|
FRONT PAGE
FIND IT Subscribe-Free News Index Calendars FEATURES Eye on Sports Larchmont's Reading New:Dine & Wine Lauren's Kitchen Career Doctor Teen Health Tax Advice Tech Talk Travel COMMENTARY Editorials Op-Ed Letters View from Albany LOCAL GUIDE Local Directory New to 10538? Local History Dining Out/In Photo Galleries MILESTONES Weddings & Births Obituaries CONTACT US Advertise About Us
OUR SPONSORS: • Clotilde, Dress Shop • Community Markets • Coughlin Group, Insurer • Debbie Frank Exercise • Elaine Amy, Buyers Broker • Emelin Theater • FAL Photography • Farm Share, Food Co-op • Fenimore Plumbing Supply • Houlihan Lawrence Realty • John J Fox Funeral Home • Kenise Barnes Fine Art • Larchmont Library • Larchmont Plumbing • Mamaroneck Artists Guild • Dr. Joel F. Levy, Dentist • Rye Arts Center • Sardegna Restaurant • Tres Magnifique
|
School Board Mulls Multi-Million Dollar Capital Planby Joan R. Simon (November 8, 2007) Six and a half years ago Mamaroneck school district voters approved a $49.7 million bond that produced major additions at both the high school and Mamaroneck Avenue School. At the November 6 school board study session, the building committee presented a much more mundane “to-do” list covering mostly maintenance and repair items at the six district schools. The $51.1 million in possible expenses was divided into two categories: construction ($28.5 million), which will probably be the basis of a new bond some time in the next year, and energy projects ($22.6 million) which could be funded on a pay-as-you-go basis through energy-efficiency savings. The State Education Department (SED) requires a 5-year capital plan from school districts and a preliminary report was presented to the school board a year ago. (See: 5-Year Repair and Maintenance Plan for Schools Unveiled). The work was divided into three categories: 1) items needing immediate attention for safety/maintenance reasons; 2) longer term projects; and 3) aesthetic improvements. The action plan presented on Tuesday by Trustee Rick Marsico, the school board’s liaison to the building committee, consisted primarily of work from category one. Mr. Marsico stressed that the proposal was preliminary and that the final decision of what to include in the capital plan would be made by the board in its future deliberations. (See box for dates.) Among the laundry list for each school were such items as renovated bathrooms, new corridor ceilings and lights, refurbished sidewalks, fire door installations, electric supply upgrades, repaved parking lots and outside brick repointing. Two big ticket items sparked much of the discussion: a new heating and ventilation system (HVAC) for the Hommocks ($11 million) and an elevator and connecting corridor at Mamaroneck Ave. School ($4 million). Energy-Efficient Boiler for the HommocksThe 40-year-old boiler and ventilation system at the Hommocks is at the top of the “must-do” list, according to representatives from LAN Associates, the architectural and engineering firm that established the 5-year plan in 2005. Director of Facilities George McNally noted that when the new Hommocks wing was built six years ago, the boiler capacity was not increased, so the current unit is working overtime. Together with new well-insulated windows, a more efficient (and therefore smaller) boiler is expected to garner significant energy cost savings.
The boiler and window projects will be part of the energy side of the plan that the building committee is hoping to fund outside of a capital improvement bond. “Because of the energy saving nature of these projects, it may be possible to finance them through a program that would allow them to be paid through long-term lease payments as opposed to construction projects fully funded up front,” explained Celia Felsher, a building committee member and former president of the school board. But she added that the “building committee still has some work to do to understand all aspects of that type of arrangement,” and they are working to complete their research before the November 27 meeting. Trustee Michael Jacobson noted that this is a “common and ordinary way to approach these projects,” adding, “the math isn’t very hard.” Ms. Felsher underscored that “we are going to do the energy efficient thing anyway,” and the question is “what is the best way to finance it effectively.” Connecting Corridor and Elevator for Mamaroneck Avenue?The proposed elevator and the corridor that would connect the upper floors of the two older buildings at Mamaroneck Avenue School were part of the original architectural plans for its new wing. Ms. Felsher explained that when those plans were approved, the corridor and elevator fulfilled the state’s requirement to make the school handicap accessible. However, the initial plans were revised and the SED permitted the school to open last fall without the work being done.
Assistant Superintendent for Business Meryl Rubinstein will meet with officials from the SED to determine whether the district is still required to put in the corridor and elevator as part of its next capital improvement plan. Ms. Felsher noted that there were compelling educational reasons for completing the project as originally planned, regardless of state requirements. However, there was concern that if the corridor were installed, two classrooms would be lost. The building committee promised to re-look at the earlier plans to determine the cost of adding more classrooms to the school if the corridor plan goes forward. MHS Cupola and Other ProjectsThe cupola at the high school, which has been in serious disrepair for some time, will be replaced by an aluminum replica to be custom made to the exact specifications of the current design. Using aluminum will lower the cost considerably ($150,000 v. $325,000 to refurbish the existing structure) and the new cupola will be less expensive to maintain. Other items on the high school list include new seats and flooring in the auditorium and removing the outside concrete balcony above the stands at the baseball field because it is no longer deemed safe. Central School is slated for an upgrade to its 42-year-old boiler and HVAC system ($2.67 million). The proposed repaving of its parking lot elicited suggestions for re-examining the parking and pick-up situation at the school. Superintendent Paul Fried remarked that he has already been in talks with Town officials and store owners in the Trader Joe’s parking lot where parents drop off and pick up their children. He suggested “we rethink how parents from the Post Road side might be bringing their children to the area” and recommended “bringing in some one to … see what reconfiguring the area [of the Central parking lot] might look like.” Ms. Felsher agreed that “this is the opportune time to look at it.” On Chatsworth’s list were new lighting for the auditorium and new flooring for classrooms on the Forest Park first floor. Murray’s repairs include repointing and reconfiguring the auditorium steps. For the Hommocks, a new fire detection system was strongly recommended. A LAN spokesman described it as a “hodge podge system of older technologies merged with newer technologies” that was “hard to keep running.” Mr. McNally concurred, calling it a “maintenance nightmare.” Since a number of items in the proposed capital plan were from the previous community-approved bond, there were questions about items that “dropped off the end of the list.” Ms. Felsher explained there would always be unexpected circumstances during construction and “smart changes and trade-offs happen all the time.” Trustee Linnet Tse stressed the importance of explaining this to the community ahead of time. LAN Associates Named Architect for Capital Improvement PlanThe school board voted to approve LAN Associates as the architect for the upcoming capital improvement projects. Ned Stolle, an architect and member of the building committee, noted that lately “the district has moved a tremendous distance in terms of working on its buildings.” He cited a time when “everything was always an emergency.” Jim Call, another long-time member of the committee, agreed that “we were reactive” rather than “pro-active.” Mr. Stolle noted a much more “orderly process” in recent years and complimented LAN for their work, saying “they know our buildings better than any of the architects” who have worked on them before. |
|