Citing A Need To Determine School Location —

School Board Tries To Bring More Focus To 5/6 School Project

By Jeff White

As the issue of Fairfield Hills remains at a standstill and next year’s budget moves toward a town vote, the Newtown Board of Education Tuesday night got an update on its proposed 5/6 school from its architect, Jeter, Cook and Jepson (JCJ).

The Hartford firm, along with the project’s management firm Strategic Building Solutions (SBS) and town building and government officials, joined the school board at taking a closer, more detailed look at the school’s design schemes, timeline, and budget. JCJ has been at work on the school’s design plans since early February, when the town approved funding the venture in a town meeting. In contrast to its conceptual design it provided the school board in December, JCJ’s presentation Tuesday night reflected “much more definitive information,” according to architect Jim Laposta.

“The plan bears some similarities to the conceptual design, but we think that it is a tighter plan and more literal,” Mr Laposta said.

One area where the 5/6 school plan has deviated from earlier designs is that JCJ has endeavored to supply plans for two school sites: Watertown Hall and Cochran House. The school district received the Legislative Council’s endorsement for architectural funding on the condition that the initial plans remained flexible as to the school’s final resting site.

In a frank message to the school board, representatives from JCJ and SBS said that the time is fast approaching when a decision needed to be made concerning the location of the school. The site, they concluded, needed to be determined by May 1, and to that end Mr Laposta placed side-by-side comparisons of the two sites for the board’s consideration.

Much is tied to where this school will be located, including the project’s budget and timeline; it is not likely now that the school will open by the fall of 2002, as the board hoped. With the fate of Fairfield Hills still being deliberated, the school board went home knowing that it might have to take its proposed school down a separate track.

Their arms folded amid rolled-up project plans and multicolored spiral presentation packets, board members listened to Jim Laposta outline side-by-side schematic plans for a school at the sites occupied by Watertown Hall and Cochran House.

“Between the two schools, really the only difference between the two buildings is the footprint,” explained Mr Laposta. For one thing, both sites take up comparable parcels of land: the Watertown Hall site at 21 acres, the Cochran House site at 22 acres. Moreover, a school on either site would still retain the diamond shaped structure that would yield two levels and two separate academic houses joined together by a media center and administrative offices. The fact that both parcels of land possess 10- to 15-foot grade differential would allow the school to be designed as “effectively the same building.”

But Mr Laposta mentioned some subtle differences between the two sites. Watertown Hall through much of the initial design phase was the primary site; the architects implied they had a firmer handle on that scenario’s nuances.

Building a school at Cochran House would require considerably more demolition, Mr Laposta pointed out, including razing Norwalk Hall and two sets of houses that flank the 34-year-old building. In addition, Mr Laposta mentioned that because the school would then exist in Fairfield Hills’ core campus, there would be greater pressure to be, architecturally speaking, “a good neighbor.”

Although having design plans for the two potential 5/6 school sites keeps all options open, Strategic Building Solutions warned, during its portion of the presentation, that the project could incur great cost and delays if it remains a two-design scheme.

A Time For A Decision

“From our prospective, we really have to make this decision soon,” remarked Mel Overmoyer, the principal for SBS. The project management firm was hired by the district essentially to be a “shepherd of the project’s budget,” as Mr Overmoyer described it. The firm is concerned about the project designs continuing to address two possible sites.

The current funding authorization that the district has for the schematic design phase was only meant for one site, not two. SBS representatives cautioned that unless a final site was determined for the 5/6 school by May 1, the project would incur “major dual design fees and a delay of the project’s completion,” according to Mr Overmoyer.

Mr Overmoyer added that architects do not have permission to design two scenarios, and could face a potential six-figure liability if the project continues to consider two sites.

With the disposition of Fairfield Hills not likely to come to fruition any time soon, the district might have to move on the town-owned land where Watertown Hall resides, the option that the school board already favors. “We’d better get on with the issues we need to address to [move on] the Watertown Hall site,” Superintendent of Schools John R. Reed remarked to the board.

Legislative Council Chairman Pierre Rochman Wednesday was not surprised at this potential May 1 deadline, stating that there was “no question in my mind that the school would not be at Watertown Hall.”

Project Budget Not Set

“As time passes, so do construction costs. These costs are going up in the neighborhood of five percent a year,” explained Mr Overmoyer, giving another reason not to delay on determining a final site for the school.

The cost for the district’s proposed 162,800 square foot school has increased slightly from estimates made in early January. The project is budgeted to cost $32,208,500, up from an initial budgeted cost of $32,196,000. The increase comes as a result of slightly higher cost estimates for furniture, fixtures, and equipment.

Although Mr Overmoyer explained that it was difficult to determine whether a school on the Cochran House site would cost the same as a school on the Watertown Hall site, such comparison could not be made Tuesday night as the project’s budget was drafted solely for the Watertown Hall option.

Moreover, SBS explained that their estimates for the cost of the project “do not reflect real project costs that have been tested against real project design,” according to Mr Overmoyer.

 Still, at a rate of 33 percent for reimbursements, the state would stand to contribute approximately $10.8 million to the project, leaving the town with the $21.3 million balance.

The Legislative Council still has to approve funding for the actual construction of the project, which JCJ predicted could start as early as next year.

Looking At A Realistic Timeline

The 5/6 school’s genesis resides in the school district’s concern over student population. With new population numbers predicting larger class sizes in the coming years, the school board has said it needed the 5/6 school in place by the fall 2002.

The district might not get what it hopes for.

Strategic Building Solutions, urging strongly against rushing the project, presented a “realistic” timeline that has the total project, from the design phase through construction, taking 36.5 months. “We are anticipating [the project] from start to finish taking just over three years,” said SBS’s David Vallerie.

The school, under this timeline, would not be ready for classes until the earliest November of 2002, and possibly into the early months of 2003.

SBS allowed for a 10-month design phase, which started in February, followed by three months for bidding, negotiations, and town approval, 18 months for actual construction, and one month to move into the new facility.

Superintendent Reed said that it was too early to determine whether or not the later opening date for the school would adversely affect the district, saying that he would not rule out moving students mid-year into the new school.