Easthampton High School Building Project. Public Information Forum #3

Transcription

1 Building Project Public Information Forum #3 May 4, 2010 CAOLO & BIENIEK ASSOCIATES, INC. Architecture Planning Interior Design

2 Presentation Agenda Introduction - Michael Buehrle, Chair EHS Building Committee Project Overview & Needs - Superintendent Carter Project Solution - Ken Jodrie, CBA Project Architect - Dr. Vito Perrone, EHS Principal Next Steps - Mel Overmoyer, SBS Owner s Project Manager Questions & Answers

3 Why the Project? After more than 10 years of planning, the needs of the school facilities are significant In 2005 voters approved $1.2 million to study Elementary & s EHS has been identified by MSBA as one of the top 50 schools in Massachusetts in need of funding project satisfies more eligibility criteria for State funding EHS Accreditation status in jeopardy EHS was chosen by Building Committee because only one building project could receive funding Does not require acquisition of additional land

4 Most Pressing Academic Needs Currently on Warning status with NEASC accreditation Overcrowded program spaces Undersized classrooms per State standards Inadequate facilities for modern special programs

5 Most Pressing Academic Needs Lacks infrastructure for current technology No auditorium for active music & drama programs Importance of perception of quality of schools

6 Pressing Building Deficiencies 1961 building does not meet modern building codes Does not comply with ADA requirements for handicap accessibility Building lacks fire suppression ( sprinkler ) system Building does not meet current structural & seismic codes

7 Pressing Building Deficiencies Poorly organized, inflexible building and space configurations Insufficient storage Structural cracking Worn finishes

8 Pressing Building Deficiencies Antiquated building operating systems Inefficient and poorly controlled heating and ventilation systems Outdated & inefficient windows / poor ventilation Inadequate electrical and data infrastructure

9 Building on the Current Site Avoids issues of non-reimbursable acquisition costs, and lack of suitable land available for new site Existing site preserves open space in the community, and provides efficiency & cost savings through use of adjacent athletic fields and central location Project proposed fully complies with all Zoning regulations. No special permits or variances required

10 EHS Site - Central location & proximity to playing fields Downtown EHS Nonotuck Park

11 Site Circulation - Existing Facility student parking student parking student parking parking parking trash receiving staff & student parking

12 Existing Building & Site (8.258 Acres) Williston Ave. Geryk Court Daley Field Taft Ave NORTH Bryan Ave.

13 Existing Building Typical Classroom Main Entrance Library Bus Entrance Accessible Entrance Music / Theatre

14 Renovations & Additions vs. New EHS Facility Total Project Costs of renovation/addition solutions are significantly higher than a new building Renovations require high costs for temporary facilities which are not reimbursed by MSBA New building reduces time of construction inconvenience, and eliminates disruption of phased renovation New building results in a better facility than renovated

15 Feasibility Study Concept Options Concept A Full Relocation - No Construction Phasing Concept B Phased Relocation & Construction Concept C New Facility - No Relocation or Phasing Project Cost $50,200,000 Project Cost $52,700,000 Project Cost $48,000,000 PROS CONS PROS CONS PROS CONS Reuse 87.5% Good contractor staging area Entire facility available for construction Less efficient MSBA guidelines (new only) Portables + temp facilities Seismic retrofit Reuse 76.8% Good contractor staging area Construction in Occupied facility Phased construction Longest duration MSBA guidelines (new only) Portables + temp facilities 100% Design Flexibility 100% MSBA guidelines No Portables Improved site & building circulation Least Costly Limited on site staging area APPROVED by MSBA 11/18/09 Seismic retrofit Temporary parking

16 MSBA Press Release November 18, 2009 BOSTON, MA The Massachusetts School Building Authority ( MSBA ) announced today that the MSBA Board voted to move the High School into the next phase in the process for potential funding. The project will move into the Schematic Design phase where the Town of will work in collaboration with the MSBA to produce the most fiscally responsible and educationally appropriate solution to the facility problems. Springfield Republican November 19, 2009 Katherine P. Craven, Massachusetts School Building Authority Executive Director, said that High School posed the clearest need for construction of an entirely new facility. She called the potential for renovation very limited.

17 Site Plan - New Facility Bryan Ave. fence / buffer fence / buffer fence / buffer Emergency Access Drive fence / buffer Receiving & Service fence / buffer Parent Drop Off Staff & Student Parking Williston Ave. GerykCourt Zoning District: R-10 Min. Lot Area Min. Frontage Min. Front Yard Setback Min. Side Yard Setback Min. Rear Yard Setback Max. Building Height Max. Height, Stories Max. Bldg. Coverage Req d/allowed 10,000 sq. ft. 120 ft. 20 ft. 10 ft. 30 ft. 40 ft. 3 25% Proposed 357,192 sq. ft. 80 ft. 87 ft. 51 ft. 63 ft. 40 ft % Existing 357,192 sq. ft. 80 ft. 72 ft. 232 ft. 65 ft ft %

18 Aerial View from South-East Bryan Ave. Taft Ave. Garfield Ave. Daley Field E x i s t i n g B u i l d i n g Existing Driveway Existing Parking Geryk Court Williston Ave.

19 Building Massing

20 Main Entrance

21 Ground Floor

22 Main Office & Support Areas Health Guidance

23 Gymnasium & Support Areas

24 Athletic Facilities Cafe - Commons Team Team Main Entrance Fitness Room Gymnasium

25 Auditorium & Support Areas (Band / Chorus & Drama Classrooms)

26 Auditorium

27 Community Use

28 Main Entrance viewed from Cafe - Commons Area Library Gym Main Entrance Office Auditorium Cafeteria - Commons

29 Academic Wing

30 Second Floor

31 2 nd Floor Community Use

32 Library / Media Center

33 Third Floor

34 Collaborative Learning Environments natural lighting & ventilation (typical) natural lighting & ventilation Flexible Group Breakout Spaces Learning Labs Moveable Wall Integrated Technology Transparency natural lighting & ventilation

35 Project Budget approved by MSBA Total Project Budget $43,691,108 Ineligible Costs ($3,042,063) (administrative costs; temporary conditions; infrastructure & off-site improvements; Sustainable Design features; haz-mat abatement) Subtotal (Basis of Grant) $40,649,045 Reimbursement Rate 62.84% (Base Rate +2 incentive points for Sustainable Design +1 incentive point for maintenance practices) State Grant $25,543,860 s $18,147,248 Maximum Cost

36 Debt Exclusion s Impact to Taxes s cost will be funded by a 20 year conventional bond Repayment of bond will begin in 2013 Impact to quarterly taxes will decrease every year that follows, as shown in the chart below FY 2013 Quarterly Impact to Average Single Family Home $69.32 Grant from MSBA $25,543,860 (at 62.84% reimbursement rate) s Maximum Cost $18,147,248 Total Project Budget $43,691,108 *Actual tax impact will be less than the numbers stated above due to other debt coming off the tax rolls

37 Project Schedule MSBA Board vote March 2010

38 Next Steps March 10 April - May 10 May 18, 2010 June 10 thru January 11 Spring 11 Spring 13 Summer 13 Fall 13 MSBA Board approves EHS Project Funding Agreement Community Information Forums Debt Exclusion VOTE Complete final design & bid documents Begin Construction of new facility Complete Construction Demolish existing EHS building School opens in new facility

39 The Future of our Schools has serious school facility issues which need to be systematically addressed Construction & Borrowing costs are both currently at historical lows Earliest impact to taxes beginning January 2013 It is clear from MSBA, if does not move forward with the project, it will be many years before the city will be considered for any further funding assistance toward their school facilities.

40 The Future of our Community State Treasurer Tim Cahill, who oversees the School Building Authority, said projects being built now are enjoying a savings in building costs thanks to the slow construction market. "This is the time to build. Even though it is a tough time to be asking people for money, everyone seems to see the value of building now."

41 The Future of "This is the time to build. Even though it is a tough time to be asking people for money, everyone seems to see the value of building now. State Treasurer Tim Cahill, MSBA Chairman May 18, 2010 Debt Exclusion VOTE for additional information go to