Mount Greylock Panel Picks Designer for New Athletic Field

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Mount Greylock Regional School District's Designer Selection Committee Wednesday chose CHA Architecture of Portland, Maine, as the preferred designer for a new athletic field and running track.
 
After interviewing representatives from CHA and SLR Consulting, the committee voted unanimously to authorize the district's administration to enter into negotiations with CHA.
 
The School Committee earlier this month voted to authorize the design group, which includes administrators, School Committee members and district personnel, to review responses to the district's request for proposals and make a final decision, provided that the preferred vendor was supported by at least two thirds of the committee.
 
During the discussion after the interviews, committee members mentioned they were impressed that CHA had designed 400 natural grass fields and that it has 20 people dedicated to athletic projects.
 
According to the timeline that CHA presented on Wednesday, the middle/high school could be using the new multi-sport field and track as soon as September 2023.
 
The project schedule the designer presented, permitting this fall and putting the project out to bid in early January with construction in the spring and summer of next year.
 
"It's an ambitious schedule, but it's doable," a CHA representative told the district's design committee.
 
In addition to its experience with the kind of grass field sought by the School Committee, CHA had a few of other advantages over its competition that emerged during the design committee's deliberations.
 
For one thing, CHA planned its presentation around the site where the district wants to create a new athletic complex.
 
Representatives from SLR, which did not attend an optional site visit when developing its proposal, were surprised during their presentation that the district wants to put the new field and track near its new administration building – considerably south of the existing remains of a track on the northwest part of the campus.
 
CHA also had the advantage of a well-known local partner, Guntlow & Associates civil engineers.
 
"Guntlow has a lot of knowledge of the site," owner's project manager John Benzinger told the committee. "They're familiar with the well system. Guntlow gives them a significant advantage to get up and go quickly.
 
"Also in the permitting process, it gives them an advantage."
 
Mount Greylock Business Administrator Joe Bergeron, a voting member of the Design Committee, agreed with his colleagues' assessment of CHA but noted that SLR also has personnel in the area and would be an acceptable choice.
 
After voting CHA forward as the preferred choice, the committee voted unanimously on a second motion to rank the two firms, allowing for the possibility to negotiate with SLR if, for some reason, it cannot reach an agreement with CHA.
 
"I've been on plenty of tracks designed by both companies," noted Design Committee member Brian Gill, a physical education teacher and track and field coach at Mount Greylock. "I don't have any doubt we'd be OK with either one."

Tags: MGRS,   playing fields,   

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

Mount Greylock School Committee Moving Superintendent Evaluation to Fall

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass.—The Mount Greylock Regional School Committee this month discussed moving its evaluation of the superintendent from the spring to the fall starting in 2027.
 
Chair Julia Bowen brought the idea to the table as part of her proposed calendar for the committee's work during the 2026-27 academic year, saying that a move to the autumn will allow the committee to factor data from the preceding year into its evaluation.
 
"To the extent that [Superintendent Joseph Bergeron's] goals are tied to school performance and, specifically, MCAS [scores], we don't get that or other end of school year summative information until the fall," Bowen said. "Many schools I've worked with and know of actually moved their school leader evaluation to the fall so they can take advantage of all the data that's actually available, rather than doing it in the June time frame.
 
"The other point on that is, as it is, we otherwise vote for Joe's goals in September/October and evaluate him in May, and that's not a year. If we can do it fall to fall, we actually get a full year of work from when we agree on the goals."
 
The committee's most experienced member, Carolyn Greene, raised a concern about breaking with the practice of completing the evaluation process in May and June.
 
"It feels natural to evaluate a superintendent at the close of a school year, not the beginning of a school year," Greene said. "We're still in it in May and June. We're still in it in terms of our mindsets. Sometimes we don't meet in July. We come back in August and do a ‘retreat.' We're now meant to hit the ground running with an evaluation in September based on the work of the previous school year. And the reason is we don't get all the data from the previous school year until September.
 
"The rhythm is off for me. But it could just be that I'm so used to the previous rhythm. I don't want to oppose it. I just do have some reservations about it."
 
View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories