, to incorporate technology, to provide room for students with specialized services, and to insure the right size and room for team teaching. Athletics and exercise are an integral and important component of the school environment and experience.

III. HOW OUR TOP FIVE CRITERIA APPLY TO SITES:

1. MAINTAIN THE CONNECTION TO OUR COMMUNITY by locating the school in the center of the community where it is” walkable” and “ bikable” and provides easy interaction with as many of the City’s assets as possible. This criterion applies overwhelmingly to Parrott Avenue.

The Parrott location allows the greatest amount of physical, social, and psychological connection with the community. In the Parrott environment there is easy interaction with as many of the City’s assets and community members as possible since it is literally in the center of our community. The Parrott Ave. site is the choice for walkability and bikability. The neighborhoods that surround Parrott Ave. are densely populated, relatively safe and attractive. These elements naturally increase walking and biking. The Parrott Ave site is in a prime location adjacent to the newly constructed Library. Also, there are numerous cultural and historical venues in the area. It is, indeed, a culturally rich location in a culturally rich city. [The minimal support for the Sagamore site stated that it would not interfere with connection to community.]

2. AVOID BUILDING OR SITING PLAYING FIELDS ON A LANDFILL in view of the potential and unknown health risks of exposure to the landfill. This criterion applies overwhelmingly to Parrott Avenue.

The landfill is on the Sagamore site which makes the Parrott Avenue site the obvious choice. The City will avoid all issues and long-term costs related to the landfill if Parrott Avenue is chosen. The landfill may contain toxins that could negatively impact our children’s health. We have the responsibility not to experiment on our children and place them at risk. LEED for schools standards have been adopted since the JSAC hearings. They now state that sites where there is a former landfill are precluded from even applying for LEED certification. Potential costs and liabilities could be devastating if hidden dangers emerge during construction of athletic fields over the landfill or later during occupancy. [The minimal support for the Sagamore site stated that the playing fields, not the school, would be directly on the landfill.]

3. HONOR THE MASTER PLAN by protecting limited open space, wildlife and other precious resources including waterfront. Preserve historic resources and utilize a sustainable building in the center of the community. This criterion applies overwhelmingly to Parrott Avenue.

The Parrott Avenue site was so strongly supported because it protects open space, prevents sprawl, and retains the building in the central community. Community centrality validates the Master plan. [The minimal support for the Sagamore site stated that a Master Plan objective was to meet the needs of students.]

4. PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT while building or renovating. Consider the negative impact sprawl has on our city’s limited open space and rare or endangered species. Reconstruct the middle school as a LEED compliant school. This criterion applies overwhelmingly to Parrott Avenue.

The Parrott Avenue site was so strongly supported because it would protect the natural environment and the Sagamore site would destroy the natural environment. Renovation would be a more sustainable choice, and provide greater opportunity for LEED certification. [The minimal support for the Sagamore site stated that it would protect the human [learning] environment and be sustainable.]

5. PROVIDE AN EDUCATIONAL FACILITY WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE EDUCATIONAL NEEDS OF ALL STUDENTS ,in seeking opportunities for their physical, social and intellectual development. This criterion applies slightly more to Parrott Avenue.

This includes physical needs, social needs and intellectual needs. Both sites must meet the needs of students and teachers. The educational narrative must be the basis for either site, and will require proper planning. [Some support for the Sagamore site was based on concerns for adequate space.]

IV. OTHER CRITERIA OR CONSIDERATIONS that did not make the “top five” but were important to our group:

6. UTILIZE EXPERTS IN RESTORING HISTORIC URBAN BUILDINGS when renovating and rebuilding the current middle school.

The planning process for the middle school has relied heavily on Team Design, the firm that did the renovation of the high school. If the renovation of historic school buildings is not a major focus of their work, their expertise may incline towards the construction of a new school rather than the renovation of a historic school building. The funds allocated just for evaluation and preliminary design for possible building sites may have been insufficient for depth of study and exploration of possibilities for the existing building.

While the need to create new, improved middle school is urgent, it is vital to take a more focused view of the current middle school building possibilities. Using funds now to obtain another view of the possibilities for the current school site would be worthwhile, in the long run, to estimate costs, and to obtain another vision. [The National Center for Preservation Technology and Training and other sources showcases firms (including in New England) expert in historic school renovation who could evaluate and plan for the middle school.

7. FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY: Fiduciary responsibility refers to the stewardship of all city resources.

We have a fiduciary responsibility to find the best long-term outcome for a new or renovated school facility, given the City’s current financial and existing physical resources. We may have to incur some short-term expenses to obtain expertise in the true long-term costs and benefits of new construction vs. historic preservation. Using the last major space of open land in Portsmouth to avoid temporary inconveniences for renovating an existing downtown school would create a long-term loss to the City of Portsmouth. Additional costs could be associated with landfill use and environmental costs [monetary and in loss of wildlife, wetlands and open space, as well as watershed affect]. Appropriate reuse of the current school if a new school is built is uncertain, as the fate of the Lafayette School and other buildings demonstrate. Long-term preservation provides a community benefit in the retention of the character of the city.

V. OTHER INPUT for the School Board and City Council:

To the extent possible, the next design team should be asked to design a flexible building that can accommodate different teaching theories

The Parrot Avenue school should be used as a teaching tool for its historical and environmental significance.

VI. CONCLUSION:

THE CURRENT MIDDLE SCHOOL SHOULD BE RENOVATED AND IMPROVED.

Download the Power Point presentation

Facilitator: Jennifer Meister

Members: Mollie Mulligan, Byrl Short, Eric Spear, Kirsten Barton, Kathleen Slover, Brendan Cooney, Kristin Logue, Maxene Feintuch, Barbara Ward, Jo Ann Paradis, Jerry Hejtmanek, Ruth Griffin, Sabrina Hosse, Doug Bates

Group “E”xcellent is proud to present to the Portsmouth School Board and City Council its findings on the question: What criteria should be incorporated into our city’s plans to improve the educational facilities for our 6th, 7th, and 8th graders? Our group struggled with the choices and finally decided that choosing A or B was inappropriate and irresponsible. We are unsure how or why the School Board has narrowed their choices so severely. We are sure that the question deserves a more thorough investigation, and so our group changed the “other” option to “opportunities,” and there are many.

Summary

Our criteria, outlined below, concerned three areas: the students, the taxpayers, and the environment. All of these areas are important to us, and we were pleased to find that our solutions allowed us to achieve all of our goals without having to compromise any of them. Briefly, our research indicates the city should take the following actions: explore other grade configurations that might serve the students better, make use of existing infrastructure, and minimize capital costs, renovate the Parrott Avenue as a 21st century public educational facility, and continue to preserve the Sagamore Creek parcel as undisturbed wilderness.

Group E’s top criteria:

1. Grade Configuration

2. School/Community Symbiosis

3. Economics/Fiscal Sustainability

4. Environmental Impact

Discussion

Grade configuration is the obvious starting point for any resolution on where to house our middle school students. That is, we need to determine where the best fit is for these grades within the entire spectrum of grades K-12. By “best,” of course, we mean best both for the students and for the taxpayer.

We found that while our middle school currently houses grades 6-8, there is no empirical evidence suggesting that this arrangement is superior to others. In fact, from studies like the Rand Education’s “Focus on the Wonder Years,” we learned that the important thing in grade configurations is to reduce the number of transitions that each student experiences. Therefore, since the need to keep grades 6-8 in a separate facility is not validated by any research, we felt that any new facility must consider other grade configurations.

In addition to the benefits to students of a rethought configuration, we soon realized that the taxpayers could also dramatically benefit. A quick investigation of other communities in New Hampshire and New England found a wide variety of grade configurations. Therefore, we felt that we could make better use of our existing facilities (like the under used high school) and save construction costs by creatively examining all grade configurations.

Continuing our discussion of criteria that positively affect children, we strongly understood the necessity of keeping our students within our civic center. This conviction was backed up with the scientific research presented by Dr. Maerlender during a presentation to the school board and the city council. It is important to have adolescents interact and observe adults in the community who are not their parents or teachers. This learning process is subtle but critical to their healthy development.

As adults we also value the physical presence of our children in our community. Seeing children and knowing the children see us provides an intangible benefit for both the adults and the students. It maintains a Portsmouth community feeling as a welcoming place for all age groups.

While it is impossible to site a school within walking distance of all homes, certainly it is clear that the city should strive to pick a location that maximizes the opportunity for walking and biking. The health benefits for children are so obvious that we hesitate to mention them. In addition, the city would experience less rush hour traffic and less pollution. We note the Safe Routes to School program that Portsmouth has recently initiated, and we hope that our middle school students would be a part of that program.

We feel it is important as well, when possible, to house our students near our first responders. In the case of Portsmouth, the fire and police are near the civic center, and of course for the safety of our students we would want them to be nearby.

Finally, we note the many community resources like the library, the Music Hall, the Seacoast Repertory Theatre, Strawberry Banke (and other historical homes) are available to students if the school is located centrally. While these things would still be accessible if the students were more remote, the logistics, pollution, and gas consumption would discourage usage.

Our third criteria for housing grades 6, 7, and 8 was that of cost. We feel cost is important because as taxpayers we are sensitive to escalating capital costs for near term projects and increasing operating costs for our new buildings. Further, we are concerned that the burden of these new projects will crowd out needed outlays for our teachers. Put another way, students value far more of their experiences with top quality teachers than the physical space the classes are held in. Therefore, we want to avoid massive expenses in building costs that might reduce money available for teachers and programs.

With that in mind, we were quite dubious of the cost estimates provided to us. We encourage the city to look to other qualified architects. Aside from the obvious value of a second opinion, we know from past experience that architects that specialize in renovation of historic structures can give a more accurate estimate than the one provided to the city.

We also acknowledge the downward student population trends. Of course, even the best projection isn’t a certainty, and so we would desire our new facility to accommodate some unanticipated growth. However, we believe we can remain flexible without being wasteful. Therefore, a building that can house much more than our current student population would be an unnecessary expense.

Finally, in any cost estimate, we ask that the city include life cycle costs. For example, if air conditioning will be used in a new facility, the utility expense for that should be computed up front to get a true estimate of the city’s future liability.

Regarding the environment, as stewards of the very limited forested open spaces in Portsmouth, we firmly believe that these should be preserved for future generations. We support the Master Plan designation of any conservation land. We recognize the value that wetlands provide, not just to wildlife but also for flood mitigation and pollution filtration.

Any new school, of course, we hope would be a “Green” building. Such a building not only saves money for taxpayers in the long run, but contributes less to local pollution and global warming.

Applying the Criteria to the Sites

Aside from Sagamore Creek and Parrott Avenue, we decided to call our third option Opportunity because it reflects the idea that the city has a chance to provide a better educational framework for our students, save the taxpayer money, and preserve open space both on Sagamore Creek and Alumni Field. This opportunity comes along only once every thirty years or so, and so we invite the city to take advantage of it. Specifically, in our Opportunity plan we envision a renovated Parrott Avenue school. It would house students currently at an elementary school, and that land could revert to private property. The students in their various grades would be redistributed as the school board saw fit, perhaps moving grades 7 and 8 to the under used high school, or perhaps making the elementary schools K-8.

Grade Configuration

Sagamore Creek: C

Parrott Avenue: C

Opportunity: A

Since the first two options, Sagamore Creek and Parrott Avenue both would house grades 6-8, which is the status quo, we considered that an acceptable configuration. However, we gave them a grade of C because they don’t take advantage of the benefits of other grade configurations. Opportunity gets the highest score here because, obviously, we are able to design our facilities around another, better, configuration. Such an approach would more effectively use school resources that already exist and would also better serve Portsmouth students.

School/Community Symbiosis

Sagamore Creek: F

Parrott Avenue: A

Opportunity: B

A quick look at a satellite image of the Sagamore Creek parcel makes it clear that it fits none of the criteria of a civically centered school. Therefore, it earned a grade of F. The Parrott Avenue site, on the other hand, is centrally situated, 100 feet from the new Library, the fire station, 300 yards from the police station, and obviously within walking distance of all of our urban resources. Therefore, it earns a grade of A for this criteria.

Depending on how grades are realigned (a task we leave to the school board), some students may be moved to the high school, and so these students would no longer be in the civic center. However, most or many students would remain so, and therefore this option earned a grade of B.

Economics/Fiscal Sustainability

Sagamore Creek: D

Parrott Avenue: B

Opportunity: A

The incredible site work required for Sagamore Creek quickly renders this option unrealistic. This site work includes the $8 million estimated by Team Design for the school and field facilities. Further, we anticipate the maintenance of a large parking lot and a half mile long road bringing cars, buses, water, sewer, and electric to the school will be a challenge to maintain over the next fifty years. Therefore, this option earned a grade of D.

The Parrott Avenue choice makes smart use of existing infrastructure like roads and parking and so is easily a better choice economically, both in initial construction and also in future costs. While the initial cost estimates from the school’s architect suggested that renovation would be more expensive, we question the validity of those reports and encourage the city to hire an expert in historic renovation to get a true picture of the costs. Parrott Avenue earned a grade of B for this criteria.

Opportunity earns the best grade because the nature of the plan’s flexibility allows us to place students to get the most value for our dollars. For example, if we decide to put 8th graders in the high school, we would be maximizing the use of the high school, reducing expenses, and expanding the use of this first class facility, all at the same time. We are confident that a realignment of grades can save the school system a lot of money in this respect. Therefore, Opportunity gets an A.

Environmental Impact

Sagamore Creek: F

Parrott Avenue: A

Opportunity: A

The parcel on Sagamore Creek provides needed habitat for a variety of creatures. The parcel connects the Urban Forestry Center and other open spaces along Little Harbour. The wetlands, while they can be legally mitigated, cannot be replaced. No matter how sensitive we are in new construction, the wilderness would be forever destroyed. Since this is unacceptable, Sagamore Creek earns an F.

Since both Parrott Avenue and Opportunity do not involve any new construction in green space, their environmental impact is negligible. Therefore, these two options earn an A.

Other Considerations

We did want to mention the landfill on the Sagamore Creek site. The city and school board have both hired engineers to examine the landfill. These experts, Hoyle Tanner Associates and GeoInsight, have come to the same conclusion that the landfill is suitable for development as athletic fields for use by a middle school. We don’t dispute the specifics of their findings.

However, when investigating the possibility of a “green building” design, it came to our attention that the US Green Building Council (USGBC) has a specific program for green school building design called LEED for Schools (LEED stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design). The LEED for Schools program specifically prohibits the siting of school campuses on landfills. In an e-mail exchange with the USGBC, we learned the following:

The LEED for Schools Rating System does indeed categorically exclude sites that are contaminated due to the past existence of a landfill on site. The LEED for Schools Core Committee made a decision that such sites are inappropriate for school buildings. Children are more susceptible to toxins for health issues resulting from contaminants associated with a site previously used as a landfill.

Though it may be possible to thoroughly remediate a site previously used as a landfill, the Core Committee that developed LEED for Schools felt that it is unnecessary to expose children to the risks associated with sites that have been contaminated to such a great extent.

Conclusion

Our group quickly came to look at the problem at our current middle school as a community problem: a problem that must take into account the needs of not only the 6th, 7th, and 8th grade students, but the whole community. Our community faces many projects that will be very costly. A new water treatment plant, a new sewage treatment plant, planned elementary school repairs and renovations, and a fire station renovation. We believe that the Portsmouth School Board must be responsible in ensuring that its projects are in harmony with all other projects to produce the best value to the students and the city.

The construction costs for the limited options of Parrott Avenue and Sagamore Creek do not result in good value to the community. In fact, the cost per student to a City of Portsmouth taxpayer to build either site as proposed by the School Board could be as much as four times as much as it was for the recently completed high school. This creates a large imbalance and ultimately an unfair burden on the taxpayers, the very same taxpayers whose numbers include fewer and fewer families with children. This is another current reality that cannot be overlooked.

Our city is becoming so expensive that young families with school aged children cannot afford to purchase property. This has forced our most valuable resources, our young adults, to select other areas of the country to live and work. It is a fact that everyone agrees will not turn around in the next 8-10 years. We should be looking at creatively maximizing the use of existing resources and alternative educational models as potential value solutions.

“The purpose of the Portsmouth schools is to educate all students by challenging them to become thinking, responsible, contributing citizens who continue to learn throughout their lives” is the mission of the Portsmouth School Department. Group “E”xcellent does not think it unreasonable that they, and we, all live up to that stated purpose and to become thinking and responsible. We can do better, much better.

Respectfully submitted,

Group “E”xcellent

I. Criteria

We believe the most important criteria to be considered in our city’s plans to improve the educational facilities for our 6th, 7th and 8th graders are as follows:

1. Environmental Impact

2. Social Environment for the Students

3. City Planning and Budgetary Issues

4. Adequacy of Facility

II. Why we chose these criteria

A. Environmental Impact

To be responsible stewards of our environment, we must make the choice that has the least environmental impact, both now and in the future. We should do this not only to protect the environment in which we live, but also to set an example for our children. They will be faced with even more difficult environmental decisions when they are adults.

The site at Sagamore Creek is one of the last natural areas left in the city. It was purchased by the city in 1975 using Federal Land and Water Conservation Funds for the purchase of land for uses such as parks and recreational trails. The proposed Sagamore Creek site is located in the Natural Resource Protection area of Portsmouth’s Conservation District. It provides habitat for animals, flora and fauna. The proposed causeway to the site will affect considerable wetlands which require mitigation, and vernal pools which cannot be replaced.

During her term as Governor of New Hampshire, Jeanne Shaheen issued executive order 99-2 pertaining to the preservation of New Hampshire’s traditional communities and landscapes. This was followed by a report to the governor by the NH Office of State Planning on the subject of sprawl in our state. This report read in part: “ a new school on the outskirts of town uses up previously open space, and increases the need for driving to get kids from neighborhoods to the outskirts. A renovated school, or one added on to, preserves the open space, and doesn't increase the need for driving. Clearly automobiles are important and necessary to the modern way of life. It is the way we choose to use automobiles – and land – that results in either planned, thoughtful growth, or unnecessary sprawl.”

We believe a move to the Sagamore Creek site would have the greater impact on air quality. Day to day use would require significantly more vehicle miles due to the long drive required to get there. A half mile driveway may not seem like much, but considering the number of vehicles and the every day necessity of driving due to the site’s inaccessibility to non motor transportation, we feel it will make a difference.

We believe these environmental concerns strongly favor the Parrott Avenue site.

B. Social Environment for the Students

While there has been a lot of focus placed on the physical building and its layout, we believe the heart of the educational process is the interaction of students with their teachers, fellow students, parents, school staff and other adults in the community.

Middle school students coming to and from an in-town location keep the city vibrant and keep the students in the hearts and minds of the local community. A class walk to visit City Hall, The Music Hall, Prescott Park, Strawbery Banke, the Police Station, or the city’s many historic sites can enhance the learning that takes place in the classroom. By weaving these elements of our city government and rich history into the daily middle school student’s experience, we will help develop more civic minded adults.

The presence of sidewalks leading to Parrott Ave from surrounding neighborhoods, the proximity of police and fire protection and densely populated travel routes provide a safer after school environment than the alternative of an isolated school down a ½ mile road, absent of houses or activity which finally emerges onto Lafayette Road, a busy and hazardous road for both vehicles and pedestrians.

We believe students are much more likely to walk or bike to the Parrott Ave site. The residential neighborhoods in the surrounding mile offer protection and security not possible at a remote site. Walking or biking to school promotes exercise, reduces air pollution and creates an opportunity for either student/parent or student/friend conversation and connection.

We believe these social factors favor the Parrott Ave location.

C. City Planning and Budgetary Concerns

The Master Plan, which was created through a process of public input, states the long term goals of the city that should drive the important decisions the city must make. Among these goals are the following:

LU-6 “…encourage development that supports the revitalization of community centers and neighborhoods; and that reuses and rehabilitates existing infrastructure where appropriate rather than requiring new infrastructure.”

FS-3 “Continue the integration of our schools with the greater community”

NR-1 “Direct new growth to areas that are already developed and where adequate infrastructure for growth is in place.”

T4.7 “incorporating bicycle, pedestrian and transit accommodations into site planning standards.”

T-4 " provide for safe and convenient bicycle and pedestrian circulation throughout the city."

We must also consider the cost of each choice and the impact a rising tax burden will have on work force housing, family affordability and gentrification of the downtown. Although cost estimates from Team Design are roughly equal, we see the costs in the Parrott Ave. estimate as inflated by $7 million for playing fields and an access road at the Sagamore site. If these estimates are low due to unknown costs for wetlands mitigation, the Sagamore site estimate is optimistic and thus misleading. If the Parrott Ave building is empty, there will be significant cost to the city for its upkeep and protection.

We believe the Parrott Ave site is in line with the city’s master plan and will cost the taxpayers less.

D. Building and School Grounds

The building where our middle school children can receive a quality education using the 6-7-8 educational narrative should be creative, unique and innovative in design. Its architecture should reflect the distinctive character of Portsmouth. The building should be a state-of-the-art facility that meets the needs of all present and future students. The plan should include athletic fields in close proximity to the school, meet all classroom needs in size and equipment and have a performance space. Lastly, the building should meet or exceed all LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) requirements.

Both sites can be creatively designed to achieve the goals of the education narrative; however, the LEED for Schools rating system categorically excludes sites that have a landfill on the site.

LEED standards for certification are now available for rehabilitated, in town structures.

III. How our crit

Insert two lan

IV. Other criteria or considerations that were important to our group

A. Demographic Projections

We spent considerable time discussing the available demographic projections and noted that they often contradict each other. They regularly group Portsmouth with projections for the State of NH, or Rockingham County. We feel that Portsmouth requires a separate analysis because we have very limited space available for new construction of homes for families with children. We see a trend developing toward housing conversions and construction targeted toward retirees, and thus potential for a shrinking student body. Correct projections will help avoid the expense of building excess capacity.

V. Other input for the School Board and City Council

The concept of sustainability is strongly championed by our city and by our Study Circle.

Many schools in historic cities have been renovated with great success. Team Design has given us one option for renovating the existing building. We would like the city to obtain other design ideas from other architecture firms who specialize in creative adaptive use of existing buildings, and school renovation in particular. Such a firm may be able to create a design for the school without having to encroach on the abutting field.

Athletic fields in close proximity to the school can be made available by redesigning the South Mill Pond area and Leary Field for school use. These fields currently used for Little League and Adult League recreation can be replaced elsewhere using the money to be paid for the encroachment on the Pierce Property. The Stump Dump off Islington Street was mentioned for a small stadium. The conservation area along Sagamore Creek should not be considered.

Group F would like to thank the School Board and City Council for opening this issue up to public comment through Portsmouth Listens. We encourage more use of this and other community involvement avenues in the future.

Download the Power Point presentation

I & II Our group’s top five criteria are as follows as well as why our group believe these should be our top priorities:

The following criteria are prioritized and presented as a cohesive and balanced package with the strong message that consideration of any site begin with the quality of education, but extend to broad community and sustainability impacts. Analysis of impacts should occur before rather than after an alternative is selected.

1. Quality of Education

We identified the quality of education as the top priority, defined as pertaining both to the physical building and setting as they relate to the ability to learn. The selected site must meet and hopefully exceed state standards and the needs in the Educational Narrative, and provide a safe and healthy environment, complying with ADA requirements and security. There is a high value for sites that provide easy access to valuable community educational resources, including the new library, Music Hall, and Strawberry Banke.

School setting influences physical activity, which is an important component of education. Childhood obesity, caused in part by lack of physical activity, is increasingly recognized as a major health concern by pediatricians and educators. To promote physical activity, the sites must be evaluated in terms of availability of athletic facilities and the ability for large numbers of children to walk and bike to school.

2. Community Impact

Selection of a site provides leaders with an important opportunity to contribute to the shape of the community generations to come, for better or for worse. Decision-makers must consider how each site would contribute to the character of the city, including historic character, compact form, and walkability. The school must enhance rather than detract from the character of this historic city and its quality of life. What impacts would each site have on neighborhoods, the larger city, and communities that share the school? Impacts must include:
• Transportation: what are transportation impacts on the neighborhood and city, for example, traffic and safety on Route 1 and Jones Avenue or loss of parking at the current school if spaces are used for building?
• Built environment: what contribution would each site make to the built environment, whether through preservation of a landmark historic building or creation of an aesthetically pleasing new building? If the school moves to Sagamore, what are the possibilities that the old school will be left unused or under-used for any period of time?
• Enhanced social connections: how will students and staff benefit from and contribute to the diversity and vibrancy of the city at either site?
• Future demographics: will the site accommodate predicted population growth?

3. Environmental and Sustainability Impacts

Portsmouth’s commitment to sustainability, particularly environmental quality, is confirmed in the Master Plan and current initiatives to balance downtown development and livability, set greenhouse gas reduction targets and identify energy savings, and involve citizens and staff on a Sustainability Committee. Sustainability requires leaders to use a long-term horizon for major public decisions such as middle school placement. To consider the kind of city we will leave to our children, our leaders must carefully balance a full range of impacts, including energy consumption and environmental quality, community impacts, and the economic soundness.

This criterion requires consideration of the high value of scarce open space in Portsmouth, which is essentially built out. For Parrot Avenue, this means careful assessment of the availability and use of surrounding fields. The Sagamore site should be considered in terms of loss of wetlands and cost of mitigation, addition of impervious asphalt and other surfaces and resulting runoff, reuse of the landfill, and loss of habitat. Sagamore must not be considered as a “free piece of land” with essentially no cost because the city owns it and it has only limited current use. The value of Sagamore must be in terms of its environmental value as a habitat and the great potential is has to be more broadly used by the public, for example, after a clean-up and addition of trails and signs, it could be a widely used park on the water for hiking, skiing, etc. similar to the Urban Forestry Center.

This criterion requires decision-makers to make tradeoffs among the advantages and disadvantages of a full range of sustainability impacts. For example: How can we reduce energy consumption through green building and LEED ratings, accepting that energy prices will inevitably continue to rise? How can we reduce greenhouse gas emissions through building design and emissions from transportation for students and staff? How can we protect open space and its benefit to the community?

4. Transportation

The transportation criterion requires decision-makers to consider both how students and staff travel to school, including impacts on traffic, and differences in the costs, including for new infrastructure, such as new roads, sidewalks, intersection improvements, parking, differences in costs for buses, etc. As a significant traffic generator in a compact city of 25,000, the middle school has a major impact on community-wide transportation, including traffic and congestion. For example, if the morning arrival time coincides with that for the high school and work trips, there is a risk of significant traffic congestion and delays. Decision-makers should consider options available for students to travel to school, including the limited ability of working parents to drive to and from school, including for after school activities.

The group put a significant value on the ability of students to walk or bicycle to school. Walking and cycling replace car trips by parents; traffic, air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions; and contribute to student health through physical activity. As part of the assessment of transportation aspects of the sites, it is essential to consider the number of students and staff who live within a mile of school – a convenient walking and cycling distance. Consideration of walking and cycling should not be limited to current levels but should reflect potential numbers after aggressive education and promotion such as the national Safe Routes to School program.

5. Full Cost

The full cost criterion cuts across all the other criteria. Monetary cost consideration must extend beyond design and construction to consider all additional public costs associated with each site, including new or improved roads, intersections, sidewalks, and parking, unless improvements are already funded regardless of choice of sites. Costs should also include adjustments to land trusts or restrictions, mitigation of wetlands, etc.

Beyond monetary costs, it is essential that there be an open and transparent process that involves the public in trading off non-monetary costs related to sustainability, environmental, and community impacts alongside full monetary costs.

III. How our top five criteria apply to sites:

We applied our criteria to each site by looking toward the future -- at a renovated Parrott Avenue site and a new school at the Sagamore site.

A. Renovate Parrott Avenue site:

QUALITY OF EDUCATION (physical environment)

The Parrott Avenue site allows students to feel connected to the core of the city through their 70-year-old building, which is a key component of downtown architecture. Learning is enhanced by proximity to the new library and easy access to community resources, including the Music Hall, Strawberry Banke, and community events.

The one negative impact is dislocation of students during the renovation. Although the initial plans would provide for 100 additional students, it would be difficult to accommodate greater numbers.

COMMUNITY IMPACT

The current Middle School is a physical anchor for the downtown. The current location is within walking distance to many arts, cultural and historic organizations, allowing students and staff to actively and easily participate in a vibrant and thriving downtown community, including through service projects. The location allows the students and their neighbors at the Senior Center to contribute to a diverse and multi-generational environment in downtown. Students gain independence by walking to internships and church and other activities.

We found no negative impact on the community.

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SUSTAINABIILTY IMPACT

The Parrott Ave site supports the City’s commitment to sustainability, as advanced by the Sustainability Committee and the Council’s commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The “carbon footprint” of the school would be lower at Parrot Avenue, considering the large number of students who could easily walk or bike, reducing car trips, energy consumption, and air pollution. The Parrot Avenue site would allow the Sagamore site to be preserved as open space for recreation and wildlife habitat. The Parrot Avenue site is fully supported with infrastructure – utilities, water, roads, and sidewalks.

One negative impact might be the loss of Pierce Family Trust land as open space for recreation. A short-term negative impact would be the debris from the renovation of the current school.

TRANSPORTATION

The ability of students and staff to walk or bike to the school is a positive attribute of the current site. Future walking and biking, which could be greatly expanded because most students live within a mile, would reduce the need for parents to drive to school, easing traffic on surrounding streets and air pollution, and encouraging valuable physical activity.

Current limitations include lack of parking and the need for improved bus and car drop-offs and pick-ups, both of which hopefully would be addressed in renovation plans.

FULL COST

Parrot Avenue does not require costly new transportation infrastructure – roads, sidewalks, lights, utilities, and water lines are already in place. There are no costs to use environmentally sensitive open space.

As a negative, the Pierce Family Trust may have to be bought out for land for construction.

B. Sagamore Creek:

QUALITY OF EDUCATION

This site would allow greater flexibility in the design of a new building. The large amount of available land would accommodate new recreational fields and provide space for future expansion. There may also be an opportunity for some interaction and sharing of resources between the middle school and the high school.

A negative impact would be that the remote location would force students to depend on busy parents for rides and lead to an increase in time spent for transportation to school and after school events. Proximity to the high school may invite negative influences on middle school students.

COMMUNITY IMPACT

The positive attribute for the community is the ability to accommodate possible future growth in enrollment. Students and staff would have access to the public pool.

The main negative impact on the community would be the loss of one of the last remaining large open spaces in the city. The location would deprive students of the benefits of proximity to the library and other educational resources in the center of Portsmouth. The students would have less opportunity to be a part of the diverse city community.

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SUSTAINABIILTY IMPACT

The Sagamore location would provide an attractive setting.

Loss of wetlands, sensitive habitat, and a valuable future park have negative impacts on environment and sustainability. Covering open space with buildings and asphalt would create “heat islands” and pollution from runoffs into the watershed. Dependence on car trips would increase air pollution, energy consumption, and carbon emissions.

TRANSPORTATION

There would be more parking at this site.

Dependence on parents for rides to the remote school would aggravate traffic problems, particularly on Route 1/Lafayette Road and Jones Avenue, with common start times with the high school. There would also likely be additional costs for buses. The remote location would eliminate opportunities for physical activity benefits from walking and biking.

FULL COSTS

The city could possibly sell or reuse the Parrott Ave building for additional revenue.

There would be a negative financial impact because there is no infrastructure at this site, requiring the city to build roads and sidewalks, add water and sewer lines, and electrical conduits. Any infrastructure costs beyond those that are already budgeted regardless of the site selected, must be factored into cost comparisons. Also, there may be additional costs as well for increased volume at the treatment and pumping facilities because of an additional building. Although monetary costs of lost open space, including wetlands and habitat, are difficult to calculate, these social and environmental costs must be seriously considered in “full cost,” as do costs of the current Conservation Land Trust and any mitigation of wetlands.

C. Other alternatives:

The group discussed alternatives such as reconfiguring the four elementary schools to incorporate K-8 or add a sixth grade. Either scenario would mean renovating the current middle school, so all criteria would apply as outlined above.

With limited information on any other sites that the School Board has already reviewed, we found it difficult to identify an “alternative” location. We did agree that more research should be done with any eye toward identifying land under the 28 acres we believe was the criterion used by the School Board. This minimum land criteria greatly exceeds the Parrott Avenue site.

IV. Other criteria or considerations that did not make the “top five” but were important to our group.

NOTE: At the end of our sessions, this group voted on how they felt about the two proposed sites. Five people voted in favor of renovating the current middle school, one voted in favor of building on the Sagamore site, one was undecided, and one did not vote.

Aesthetics and Design

The group included aesthetics and design as an important additional criterion. There was a consensus about the value of a sense of place through history that Portsmouth has worked to enhance. The group recognized the contribution the historic school makes to the downtown and voiced concern about the risks of the building remaining unused. Considering current budget constraints, likely cost inflation, and the risk of corner cutting, it is important that any new alternative include the cost of a quality design to allow a fair comparison to the existing historic school.

VI. Other input for the School Board and City Council

If the decision is made to renovate the current school, related considerations include to:
•Use Sagamore site for recreation fields only.
•Move the dog park to the Sagamore site allowing that space to be used for fields, if needed.
•Improve the Sagamore site and create a natural recreation facility similar to the Urban Forestry Center.
•Publicize the fact that the Sagamore site belongs to the public, and make basic improvements (trails, signs, maps, etc.) to enhance community enjoyment.

What criteria should be incorporated into our city’s plans to improve the educational facilities for our 6th, 7th and 8th graders?

I. Our group’s top five criteria were:
• Integration of School and Community
• Reuse of Existing Buildings
• Multiple Use of New and Existing City Assets
• Successful Student Learning [i.e., Consider Educational Narrative to Ensure Successful Student Learning]
• Environmental Sustainability

NOTE: Group H consisted of nine people. While the group agreed on many points, in some cases a minority of participants disagreed and duly voiced differing views. In this report, please note that references to the “minority” within the group represents two people and the “majority” represents the remaining seven people.

II. Group H believed these should be our top priorities because:

• Integration of School and Community

By “integration,” the group meant connection/understanding/strong bonds between the school and community.

Whichever site is chosen, the group agrees that the assets and environment that surround the school will impact students’ educational experience. The group also agrees that the school should address the long-term needs of the community as it evolves, and take a flexible approach so that the site—whichever one is chosen—can accommodate wide-ranging demographic projections and possibly unpredictable outcomes in the coming decades. Finally, the group agrees that the school’s site should establish a sense of history and sense of place for students—whether the appreciation of surrounding city history on Parrot Ave. or appreciation f nature at Sagamore site.

The majority of the group wants to integrate the middle school into the surrounding community (defined as the city center or downtown), while the minority wants to bring the community into the school (i.e., so that with a school located at Sagamore Creek, the community is infused into the school).

The majority favors a campus-like feel to the school so that it’s integrated into the downtown community. They said it’s important for middle school students “to see and be seen” by the community, to establish a visible, welcome presence amid a bustling civil society that surrounds and embraces it. That way, the students would be connected to the community and be seen by adults more frequently—and citizens (including childless citizens) would gain an increased awareness and appreciation of the middle school.

In a campus-like setting, the majority felt that students would benefit by attending a school with an “urban” feel, meaning a school built to the lot lines (with higher floors, if necessary) so that it fits into the existing city fabric—a “work with what you’ve got” philosophy as opposed to building a new school that’s physically separated from the community’s center of activity and history.

The group wants to ensure students’ safety and security regardless of the site that’s chosen. A majority proposes that by cutting off traffic on Parrot Ave. in front of school and expanding the existing building, the city could achieve less interaction among cars, buses and students (thus enhancing safety) while also creating more green space (perhaps stretching all the way to the pond), thus affording a more walkable “campus feel” to the school.

The group also wants the city to explore the possibility of having the former Visiting Nurses building on Parrot Ave. used as part of the campus.

A majority also feels that maintaining separate sites for middle school and high school students can enhance safety in terms of evacuation plans in the event of a community-wide emergency.

• Reuse of Existing Buildings

The minority does not agree with this bullet point.

The group does agree, however, that whichever site is chosen, it’s important to take the existing middle school’s architecture and historical features and preserve them in the new site to create a sense of historical continuity.

The majority feels that there are provisions within the Master Plan (MP) that we should follow—and that whichever site is chosen, that site must not contradict the MP. Specifically, the MP states in goal LU6 to "encourage development that supports the revitalization of community centers and neighborhoods; and that reuses and rehabilitates existing infrastructure where appropriate rather than requiring new infrastructure." The MP also states in goal NR1 that new growth should be directed to areas that are already developed and that wildlife corridors should be preserved and enhanced.

The majority adds that existing sewer, water and utilities already serve the Parrot Ave. site, so that fits into the “reuse, not rebuild” concept that they favor and that’s in the MP. Such infrastructure elements would need to be laid out from scratch at the Sagamore site.

• Multiple Use of New and Existing City Assets

The group agrees that whichever site is chosen, there is a need for creativity and flexibility in how the facility is used so that the resulting school offers venues that provide multiple uses for both students and the community at large. Examples include a new auditorium, new parking and new athletic fields.

The majority feels that a new multi-level parking structure (perhaps built on the municipal lot near Parrot Ave.), a new athletic field and a new auditorium (or amphitheatre) can be used by the community (including downtown merchants) during non-school hours. They also feel that the new public library can have more multiple uses during school-day hours.

• Successful Student Learning [i.e., Consider Educational Narrative to Ensure Successful Student Learning]

The group agrees that whichever site is chosen, the school should provide for successful student learning. The physical plant needs to support such learning, so that means funds for building/renovating must not shortchange money for supplies/computers/learning resources/after-school programs/music, etc. The group also endorses the “pod” design, especially in student service rooms where pods discourage ostracizing certain students.

• Environmental Sustainability

The group agrees that the school be a “green building” that’s LEED-certified and the majority wants to preserve the city’s remaining natural acreage wherever possible.

III. How our top five criteria apply to sites:

Through a vote, the group decided to use a 1-5 scale (1=perfect match and 5=no match) based on each of the five criteria. The group did not consider the third category—“other”. Eight people voted (one member chose not to vote). The results:

VI. Other input for the School Board and City Council:

1. The group would like sidewalks throughout the city. If more sidewalks are built in the area surrounding the Parrot Ave. site, it may induce more students to walk to school (and enhance their safety as pedestrians).

2. The group would like the City Council to clarify publicly the status of the Peirce property (includes adjacent athletic fields). The public needs to know to what extent that land is buildable. What potential legal and/or financial issues are involved? The group feels the same way about the Sagamore Creek site: The city needs to clarify that site’s buildability.

3. The group would like more information on the long-term safety of building on the Jones landfill. What are the latent or long-term health risks? The group thinks more tests and research are needed.

Download the Power Point presentation

Participants: Leslie Brenner, Peg Roy, Jim Colbert, Kathy Pearce, Lisa Sweet, Susan Chamberlin, Patrick Ellis, Monica Sylla, Meghan Rice, and Gerald Duffy (Zelita Morgan withdrew her name from the final report)

Facilitator: Sherry Brandsema

What criteria should be incorporated into our city’s plans to improve the educational facilities for our 6th, 7th and 8th graders?

I. Our group’s top five criteria were:

1. Respect and apply City of Portsmouth Master Plan (11 votes)

2. Carefully evaluate and minimize environmental impact (8 votes)

3. Respect and apply the educational narrative (6 votes)

4. Remain a multi-year school – more than 2 grades (6 votes)

5. Design energy-efficient building with architectural significance (6 votes)

II. Our group selected these as our top priorities because:

1. Respect and apply the Portsmouth City Master Plan (11 votes)

We think the Portsmouth City Master Plan is a very important document. It was created through a collaborative process that involved city government and many of its citizens (Portsmouth Listens, Phase II). Because the Master Plan is a comprehensive vision for the future of the whole city, we believe that plans for a Portsmouth Middle School should respect and honor that vision and be integral to it.

More specifically, we see the Middle School as not just a one-off project, but instead as a development that is part of a long-range municipal plan. Such a plan would take into consideration a long-range plan for schools and other infrastructures in the city and reflect a reasonable interpretation of the differing demographic projections we already have at hand. Being an integral part of a long-term plan would also mean that we see the Middle School as just one element in a capital improvement plan for a variety of city needs (for example, the building of the new waste-water plant).

By adhering to the Master Plan, the City Council and School Board will send a strong message to the Portsmouth community: That our city values the benefits of thoughtful, long-term planning and that we want to bequeath future citizens (many of whom are now students in the Portsmouth school system) of a livable city of which they can be proud.

2. Carefully evaluate and minimize environmental impact (8 votes)

We would expect the plans for the Middle School, regardless of final location, to take into account any disturbance to existing ecosystems, the importance of wetlands, the loss of woodland or open land, and the impact on wildlife habitat.

This generation of school children is benefiting like no other from increasing knowledge of the environment and the ecosystems that support our very existence (water, air, and flora and fauna). Students are learning in a very practical way not only about the natural world, but also about the ways in which human life impacts it.

In light of this, we think it is very important the Middle School reflect the most up-to-date knowledge about how a new building impacts the environment. Importantly, it is also an opportunity to send a strong message (turning words into action) – not only to Portsmouth’s s school children, but also to all citizens – that the city takes very seriously its obligation to the natural world we live in.

3. Respect and apply the educational narrative (6 votes)

We ask the City Council and School Board to respect and apply the existing educational narrative for the Portsmouth Middle School. The narrative spells out the overarching philosophy that shapes the practical aspects of Middle School education and how it is run day-by-day in the classrooms – for example, the use of classroom clusters or “pods” designed to promote collaboration among teaching staff.

Significantly, the narrative was developed through collaboration between the architects and our own community of professional teachers and administrators – a community we respect and value for their important work. Through interviews and consultation, teachers were asked about what they need in a new facility to help deliver the best possible education for Portsmouth’s students. The existing educational narrative and the preliminary designs for the Middle School were informed by those findings.

4. Remain a multi-year school – more than 2 grades (6 votes)

Our group supports the continuation of the current Middle School educational model. This research-based model calls for a multi-year school with more than two grades. Studies on the subject carried out around the United States have concluded that students benefit from this model for Middle School education. Findings show, for example, that students develop better transitional skills and experience less frustration and boredom.

We are concerned that – in spite of explicit support from teachers and the School Board – this proven model will be compromised by the imposition of non-educational factors.

5. Design energy-efficient building with architectural significance (6 votes)

Buildings speak. They reflect back to us our values of harmonious development with both the surrounding natural world and our existing buildings and streetscapes. Portsmouth and its varied architecture is a city that is much-admired around the country for the thoughtful integration of its history, traditions, and the needs of modern times. That is why we want a Middle School that is architecturally “significant.” We envision a creative, attractive building that respects our architectural heritage and/or provides a structure that harmoniously fits its surroundings.

Practically speaking, we think the new building should be built to high-quality construction standards. We would expect a new building that will weather time and the expected wear-and-tear with resilience. We would not expect to see degraded features after only a few years’ use.

In addition, the times we live in require a strong focus on energy-efficiency. The interior of the school should provide year-round comfort (conducive to teaching and learning) with the lowest possible energy costs. New technologies make this possible in a way that would have been inconceivable fifty years ago. We know enough now about energy issues to calculate the “carbon footprint” of buildings. This knowledge should play a key role in the design of the new school.

III. How our top five criteria apply to sites (two page limit):

A. Renovate Parrott Avenue:

B. Sagamore Creek:

C. Other alternatives* we believe exist, and how our criteria apply:

*Note: Regarding other locations, our group felt that all criteria should be applied, whether the site is undeveloped or not.

**Note: 4 out of 9 members believe that, while being likely, the loss of green space is not necessarily a certainty.

IV. Other criteria or considerations that did not make the “top five” but were important to our group.

Criteria Receiving One or More Votes:

• Consider walkability for ALL students (5 votes)

Some members of the group felt that walkability is a design criterion worth attention. Offering students increased opportunities to walk would have health benefits and a positive environmental effect. One member felt strongly that walkability should not be considered as a criterion.

• Start site selection with criteria provided by study circles, then search city for sites or contiguous small sites that fit those criteria (3 votes)

Ideas from the group included: looking at additional building sites such as the Wentworth School or another elementary school/site; filling in the Mill Pond; locating in the North End; having a 6th-grade annex in a building like the Compass Care Center; using the District Court building; using the Federal Building; and finding land at Pease for playing fields.

• Make sure we get the highest percentage of state aid (3 votes)

• Have minimal impact on students during construction and transition (2 votes)

• Consider building/land swaps (1 vote)

• Make school accessible to after-school activities (1 vote)

• Integrate the school into the community (1 vote)

The idea of this criterion was to integrate the Middle School into the existing city infrastructure: downtown with its businesses, neighborhoods, close-by services such as the new library, police station, etc.

• Consider the issue of potential flooding (1 vote)

Concern was expressed about the risk of potential flooding at the current Middle School site that would affect fields, roads, and buildings. Rising sea levels and/or increasingly severe weather was raised as a potential cause.

• Be flexible with regards to grade configuration (1 vote)

This criterion reflected interest in exploring other possibilities for the educational narrative/model, such as K through 8, and so on. Another related item was the consideration of demographics. This would involve looking at the size of the current student population, projected numbers for the future, and then recognizing the implications and planning accordingly. Another idea was to include another grade in the current Middle School model; for example, adding the 5th grade.

• Other sites: same criteria would apply

V. Other input for the School Board and City Council

Other Considerations of Note Within Our Group:

• Make site and design secure and safety for well-being of students

This criterion included the following: Meeting minimum state requirements for safety, good night-lighting, good ventilation, adequate bathrooms and water fountains, evaluation of toxic materials in buildings and surrounding environment (hazards such as landfill contamination, South Mill pond, asbestos), and the safety-related separation of the school from public use.

• Support all decisions with research

• Evaluate how choice of site meets needs for playing fields and balances public need

• Take into account traffic and safety issues

The ideas raised here included: providing sidewalks, traffic lights, traffic flow, and dedicated bus lanes; reducing vehicular fumes; establishing evacuation routes; implementing applicable traffic safety measures. It would be important to balance these improvements with the cost of making of them.

• Make sure ongoing maintenance and operation is fully funded

• Remain a great educational, warm, and loving place

• Plan for long-range building use and expansion

This criterion recognized the probability of the renovated or new building being in use for another 50 to 100 years. Therefore, the design should be flexible enough to adapt to future change. A related point was to secure the services of experienced architects and widen the variety of potential architects to include those with specialized expertise in designing schools and renovating historic buildings.

• Be cost-effective and quantified during transition and ongoing operation

This criterion would take into account compliance and meeting requirements would affect funding.

• Provide access to resources/walking tours for educational purposes

This criterion included an assessment of walking versus cost of buses to reach various local resources, such as the Urban Forestry Center and the public library, etc.

• Share resources in the city

• Provide auditorium large enough for the whole Middle School community

While this criterion was discussed mostly in positive terms, one member expressed strong dissent.

Items the Group Decided Were Not Important (or Already Dealt with Elsewhere):

• Develop a municipal auditorium that the school can use

• Location should be appropriate to the Middle School student population

• After-school courses, music, and homework club should accommodated in the building

• Consider single-sex education

Download the Power Point presentation

Group J

Chris Beal
Paul Cragnoline
Robin LeBlanc
Paul Mannle
Tobey Schoff
John Shea
William St. Laurent
Rose Sulley
Joan Walsh
ML Hannay - facilitator

What criteria should be incorporated into our city’s plans to improve the educational facilities for our 6th, 7th and 8th graders?

I. Our Group's Top Five Criteria:

1. Safety

2. Do the Right Thing – Strategically

3. Geographic location

4. Educational philosophy

5. Cost

II. Rationale for Group J's Top Priorities:

Group J's dialogue focused on the following two queries to determine the top five criteria: a) What course of action is in the best interests of students/teachers/learning?; b) What course of action is in the best interests of the community?

A. Safety. The primary concern of decision-makers must be the physical well-being of our children and the school's teachers and staff. We believe any plan to improve the educational facilities of the Portsmouth Middle School (PMS) must ensure that our children and teachers will not be negatively impacted by current and/or future environmental concerns. Although many aspects of life are governed by calculated risk, the children of Portsmouth represent our joy, our passion, our future. Even the smallest risk or potential risk to their safety, health, and development is unacceptable. Also, the underlying assumption made by Group J with respect to safety is that regardless of site selection, the new facility shall meet all relevant safety codes. Students walking or biking to school should be encouraged and they should be able to do so safely.

B. Do the Right Thing - Strategically. Group J is adamant that city leaders do the right thing for students, teachers, and the community no matter how difficult the path while minimizing disruption to our students. We acknowledge this may be a difficult task. Goal FS-3 of the Master Plan: “Continue to provide quality facilities that promote excellence in public education.” Section “BI-SD-08: MIDDLE SCHOOL UPGRADE” of the 2008-2013 Capital Improvements plan states: “Renovation and Possible New Construction at Portsmouth Middle School. The Portsmouth Middle School was constructed in the mid-1930’s and was remodeled in the early 1970’s. The building will need a complete engineering review as well as an educational space needs review in order to determine the scope of work. Given the age and the current classroom layout, a complete renovation as well as possibly some new construction can be anticipated. Cost figures are only a preliminary estimate and need refining in the future. Total Project $30,025,000.” (underlining above ours – Group J) http://www.cityofportsmouth.com/planning/2008-2013CapitalImprovements.pdf,

The following strategic issues must be addressed before any course of action regarding PMS is taken.

1. Exhaust all possibilities. Due diligence has not been paid to this critical issue that will impact Portsmouth for generations. Given the Portsmouth Listen's report requirements, let's assume that the only viable sites are Parrot Avenue and Sagamore Creek. We infer that the School Board as a whole would like to take action on the middle school issue sooner rather than later. The authors of the Master Plan devised strategies for accomplishing the goal of providing quality facilities for excellence in education: “FS-3.1 Complete an assessment of the Middle School to determine its adequacy for future needs consistent with educational programming, and complete renovation/new construction project.” http://www.cityofportsmouth.com/planning/2008-2013CapitalImprovements.pdf

We agree with this strategy and believe the city must invest appropriate time and money in a thorough, competitive process that will provide a number of proposals to consider. Currently, the only plans/sketches on renovation and new building are by Team Design. We believe that a highly competitive process involving several educational design firms that have proven experience with new construction, historic preservation, and the adaptive use of current structures is absolutely critical to the decision-making process. If the Capital Improvements plan calls for investing approximately $30M to improving the middle school educational facilities, let's spend appropriate money early – in the design and planning phase of the project – and then choose from several creative, cutting edge designs. The Capital Improvements document suggests its authors considered renovation the best option given the wording of the paragraph cited above. Although the report states that the $30M cost figure is preliminary, we don't believe the authors of the Capital Improvements report imagined or would support the $39-48M estimates provided by Team Design.

2. We must learn from our mistakes. Portsmouth recently built a new high school (and renovated a large portion of the old building). What lessons were learned? What should we do differently concerning PMS with the benefit of our Portsmouth High School (PHS) experience? Are we happy with Team Design's role in the construction of PHS? Are any deficiencies in the building directly related to Team Design’s work? This after-action review may require independent third-party involvement given that it may be understandably difficult for an unbiased review from the School Board, the School Department, and/or city officials.

3. Any improvements in PMS educational facilities must achieve project certification through The United States Green Building Council's (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design® (LEED) for Schools Rating System. From the USGBC website, “LEED® certification provides independent, third-party verification that a building project meets the highest performance standards.” (www.usgbc.org)

4. Improvements must fit the community school model.

5. Consider the taxpayer. If a new middle school is constructed, will renovating PMS for purposes other than education impose even more burden on Portsmouth taxpayers? If left vacant in the event of new building construction, is the community of Portsmouth ready for another empty building on its rolls, especially one in the heart of the city?

C. Geographic location.

1. The middle school should be at or near the center of the community such that a significant number of middle school students could walk and/or ride bicycles to school; this is a LEED® certification issue. The architecture and aesthetics of the middle school should be true to the historical nature of Portsmouth and its culture.

2. Athletic fields should be adequate and close. Adequate parking options are required - this is a LEED® certification issue.

D. Educational philosophy. “Design and construct facility improvements to meet programmatic needs.” - Portsmouth Master Plan. Group J believes we should follow the Master Plan. We found the middle school philosophy of small collaborative teaching teams and an integrated curriculum very compelling. We agree that the middle school philosophy supports the development of adolescents during the critical ages of 11-14.

1. Improvements must support the educational philosophy but also be flexible enough should our educational leaders and teachers decide to move in a different direction – see Little Harbor's design as an example of how construction anchored to educational philosophy is not the best approach. Improvements must support a strong school culture. Group J supports the team-approach middle school philosophy; however, it does not necessarily believe that philosophy for grades 6-8 requires a separate facility. Any improvements should be dynamic and meet current and future technological needs.

E. Cost. Group J believes that the taxpayer must be kept in mind.

1. Improvements must produce a cutting edge facility while being fiscally responsible; costs are directly related to the hired firm(s)’ expertise and ability to execute/manage the project. Our teachers, students and community deserve a well designed, state-of-the-art facility; our taxpayers deserve a fiscally responsible project that is well-managed.

2. The PMS footprint should be minimized while creatively optimizing space. Group J believes that we must decide what we truly need as compared to what we want. As an example, does the middle school really need an auditorium when options exist in the form of the high school's auditorium, the Music Hall, and/or a combination cafeteria-auditorium?

3. Any new facility or renovation must achieve certification through LEED® for Schools Rating System. We believe this certification will more than pay for itself in the long term and also provide a possible vehicle for curriculum work in areas such as the environment and energy conservation.

III. How our top five criteria apply to the proposed sites:

Renovate the Portsmouth Middle School at Parrott Avenue

Due diligence in selecting the very best design firm and construction company is essential to renovating PMS to fit the educational narrative and the needs of the Portsmouth community.

A. Safety. The Parrott Avenue site is not hazardous or potentially hazardous. Renovating PMS at Parrott Avenue can be LEED® certified. We assume that any renovation of the current middle school will meet all applicable safety codes. Existing transportation – safety issues can be resolved through thoughtful planning and design. The current middle school is located in the community center creating a natural safety net that makes walking and biking to school possible.

B. Do the Right Thing - Strategically. The Portsmouth Master Plan (2005) addresses educational facilities in general terms. Goal LU-6 Objective: “Encourage development that supports the revitalization of community centers and neighborhoods; and that reuses and rehabilitates existing infrastructure where appropriate rather than requiring new infrastructure.” Renovating PMS will require creative, adaptive leadership from the School Board, the superintendent of schools, the PMS administration and teachers. Renovating PMS would render moot the prospects and taxpayer burden of renovating PMS for some other capacity as well as that of owning another vacant school.

C. Geographic location. According to the Portsmouth Master Plan (PMP), “Portsmouth’s downtown is widely recognized as the heart of the community.” One of the objectives of PMP Goal FS-3 is to “Continue the integration of our schools with the greater community.” PMS is fully integrated with the community. Children can walk and bike to school. The current middle school is sited near the new $7 million dollar library with its outstanding resources. It is also within walking distance of the Music Hall and Strawberry Bank. The architecture and aesthetics of PMS is true to the historical nature of Portsmouth and its culture. It is a city landmark.

D. Educational philosophy. Assuming due diligence is accomplished in terms of design and construction, Group J believes that renovating PMS can fit the educational narrative of the team-approach middle school philosophy. A cutting-edge, safe, green building located in the heart of Portsmouth will also attract the very best teachers for our children. Is it possible to complete any renovation of the current middle school in stages to minimize any disruption of teaching and learning?

E. Cost. It is difficult to address the cost criteria since we believe that the city has not done its due diligence in acquiring plans from a large number of expert firms. Assuming the city plans the renovation thoroughly and hires the very best, the city can provide a cutting edge, green middle school that supports both the educational narrative and the Master Plan. LEED® will provide long-term savings in terms of maintenance and energy requirements. We do believe that improvements must produce a dynamic facility while being fiscally responsible; costs are directly related to the hired firm(s)’ expertise and ability to execute/manage the project. Our teachers, students and community deserve a well designed, state-of-the-art facility; our taxpayers deserve a fiscally responsible project that is well managed. These things can occur at the current middle school site. We believe that there are creative ways to minimize the PMS footprint while optimizing space. The Parrot Avenue site also ensures that we will balance what we truly need with what we want.

Sagamore Creek - New Construction:

A. Safety. According to our consensus group criteria, even the smallest risk or potential risk to the safety, health, and development of Portsmouth’s children is unacceptable. With that in mind, the Sagamore Creek site should be eliminated from consideration as a viable plan to improve the educational facilities for our middle schoolers. Group J reached its decision concerning the safety of the Sagamore Creek using subjective and objective input. Objectively, Group J found the standards articulated by the United States Green Building Council compelling. USGBC’s website states: “Sites that are contaminated due to the past existence of a landfill on the site are prohibited.” http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=2593)

Furthermore, Ms. Rachel Gutter, who will soon assume the duties of School Sector Manager at USGBC, wrote in an e-mail:

“The LEED® for Schools Rating System does indeed categorically exclude sites that are contaminated due to the past existence of a landfill on site. The LEED® for Schools Core Committee made a decision that such sites are inappropriate for school buildings. Children are more susceptible to toxins and environmental pollutants than adults and are thus at greater risk for health issues resulting from contaminants associated with a site previously used as a landfill. The LEED® for Schools Rating System acknowledges that certain other contaminated sites may be sufficiently rehabilitated to protect children's health and safety and that these sites may, in some cases, be appropriate locations for school buildings. Though it may be possible to thoroughly remediate a site previously used as a landfill, the Core Committee that developed LEED® for Schools felt that it is unnecessary to expose children to the risks associated with sites that have been contaminated to such a great extent.”

Group J's consensus was that even the smallest health risk associated with constructing a school on the Sagamore Creek site is not acceptable. Our children’s health and well-being must not be compromised. History shows that science and engineering methods are often unable to fully explain and account for complex real-world phenomena. We believe that the potential adverse impact of citing a school near a landfill and positioning its athletic fields on a landfill cannot be fully explained nor modeled using current engineering and scientific methods. The United States Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design® (LEED®) standards would not apply to a school sited near any landfill.

Group J believes that we have no way of knowing the true picture of what is in the landfill or what possibly could happen to the landfill if major construction were to take place at the Sagamore Creek site. As reported on the city’s own website, “The depth of waste present at the site ranges from about 1 foot along its northwesterly boundary to about 35 feet at the southeasterly side.” http://www.cityofportsmouth.com/school/middleschooldesign/15.pdf

Students walking or biking to school should be encouraged and they should be able to do so safely - not only from a traffic perspective, but overall safety from potentially dangerous situations, i.e., bullying from older kids, potential drug dealers, child predators, etc. The isolated nature of this site may discourage parents from allowing their children to walk and bike to school.

B. Do the Right Thing - Strategically. The consensus of Group J is that new construction on the Sagamore Creek site would be adverse to the strategic goals of the city as described in the Master Plan. New construction at Sagamore Creek would leave one more building vacant in the downtown area, and would develop rather than preserve green space.

C. Geographic location. This site does not support the goals as articulated in the Portsmouth Master Plan. Goal NR-1 reads, “Develop and promote an approach to natural resource protection and planning that is based on watershed boundaries, wildlife habitat areas, and open space corridors.” One of the objectives of this goal is to, “Preserve and restore identified critical habitats and enhance wildlife corridors. Maintain and manage public open space and conservation lands for appropriate levels of use and access.” The Sagamore Creek site affords limited ability for kids to walk/bike to school. Portsmouth will lose a significant piece of open, green space. Children will lose their sense of community and neighborhood since they are in a hidden area. Our middle schoolers will also lose access to the new Portsmouth Library.

D. Educational philosophy. We assume that any new construction, if executed correctly, would support the educational narrative. However, this site is unacceptable due to overriding safety concerns – see above.

E. Cost. Group J believes that the cost associated with a new building would be exorbitant and would also necessitate a renovation of PMS for some other purpose. We believe the city would not leave such a building vacant in the heart of the city.

Other alternatives we believe exist, and how our criteria apply:

While we strongly support the middle school philosophy, Group J believes that the teaching philosophy may not be affected by viewing alternative school configurations. As an example, we discussed different grade configurations such as K-8 schools, K-6 schools, and even renovating Lafayette school so that it could be a city-wide kindergarten. More due diligence: If elected officials decide on a site other than Parrott Avenue, have all potential sites been truly explored? Could we use currently closed and/or underutilized school facilities, perhaps in different grade configurations?

In our deliberations on grade configurations, Group J expressed a strong concern regarding grade 6 exiting elementary school too soon. We wondered if grade 6 really needed to be part of the middle school given that the sixth grade schedule does not seem to follow the middle school philosophy as practiced in seventh and eighth grades. Although group J did not have the time, information, and resources to analyze alternative school configurations, we felt these options should be considered in any deliberations of improving the middle school facility.

IV. Other criteria that did not make the “top five” but were important to our group.

Group J agreed that our top five criteria are of utmost importance.

V. Other input for the School Board and City Council.

Clearly, the School Board and School Administration have the best interests of our students and teachers in mind as they plan improvements for grades 6-8. It is a consensus belief of this group that the best interests of our students and teachers are inherently connected to the best interests of this community. Although the future of the educational facilities for our middle school children is currently a contentious issue, the two sides simply cannot be diametrically opposed since the welfare of our community and of our school system are co-dependent. We ask our School Board and City Council to keep that in mind and to make responsible, thoughtful decisions regarding the improvements for grades 6-8. This group can see that the easiest thing from a School Board perspective would be to build new facility, however we are asking that the School Board and City Council choose the harder right over the easier wrong when planning improvements for all of our schools.

The School Department's budget is far and away the largest outlay of Portsmouth's fiscal resources. In the proposed 2008 city budget, over thirty-four million dollars of the approximately eighty million dollar budget is earmarked to education. In comparison the next two largest outlays, municipal and non-operating expenditures, account for approximately fifteen million dollars each. Portsmouth faces many important decisions in its near future. We must invest the time and money to make the best decision regarding the educational facilities for our middle school children.

What criteria should be incorporated into our city’s plans to improve the educational facilities for our 6th, 7th and 8th graders?

I. Our Group’s top five criteria are:

1. Adhere to the Master Plan as adopted by the City of Portsmouth in March, 2005

2. Maintain the quality of education of Portsmouth’s 6th, 7th, and 8th grade students.

3. Ensure the safety, security, and health of our middle school students

4. Minimize the taxpayer burden by examining the costs and implications.

5. Construct a sustainable “green” facility meets today’s needs without compromising future needs.

Study Circle Group K

Theresa Garabedian, Facilitator
Jodi Adams
Robert Burns
Nancy Emerson
Thomas Hindle
Clif Horrigan
Kim Kumph
JoAnn Paradis

II. Our group believed these should be our top priorities because:

1. Adhere to the Master Plan -

This plan envisions the city’s future development and presents priorities and goals, across ten different topic areas. The Plan stresses an overriding principle of resource protection and sustainability which focuses on the long term stewardship of our community. While any plan to improve middle school facilities affects almost all ten areas of development, the most relevant portions are:

1. Transportation: This goal includes the development of city-wide sidewalk and bicycle routes, bicycle racks, safety standards, and increased public participation in walking and riding

2. Community Facilities and Services: Continue the integration of our schools with the greater community and expand intergenerational learning, shared resources and programs.

3. Natural Resources and Open Space: This goal recommends that the City be proactive in land protection and prioritizes open space protection and management policies; improve coordination among City Boards and Departments in order to protect and improve natural resources; follow a standard for development that achieves the “least impact to wetlands”; develop a wetlands protection plan which targets significant wetland areas such as Sagamore Creek. It also stresses the education of City officials and residents about practices that protect environmental quality and to work with the schools to educate the school community about natural resources, to engage children in conservation projects, and to involve students in public awareness campaigns.

4. Recreation: Expand and strengthen recreational department and school athletic partnership.

5. Cultural and Historic Resources and the Arts: This topic encourages the recognition, preservation, and appreciation of the City’s resources which include open spaces as well as architecture and neighborhood character.

2. Maintain Quality of Education-

1. Support current PMS educational formula.

2. Maximize use of all city cultural resources.

3. Continue to foster teacher and student pride in their school.

4. Support teachers with resources needed to successfully reach and exceed educational goals.

5. Adopt a Master Plan for Portsmouth Schools which would take into account best practices in city planning and be consistent with expert opinion in child behavioral health and developmental needs.

6. Maintain students’ interaction with and sense of belonging to the community

3. Ensure Safety, Security, and Health -

1. Minimize traffic like buses and cars

2. Support physical health benefits by facilitating biking/walking

3. Decrease potential for inviting unwelcome influences due to closeness to H.S.

4. Ensure proximity of community resources (library) and services (PD, FD, EMT)

4. Minimize the Taxpayer Burden -

1. The current school proposal (totaling ~$40M) is based on a single bid. Any organization facing such a significant capital spend is obligated to secure multiple completive bids in order to justify the magnitude of the expenditure but also to maximize the value to be obtained by those funds. The City of Portsmouth owes this fiduciary obligation to its constituents.

2.

2. No competitive RFP was issued to firms that specialize in the renovation of municipal/educational buildings. These firms exist nationally, and it should be mandatory that the City engages them in a competitive bid process to evaluate the alternative solutions and cost associated with a renovation of the existing site.

3. Should there ultimately be cost savings based on a renovation project, what are the opportunity costs associated with teacher’s salaries, the quality and range of programs that could otherwise be offered if the City saved money on not building a new facility?

4. The “Domino Effect” of building a new middle school must be acknowledged and examined thoroughly. Building a new school does not alleviate the City’s obligation to renovate the current Parrott Avenue facility for future use. How many millions will this add to the taxpayer’s base? Should the City elect to move its offices to this site, there will be capital obligations to renovate/convert the current City offices. Although this might not be in consideration, there is a very significant ripple effect to a “new build” that needs to be acknowledged, properly addressed and brought to the attention of the voting citizens.

5. The City has already undertaken the capital costs associated with the renovation and expansion of the High School, the building of a new library and we have mandatory fiduciary obligations at the Federal level (~$100M) that we must contribute to new waste water treatment facilities. This is ONLY a town of twenty thousand people. Where is the money going to come from?? What are the financial obligations/projections for the refurbishments that are already needed on our current elementary schools

6. Of the many things that do not appear to be sufficiently (if at all) addressed in the current proposal for a new Middle School to be located at Jones Ave., what are the added costs associated to the following:

o Road construction to the new facility
o Traffic light(s) to accommodate the intersection(s)
o Totally new sewage infrastructure
o Costs associated with the major blasting, clean-up, and potential disruption of the dump site that will take place
o New side walks on Jones Ave. and the associated snow removal costs with maintaining free passage of those walkways.
o Additional busing costs that will be associated with the new site
o The maintenance and operating costs associated with a new stand alone facility.

5. Construct a sustainable “green” facility -

1. Build to comply with LEEDS standards

2. Maintain trees on site

3. Be energy efficient in site development and access

4. Design for resource efficient construction, maintenance, and daily operation

5. Keep fossil fuel usage as low as possible at PMS (esp. for busses, cars, trucks, delivery vans, dumpsters, and snow plows)

IV. Other criteria or considerations that did not make the "top five" but were important to our group:

Citywide Referendum

1 There is a strong consensus that a capital expenditure of this magnitude with its broad reaching implications should be subject to a rigorous and thorough examination by multiple external parties and the public at large. Based on the literature and materials available at this time it is clear that these provisions are not currently in place in order to make an informed decision about the available options.

2 This group would like to see a referendum vote at the upcoming civic elections which provide the public with an option to either waive this obligation or ensure that a non-biased mechanism is put in pace to evaluate the two alternatives in a fair and thorough manner.

Closely Analyze Demographic Data Build based on current and future needs

Segregate Need for Athletic Fields When Evaluating Sites Integrate school and community athletic facilities and fields

V. Other input for the School Board and City Council (from individual group members):

1. It is incomprehensible that the Members of this School Board as well as the Council Members of this City would make decisions for the tax payers of the City of Portsmouth based on such preliminary and conceptual cost analysis as is presented. Multi Million dollar decisions should not be made with out more thorough, accurate, and complete cost information to substantiate such decisions.

2. Our group discussed playing fields but decided not to include them in our list of criteria for site selection. Since the current PMS on Parrott Ave. has adequate space around the building during the school day for gym classes and recess, we considered the need for playing fields in Portsmouth to be a totally separate issue from site selection. A number of new playing fields are in the planning stage around Portsmouth. One is included in the current capital budget for the “stump dump” on Rt 33 near the RR track. Several fields are being built at the Community Campus. Others have been discussed for other locations in the city and may already be on the drawing boards. Because of the sensitivity of the old Jones Ave dump site and the wild life habitats along Sagamore Creek, the Sagamore Creek site should not be disturbed. It is a bad site for playing fields but a very good site for conservation. The vernal pools are excellent for “spring peepers” and other critters. The dry up lands are important for turtles, nesting birds and other wild life. The salt marshes along the creek are the “nurseries of the sea” and feeding stations for migrating shore birds and water fowl. The Sagamore Creek site should be open to the public for walking, running, skiing, bird watching, and nature study.

3. Open communication, exchange of ideas, and sharing of information and data are critical to building a consensus within the community. It would have been helpful if each study circle had been provided a copy of the Master Plan, a copy of the Master Plan: Existing Conditions and Trends, and the PDT Architects Space Needs Study which was commissioned by the School Board. When our study circle requested factual information from the school