Ashby, Pepperell, Townsend North Middlesex Regional High School. Preferred Schematic Report Update

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Ashby, Pepperell, Townsend North Middlesex Regional High School. Preferred Schematic Report Update"

Polly Cook
5 years ago
Views:

1 Ashby, Pepperell, Townsend North Middlesex Regional High School Preferred Schematic Report Update June 3, 2013

2 AGENDA Preferred Schematic Report (PSR) Options Review Criteria and Goals Project Costs Factors That Impact Construction Costs Next Steps

3 OTHER PROGRAMS TO CONSIDER? Central Administration - no* Culinary Arts Program - no Community Uses for NMRHS - inherent Teen Center - inherent Maintenance Facility - yes *Options for central admin still under discussion

4 DISTRICT MAINTENANCE & STORAGE REQUIREMENTS Existing: Exterior Shed 2,000 sf Old Central Office 3,500 sf Interior Old Wood Shop 3,015 sf Interior Custodian Shop 1,020 sf Proposed: 9,535 sf Single Stand Alone Facility? ±10,000 sf Cost Range $2-3M Building & Grounds Two Trucks, Tractor, Lawn Mowers Buildings & Grounds Athletic Exterior Equipment Storage, High Jumps etc. Surplus Furniture Storage Drama Sceneries Project Graduation Materials Custodian Workshop Truck Storage Does not include on site storage boxes for athletics.

5 MAINTENANCE BUILDING PLAN OPTION

6 MAINTENANCE BUILDING SITE PLAN OPTION

7 CONCEPTUAL OPTIONS REVIEWED Option 1 Option 2a Option 2b Option 2c Option 3a Option 3b Option 3c

8 Guidance Kitchen Auditorium Art Art Main Entrance Gym expansion Music Admin SPED Cafeteria Cust Service Courtyard Library Media Maint LGI Classrooms SPED Bus Entrance

10 ADD/RENOVATION OPTION 2B.2 Existing Building 197,377 gsf Proposed 190,656 gsf MSBA Guidelines 175,740 gsf PROS (BUILDING) Moderate ability to close off non-public areas Admin is at hub of activity Improved organization (STEM Wing) PROS (SITE) Main entry is close to main parking area Opportunity for public plaza Separate bus/parent drop-offs CONS (BUILDING) Challenging phasing and distribution 50% of classrooms are older wing CONS (SITE) Main entrance faces away from Rt.119 No Admin oversight at bus drop-off

11 CONCEPTUAL OPTIONS REVIEWED Option 1 Option 2a Option 2b Option 2c Option 3a Option 3b Option 3c

12 Full Educational Program, although with compromises No demolition or Additions Renovations only

13 CONCEPTUAL OPTIONS REVIEWED Option 1 Option 2a Option 2b Option 2c Option 3a Option 3b Option 3c

SPED Commons Library/Media Auditorium Music Music

15 Gymnasium Fitness Main Entrance Admin Service Entrance Lockers Custodian Maintenance Kitchen SPED Commons Library/Media Auditorium Music Music Art Art Tech LGI STEM Classrooms Humanities Classrooms

17 NEW BUILDING OPTION 3A Existing Building 197,377 gsf New Building 192,005 gsf MSBA Guidelines 175,740 gsf PROS (BUILDING) Meets full educational program Revised location avoids need for temporary trailers; No Demo Required Less expensive than renovation PROS (SITE) Renovates in place track and field complex (minimized costs and impact on athletics) Set back from both roads and associated noise Creates comprehensive site circulation layout CONS (SITE) Interferes with existing septic Backs onto trees (loss of trees) Existing athletic layout remains as is (5 lane track)

18 CONCEPTUAL OPTIONS SCHEDULE Add/Reno Option 2b.2 3 years Spring 2018* Renovation Option 2c 3.5 years Fall 2018* New Option 3a 2.8 years Spring 2017*

19 CONCEPTUAL PROJECT COSTS

20 FACTORS THAT IMPACT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Reduce Scope Reduce program area Reduce limit of work e.g. no work on fields, no work on parking lot Reduce areas of renovation e.g. minimal work in auditorium Reduce areas of AC Eliminate modulars use existing district buildings Reduce Quality Reduce all building & engineering systems Reduce overall level of finish Cost Quality Scope

22 Cost for Temporary Modulars 2b.2 - $1.5M 2c - $2.5M Cost to upgrade Peter Fitzpatrick to accommodate Grade 9 $1.437M

23 SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REDUCTIONS 5/31/2013 Revisions net change in SF Comments General Classrooms reduce from 29 to sf Large Group Instruction reduce from 2 to 1-2,000 sf Computer Lab reduce from 1 to 0-1,000 sf no computer labs in school Language Lab reduce from 1 to 0-1,000 sf no language lab in school, assume on a cart School Store (run by Life Skills Students) reduce from 1 to sf Store to be incorporated into Life Skills classroom (kiosk) Art Graphics Lab (Mac) reduce from 1 to 0-1,200 sf incorporate curriculum into Voc / Tech classroom w/ technology Music office reduce from 1 to sf assume room to come from teacher planning allowance Business Classroom reduce from 1200 to sf Business Technology Lab reduce from 1200 to sf Service Program (Garden support room) reduce from 500 to sf Sink and small storage only - tools in outdoor shed -7,650 sf -11,475 sf 1.5 multiplier

29 CMU Brick Stone Arriscraft (Thin set MFD stone) Metal Panel Composite Wood Panel Terracotta Channel Glass Low $/sf $/sf $/sf $/sf $/sf High $/sf $/sf $/sf $/sf $/sf

30 NEXT STEPS Select a Preferred Alternative Refine Options Size, Costs, Schedule Submit PSR Preferred Schematic Report Ongoing Meetings with Building Committee and Community MSBA facility advisory study committee 6/26/13 or 7/10/13 MSBA board meeting to approve preferred schematic 7/31/13

31 UPCOMING MEETINGS June 3 rd - Building Committee Meeting at North Middlesex Regional HS Preferred Option Ranking June 3 rd - Community Meeting June 6 th (TBD) - Joint meeting of the BC, School Com, Selectman Boards and Fin Com June 10 th - Building Committee Meeting June 13 th - Submit PSR June 17 th - Building Committee Meeting at Nissitissit Middle School June 17 th - Community Meeting

32 Thank you

New Hope-Solebury School District Campus Revitalization Plan

New Hope-Solebury School District Campus Revitalization Plan Campus Revitalization Plan 20 January 2016 GODSHALL KANE O ROURKE ARCHITECTS, LLC 12 East Butler Avenue, Suite 205, Ambler, PA 19002 T: 215.646.2003 F: 215.646.5707 www.gkoarchitects.com Site Rendering