New'consolidated' elementary school hinges on answers to tough questions

Some Town Council and Board of Education members said they are leaning in the direction of Option D, but added they aren’t willing to take the proposal to voters without a lot more information.

Sometime between now and the end of January, the Town Council hopes to decide whether to ask Mansfield residents to vote on a proposal to build a single elementary school that would serve all of the town’s children.

The clock is ticking, because there are several steps to take before June 30, 2009 just to be included in bonding requests that won’t be decided by the state Legislature for yet another year.

For one, school bonding projects must be approved by a referendum before they can be submitted for bonding.

Council members were feeling the pressure Monday night when they sat down for a workshop with the School Building Committee and the Board of Education to review options placed before them by the architectural firm, Lawrence Associates, hired to help the town address problems with its aging school buildings.

There are four options, but comments repeatedly returned to one – Option D – replace the town’s three elementary schools with a single facility. This option is eligible for the largest percentage of state reimbursement.

Of the projected $74 million price tag, the state could reimburse as much as $53 million, leaving $21 million to be covered by the town’s taxpayers.

Finance Director Jeff Smith noted that the debt service costs for those bonds would be offset by the fact that a single school would have one cafeteria, one gym, one main office and other “economies of scale.”

Let’s not go there…

Two options found little or no support – Option A – simply repair and maintain the elementary and middle schools over the next 20 years; and Option C – close one of the elementary schools and upgrade/add onto the others.

For Option A, the town would receive about $9 million for some kinds of work (for example, projects that make the school accessible under ADA guidelines), while the cost to the town is estimated at $34 million.

Director of Facilities William Hammond, answering questions about conditions at the existing schools, said many systems are well beyond their lifespan.

For example, the pipes running through the concrete floors are 50 years old; the lifespan of the heat pumps is 11 years and they are now 13 years old; and the boilers are constantly in need of repair. “Goodwin School’s is down now,” Hammond said.

He added, “We took an educated estimate of what we’ll need to repair. I’m pretty confident those things on the list will not last another 20 years.”

Option C’s projected cost is $84 million, with potential reimbursement up to $39 million, and the town picking up $45 million. But the main objection to this option was the potential uproar that would be created when trying to decide which neighborhood school to close.

The town also stands to receive little or no state reimbursement for adding onto schools because the existing buildings already exceed the state’s square-footage-per-student formula, said Rick Lawrence, president of Lawrence Associates.

He added that the formula hasn’t changed in almost 30 years.

Still too many unknowns…

Some Town Council and Board of Education members said they are leaning in the direction of Option D, but added they aren’t willing to take the proposal to voters without a lot more information.

Key questions include:

• Where would the school be built?
• And how much does purchasing land add to the estimated cost of $74 million?

Between 16 to 20 acres are needed, depending on how much ledge and/or wetlands there may be on the property, said Lawrence. And currently the cost of land isn’t factored into Option D, he said.

There was some discussion about the possibility of building the new school on the site of one of the existing schools.

Superintendent Fred Baruzzi said this would mean losing athletic fields in the case of Southeast Elementary School.

And Lawrence said it would be “really stretching things” at the Goodwin Elementary or Vinton Elementary school sites.

Other key questions:

• What happens to the three closed buildings? Does the town convert them to a different use, or “mothball” them and continue to maintain them?
• And what would that cost?
• Is it possible for the town to sell the buildings?

Finance Director Jeff Smith noted that he knows of a town that converted a school into senior housing.

The most emotional objection to the proposal for a single elementary school raised at a public forum in September was voiced again Monday – does the town want to trade its neighborhood schools and their sense of community for one “massive” school building?

Lawrence displayed designs currently in use that create a small-school feeling within a single facility, such as a school in Colchester that has separate wings for preschool, kindergarten, first and second grades.

Another was a “village” design, constructed like a campus.

The meeting ended with agreement that Lawrence Associates and town staff will research answers to questions raised at the workshop, to be presented to the School Building Committee in December, and another joint workshop will be held in January.

For More Information:http://mansfield.htnp.com/news/town_council_zeroes_in_on_consolidated_school.html

Q&A: Responses to questions about the Four School Renovation Project.

Questions raised at the September public forum and/or at the Oct. 15, 2008 School Building Committee meeting.

The following information was distributed at the Monday, Nov. 17 joint workshop with the Mansfield Town Council, School Building Committee and Board of Education. These questions were raised at the September public forum and/or at the Oct. 15, 2008 School Building Committee meeting.

Q: Who pays for the cost overruns during the project, whichever option is selected?

A: As with all similar municipal school building projects, the design team and construction manager suggest a contingency fund as a part of the total project cost. This is used for unexpected cost changes found necessary during construction. This fund is anticipated to cover increases in material costs and any such “overruns.”

Q: Does Option D include the land?

A: No cost has been included for the purchase of land, since no site was identified and each site may vary significantly.

Q: How/why would the district propose one elementary school which would be extremely large?

A: A single elementary school was listed as one of the options available for purposes of cost comparison and inevitably would be raised as a possibility. This option appears to be the least costly to the town of Mansfield, due to the current method of reimbursement by the State. A single school would result in the elimination of many redundancies found in the three small schools now in town, such as having 3 cafeterias, 3 nurses’ offices, 3 gymnasiums, 3 libraries, etc. There are many new schools that have been designed to provide a visual appearance of small, identifiable ‘pods’ or wings, such that the overall appearance is not one of ‘extremely large.’

Q: The costs presented for each option cover what period of time?

A: These are all based on the current value of dollars and the anticipated time frame required for design and construction.

Q: Have you calculated the time and property values in today’s dollars or in future dollars?

No, that has not been done.

Q: What are the life cycle costs, including operations, for the various options?

A: A life cycle cost analysis [LCCA] will be a requirement of any option that is submitted to the Bureau of School Facilities. At this stage of the project, and with so many variables, preparing a LCCA will be a significant engineering undertaking and expense. Based on previous, similar school construction projects, it an be estimated the energy costs for new construction will be 20-25 percent lower than for renovation of existing buildings.

Q: Have you considered Option E – building three new schools adjacent to the current schools?

A: After making a cursory review of the three school sites, it appears that the most logical position for any such construction would be on the current playgrounds. The schools would then have no such play facilities during the course of construction, and construction traffic might present a significant hazard, to bring materials and equipment to those parts of the site.

Septic systems in the vicinity of the playfields would become an issue, also. How will the existing buildings be served while construction occurs?

Assuming the town would opt to build the three new schools at the maximum size eligible for State reimbursement, the new schools would be smaller than the current ones.

That is because Goodwin is currently 7,830 square feet larger than the maximum, Vinton is currently 2,032 square feet larger than the maximum, and Southeast is currently 4,585 square feet larger than the maximum.

Considering the Board of Education initiated this project to upgrade and enlarge the Library/Media Centers in each school, the resulting new schools would be considerably smaller than their existing counterparts.

Other issues would require considerable engineering study – such as the recently drilled wells, septic systems, etc. to determine if these would require removal and replacement or demolition to make room for the new school.

Q: What would the town do with the three elementary school buildings?

A: This has not been determined at this time.

Q: Is there water and septic available to support a single elementary school site in the town of Mansfield?

A: These issues would have to be the subject of further studies.

Q: What is the time frame for deciding on a proposal and bringing it to the voters?

A: This will be subject to a decision by the Town Council in collaboration with the Board of Education. It should be noted that the current cost estimates are based on the assumption that a project will be approved by the town in sufficient time to make a submission to the State Department of Education prior to June 20, 2009.

Q: What energy savings would be provided from each of the options listed?

A: Similar to the LCCA noted above, this will take a considerable amount of engineering effort to determine, unless a relative scale is used on a preliminary basis.

Q: What can be done to maintain the individual elementary school’s pride, if we consolidate elementary schools?

A: If designed with three “pods” or wings or houses, each could be identified using the current building’s name. And through the use of color, materials and graphics, there would be an identifiable separation.

Q: What is the optimal elementary school building size, based on research? One parent mentioned 500.

A: Some studies have suggested a range of 350-500 students. However, there are many examples of larger schools that are designed with smaller “houses,” wings or pods that provide the appearance of small schools interconnected to share common program facilities.

Q: What would a single elementary school look like in its architectural design and layout of classrooms?

A: That will be responsive to the Board of Education’s educational specifications and the concept arrived at by preparing a schematic design. Such services were not requested from the design team when this study began.

Q: How would special subjects – art, music, physical education – and special events be conducted in one consolidated school?

A: These could be located in a central core and have spaces designed to fit the program needs and numbers of students utilizing them. Designs could be included so the cafeteria is capable of being divided into smaller spaces to maintain some intimacy and then opened up for larger groups.

Q: What is the cost of land if added to Plan D, and what size would it be? 16 acres was suggested as an approximate size.

A: This would vary with each individual parcel.

Q: Will there be a full accounting for all the costs, so that taxpayers are fully aware, prior to making a decision?

A: Yes, informational meetings will be held, descriptive brochures prepared and designs posted on the town’s Web site.

Q: How will the committee balance education quality with pocketbook expenses in making their recommendations?

A: Mansfield has constructed its town buildings with economical materials that are easy to maintain and buildings that are practical, efficient and without “frills.” The design team has been selected knowing that a careful balance must be maintained between the cost of construction and quality of buildings.

Q: Are we addressing the human needs first?

A: The process the design team followed was one of inclusivity and they spent considerable time in each building looking and listening to the staff. Furthermore, four community workshops and meeting with each of the schools’ PTOs were held. The design team is aware of the issues and has considered the human needs throughout this study.

For More Information: http://mansfield.htnp.com/news/q_and_a_on_four_school_renovation.html

Albert L. Fontaine June 23, 1917 – Nov. 5, 2008

He was a cook at Connecticut State Police Barracks for many years, and he volunteered at the Immaculata Retreat House since its inception.

Albert L. Fontaine, 91, of Willimantic, beloved husband of the late Dorea (Martineau) Fontaine died Nov. 5, 2008.

A lifelong resident of Willimantic, he was born June 23, 1917 the son of Napoleon and Adele (Bernard) Fontaine.

Al was a cook at Connecticut State Police Barracks for many years.

He retired from Pratt & Whitney Aircraft after 25 years of employment.

He was a communicant of St. Mary Church and volunteered at the Immaculata Retreat House since its inception.

He was a member and Past Faithful Navigator of the Knights of Columbus, a member of the Franco-American Club and the Willimantic Elks Lodge 1311 for more than 60 years.

He is survived by a son, Gary R. Fontaine of Willimantic; three sisters, Rose Chappell of Torrance, CA, Theresa Zak and her husband Peter of Willimantic and Irene Vesco of Reno, Nevada. He also leaves many nieces, nephews and cousins.

His Funeral Mass was celebrated Monday, Nov. 10, 2008 in St. Mary Church in Willimantic, followed by burial in St. Joseph Cemetery in Windham. Arrangements were coordinated by the Bacon Funeral Home, 71 Prospect St., Willimantic.

In lieu of flowers, donations may be made to the St. Mary Church Repair Fund, 80 Maple Avenue, Willimantic, CT 06226

For More Information: http://mansfield.htnp.com/obituaries/936.html

And you thought Mansfield was tough?

Windham has proposed an ordinance that would bar retailers from giving out nonbiodegradable plastic bags or even certain paper bags.

Mansfield has a reputation for being proactively “green,” but Winham may be setting the bar even higher.

The Windham Board of Selectmen has scheduled a public forum on a new ordinance that would punish retailers for handing out plastic bags, or even paper bags that don’t meet certain minimum requirements.

Failure to take this ordinance seriously could result in fines as high as $150 a day for scofflaws.

The justification section of the proposed ordinance explains that this isn’t just about reducing consumption of fossil fuels or putting the brakes on clear-cutting old growth forests.

Non-biodegradable plastic bags cause many ills, it states. These proliferating bags “often are discarded into the environment and end up polluting our waterways, clogging sewers, endangering marine life and causing unsightly litter. These bags last hundreds of years in landfills and are a potential source of harmful chemicals when they do break down.”

So, under this proposed ordinance, “Any person engaged in retail sales shall provide only reusable bags or recyclable paper bags as checkout bags to customers. No person engaged in retail sales may make available by gift or purchase a checkout bag other than a reusable bag or a recyclable paper bag.”

For those who may want to hear the discussion, the Public Forum for the Plastic Bag Ordinance is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. on Dec. 29 in the meeting room at Windham Town Hall.

To read a complete copy of the proposed ordinance, click on the “plastic bag” attachment at the end of this story.

For more information: http://mansfield.htnp.com/areawide/windham_gets_tough_with_plastic_bags.html