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 [+/-] ##

I. INTRODUCTION:

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)

Citizens of MSAD 46

7/17/2006

Archives