Citizens of MSAD 46
A "sister" site to the Voters of MSAD 46 site.Archiving and making available documents and resources in support of discussions on the important issues before us.
Click on [+\-] after post title to toggle between title-only and full versions of posts!
7/17/2006
Report of the MSAD 46 Site Selection Subcommittee to the MSAD 46 Building Committee May 31, 2005 [+/-]In its mission statement, in preparation for the 1999 Middle School construction project application, the MSAD #46 Board of Directors intends “ to provide facilities for the students of the district that support their educational, social, and physical needs”…and “provide a healthy, safe academic environment in which students can learn and staff can work. Through a broad community involvement, the MSAD #46 Board of Directors will examine all available options to create a facility appropriate for middle level education in the 21st century”.
Utilizing the previous Board site selection study by Stephen Blatt Architects and his consultants, DeLuca-Hoffman Associates, Inc., dated April26,2004, the Site Selection Subcommittee reviewed the criteria used and sites considered, and in its Interim Report, dated March 2, 2005, requested the further study of the Abbott Hill Road school property for comparison with Rte #94 identified potential sites for a proposed new district-wide consolidated
K-8 school facility for 750 students.
On March 22,2005 the subcommittee met with Stephen Blatt and Bill Hoffman for the purpose of defining the subcommittee’s interest in answering the following issues:
- Review of a previous WBRC site plan for cost estimates for a new, second access road to the Abbott Hill site
- Inclusion of a new K-8 facility “fooprint”, parking, playground and determination of usable acreage for the public knowledge
- Determine whether off-site athletic fields can be considered as part of the minimum usable acreage requirements (High School, Pine Street)
I. SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
The members of the Site Selection Subcommittee are: Melvin Wyman; Chief, Dexter Fire Department: David A. Clukey; retired Chief, Dexter Police Department: and Matt McKusick; owner, McKusick Construction,
and Michael Delaware, Public Works Director, all of Dexter;
Frank Spizuoco, historian/forester/small farmer, of Ripley, Bob Wetzler; retired Town Manager, of Exeter: Kevin Webber; Webber Surveying/ Garland Planning Board, Arthur Jette, MSAD #46 Board member, of Garland.
The members of the subcommittee thank the Board of Directors for the opportunity to participate in this worthy exercise.
III. PROCESS
The question for the subcommittee had been previously identified as: ” Whether the new District wide K-8 shall be sited on the current Abbott Hill location, or at the Board identified site on Route #94”.
It has been the consensus of this subcommittee, that the “Abbott Hill site” versus the ”Rte. #94” site comparisons will answer lingering questions regarding the communities’ value of the hilltop site. Previous engineering and architect’s plans were outdated when costs were compared; therefore new estimates were necessary. Whether the placement of a 750-student facility could be accommodated on Abbott Hill, allowing an on-site parking, playground and athletic field needed to be ascertained.
The reasons for lingering attachments to the Abbott Hill are many;
- Tradition -the site has a multi-generation history as a school
- Location- proximity to the high school, walking distance to Crosby Park, Main Street shopping centers and the Abbott Memorial Library
- Utilities- Town water and sewer, and three phase power on site
- Ownership- already owned by District, no acquisition considerations
Whenever discussing the Abbott Hill site, a major concern is that of traffic safety. For the site to be acceptable it needs a second access road, which can be accomplished at an expense of $805,000-$920,000 ( Figure 4, Comparison of Site E and H, DeLuca-Hoffman,April 7,2005) Given there are no acquisition costs, or other utility infrastructure costs anticipated, comparison can be made with Site E as noted in Figure 7 Comparison of Site E and H. Notwithstanding this comparison, there is admittedly limited available, usable acreage for creation of a K-8 complex on the hill. When applying factors such as parking for staff and community, a retention pond for runoff, and open area for playground, the remaining acreage is inadequate for support of the athletic programs supported by the community. Consolidation of Garland and Exeter student populations into the new facility will require additional space requirements, making Site H even more undesirable.
The Subcommittee met on March 22, 2005 with Blatt and Hoffman for the purpose of identifying site related issues, including the comparison of the current primary/ middle school hilltop site and the previously identified Rte #94 site. At this meeting, the group reviewed the work commissioned by the Board regarding sites, and the Architect agreed to provide current cost estimates for construction of a new second access road; an overlay of a new school facility and its incumbent infrastructure requirements (parking, playground, water retention pond, etc.); and a determination of minimum usable acres, including consideration of off-site athletic fields.
Finally, the Comparison of Site E and H report, prepared by DeLuca-Hoffman Associates Inc. as a sub consultant to Stephen Blatt Architects was presented at a meeting of the Site Selection Subcommittee on May 17, 2005.
It is noted that the report was dated April 7, 2005, although the subcommittee was not made aware of its completion until May16, 2005.
With the exception of one member, all MSAD #46 Board members were in attendance at the meeting, as well as the members of the subcommittee, and all were given copies of the Comparison of Site E and H study, to which this report will refer.
On May 25, 2005 the subcommittee met to further discuss its previous considerations, as well as the consultants’ conclusions and recommendations. Throughout this process, we have attempted to remain faithful to the defined role of the Site Selection Subcommittee as described in the projects mission statement. “The role of the Site Selection Subcommittee is to recommend to the Board of Directors, through a process involving public participation and public hearings, sites to be considered for a Middle School building project. The recommendations will be based upon a process that evaluates various site selection factors.”
I. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION
In the Comparison of Site E and H dated April 7,2005, the original matrix used in this process is included (Figure 3). Questions raised as to why, for example Site A, which was rated higher than Site E was not chosen were considered and issues of traffic safety (sight lines, visibility), access road cost factors, and multiple landowner issues were cited as determinants.
In its March 2,2005 Interim Report the subcommittee had already conceded the comparison was basically limited to” on the Hill “ or the preferred Rte. #94 site and generally proceeded on that course.
Further review of the Comparison of Site E and H, notably C. New Comparative Information Figure 5 shows the computated net area with slope considerations and net usable acreages. As suspected, the Abbott Hill site comes up short, especially when it is compared to the spacious Site E.
Calculating the development costs of the two cites ( Figure 7) Comparison of Site E and H indicates that even though the District already owns the Abbott site, and the power and utility requirements are present, the cost of providing a second access road will be equivalent to aquisition and development costs for the more expansive Rte #94 Site E.
The recommendation of the Site Selection Subcommittee is that Site E, the Rte #94 site is more than adequate in size, is situated in an acceptable location, and possesses the features requisite for a school to be designed for more than 750 K-8 students, in concurrence with the conclusions and recommendations set forth in the April 7, 2005 Comparison of Site E and H .
While Site H ( Abbott Hill) has a long history, Site E (Rte #94) represents a long term future, with opportunities for future growth of the MSAD #46 school system, providing “facilities for the students of the district that support their educational, social, and physical needs” and a “healthy, safe academic environment in which students can learn and staff can work, in a facility appropriate for education in the 21st century “(Building Project Mission Statement)
MSAD 46 Building Committee Chooses Building Site (May 31, 2005 press release)
[+/-]
##
`
The Site Selection Subcommittee looked at 9 possible building sites. They immediately discarded 4 because of a low rating based on a Standard Site Selection Criteria Matrix. They then considered very carefully 5 sites before making their choice. The Abbott Hill site of the present school was scrutinized and after much agonizing was rejected.
Reasons for building a new K-8 school complex on Abbott Hill included a long history of a school on that site, the location being close to the present high school and being within walking distance to town that would save on busing. That the school district already owns the land and the utilities are there was other strong reasons to consider the present site.
But ultimately the concern for adequate space needed for 100,000 square feet of building, 2.5 acres for parking, 7.5 acres for athletic fields and playgrounds, room for a bus area, plus a water runoff retention pond, proved insurmountable.
The need for a second access road at a cost of over $800,000, traffic problems, and that there would never be any room for expansion for either the K-8 facility or the high school were the clinchers for many on the committee and they reluctantly rendered a unanimous decision to locate the new school off Abbott Hill.
The sites rejected on the Garland Road had various flaws that in the final analysis caused them to be rejected. Of major concern were traffic problems at intersections, poor visibility for vehicle safety, access to the sites, and a narrow unpaved road.
The site chosen is more that adequate in size, is situated in an acceptable location, and possesses the features requisite for a school to be designed for more than 750 K-8 students. Copies of the Subcommittee’s report is available at the Superintendent’s office.
MSAD 46 Building Committee Chooses Building Site (
`
The Site Selection Subcommittee looked at 9 possible building sites. They immediately discarded 4 because of a low rating based on a Standard Site Selection Criteria Matrix. They then considered very carefully 5 sites before making their choice. The Abbott Hill site of the present school was scrutinized and after much agonizing was rejected.
Reasons for building a new K-8 school complex on Abbott Hill included a long history of a school on that site, the location being close to the present high school and being within walking distance to town that would save on busing. That the school district already owns the land and the utilities are there was other strong reasons to consider the present site.
But ultimately the concern for adequate space needed for 100,000 square feet of building, 2.5 acres for parking, 7.5 acres for athletic fields and playgrounds, room for a bus area, plus a water runoff retention pond, proved insurmountable.
The need for a second access road at a cost of over $800,000, traffic problems, and that there would never be any room for expansion for either the K-8 facility or the high school were the clinchers for many on the committee and they reluctantly rendered a unanimous decision to locate the new school off Abbott Hill.
The sites rejected on the Garland Road had various flaws that in the final analysis caused them to be rejected. Of major concern were traffic problems at intersections, poor visibility for vehicle safety, access to the sites, and a narrow unpaved road.
The site chosen is more that adequate in size, is situated in an acceptable location, and possesses the features requisite for a school to be designed for more than 750 K-8 students. Copies of the Subcommittee’s report is available at the Superintendent’s office.
Analysis Of School Building Sites Presented To MSAD 46 (May 17, 2005 press release)
[+/-]
##
Almost the entire school board and incoming Superintendent Kevin Jordan joined with the site selection sub-committee to hear a lengthy presentation from engineer Bill Hoffman and architect Stephen Blatt and see a sketch of a new K-8 school on Abbott Hill.
Hoffman and Blatt’s conclusion is that there is insufficient area to construct an additional 72,000 square feet of new building on the site next to the present Primary school. They felt that at most there is 8.2 useable acres that could be utilized, whereas 17.5 acres is the minimum size recommended for a functional, quality school for 750 students in a K-8 setting. There are space problems to park 160 automobiles and insufficient space for adequately sized all-purpose fields at this location due to the sloping topography. Costs also escalate significantly when the slope exceeds 6% was mentioned by Hoffman. There are about 4.89 net useable acres with a slope of less than 6% on Abbott Hill. “The impact of squeezing a school onto an undersized site is that the site construction costs are elevated.” An alternate use of the site might be the retention of the gym, remodeling the Primary school for administration offices, and an additional High School playing field.
A major concern of engineer Bill Hoffman was the limited access
at the present school complex and steep topography to construct another road off the hill to Grove Street. Hoffman stated, “the DOE has increased concerns on emergency access to schools”. After looking at 3 variations of road access off the hill, Hoffman and Blatt came to the conclusion that the most desirable access road to Grove Street that doesn’t exceed a 5% slope could be constructed with a cost estimated in excess of $800,000.
Stephen Blatt stated it would probably require a waiver from the Dept. of Education (DOE) to build on Abbott Hill because of space and access limitations. Scott Brown of the DOE was in Dexter recently to look at the potential sites and Blatt mentioned Brown has reservations about space limitations on Abbott Hill.
The Route 94 site was discussed at length regarding the traffic problems, its central location in the district, adequate useable space, and the cost of acquisition and site development costs. There were no strong reservations about any of these conditions on this site. Net useable acres on this site is 23-27 acres at a slope of less than 6%.
There was concern from some of the audience that all decisions in this process are made for practical reasons and that the entire community is presented all the information to know how each decision was made to pick the best possible site for the best reasons.
School board member Mike Bennett summed up the meeting consensus best when he said, “whatever decision made about the selection of a site should be based on what’s best for the education of the children of the district.”
It was agreed by all that the next step is to meet with the Maine State Planning Office as soon as possible to review these findings. The Site Selection Subcommittee will meet next Wed. May 25th to finalize a report to forward to the MSAD #46 Building Committee.
Analysis Of School Building Sites Presented To MSAD 46 (
Almost the entire school board and incoming Superintendent Kevin Jordan joined with the site selection sub-committee to hear a lengthy presentation from engineer Bill Hoffman and architect Stephen Blatt and see a sketch of a new K-8 school on Abbott Hill.
Hoffman and Blatt’s conclusion is that there is insufficient area to construct an additional 72,000 square feet of new building on the site next to the present Primary school. They felt that at most there is 8.2 useable acres that could be utilized, whereas 17.5 acres is the minimum size recommended for a functional, quality school for 750 students in a K-8 setting. There are space problems to park 160 automobiles and insufficient space for adequately sized all-purpose fields at this location due to the sloping topography. Costs also escalate significantly when the slope exceeds 6% was mentioned by Hoffman. There are about 4.89 net useable acres with a slope of less than 6% on Abbott Hill. “The impact of squeezing a school onto an undersized site is that the site construction costs are elevated.” An alternate use of the site might be the retention of the gym, remodeling the Primary school for administration offices, and an additional High School playing field.
A major concern of engineer Bill Hoffman was the limited access
at the present school complex and steep topography to construct another road off the hill to Grove Street. Hoffman stated, “the DOE has increased concerns on emergency access to schools”. After looking at 3 variations of road access off the hill, Hoffman and Blatt came to the conclusion that the most desirable access road to Grove Street that doesn’t exceed a 5% slope could be constructed with a cost estimated in excess of $800,000.
Stephen Blatt stated it would probably require a waiver from the Dept. of Education (DOE) to build on Abbott Hill because of space and access limitations. Scott Brown of the DOE was in Dexter recently to look at the potential sites and Blatt mentioned Brown has reservations about space limitations on Abbott Hill.
The Route 94 site was discussed at length regarding the traffic problems, its central location in the district, adequate useable space, and the cost of acquisition and site development costs. There were no strong reservations about any of these conditions on this site. Net useable acres on this site is 23-27 acres at a slope of less than 6%.
There was concern from some of the audience that all decisions in this process are made for practical reasons and that the entire community is presented all the information to know how each decision was made to pick the best possible site for the best reasons.
School board member Mike Bennett summed up the meeting consensus best when he said, “whatever decision made about the selection of a site should be based on what’s best for the education of the children of the district.”
It was agreed by all that the next step is to meet with the Maine State Planning Office as soon as possible to review these findings. The Site Selection Subcommittee will meet next Wed. May 25th to finalize a report to forward to the MSAD #46 Building Committee.
7/10/2006
Updated July/August Calendar, 7/10/06 [+/-]Calendar for July/August 2006
| S | M | Tu | W | Th | F | S |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 Site Meeting, | 19 | 20 Site Meeting, | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 Forum at Abbott Library | 26 | 27 Straw Vote Meeting, | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 1 August | 2 Likely Special Board Mtg | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 Presentation To State BoE, Augusta | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 School Board Mtg, | 24 | 25 | 26 |
ATM = ATM Room, DRHS
SO = Superintendent’s Office
Archives
May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 October 2006 November 2006 January 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 October 2007 December 2007 February 2008 March 2008 May 2008
