School Board Weighs ‘Option G’ For NHS Expansion

By Laurie Borst

The Board of Education heard representatives of Fletcher Thompson present Option G at its meeting on Monday, April 23. With Bothwell’s forecast of lower enrollment numbers and a directive from the Legislative Council to reduce costs, the architects went back to the drawing board to address the needs for the high school expansion within the new parameters.

Project Manager Joe Costa, Senior Design Architect Tim Cohen, and Intern Architect Matt Holst of Fletcher Thompson guided the audience through the changes in the building plans. Barry Blades, landscape architect for Blades & Goven, reviewed changes in the parking areas and roadways around the school.

The architects brought a scale-model mockup of the proposed addition and site changes, which audience members studied.

The new enrollment projection is 2,022 students. The board’s desire to keep the average class size at 22.5 and the state standard calling for 174.5 square feet per student results in an overall school size of 352,839 square feet. This equates to an addition of 72,727 square feet to meet the maximum allowed state standard.

The previous version of the expansion, Option F, was based on a projected enrollment of 2,137 students and a total school size of 372,907 square feet.

Two versions of the new option were presented, G-1 and G-2. Option G-1 takes Option F and downsizes the project, moving some programs to different areas, and refurbishing the gym in situ. Option G-2 addresses the possibility of building a free-standing gymnasium with an enclosed hallway connecting it to the main building.

The possibility of building a separate gym was an idea from the Public Building and Site Commission (PBSC). According to PBSC member Robert Mulholland, Sr, the separate gym was mentioned during interviews with architectural firms being considered for this expansion project. Some of the firms stated that many high schools the size of Newtown’s have an auxiliary gym.

“We were looking at the overall cost and ways to cut down the costs,” Mr Mulholland explained in a phone interview Wednesday morning. “The present gym needs to be physically expanded and the roof lifted. There’s a lot of ductwork and support structures that have to be moved. There are classes and facilities below the gym.”

The costs of refurbishing the present gym or building a new facility need to be compared to determine the most cost-effective approach. One plus to building a separate structure avoids interrupting the athletic program while the rework is done.

The gym proposed in Option G-2 would be 22,000 square feet in size with 1,250 seats in the arena. There would be storage and office space in the structure, as well as a separate lobby for the public attending events with bathrooms and concession stands.

Barry Blades addressed the exterior site changes in the new option. A few more parking spaces have been added to the plan as well as a new road that would run from the main parking lot southwest behind the football stadium and connect with Wasserman Way allowing for improved traffic patterns.

Based on the scope of the project and current levels of state reimbursement, the town can anticipate the state covering 32.86 percent of the total cost. Option F had an estimated total project cost of $47,269,500 with an additional $650,000 for Blue and Gold Stadium turf. With state reimbursement, the total cost to the town was $33,319,000.

Option G-1, with the refurbished gymnasium and including monies for the stadium turf, has a total project cost of  $42,894,000. After state reimbursement, the total cost to the town would be $30,222,000. Option G-2, with a separate gymnasium and including the turf, has a total cost of $46,869,000, and a total cost to the town of $33,906,000.

The timeline for this project, based on town approval in June and filing the ED049 grant application that same month, results in a move-in date of August 2009 for the additions and March 2010 for the renovations.

After the presentation, the board voted to send a request to the Board of Finance and the Legislative Council for the full amount of the project, $38,826,000. The architect’s fees have already been approved.

“By making this motion, it allows the Board of Finance to do a full cost analysis of the entire project,” stated Superintendent Evan Pitkoff.