Article 8: delay

[Ruth Thomas]

After the filing, can the Bloom design  be modified?

The four- and, especially, the 5-story design is inappropriate in a recreational and residential location.  Sun and shadow impacts are concerning.  The general mass of the buildings is overwhelming in a neighborhood and in a playground.  More design work needs to be done.

I do not feel the Bloom impact on the neighborhood has been considered sufficiently and  hope the design can be modified so adjustments can be made to respect the households most affected.

I posed the question and comment about a week ago and am posing it again after receiving this email from my new neighbor on Clarke St.  I believe he sent it only to TMMs in Precinct 4. I am copy/pasting part of it here.

Ruth Thomas

Town Meeting Member

Precinct 4

"Dear Precinct 4 Town Meeting Members,

My wife Heather and I have just moved to Clarke St a little over two months ago to a wonderful neighborhood and neighbors. My wife is expecting our first in March and we are excited to start our tenure in this neighborhood.

We are writing asking you to vote yes on Article 8. We strongly support Peter Kelly's plan for a more commensurate and predictable project.

In walking the site today we realized that in the winter, the building will occlude the sun when walking to the playground and fields from Parker, Park Dr and Clarke St. The 75 foot elevations will deeply transform what is today a wide open and sunny area. It will severely affect protected land and recreation space that are so dear to our community.

We need a new school. We want to support a new school project, but we fear that the current trajectory is only guaranteeing three things: a disproportionate spend, highly uncertain site construction suitability (see the recent drilling results...), and deep and lasting alienation of a part of the community. It is also an astronomical spend at $1B fully loaded cost, and as was requested by a member of the High School staff at a recent meeting: "can we make sure we keep money aside to invest in the staff?".

We strongly support the proposal of the LHS4All that the SBC develops a staged plan at a lower cost per students that is off the fields (i.e., stays on current campus). The THRIVE proposal is a much more reasonable plan, more fiscally responsible, less disruptive to the neighborhood, and much more certain with regards to construction and timelines.

Cordially,

Charles and Heather.